Datasets:

akkasi

/

multi_eurlex_en

like 0

Council Decision of 4 April 2001 on the conclusion of a Protocol to the Europe Agreement establishing an Association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Czech Republic, of the other part, on Conformity Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial Products (PECA) (2001/365/EC) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 133 thereof, in conjunction with the first sentence of the first subparagraph of Article 300(2), the first sentence of the first subparagraph of Article 300(3) and Article 300(4) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Whereas: (1) The Europe Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Czech Republic of the other part(1), hereinafter referred to as the "Europe Agreement", entered into force on 1 February 1995. (2) Article 75(2) of the Europe Agreement provides that cooperation in the fields of standardisation and conformity assessment shall seek to achieve, amongst other things, the conclusion of agreements on mutual recognition. (3) Article 108(2) of the Europe Agreement provides that the Association Council may delegate to the Association Committee any of its powers. (4) Article 2 of Decision 94/910/ECSC, EC, Euratom of the Council and the Commission of 19 December 1994 on the conclusion of the Europe Agreement(2), provides for the Community decision-making procedures and for the presentation of the Community position in the Association Council and in the Association Committee. (5) Article 14 of Decision No 1/95 of the Association Council between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Czech Republic, of the other part of 4 April 1995 on its rules of procedure provides that the Association Committee may set up further subcommittees or groups to assist in carrying out its duties. (6) The Protocol to the Europe Agreement, on Conformity Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial Products, was signed on behalf of the Community in Brussels on 26 February 2001 and should be approved. (7) Certain tasks for implementation have been conferred upon the Association Council and, in particular, the power to amend the Annexes to the Protocol. (8) The appropriate internal procedures should be established to ensure the proper functioning of the Protocol. (9) It is necessary to empower the Commission to make certain technical amendments to the Protocol and to take certain decisions for its implementation, HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS: Article 1 The Protocol to the Europe Agreement, on Conformity Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial Products (hereinafter referred to as "the Protocol"), as well as the declarations annexed to the Final Act thereto, are hereby approved on behalf of the Community. The text of the Protocol, and of the declarations annexed to the Final Act thereto, is attached to this Decision. Article 2 The President of the Council shall, on behalf of the Community, transmit the diplomatic note provided for in Article 17 of the Protocol(3). Article 3 1. After consultation with the special committee appointed by the Council, the Commission shall: (a) carry into effect the notifications, acknowledgements, suspensions and withdrawals of bodies, and appointments of joint team or teams of experts, in accordance with Articles 10, 11 and 14(c), of the Protocol, and Section III of the Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) Annex to the Protocol; (b) bring about the consultations, exchange of information, the requests for verifications and for participation in verifications, in accordance with Articles 3, 12 and 14(d), (e), and Sections III and IV of the Annexes to the Protocol concerning machinery, lifts, personal protective equipment, electrical safety, electromagnetic compatibility, equipment and protective systems intended for use in potentially explosive atmospheres, hot water boilers, gas appliances, pressure equipment and GMP; (c) if necessary, reply to requests in accordance with Article 11, Sections III and IV of the Annexes to the Protocol concerning machinery, lifts, personal protective equipment, electrical safety, electromagnetic compatibility, equipment and protective systems intended for use in potentially explosive atmospheres, hot-water boilers, gas appliances, pressure equipment and GMP. 2. Following consultation of the special committee referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall determine the position to be taken by the Community in the Association Council and, where applicable, in the Association Committee, with regard to: (a) amendments to the Annexes in accordance with Article 14(a) of the Protocol; (b) any decisions regarding disagreements on the results of the verifications and the suspensions, in part or totally, of any notified body in accordance with the second and third subparagraphs of Article 11 of the Protocol; (c) any measures taken in the application of the safeguard clauses in Section IV of the Annexes of the Protocol concerning machinery, lifts, personal protective equipment, electrical safety, electromagnetic compatibility, equipment and protective systems intended for use in potentially explosive atmospheres, hot-water boilers, gas appliances, and pressure equipment; (d) the pre-operational phase and the measures to be taken in accordance with points 3.3, 3.4, 4.12, 4.17 and 5.1 of Section III of the GMP Annex to the Protocol; (e) any measures concerning the verification, suspension, or withdrawal of industrial products as having mutual acceptance under Article 4 of the Protocol. 3. In all other cases, the position to be taken by the Community in the Association Council and, where applicable, in the Association Committee, with regard to this Protocol shall be determined by the Council, acting by qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission. Done at Luxembourg, 4 April 2001.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 96/51/EC of 23 July 1996 amending Directive 70/524/EEC concerning additives in feedingstuffs THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 43 thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1), Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2), Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (3), (1) Whereas application of Council Directive 70/524/EEC of 23 November 1970 concerning additives in feedingstuffs (4) has shown that certain basic concepts must be revised to take account of the need to ensure a greater degree of protection of animal and human health and of the environment; (2) Whereas experience has shown that the current rules on the use of additives in feedingstuffs do not provide all the necessary assurances as to safety, particularly because of the circulation in the Community of poor copies of zootechnical additives; whereas it is therefore essential to link the authorization of such additives to the person responsible for putting the additive authorized by the Community into circulation; (3) Whereas a distinction should be made between additives which are widely used and present no particular dangers for the manufacture of feedingstuffs and high technology additives with a very specific composition for which the person responsible for putting them into circulation must receive authorization, in order to avoid copies which might not be in conformity and might therefore be unsafe; (4) Whereas there should be drawn up in the form of an Annex to this Directive, first a list of additives for which authorization to put them into circulation is granted to persons responsible who alone are entitled to put the additives in question into circulation, second, a list of other additives which may be put into circulation by any person provided that they are additives which meet the specifications in the dossiers on the basis of which they have been authorized; (5) Whereas, to facilitate application of Directive 70/524/EEC, the list of definitions should be supplemented and certain definitions should be amended; whereas, in particular, the concept of additives should be defined so as also to take account of their possible effects on feed materials, animal products, animal welfare or the environment; whereas processing aids should be excluded from the scope of this Directive insofar as these substances are used in the processing of feed materials or of feedingstuffs and no longer have any effect in the finished product; (6) Whereas micro-organisms authorized as such in group 0 for improving animal production and in particular influencing gastro-intestinal flora must form colonies; (7) Whereas, where in particular vitamins, trace elements or colouring matter are present in certain raw materials in their natural state, they must not be considered as additives unless products specially enriched with such a substance corresponding to an additive are concerned which cannot therefore be considered as raw materials naturally containing the substances concerned; (8) Whereas the premixtures referred to in this Directive may under no circumstances be regarded as preparations covered by the definition of additive; (9) Whereas experience has shown that the authorization of additives by means of directives causes considerable delays; whereas such delays in the transposition of directives have sometimes resulted in distortions of competition and even created barriers to trade; whereas, to remedy this situation, additives should be authorized by means of regulations; (10) Whereas fees may be charged for the examination of dossiers by the Member State acting as rapporteur; whereas the levels of such fees should be harmonized in order to obviate distortion of competition; whereas such harmonization will fall within the general framework of future Community rules on fees or charges to be levied in the animal feed sector; whereas it will then be necessary to examine whether the levels of fees to be charged should not vary depending on the type of authorization sought or the additive group concerned; whereas it would be fair to charge higher fees, for example for examining dossiers concerning growth promoters than for examining dossiers concerning vitamins; whereas it would be fair not to charge a fee for additives or examining the dossier concerning very simple technological additives; whereas the fee should be paid to the Member State acting as rapporteur at the time of submission of the dossier; (11) Whereas, until the Council has adopted legal provisions regarding fees, a Member State acting as rapporteur should be able to adopt provisions or retain the legal provisions which it has adopted in this area; (12) Whereas the introduction of fees must be accompanied by the assurance that a decision will be reached by a given deadline on the application for authorization to put an additive into circulation; (13) Whereas certain feed additives may reach the human food chain; whereas it is necessary for the Scientific Committee for Animal Nutrition to be able to collaborate with the Scientific Committee for Food on such matters which may influence consumer health; (14) Whereas the search for new additives belonging to the group of substances for which authorization is linked to those persons responsible for putting them into circulation requires costly investment; whereas protection for a period fixed at ten years should therefore be afforded to scientific data or information included in the dossier on the basis of which the first authorization is granted; whereas protection should also be afforded to new data supplied with a view to renewal or alteration of the conditions of the original authorization for a shorter period which is fixed at five years; whereas, during those periods of protection, any new applicant for authorization will be obliged to submit a dossier drawn up in accordance with Council Directive 87/153/EEC of 16 February 1987 fixing guidelines for the assessment of additives in animal nutrition (5) unless the parties reach agreement on shared use of the data; whereas where two or more persons benefit from the authorization granted to a single additive, they must respond individually or collectively to any request from the Commission for scientific information on pain of losing the benefit of the authorization; (15) Whereas, in order to put an end to the differences between Member States regarding the arrangements for admitting the additives in Annex II onto their territory, the provisional authorization of additives meeting a minimum number of conditions should be extended throughout the Community; whereas such authorizations become definitive for certain additives or are valid for a period of 10 years for other additives when all the conditions for authorization are fulfilled, although that may occur no later than the date of expiry of the period of provisional authorization; (16) Whereas for applications for authorization concerning additives referred to in Article 2 (aaa) and (aaaa) lodged before 1 April 1998 and in respect of which provisional authorization has been given before 1 October 1999, Member States may allow the putting into circulation and use of the additive on their national territory for a period not exceeding five years from the date of adoption of the authorizing regulation; (17) Whereas for applications for authorization concerning additives referred to in Article 2 (aaa) and (aaaa) submitted with effect from 1 April 1998 and in respect of which provisional authorization has been given before 1 October 1999, Member States may allow the putting into circulation and use of the additive for a period not exceeding five years from the date of adoption of the authorizing regulation; (18) Whereas it is necessary to have transitional arrangements for the changeover from the old to the new authorization system; whereas the date of entry into force of the relevant provisions must therefore be brought forward; (19) Whereas account should be taken of developments in techniques for using additives; whereas provision should therefore be made, in certain cases, for the possibility of administering additives, under certain conditions, by means other than incorporation in feedingstuffs; (20) Whereas, in the present state of scientific and technical knowledge and taking account of the methods of inspection, the use of antibiotics, coccidiostats and other medicinal substances and growth promoters should not be authorized by any mode of administration other than incorporation in feedingstuffs; (21) Whereas monographs of zootechnical additives should no longer be published; whereas an information note on the additives in question should be published instead in order to facilitate their identification during controls; (22) Whereas the national authorities should be provided with a standard sample to enable them to carry out checks; (23) Whereas the mixing of additives belonging respectively to the groups of antibiotics, coccidiostats, other medicinal substances and growth promoters with micro-organisms must be prohibited, unless the specific authorization of the micro-organism allows such mixing; (24) Whereas, in view of the deletion of Annexes I and II, in the interests of clarity and transparency, there should be published annually the list of persons responsible for putting the additives referred to in Article 2 (aaa) into circulation and a list of producers who have received from an authorized person the right to manufacture additives as well as a list of all authorized additives, HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE: Article 1 Directive 70/524/EEC is hereby amended as follows: 1) Article 1 shall be replaced by the following: 'SCOPE Article 1 1. This Directive shall apply to additives in feedingstuffs. 2. This Directive shall not apply to processing aids used deliberately as substances in the processing of feed materials or of feedingstuffs in order to achieve a certain technological objective during treatment or processing which may result in the unintentional but technically unavoidable presence of residues of the substances or their derivatives in the final product, provided that these residues do not present any health risk and do not have any technological effect on the finished product. 3. Provided they are not products specially enriched with substances corresponding to additives, substances present in their natural state in feed materials which are part of the normal composition of feedingstuffs and which correspond to a substance authorized under this Directive shall not be regarded as additives.`; 2) the following title shall be inserted between Articles 1 and 2: 'DEFINITIONS`; 3) Article 2 shall be amended as follows: (i) point (a) shall be replaced by the following: '(a) additives: substances or preparations used in animal nutrition in order to: - affect favourably the characteristics of feed materials or of compound feedingstuffs or of animal products; or - satisfy the nutritional needs of animals or improve animal production, in particular by affecting the gastro-intestinal flora or the digestibility of feedingstuffs; or - introduce intro nutrition elements conducive to attaining particular nutritional objectives or to meeting the specific nutritional needs of animals at a particular time; or - prevent or reduce the harmful effects caused by animal excretions or improve the animal environment; (aa) "micro-organisms": micro-organisms forming colonies; (aaa) additives subject to authorization linked to the person responsible for putting them into circulation: the additives listed in Part I of Annex C; (aaaa) other additives: additives not subject to authorization linked to the person responsible for putting them into circulation and referred to in Part II of Annex C;` (ii) point (f) shall be replaced by the following: '(f) feed materials: various products of vegetable or animal origin, in their natural state, fresh or preserved, and products derived from the industrial processing thereof, and organic or inorganic substances, whether or not containing additives, which are intended for use in oral animal feeding either directly as such or after processing, in the preparation of compound feedingstuffs or as carriers of premixtures, hereinafter referred to as "feed materials";` (iii) the following points shall be added: '(k) "putting into circulation" or "circulation": the holding of products for the purposes of sale, including offering for sale, or any other form of transfer, whether free or not, to third parties, and the sale and other forms of transfer themselves; (l) person responsible for putting into circulation: the natural or legal person who has responsibility for the conformity of the additive which has been granted Community authorization and for putting it into circulation.`; 4) Articles 3 to 9 shall be replaced by the following: 'PROCEDURE FOR THE AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIVES Article 3 Member States shall require that no additive may be put into circulation unless a Community authorization has been granted. This authorization shall be granted under a Commission regulation in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 4. Article 3a Community authorization of an additive shall be given only if: (a) when used in animal nutrition it has one of the effects referred to in Article 2 (a); (b) taking account of the conditions of use, it does not adversely affect human or animal health or the environment, nor harm the consumer by impairing the characteristics of animal products; (c) its presence can be monitored: - as an additive per se, - in premixtures, - in feedingstuffs or, where appropriate, in feed materials; (d) at the level permitted, treatment or prevention of animal disease is excluded; this condition shall not apply to additives belonging to the group of coccidiostats and other medicinal substances; (e) for serious reasons concerning human or animal health its use must not be restricted to medical or veterinary purposes. Article 4 1. In order to obtain the Community authorization for a substance or a preparation as an additive or for a new use in the case of an already authorized additive, the applicant for authorization shall select a Member State to act as rapporteur during the scrutiny procedure on the dossier he has compiled in accordance with the provisions of Council Directive 87/153/EEC of 16 February 1987 fixing guidelines for the assessment of additives in animal nutrition (*). Where the applicant is established in a third country, he must have a representative in the Community. 2. The Member State acting as rapporteur shall check that: (a) the dossier has been compiled in accordance with Directive 87/153/EEC; (b) the substance or preparation, according to the information given, appears to meet the conditions laid down in Article 3a. 3. The applicant for Community authorization shall dispatch to the Commission, via the Member State acting as rapporteur, an application accompanied by the dossier, sending copies to the other Member States, which shall acknowledge receipt at the earliest opportunity. That dispatch shall be affected no later than one year after the date of submission of the applicant's dossier in the Member State acting as rapporteur, unless the latter is rejected or postponed. The Member State acting as rapporteur shall inform the applicant, the other Member States and the Commission of the reasons for rejection or postponement of the dossier. 4. Member States shall have a period of sixty days from the date on which the dossier was dispatched to them in which to check whether the dossier has been compiled in accordance with Directive 87/153/EEC and, where appropriate, to submit their comments in writing to the Commission and the other Member States. If, on expiry of the period referred to in the first paragraph, no objection has been made, the representative of the Commission shall have a period of thirty days in which to include the authorization application on the agenda for the Standing Committee for Feedingstuffs. 5. If, after consultation of the Standing Committee for Feedingstuffs, it is deemed that the rules on presentation of dossiers have not been complied with, a representative of the Commission shall so notify the applicant for authorization to put into circulation and the Member State acting as rapporteur; where necessary, a new application must be submitted in accordance with the above provisions. 6. The Commission shall ensure that a decision is taken, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23, on the application for Community authorization within 320 days following its inclusion on the agenda for the Standing Committee for Feedingstuffs in accordance with the second subparagraph of paragraph 4. However, this time limit shall be interrupted where a request is made for additional information by a Member State in the Standing Committee for Feedingstuffs, or at the request of the Scientific Committee for Animal Nutrition. Where an application for Community authorization to put an additive into circulation is rejected or the decision on it is postponed, a representative of the Commission shall inform the applicant for authorization and the Member State acting as rapporteur of the reasons for the rejection or postponement of the decision. (*) OJ No L 64, 7. 3. 1987, p. 19. Directive as last amended by Directive 95/11/EC (OJ No L 106, 11. 5. 1995, p. 23). Article 5 Amendments to Directive 87/153/EEC: - which arise from developments in scientific and technical knowledge and - take account of the provisions of Article 9b (1), Article 9c (3), Article 9o and Article 9q (5) shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23. Article 6 1. A fee may be charged, according to the additive groups and the nature of the Community authorization requested, by the Member State acting as rapporteur for the examination of dossiers arising from the obligations laid down in Articles 4 (2), 9b (1), 9c (3) and 9g (4). This fee shall be paid at the time of submission of the dossier. 2. Before 1 October 1999, the Council, acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission, shall fix the level of the fee referred to in paragraph 1. Article 7 1. Member States and the Commission shall ensure that any information which, if disseminated, could affect industrial and commercial property rights is kept confidential. 2. Confidentiality shall not apply to: - the name and composition of the additive, - the physico-chemical and biological characteristics of the additive, - the interpretation of the pharmacological, toxicological and ecotoxicological data relating to the additive, - the analytical methods for monitoring the additive itself and the additive in premixtures, in the feedingstuffs and, where appropriate, in feed materials, - the methods for testing for residues of the additive or metabolites thereof in animal products. Article 7a If an additive contains or consists of genetically modified organisms within the meaning of Article 2 (1) and (2) of Council Directive 90/220/EEC of 23 April 1990 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms (*), a specific environmental risk assessment similar to that laid down in the abovementioned Directive shall be carried out; for this purpose, the following documents shall be included in the dossier submitted pursuant to Article 4 of this Directive in order to ensure compliance with the principles set out in Article 3a: - a copy of any written consent or consents of the competent authorities to the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms for research and development purposes pursuant to Article 6 (4) of Directive 90/220/EEC and the result of the release(s) with respect to the risk in each case to human health and the environment, - the complete technical dossier supplying the information requested in Annexes II and III to Directive 90/220/EEC and the environmental risk assessment resulting from this information; the results of any investigations performed for the purposes of research or development. Articles 11 to 18 of Directive 90/220/EEC shall not apply to additives consisting of or containing genetically modified organisms. (*) OJ No L 117, 8. 5. 1990, p. 15. Directive as last amended by Directive 94/15/EC (OJ No L 103, 22. 4. 1994, p. 20). Article 8 1. The Scientific Committee for Animal Nutrition established by Commission Decision 76/791/EEC (*) shall be responsible for assisting the Commission, at the latter's request, on all scientific questions relating to the use of additives in animal nutrition. 2. At the request of the Commission, the Member State acting as rapporteur shall ensure that all or part of the dossier referred to in Article 4 is officially forwarded to the members of the Committee referred to in paragraph 1. (*) OJ No L 279, 9. 10. 1976, p. 35. Decision as amended by Decision 86/105/EEC (OJ No L 93, 8. 4. 1986, p. 14). ARRANGEMENTS APPLICABLE TO AUTHORIZATIONS FOR ADDITIVES LINKED TO THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR PUTTING THEM INTO CIRCULATION Authorization given for 10 years Article 9 Additives as referred to in Article 2 (aaa) which meet the conditions laid down in Article 3a shall be authorized and included in Chapter I of the list referred to in Article 9t (b). Provisional authorization for a maximum of four years Article 9a 1. In the case of the additives referred to in Article 2 (aaa), provisional authorization may be given at Community level for the use of a new additive or a new use of an additive already authorized, provided that the conditions laid down in Article 3a (b), (c), (d) and (e) are met and it is reasonable to assume, in view of the available results, that the other condition laid down in Article 3a (a) is also met. These additives shall be included in Chapter II of the list referred to in Article 9t (b). 2. Provisional authorization as referred to in paragraph 1 may not exceed four years from the date on which it takes effect. Renewal of authorization after 10 years Article 9b 1. Community authorization of additives referred to in Article 2 (aaa) shall be valid for 10 years from the date on which final authorization takes effect and shall be renewable for 10-year periods. In the event of renewal, the authorization holder shall send to the Commission, via the Member State acting as rapporteur, an application accompanied by a dossier complying with the provisions to be laid down for the renewal of authorizations for additives in Directive 87/153/EEC. The application and the dossier shall be sent, at least one year before the date of expiry of the authorization, to the Commission, which shall acknowledge receipt thereof at the earliest opportunity. A copy of the renewal application, together with the dossier, shall be officially forwarded by the authorization holder via the Member State acting as rapporteur to the other Member States, which shall acknowledge receipt thereof at the earliest opportunity. 2. Articles 3, 3a, 4, 7, and 7a shall apply mutatis mutandis to applications for renewal. 3. Where, for reasons beyond the control of the authorization holder, no decision may be taken on the renewal application before the expiry date of the authorization, the period of authorization of the additive shall be automatically extended until the Commission takes a decision. DATA PROTECTION Article 9c 1. In the case of the additives referred to in Article 2 (aaa), the scientific data and other information in the initial dossier submitted for the purpose of the first authorization may not be used for the benefit of other applicants for a period of 10 years: (a) from the date on which the first authorization by means of regulation takes effect for the additives referred to in Article 9g (1), Article 9h (1) and Article 9i (1), or (b) for other additives from the data on which the first authorization by means of regulation takes effect or counting from 1 October 1999 if the latter date of taking effect is earlier, unless the applicant has agreed with the authorization holder that such data and information may be used. During this period, however, authorizations for putting into circulation may be granted to persons other than the person responsible for first putting the additive into circulation provided that the conditions in Articles 3a and 4 are met. 2. Where additional information is supplied on an additive which has been provisionally authorized under Article 9a, for the purpose of obtaining authorization of the additive under Article 3a, that information shall be considered as an integral part of the initial dossier and shall consequently cease to be protected at the same time as the information in the initial dossier. 3. On expiry of the 10-year period referred to in paragraph 1, the findings of all or part of the evaluation conducted on the basis of the scientific data and information in the dossier which led to authorization of the additive may be used by the Commission or by a Member State for the benefit of another applicant for authorization to put an additive which has already been authorized into circulation. In such a case, an application accompanied by a dossier in accordance with the provisions to be laid down for this purpose in Directive 87/153/EEC shall be addressed by the new applicant, via a Member State acting as rapporteur, to the Commission, which shall acknowledge receipt thereof as quickly as possible. A copy of the application, together with the dossier, shall be officially forwarded by the new applicant, via a Member State acting as rapporteur, to the other Member States, which shall acknowledge receipt thereof at the earliest opportunity. The provisions of Articles 3, 3a, 4, 7 and 7a shall apply mutatis mutandis. 4. The provisions of paragraph 3 shall also apply to the use of data from a dossier concerning an additive which has been the subject of withdrawal of authorization at the request of the holder of that authorization. 5. The additional scientific data and information required for modification of the conditions for listing an additive or for renewal of the authorization in accordance with Article 9b (1) or any new scientific data or information provided during the period of authorization of the additive may not be used by the Commission or by a Member State for the benefit of another applicant for a period of five years from the date on which the authorization of a new use, the renewal or the submission of new scientific data or information takes effect. Where the data-protection period granted for modification of the conditions for listing an additive expires before the end of the period provided for in paragraph 1, the five-year period shall be extended so that both periods expire simultaneously. 6. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, an applicant for an authorization for an additive referred to in Article 2 (3) (aaa) shall, before beginning toxicological tests on vertebrates, check whether his product or its active substance has not already been authorized. If necessary, he shall find out from a Member State's competent authorities whether the product or active substance concerned is the same as that already authorized. If the product or active substance concerned has already been authorized, the applicant and the holder(s) of earlier authorizations shall take all necessary steps to reach agreement on sharing the use of information, in order not to repeat the toxicological tests on vertebrates. If, however, the applicant and the holder(s) of previous authorizations for the same product do not reach agreement on sharing the information, the Member States may take national measures to oblige the applicant and the holder(s) of previous authorizations established within their territories to share the information, in order to avoid repeating toxicological tests on vertebrates undertaken on their territory and may lay down conditions for the use of the information while ensuring a reasonable balance between the interests of the parties concerned. ARRANGEMENTS APPLICABLE TO AUTHORIZATION OF OTHER ADDITIVES Authorization without a time limit Article 9d 1. Additives as referred to in Article 2 (aaaa) which meet the conditions laid down in Article 3a shall be authorized and included in Chapter III of the list referred to in Article 9t (b). 2. Additives as referred to in Article 2 (aaaa) included in Annex I before 1 April 1998 shall be authorized and included in Chapter III of the list referred to in Article 9t (b). Provisional authorization for a maximum of four or five years Article 9e 1. In the case of the additives referred to in Article 2 (aaaa), provisional authorization may be given at Community level for the use of a new additive or a new use of an additive already authorized, provided that the conditions laid down in Article 3a (b), (c), (d) and (e) are met and it is reasonable to assume that the condition laid down in Article 3a (a) is also met. These additives shall be included in Chapter IV of the list referred to in Article 9t (b). 2. Provisional authorization as referred to in paragraph 1 may not exceed four years from the date on which it takes effect. 3. Additives as referred to in Article 2 (aaa), included in Annex II before 1 April 1998, may continue to be the subject of national provisional authorizations; they shall be included in Chapter IV of the list referred to in Article 9t (b). The period of provisional authorization of these additives may not exceed five years taking account of the period of inclusion in Annex II referred to above. TRANSITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS APPLICABLE TO AUTHORIZATIONS FOR ADDITIVES LINKED TO THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR PUTTING THEM INTO CIRCULATION Article 9f Notwithstanding Article 3, Member States shall permit the additives listed in Annex B to be put into circulation. Additives included in Annex I before 1 January 1988 Article 9g 1. Additives as referred to in Article 2 (aaaa) included in Annex I before 1 January 1988 shall be provisionally authorized as from 1 April 1998 and transferred to Chapter I of Annex B with a view to their re-evaluation as additives linked to a person responsible for putting them into circulation. 2. With a view to their re-evaluation, the additives as referred to in paragraph 1 must, before 1 October 1998, be the subject of new applications for authorization; such applications, accompanied by the monographs and the identification notes provided for in Articles 9n and 9o respectively, shall be addressed by the person responsible for the dossier on the basis of which the former authorization was granted or by his successor or successors, via the Member State acting as rapporteur, to the Commission, sending copies to the other Member States, which shall acknowledge receipt thereof. 3. In accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23, provisional authorization of the additives shall be withdrawn through the adoption of a Regulation and they shall be deleted from the list in Chapter I of Annex B before 1 October 1999: (a) if the documents prescribed in paragraph 2 are not submitted within the time allowed or (b) if, after scrutiny of the documents, it is established that the monographs and identification notes are not in accordance with the date in the dossier on the basis of which the original authorization was given. 4. Member States shall ensure that the person responsible for putting an additive as referred to in paragraph 1 into circulation submits, as provided for in Article 4 and not later than 30 September 2000, the dossier referred to in Article 4 with a view to re-evaluation. Where he fails to do so, the authorization of the additive in question shall be withdrawn through the adoption of a regulation in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23 and it shall be deleted from the list in Chapter I of Annex B. 5. The Commission shall take all necessary measures to ensure that re-evaluation of the dossiers referred to in paragraph 4 is completed no later than three years after the dossier is submitted. In accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23, authorizations of the additives referred to in Article 1: (a) shall be withdrawn and they shall be deleted from the list in Chapter I of Annex B through the adoption of a regulation, or (b) shall be replaced by authorizations linked to the person responsible for putting them into circulation for a period of 10 years through the adoption of a regulation taking effect no later than 1 October 2003 and included in Chapter I of the list referred to in Article 9t (b). 6. The provisions of Article 9b (3) shall apply mutatis mutandis. Additives included in Annex I after 31 December 1987 Article 9h 1. Additives as referred to in Article 2 (aaa) included in Annex I after 31 December 1987 shall be authorized provisionally as from 1 April 1998 and transferred to Chapter II of Annex B with a view to their authorization for a period of 10 years as additives linked to a person responsible for putting them into circulation in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3. 2. The additives referred to in paragraph 1 must, before 1 October 1998, be the subject of new applications for authorization; such applications, accompanied by the monographs and the identification notes provided for in Articles 9n and 9o respectively, shall be addressed by the person responsible for the dossier on the basis of which the former authorization was given or by his successor or successors, via the Member State acting as rapporteur, to the Commission, sending copies to the other Member States, which shall acknowledge receipt thereof. 3. In accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23, provisional authorizations of the additives referred to in paragraph 1: (a) shall be withdrawn and they shall be deleted from the list in Chapter II of Annex B, through the adoption of a regulation, if the documents prescribed in paragraph 2 are not submitted within the time allowed or if, after scrutiny of the documents, it is established that the monographs or the identification notes are not in accordance with the data in the dossier on the basis of which the original authorization was given, or (b) shall be replaced by authorizations linked to the person responsible for putting them into circulation, which shall be given for a period of ten years through the adoption of a regulation taking effect no later than 1 October 1999 and included in Chapter I of the list referred to in Article 9t (b). 4. The provisions of Article 9b (3) shall apply mutatis mutandis. Additives included in Annex II before 1 April 1998 Article 9i 1. Additives as referred to in Article 2 (aaa) included in Annex II before 1 April 1998 may continue to be the subject of national provisional authorizations; they shall be authorized and transferred to Chapter III of Annex B with a view to their authorization as additives linked to a person responsible for putting them into circulation; the period of provisional authorization of these additives may not exceed five years taking account of the period of inclusion in Annex II referred to above. 2. The additives as referred to in paragraph 1 must, before 1 October 1998, be the subject of new applications for authorization; such applications, accompanied by the monographs and identification notes provided for in Articles 9n and 9o respectively, shall be addressed by the person responsible for the dossier on the basis of which the former authorization was given or by his successor or successors, via the Member State acting as rapporteur, to the Commission, sending copies to the other Member States, which shall acknowledge receipt thereof. 3. In accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23, provisional authorizations of the additives referred to in paragraph 1: (a) shall be withdrawn and they shall be deleted from the list in Chapter III of Annex B through the adoption of a regulation if the documents prescribed in paragraph 2 are not submitted within the time allowed or if, after scrutiny of the documents, it is established that the monographs and identification notes are not in accordance with the data in the dossier on the basis of which the original authorization was given, or (b) shall be replaced by provisional authorizations as referred to in paragraph 1 linked to the person responsible for putting them into circulation through the adoption of a regulation taking effect no later than 1 October 1999 and the additives shall be included in Chapter II of the list referred to in Article 9t (b). 4. The provisions provided for in Article 9b (3) shall apply mutatis mutandis. Article 9j Applications for authorization to put into circulation submitted between 1 April 1998 and 30 September 1999 in respect of which the Commission has not yet given a ruling at that date shall be examined in accordance with Articles 3, 3a, 7, 7a, 9, 9a, 9b, 9c, 9d, 9e, 9n and 9o, as appropriate. DISTRIBUTION AND USE OF ADDITIVES Article 9k 1. Member States shall ensure that in the field of animal nutrition only additives authorized in accordance with this Directive may be put into circulation and that they may be used only if incorporated in feedingstuffs under the conditions set out in the authorization regulation. 2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, additives belonging to groups other than "antibiotics", "coccidiostats and other medicinal substances", and growth promoters may be used if administered by a method other than incorporation in feedingstuffs, on condition that that method is provided for in the authorization regulation. 3. Member States shall, in particular, ensure that additives are added to feed materials and to straight feedingstuffs only where their use is expressly provided for in the authorization regulation. REGISTRATION Article 9l 1. Where additives as referred to in Article 2 (aaa) are authorized, the person(s) responsible for putting them into circulation shall be given a registration number and the additive shall be given a Community registration number. 2. Authorized additives as referred to in Article 2 (aaaa) shall be given a Community registration number. WITHDRAWAL OF ADDITIVES Article 9m A regulation shall be adopted to withdraw the authorization of an additive: - at the request of the person responsible for putting the additive into circulation, if the additive is one of those referred to in Article 2 (aaa), - if any of the conditions for the authorization of the additive referred to in Article 3a are no longer met, - if a standard sample of the additive is not supplied to the official authorities which have requested it or if an additive put into circulation does not correspond to the standard sample of the authorized additive, - if a reference sample of the active substance is not supplied to the official authorities which have requested it, - if the person responsible for putting the additive into circulation does not provide, within a given period of time, the information requested by a person responsible at the Commission. However, such additives may continue to be authorized in order to use up stocks for a period of no longer than one year if at least the conditions laid down in Article 3a (b) and (e) continue to be met. MONOGRAPHS AND IDENTIFICATION NOTES Article 9n 1. In accordance with Directive 87/153/EEC, Member States shall ensure that applicants present a monograph for additives as referred to in Article 2 (aaa). 2. During the authorization procedure for additives as referred to in Article 2 (aaa), the Standing Committee for Feedingstuffs shall give an opinion, if appropriate after having made the necessary amendments, on the monograph of the additive presented in the dossier provided for in Article 4. The Commission shall approve the opinion given by the Standing Committee for Feedingstuffs on the monograph and its amendments in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23. 3. Monographs may also be approved for additives other than those referred to in paragraph 1 in accordance with the procedure laid down in paragraph 2. 4. The competent authorities of the Member States shall have recourse to the monograph: (a) to determine whether an additive for which authorization to put into circulation has been requested constitutes an innovation or should be considered as a copy; (b) to ascertain whether the additive put into circulation actually corresponds to the additive described in the dossier on the basis of which the Community authorization was granted. 5. Subsequent amendments to be made to monographs on account of developments in scientific and technical knowledge shall be submitted to the Standing Committee for Feedingstuffs for its opinion in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23. Article 9o 1. In accordance with Directive 87/153/EEC, Member States shall ensure that the applicant presents an identification note summarizing the characteristics and properties of the additive. In the case of the additives referred to in Article 2 (aaa), or should Article 9n (3) be applied, the identification note shall contain a summary of the most important characteristics and properties given in the monograph referred to in Article 9n. 2. The following shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23: - the identification note, - subsequent amendments to the identification note as a result of developments in scientific and technical knowledge. 3. In order to facilitate identification of the additives referred to in paragraph 1 during official checks, the identification note provided for in that paragraph shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities. STANDARD SAMPLE Article 9p 1. For the additives referred to in Article 2 (aaa) a standard sample having the characteristics and properties described in the monograph referred to in Article 9n together with a reference sample of the active substance shall be made available, upon request, to the national inspection authorities of the Member States by the person responsible for putting them into circulation. 2. If the characteristics or properties of the additive are modified, a new standard sample corresponding to the new monograph shall be provided. 3. Detailed rules concerning the provision and maintenance of standard samples shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23. MIXTURES AND ADDITIVE LEVELS Article 9q 1. The maximum and minimum levels set for certain additives shall refer to complete feedingstuffs with a moisture content of 12 % insofar as no special provisions are laid down in the authorization regulation. If the substance permitted as an additive also exists in the natural state in certain feed materials, the amount of additive to be incorporated shall be calculated so that the total of the elements added and the elements present naturally does not exceed the maximum level provided for in the authorization regulation. 2. The mixing of additives shall be permitted in premixtures and feedingstuffs only where there is physico-chemical and biological compatibility between the components of the mixture in relation to the effects desired. 3. Unless the mixture concerned is the subject of a specific authorization as an additive, Member States shall require that: (a) antibiotics and growth promoters may not be mixed together, either with substances from their own group or with substances from the other group; (b) coccidiostats and other medicinal substances may not be mixed with antibiotics and growth promoters where coccidiostats also act, for the same category of animal, as an antibiotic or as a growth promoter; (c) coccidiostats and other medicinal substances may not be mixed together if their effects are similar. 4. Mixing antibiotics, growth promoters, coccidiostats and other medicinal substances with micro-organisms shall be prohibited unless such a mixture is authorized by the regulation authorizing the micro-organisms. 5. By way of derogation from Article 3 and paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article, Member States may authorize, but only for practical tests conducted for scientific purposes and for non-commercial ends, the use as additives of products which are not authorized at Community level or the use of additives under conditions other than those laid down in the authorization regulation, provided that: - the tests are carried out in accordance with the principles and conditions to be laid down in Directive 87/153/EEC, and - an adequate official inspection has been performed. AMENDMENTS TO THE ANNEXES Article 9r Amendments to be made to the Annexes shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23. INFORMATION ON PRODUCERS OF ADDITIVES Article 9s Member State shall ensure that the persons responsible for putting the additives referred to in Article 2 (aaa) into circulation forward to the Commission as quickly as possible the name or corporate name and the address or registered office of the producers to whom they have granted the right to manufacture the additive and, if the producers are established in a third country, also the name or corporate name and the address or registered office of their representatives in the Community. PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL Article 9t The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Communities, "C" Series, not later than 30 November each year: (a) the list of persons responsible for putting additives into circulation as referred to in Article 9s, the names of the producers to whom they have granted the right to manufacture the additives and their representatives in the Community if such producers are established in a third country; (b) the list of authorized additives subdivided as follows: - Chapter I: list of additives linked to a person responsible for putting them into circulation and authorized for a period of 10 years, - Chapter II: list of additives linked to a person responsible for putting them into circulation and authorized on a provisional basis for no longer than four years or five years in the case of additives which have been the subject of provisional authorization before 1 April 1998, - Chapter III: list of other additives authorized for an unlimited period, - Chapter IV: list of other additives authorized on a provisional basis for no longer than four years or five years in the case of additives which have been the subject of provisional authorization before 1 April 1998.` 5) The following title shall be inserted between Articles 9t and 10: 'PACKAGING`. 6) The following title shall be inserted between Articles 10 and 11: 'SAFEGUARD AND MEASURES`. 7) In Article 11 (1), 'listed in Annex I` shall be replaced by 'authorized`. 8) The following title shall be inserted between Articles 11 and 12: 'ADDITIVE LEVELS IN COMPLEMENTARY FEEDINGSTUFFS`. 9) The following title shall be inserted between Articles 12 and 13: 'RULES FOR THE DISTRIBUTION AND INCORPORATION IN FEEDINGSTUFFS OF ADDITIVES AND PREMIXTURES`. 10) Article 13 shall be replaced by the following: 'Article 13 1. Member States shall require that certain additives covered by this Directive, premixtures prepared from those additives with a view to their being incorporated in compound feedingstuffs and compound feedingstuffs containing those premixtures may be put into circulation or used only by the establishments or intermediaries which meet the conditions laid down, as appropriate, in Council Directive 95/69/EC of 22 December 1995 laying down the conditions and arrangements for approving and registering certain establishments and intermediaries operating in the animal feed sector (*). 2. Member States shall require that: (a) additives referred to in Part A of Annex A may be supplied only by approved establishments: (i) to intermediaries or establishments which manufacture premixtures and which have been approved in accordance with the provisions laid down in Article 3 (1) or Article 2 (2) (b) respectively of Directive 95/69/EC, and (ii) in the form of premixtures, only to intermediaries or establishments which manufacture compound feedingstuffs with a view to putting them into circulation or for the exclusive requirements of their holding and which have been approved in accordance with the provisions laid down in Article 3 (1) or Article 2 (2) (c) or (e) respectively of the above Directive; (b) additives listed in Part B of Annex A may be supplied only by approved establishments: (i) to intermediaries or establishments which manufacture premixtures and which have been approved in accordance with the provisions laid down in Article 3 (1) or Article 2 (2) (b) respectively of the above Directive, and (ii) in the form of premixtures, only to: - intermediaries which have been approved in accordance with the provisions laid down in Article 3 of the above Directive, or - establishments which manufacture compound feedingstuffs with a view to putting them into circulation or for the exclusive requirements of their holding and which have been registered in accordance with the provisions laid down in Article 7 (2) (c) or (d) respectively of the said Directive or, as appropriate, approved in accordance with the provisions laid down in Article 2 (2) (c) or (e) of this Directive. 3. Member States shall require that additives referred to in Annex A (a) and (B) may be incorporated in compound feedingstuffs only if they have been prepared beforehand in the form of premixtures containing a carrier substance by establishments which meet the conditions laid down in Article 2 (2) (b) of Directive 95/69/EC. Such premixtures may be incorporated in compound feedingstuffs only in a proportion of at least 0,2 % by weight. By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States may allow premixtures to be incorporated in compound feedingstuffs in a proportion as low as 0,05 % by weight, provided that the quantitative and qualitative composition of the premixture so permits and that they have first established that the establishments satisfy the conditions set out in Chapter I.2 (b) of the Annex, with a view to achieving homogeneous distribution of premixtures and observing the additive levels set for the whole feedingstuff. These manufacturers as referred to in the second paragraph shall be entered on the national list under a special heading as follows: "Manufacturers of compound feedingstuffs authorized to use a minimum proportion of 0,05 % by weight of premixtures". 4. By way of derogation from paragraph 2, Member States shall require that: (a) additives referred to in Annex A (B) may be supplied to approved intermediaries or registered establishments which manufacture compound feedingstuffs for pets and fulfil the conditions laid down, as appropriate, in Article 3 (1) or Article 3 (2) (c) or (d) of Directive 95/69/EC; (b) additives referred to in Annex A (A) or (B) may be delivered at the last stage of circulation to establishments which manufacture compound feedingstuffs, provided that: - the Community regulation authorizing the additive provides, in the case of a specific preparation of the additive, for direct addition to feedingstuffs, and - the manufacturer of compound feedingstuffs is approved in accordance with Article 2 (2) (c) of the above Directive for the additives referred to in Annex A (A) or is registered in accordance with Article 7 (2) (c) of the above Directive for the additives referred to in Annex A (B), and - it has been checked on the spot that the manufacturer is in possession of the appropriate technology defined in Chapter I (3) (b) or Chapter II (c) of the Annex to the above Directive in order to add the preparation in question directly to the compound feedingstuff. Such manufacturers shall appear on the national list under a special heading as follows: "Manufacturers of compound feedingstuffs referred to in point (b) authorized to add antibiotics, cocciodiostats and other medicinal substances, and growth promoters directly to compound feedingstuffs" or "Manufacturers of compound feedingstuffs authorized to add copper, selenium and vitamins A and D directly to compound feedingstuffs". 5. By way of derogation from Article 7 of Directive 95/69/EC and paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article, Finland and, as regards that part of its territory situated to the north of latitude 60°, Sweden shall be authorized, in view of the special feeding conditions on their farms, to allow premixtures of vitamins, provitamins and chemically well-defined substances having similar effect to be supplied to stock farmers for direct addition to feed materials of vegetable origin, provided that: - the directions for use state precisely the dosage to be complied with according to the species or category of animals and the type of fodder used, and - special measures are taken by Finland and Sweden to monitor use of such premixtures. (*) OJ No L 332, 30. 12. 1995, p. 15.` 11) The following title shall be inserted between Articles 13 and 14: 'LABELLING OF ADDITIVES` 12) Articles 14 to 16 shall be replaced by the following: 'Article 14 1. Member States shall require that authorized additives may be put into circulation for use in feedingstuffs only if the following particulars, which must be clearly visible, readily legible and indelible and must place responsibility on the producer, packer, importer, seller or distributor established within the Community, are given on the package, the container or a label affixed thereto: A. for all additives, with the exception of enzymes and micro-organisms: (a) the specific name given to the additive upon authorization, the EC registration number of the additive and, in the case of an additive within the meaning of Article 2 (aaa), the trade name and the registration number given to the person responsible for putting it into circulation; (b) the name or business name and the address or registered place of business of the person responsible for the particulars referred to in this paragraph; (c) the net weight and, in the case of liquid additives, either the net volume or the net weight; (d) as applicable, the approval number assigned to the establishment or the intermediary pursuant to Article 5 of Directive 95/69/EC or the registration number assigned to the establishment or the intermediary pursuant to Article 10 of the above Directive. B. In addition, with regard to: (a) antibiotics, growth promoters, coccidiostats and other medicinal substances: the name or business name and the address or registered place of business of the manufacturer, if he is not responsible for the particulars in the label, the active-substance level, the expiry date of the guarantee or the storage life from the date of manufacture, the batch reference number and the date of manufacture, the directions for use and, where appropriate, a safety recommendation regarding use in the case of additives which are the subject of special provisions upon authorization; (b) vitamin E: the alpha-tocopherol level and the expiry date of the guarantee of that level or storage life from the date of manufacture; (c) vitamins, other than vitamin E, provitamins and substances having a similar effect: the active-substance level and the expiry date of the guarantee of that level or storage life from the date of manufacture; (d) trace elements, colourants including pigments, preserving agents and other additives, with the exception of those belonging to the enzyme and micro-organism groups: the active-substance level. C. For additives belonging to the groups: (a) of enzymes: the specific name of the active component or components in accordance with their enzyme activities, in conformity with the authorization given, the International Union of Biochemistry identification number, units of activity (*) (units of activity per gram or units of activity per millilitre), the EC registration number of the additive, the name or business name and the address or registered place of business of the person responsible for the particulars on the label, the name or business name and the address or registered place of business of the manufacturer, if he is not responsible for the particulars on the label, the approval number assigned to the establishment or the intermediary pursuant to Article 5 of Directive 95/69/EC, the expiry date of the guarantee or the storage life from the date of manufacture, the batch reference number and the date of manufacture, the directions for use specifying in particular the recommended dose, in the form of a range if appropriate, in accordance with the percentage(s) by weight of target feed material(s) per kilogram of the whole feedingstuff in accordance with the requirements laid down on a case-by-case basis in the authorization for the additive and, where applicable, safety recommendations as provided for in the authorization for the additive, the net weight and, in the case of liquid additives, either the net volume or the net weight, where appropriate indication of special significant characteristics due to the manufacturing process, in accordance with the provisions concerning labelling in the authorization for the additive; (b) of micro-organisms: identification of the strain(s) in accordance with the authorization granted, the file number of the strain(s), the number of colony-forming units (CFU per gram), the EC registration number of the additive, the name or business name and the address or registered place of business of the person responsible for the particulars on the label, the name or business name and the address or registered place of business of the manufacturer, if he is not responsible for the particulars on the label, the approval number assigned to the establishment or the intermediary pursuant to Article 5 of Directive 95/69/EC, the expiry date of the guarantee or the storage life from the date of manufacture, the batch reference number and the date of manufacture, the directions for use and, where applicable, safety recommendations as provided for in the authorization for the additive, the net weight and, in the case of liquid additives, either the net volume or the net weight, where appropriate an indication of special significant characteristics due to the manufacturing process, in accordance with the provisions concerning labelling in the authorization of the additive. 2. Member States shall require that the specific name of the additive may be accompanied, in cases where the indications are not required by virtue of paragraph 1: (a) by the trade name; (b) by the name or business name and the address or registered place of business of the manufacturer, if he is not responsible for the particulars on the label, the directions for use and, where appropriate, a safety recommendation regarding use. 3. Member States shall require that information other than that required or authorized pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 may appear on packages, containers or labels, provided that they are clearly separated from the abovementioned marking particulars. (*) Units of activity expressed in micromoles of product released per minute, per gram of enzyme preparation. Article 15 1. Member States shall require that premixtures may be marketed only if the following particulars, which must be clearly visible, readily legible and indelible and must place responsibility on the producer, packer, importer, seller or distributor established within the Community, are given on the package, the container or a label affixed thereto: A. For all premixtures: (a) the description "premixture"; (b) directions for use, and any safety recommendations regarding the use of the premixtures; (c) the animal species or category of animals for which the premixture is intended; (d) the name or business name and the address or registered place of business of the person responsible for the particulars referred to in this paragraph; (e) the net weight and, in the case of liquids, either the volume or net weight; (f) as applicable, the approval number assigned to the establishment or the intermediary pursuant to Article 5 of Directive 95/69/EC or the registration number assigned to the establishment or the intermediary pursuant to Article 10 of the above Directive. B. In addition, for the premixtures incorporating the additives listed below: (a) antibiotics, growth promoters, coccidiostats and other medicinal substances: the name or business name and the address or registered place of business of the manufacturer if he is not responsible for the details on the label, specific name given to the additive upon authorization, active substance level and expiry date of the guarantee of that level, or storage life from the date of manufacture; (b) substances having antioxidant effects: specific name given to the additive upon authorization, and active substance level, provided that a maximum level is fixed for complete feedingstuffs on authorization of the additive; (c) colourants, including pigments: specific name given to the additive upon authorization, and active substance level, provided that a maximum level is fixed for complete feedingstuffs upon authorization of the additive; (d) vitamin E: specific name given to the additive upon authorization, alpha-tocopherol level and expiry date of the guarantee of that level or storage life from the date of manufacture; (e) vitamins other than vitamin E, provitamins and substances having a similar effect: specific name given to the additive upon authorization, active substance level and expiry date of the guarantee of that level or storage life from the date of manufacture; (f) trace elements: specific name given to the additive upon authorization, and level of the various elements insofar as a maximum level is fixed for complete feedingstuffs upon authorization of the additive; (g) preserving agents: specific name given to the additive upon authorization, and active substance level, provided that a maximum level is fixed for complete feedingstuffs upon authorization of the additive; (h) enzymes: the specific name of the active component(s) according to its (their) enzymatic activity(ies) in accordance with the authorization given, the identification number according to the International Union of Biochemistry, the activity units (activity units per g or activity units per ml), the additive's EC registration number, the name or business name and the address or registered place of business of the manufacturer if he is not responsible for the particulars on the label, the expiry date of the guarantee or the storage life from the date of manufacture, the batch reference number and the date of manufacture, the directions for use specifying in particular the recommended dose, in the form of a range if appropriate, in accordance with the percentage(s) by weight of target feed material(s) per kilogram of the whole feedingstuff in accordance with the requirements laid down on a case-by-case basis in the authorization for the additive and, where applicable, indication of any particular significant characteristics due to the manufacturing process, in accordance with the provisions concerning labelling in the authorization of the additive; (i) micro-organisms: the identification of the strain(s) in accordance with the authorization given, the file number of the strain(s) in accordance with the authorization given, the file number of the strain(s), the number of colony-forming units (CFU/g), the additive's EC registration number, the name or business name and the address or registered place of business of the manufacturer if he is not responsible for the particulars on the label, the expiry date of the guarantee of the storage life from the date of manufacture and, where applicable, indication of any particular significant characteristics due to the manufacturing process, in accordance with the provisions concerning labelling in the authorization of the additive; (j) other additives belonging to the groups referred to in (b) or (i) for which no maximum level is laid down and additives belonging to other groups authorized: specific name given to the additive upon authorization and active substance level, provided that these additives fulfil a function in the feedingstuff as such and the amounts present can be determined by official methods of analysis or, failing this, by valid scientific methods. 2. Member States shall require that: (a) the specific name of additives may be accompanied by the tradename; (b) the name of the producer of the additives referred to in paragraph 1 (B) (a) may be indicated in the labelling of premixtures. However, they may stipulate that this indication shall be compulsory; (c) the specific name of the additives authorized may be accompanied by the additive's EC registration number. 3. Where, pursuant to paragraph 1, the expiry date of the guarantee or storage life from the date of manufacture of several additives belonging to the same group or different groups has to be stated, Member States shall require that a single date of guarantee or a single reference to the storage life may be indicated for all the additives, namely the deadline which will be reached first. 4. Member States shall require that information other than that required or authorized pursuant to paragraphs 1 to 3 may appear on packages, containers or labels, provided that they are clearly separated from the abovementioned marking particulars. Article 16 1. Member States shall require that feedingstuffs incorporating the additives belonging to the groups listed below may be put into circulation only if the following particulars, which must be clearly visible, readily legible and indelible and must place responsibility on the producer, packer, importer, seller or distributor established within the Community, are given on the package, the container or a label affixed thereto: (a) for antibiotics, coccidiostats and other medicinal substances and growth promoters: the specific name given to the additive upon authorization, the active substance level and the expiry date of the guarantee of that level or storage life from the date of manufacture, the approval number assigned to the establishment in accordance with Article 5 of Directive 95/69/EC; (b) for substances having antioxidant effects: - in the case of pet foods: use of the words "with antioxidant" followed by the specific name given to the additive upon authorization, - in the case of compound feedingstuffs other than pet foods: the specific name given to the additive upon authorization; (c) for colourants, including pigments provided that these are used for the colouration of feedingstuffs or animal products: - in the case of pet foods: use of the words "colourant" or "coloured with" followed by the specific name given to the additive upon authorization, - in the case of compound feedingstuffs other than pet foods: the specific name given to the additive upon authorization; (d) for vitamin E: the specific name given to the additive upon authorization, the alpha-tocopherol level and the expiry date of the guarantee of that level or storage life from the date of manufacture; (e) for vitamins A and D: the specific name given to the additive upon authorization, the active substance level and the expiry date of the guarantee of that level or storage life from the date of manufacture; (f) for copper: the specific name given to the additive upon authorization and the level expressed in Cu; (g) for preserving agents: - in the case of pet foods: use of the words "preservative" or "preserved with" followed by the specific name given to the additive upon authorization, - in the case of compound feedingstuffs other than pet foods: the specific name given to the additive upon authorization; (h) for enzymes: the specific name of the active constituent(s) according to its (their) enzymatic activity(ies) in accordance with the authorization given, the identification number according to the International Union of Biochemistry, the activity units (activity units per kilogram or activity unit per litre), the EC registration number of the additive, the expiry date of the guarantee or the storage life from the date of manufacture and, where applicable, indication of any particular significant characteristic due to the manufacturing process, in accordance with the provisions concerning labelling in the authorization of the additive; (i) for micro-organisms: the identification of the strain(s) in accordance with the authorization given, the file number of the strain(s), the number of colony-forming units (CFU/kg), the EC registration number of the additive, the expiry date of the guarantee or the storage life from the date of manufacture and, where applicable, indication of any particular significant characteristic due to the manufacturing process, in accordance with the provisions concerning labelling in the authorization of the additive. 2. In addition to the particulars provided for by paragraph 1, particulars concerning the proper use of the feedingstuffs may be laid down in the authorization of the additive in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 23. Member States shall require that these particulars must appear on the package or the container or on a label affixed thereto. 3. The presence of trace elements other than copper and of vitamins other than vitamins A, D and E, provitamins and additives having a similar effect may be indicated if the amounts of these substances can be determined by official methods of analysis or, failing this, by valid scientific methods of analysis. In such cases the following details shall be given: (a) for trace elements other than copper: the specific name of the additive in accordance with the authorization given and level of the various elements; (b) for vitamins other than vitamins A, D and E, provitamins and substances having a similar chemical effect: the specific name of the additive in accordance with the authorization given, the active substance level and the expiry date of the guarantee of that level or storage life from the date of manufacture; 4. Member States shall require that: (a) the details provided for in paragraphs 1 to 3 shall be printed close to the particulars which have to appear on the package, container or the label affixed thereto in accordance with Community rules on feedingstuffs; (b) where a level or a quantity is stated pursuant to paragraphs 1 to 3, such statement shall refer to the amount of additive incorporated in the feedingstuff; (c) the details of additives may be accompanied by the EC registration number of the additive or the trade name where those particulars are not required by virtue of paragraph 1. 5. Where, pursuant to paragraph 1, the expiry date of the guarantee or storage life from the date of manufacture of several additives belonging to the same group or different groups has to be stated, Member States shall require that a single date of guarantee or a single reference to the storage life from the date of manufacture may be indicated for all the additives, namely the deadline which will be reached first. 6. In the case of feedingstuffs distributed by road tankers or similar vehicles or in bulk, the details provided for in paragraphs 1 to 3 shall be given in the accompanying document. Where small quantities intended for the end-user are involved, it shall be sufficient for such details to be conveyed to the purchaser by a suitable notice. 7. Member States shall require that, in the case of pet foods containing colourants, preservatives or substances having antioxidant effects and put up in packages having a net weight of not more than 10 kilograms, it shall be sufficient for the package to bear the words "coloured with", or "preserved with", or the words "with antioxidant" as appropriate, followed by the words "EC additives", provided that: (a) the package, container or label bears a reference number by means of which the feedingstuff may be identified, and (b) the manufacturer gives, on request, the specific name, or names, of the additive or additives used. 8. Any reference to additives other than in the form provided for in this Directive shall be prohibited.` 13) In Article 17 (1), the second subparagraph shall be replaced by the following: 'This information must be in accordance with the conditions of use prescribed upon authorization of the additive.`. 14) The following title shall be inserted between Articles 20 and 21: 'INSPECTION MEASURES`. 15) The following shall be added after Article 21: 'MONITORING OF UNDESIRABLE INTERACTIONS Article 21a Where there is found to be unforeseen undesirable interaction between additives referred to in Article 2 (aaa) and other additives or veterinary medicines, Member States shall require that the person responsible for putting the additive into circulation, or his representative within the Community where additives originate in third countries, gathers all the relevant information and forwards it to the competent authorities.`. 16) The following title shall be inserted between Articles 21a and 22: 'EXPORTS TO THIRD COUNTRIES`. 17) The following title shall be inserted between Articles 22 and 23: 'IMPLEMENTATION POWERS OF THE COMMISSION`. 18) The following title shall be inserted between Articles 24 and 25: 'FINAL PROVISIONS`. 19) Annexes I, II and III shall be deleted. 20) The Annexes A, B and C set out in the Annex to this Directive shall be added. Article 2 1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with: (a) the following provisions provided for in Article 1: - point (4): Article 6 (1), Article 9d (2), Article 9e (3), Article 9f, Article 9g, Article 9h, Article 9i, Article 9j, Article 9n, Article 9o, - points 10, 12, 19 and 20, on 1 April 1998; (b) the other provisions of this Directive by 1 October 1999. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof. When Member States adopt these measures, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such reference on the occasion of their official publication. The methods of making such reference shall be laid down by Member States. 2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the provisions of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive. Article 3 This Directive is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 23 July 1996.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 2127/89 of 14 July 1989 on securities relating to import licences, issued in respect of the second quarter of 1989, for high-quality beef and veal and derogating from Regulation (EEC) No 2377/80 on special detailed rules for the application of the system of import and export licences in the beef and veal sector THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 of 27 June 1968 on the common organization of the market in beef and veal (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 571/89 (2), and in particular Articles 15 (2) and 25 thereof, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4075/88 of 19 December 1988 opening a Community tariff quota for high quality fresh, chilled or frozen meat of bovine animals falling within CN codes 0201 and 0202 and for products falling within CN codes 0206 10 95 and 0206 29 91 (3), and in particular Article 2 thereof, Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 4148/88 (4) lays down detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements provided for in Council Regulations (EEC) No 4075/88 and (EEC) No 4077/88 (5) in the beef and veal sector; Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1030/89 of 20 April 1989 on the issue of import licences for high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal (6), determines the percentage of quantities applied for in respect of the first and second quarters of 1989 which may be imported; Whereas Commission Decision 89/15/EEC (7) as amended by Decision 89/18/EEC (8), suspends importation for human consumption of animals of the bovine species and meat from the United States of America and Canada from 1 January 1989; Whereas contacts entered into with the abovementioned countries with a view to finding a solution to enable the suspension in question to be lifted have resulted in the issuing of licences pursuant to Regulation (EEC) No 1030/89; whereas the licences issued could not be used, no such solution having been found; whereas provision should accordingly be made for the release of the securities lodged with a view to obtaining the said licences, in the same way as was done for the first quarter by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1485/89 (9); Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2377/80 (10), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3182/88 (11), lays down practical rules for the management of the special arrangements; whereas pursuant to Article 12 (3) thereof the quantity remaining from the previous quarter is part of the quantity available; whereas pursuant to Article 15 (6) of the said Regulation, the said quantity available is to be fixed by the Commission on the basis of the difference between the quantity and that for which licence applications have been made, the quantities covered by unused licences being ignored; Whereas applications in respect of the first and second quarters of 1989 covered quantities exceeding those available for those two quarters; whereas the Commission accordingly fixed a single percentage to reduce the quantities applied for; whereas, however, owing to Decision 89/15/EEC, licences issued in respect of the first and second quarters of 1989 could not be used in full; Whereas the lifting of the suspension of imports by Commission Decision 89/353/EEC (12), amending Decision 89/15/EEC, enables imports of those products from the United States of America to be resumed; whereas, in order to enable the quota for 1989 fixed in Regulation (EEC) No 4148/88 to be used in full, quantities not used during the first two quarters of 1989 should be permitted to be transferred to the fourth quarters; whereas a derogation should accordingly be introduced from the abovementioned provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 2377/80; Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Beef and Veal, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 On application by the parties concerned, securities relating to import licences issued pursuant to Regulation (EEC) No 1030/89 shall be released within one month provided that imports could not be effected owing to Decision 89/15/EEC. Applications with supporting documents must be submitted to the competent authority of the Member State in question by 15 August 1989. Article 2 Member States shall notify the Commission by 15 September of quantities covered by Regulation (EEC) No 1485/89 and by Article 1 of this Regulation. Article 3 Notwithstanding Articles 12 (3) and 15 (6) (d) of Regulation (EEC) No 2377/80, the Commission shall determine the quantities of meat which have qualified under Regulation (EEC) No 1485/89 and Article 1 of this Regulation and which are to be added to the quantities available for the fourth quarter of 1989. Article 4 This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 14 July 1989.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 125/2006 of 24 January 2006 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 (2) laying down provisions for the implementation of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92, 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 January 2006. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 24 January 2006.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 30 March 1999 on certain protection measures with regard to registered horses coming from Malaysia (Peninsula) and Singapore (notified under document number C(1999) 859) (Text with EEA relevance) (1999/240/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Directive 91/496/EEC of 15 July 1991 laying down the principles governing the organisation of veterinary checks on animals entering the Community from third countries and amending Directives 89/662/EEC, 90/425/EEC and 90/675/EEC(1), as last amended by Directive 96/43/EC(2), and in particular Article 18 thereof, (1) Whereas, Member States authorise imports of registered horses from Malaysia (Peninsula) and Singapore in accordance with Council Directive 90/426/EEC(3), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden; (2) Whereas fatal cases of a disease caused by Japanese encephalitis virus and Hendra-like virus have been declared in humans in Malaysia and Singapore; whereas these infections may be transmitted to equidae; whereas, Hendra-like virus may be transmitted from equidae to humans; (3) Whereas the presence of these diseases in Malaysia and Singapore constitutes a serious danger for public and animal health in the Community; (4) Whereas it is necessary to adopt rapidly protection measures at Community level with regard to imports of registered horses from Malaysia (Peninsula) and Singapore; (5) 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 temporary admission of registered horses, the re-admission after temporary export of registered horses, and the import of equidae, coming from Malaysia (Peninsula) and Singapore are prohibited. Article 2 Member States shall amend the measures they apply with regard to Malaysia and Singapore to bring them into line with this Decision. They shall inform the Commission thereof. Article 3 This Decision shall apply until 30 June 1999. Article 4 This Decision is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 30 March 1999.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1404/94 of 20 June 1994 laying down detailed rules for the financial monitoring of programmes approved under Council Regulation (EEC) No 2079/92 instituting a Community aid scheme for early retirement from farming THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2079/92 of 30 June 1992 instituting a Community aid scheme for early retirement from farming (1), and in particular Article 10 thereof, Whereas pursuant to Council Decision 88/377/EEC of 24 June 1988 concerning budget discipline (2), and in particular Article 6 thereof, the Commission must set up an effective early-warning system in order to ensure that the agricultural guideline is respected; Whereas a reliable system must be established for the financial monitoring or the application of Regulation (EEC) No 2079/92; permitting reactions in the framework of the early-warning system for budget discipline and estimates of the trend in expenditure affecting future budgets as a result of the multi-annual nature of the commitments entered into under programmes approved under Regulation (EEC) No 2079/92 and resulting in expenditure to be charged to the Community budget over several years; Whereas, to that end, the system of monitoring must be based on the individual undertakings made under the programmes approved under Regulation (EEC) No 2079/92 and on short-term forecasts updated regularly; Whereas the decision approving the programmes fixes an amount to be part-financed for the period 1993 to 1997 which is subject to review on the basis of actual programme implementation, and it is therefore necessary that each programme approved be monitored; Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2061/93 (3) meets the above needs in part and should, in the interests of clarity, be repealed and replaced by another one; Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Agricultural Structure and Rural Development, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The Member States shall forward information on progress in implementing each programme approved under Regulation (EEC) No 2079/92 as at 15 April and 15 October of each financial year using the table given in Annex I hereto and distinguishing, where applicable, between Objective 1 regions and other regions. The information must reach the Commission within 45 days of the stated dates. Article 2 The Member States shall also forward forecasts of expenditure under Regulation (EEC) No 2079/92 to the Commission each quarter using the table given in Annex II hereto. The forecasts must reach the Commission by 31 March, 30 June, 30 September and 31 December. Article 3 Regulation (EEC) No 2061/93 is hereby repealed. Article 4 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, 20 June 1994.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 565/2009 of 29 June 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 30 June 2009. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 29 June 2009.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3598/87 of 30 November 1987 fixing the quota, for 1988, for cheese imports into Portugal from 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, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3792/85 of 20 December 1985 laying down the arrangements applying to trade in agricultrual products between Spain and Portugal (1), and in particular Article 13 thereof, Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 608/86 (2) fixed the initial quota for cheese imports into Portugal from Spain at 200 tonnes; whereas Article 4 (4) (a) of Regulation (EEC) No 3792/85 fixed the minimum annual rate of increase in the quotas expressed in volume at 10 %; whereas this percentage should be used to fix the quota for imports into Portugal of cheeses from Spain for 1988; whereas this quota should be in addition to that under Article 269 of the Act of Accession in respect of imports from the Community of Ten; Whereas, to ensure proper management of the quota, the applications for import licences should be subject to the lodging of a security; Whereas provision should be made for Portugal to communicate information to the Commission on the application of the quota; 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 The volume of the quota for 1988 for cheeses which are specified in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3792/85 in the case of imports into Portugal from Spain shall be 242 tonnes. Article 2 1. The Portuguese authorities shall issue import authorizations so as to ensure a fair allocation of the available quantity between the applicants. 2. The applications for import authorizations shall be subject to the lodging of a security, which shall be released, under the conditions defined by the Portuguese authorities, once the goods have been effectively imported. Article 3 1. The Portuguese authorities shall communicate to the Commission the measures which they adopt for the application of Article 2. 2. They shall, for each of the products, transmit, not later than the 15th day of each month, the following information on import authorizations issued in the preceding month: - the quantities covered by the import authorizations issued, - the quantities imported. Article 4 This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 January 1988. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 30 November 1987.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION DECISION of 28 June 1985 on precautionary measures with regard to the buying in of rape seed (85/330/EEC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Articles 5 and 155 thereof, 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 231/85 (2), Whereas the Council has not, to date, adopted the prices for the 1985/86 marketing year, in accordance with Articles 22 and 24a of Regulation No 136/66/EEC; whereas the Commission, in compliance with the tasks entrusted to it by the Treaty, is obliged to adopt the precautionary measures essential to ensure continuity of operation of the common agricultural policy as regards rape seed; whereas these measures are taken as a precaution and are without prejudice to the Council's price decisions for the 1985/86 marketing year; Whereas the retention, even on a temporary basis, of the intervention prices paid during the 1984/85 marketing year would definitely involve the threat of very heavy sales of rape seed from the new crop to intervention in the light of the possible reduction in the prices that will be adopted for the new marketing year; whereas, in order to avoid the management of the sector being disrupted, the buying-in prices fixed for the 1984/85 marketing year should be applied as a precautionary and interim measure, less a reduction; Whereas Article 24a of Regulation No 136/66/EEC provides for a compulsory reduction in the target and intervention prices where the actual average production of the three most recent marketing years exceeds the guarantee thresholds set; whereas, in the light of the positions adopted in the Council and in line with the Commission's amended proposal, a reduction of 1,8 % should be implemented on a temporary basis; whereas such a reduction leaves open the possibility of a later adjustment in the event that the prices are fixed at a higher level, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 1. The intervention agencies shall apply, when buying in rape seed, an intervention price equal to that fixed by Council Regulation (EEC) No 1102/84 (3) for the 1984/85 marketing year, less 1,8 %. 2. The price referred to in paragraph 1 shall be increased, in accordance with Article 25 of Regulation No 136/66/EEC, each month as from the beginning of the third month of the marketing year and for a period of eight months, by an amount equal to that laid down by Council Regulation (EEC) No 1103/84 (4). 3. Pursuant to Article 26 (1) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC, the purchase price shall be adjusted on the basis of the premiums and penalties provided for by Commission Regulation No 282/67/EEC (5). 4. The provisions of this Article shall be applied without prejudice to the decisions to be taken by the Council in accordance with Articles 22 and 24a of Regulation No 136/66/EEC. Article 2 This Decision is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 28 June 1985.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 6 November 2008 on State aid C 17/05 (ex N 194/05 and PL 34/04) granted by Poland to Stocznia Gdynia (notified under document C(2008) 6771) (Only the Polish text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) (2010/47/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the first paragraph of Article 88(2) thereof, Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 62(1)(a) thereof, Having called on interested parties to submit their comments (1) pursuant to the provisions cited above and having regard to their comments, Whereas: I. PROCEDURE (1) Pursuant to the provisions of point 3 of Annex IV to the Accession Treaty governing the interim mechanism procedure, on 29 April 2004 Poland notified restructuring measures in favour of Stocznia Gdynia S.A. (hereinafter Gdynia Shipyard). The case was registered as PL 34/2004. (2) By letter of 19 May 2004 the Commission asked Poland to submit certain missing documents. These were provided on 16 June 2004. The Commission requested further information by letters of 30 July 2004, 8 October 2004, 23 November 2004 and 4 March 2005, to which Poland replied, respectively, by letters of 3 September 2004, registered on 7 September 2004, 10 November 2004, registered on 15 November 2004, 17 February 2005, registered on 21 February 2005, 30 March 2005, registered on 1 April 2005 and 18 April 2005, registered on 20 April 2005. By letter of 22 April 2005 registered on the same day, Poland accepted that the Commission would treat PL 34/2004 dated 29 April 2004 as a notification under Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty with regard to any measures which were found to constitute new aid. The case was attributed a new number: N 194/2005. (3) On 1 June 2005 the Commission adopted a decision to open a formal investigation, which was published in the Official Journal (2), and invited Poland and interested parties to submit comments. (4) Having been granted an extension of the deadline for submitting comments (letter of 9 August 2005), Poland submitted its comments by letter of 2 September 2005, registered on 5 September 2005. In its reply Poland submitted to the Commission the restructuring plan for Gdynia Shipyard Update, dated 4 March 2004 (hereinafter ‘the 2004 restructuring plan’). (5) Poland submitted additional comments by letter of 3 November 2005, registered on 7 November 2005. (6) Gdynia Shipyard submitted comments by letter of 10 October 2005, registered on 14 October 2005. Comments were also submitted by Ray Car Carriers (by letter of 7 October 2005, registered on 10 October 2005), by the Office of the Permanent Representative of Denmark to the European Union (by letter of 7 October 2005, registered on 11 October 2005), by the Danish shipbuilding association Danish Maritime (by letter of 7 October 2005, registered on the same day), by the Solidarity trade union (by letter of 7 October 2005, registered on 10 October 2005) and by the Polish shipbuilding association (by letter of 10 October 2005, registered on 11 October 2005). (7) The Commission forwarded these comments to Poland by letters of 26 October 2005 and 12 December 2005 (3). Poland responded to the comments provided by Gdynia Shipyard by letter of 16 January 2006, registered on 18 January 2006. Poland did not provide any comments on the submissions of other third parties. (8) The Commission sought the assistance of an external consultant for the evaluation of the 2004 restructuring plan. The consultant transmitted his report to the Commission in December 2005. (9) By letter of 13 January 2006, the Commission asked Poland to provide an update on the latest developments in its restructuring strategy for Gdynia Shipyard. Poland replied by letter dated 20 February 2006, registered on 21 February 2006, and a meeting between representatives of the Commission, the Polish authorities and Gdynia Shipyard took place on 22 February 2006. Poland announced that the 2004 restructuring plan was outdated and that it had adopted a new strategy for the restructuring of Gdynia Shipyard Group involving the spin-off from the Group of Gdańsk Shipyard and the (partial) privatisation of Gdynia Shipyard. Poland also announced that an amended restructuring plan was to be submitted to the Commission by 30 June 2006 and that the privatisation of Gdynia Shipyard would commence shortly. (10) As follow-up to this meeting, the Commission sent a letter to Poland on 8 March 2006, to which Poland replied by letter of 13 March 2006, registered on the same day, announcing a privatisation timetable. Poland provided additional information on the privatisation process by letter dated 29 March 2006, registered on 30 March 2006. The Commission asked for further information by letter of 30 March 2006, to which Poland replied by letter of 19 April 2006, registered on 20 April 2006. (11) By letter of 6 April 2006, registered on 10 April 2006, Poland submitted a first draft of the document ‘A strategy for the shipbuilding sector (maritime construction shipyards) in Poland 2006-2010.’ The Commission provided comments by letter of 12 April 2006. The document was finally approved by the Polish Cabinet on 31 August 2006 and sent to the Commission by letter of 1 September 2006, registered on the same day. (12) By e-mail of 15 May 2006, Gdynia Shipyard submitted to the Commission the ‘information memorandum on Gdynia Shipyard’ dated May 2006, which was made available to potential investors as of 10 May 2006. (13) By letter of 26 May 2006, registered on 30 May 2006, Poland submitted further information on the ongoing privatisation process, including the list of companies to which Poland, via its privatisation consultant, had sent the offer to participate in the new capital increase approved by the General Assembly of Gdynia Shipyard on 19 April 2006. By letter of 13 July 2006, registered on 17 July 2006, Poland submitted further information on the ongoing privatisation process, informing the Commission that two companies had submitted preliminary offers to participate in the capital increase and providing a comparative analysis by the privatisation consultant of these offers. (14) Gdynia Shipyard submitted initial draft amendments to the restructuring plan to the Commission on 9 June 2006. Commission representatives visited the yard on 13 June 2006 and made initial comments on the amended restructuring plan. The Commission’s external consultant provided his comments in a report dated July 2006. Lastly, the Commission commented on the shortcomings of the draft amendments to the restructuring plan by letter of 17 July 2006. (15) Several meetings were held on the privatisation process and the preparation of the amended restructuring plan attended by representatives of the Commission and the Polish authorities: in Brussels on 31 January, 22 February and 10 May 2006 and on the premises of Gdynia Shipyard on 13 June 2006. (16) Poland replied to the Commission’s letter of 17 July 2006 by letter dated 31 August 2006, registered on 1 September 2006. (17) Poland gave notice of amendments to the ‘Restructuring Plan of Gdynia Shipyard S.A.’ dated 3 September 2006 (hereinafter the ‘2006 restructuring plan’) and of new State aid granted to Gdynia Shipyard following the Commission’s decision to open a formal investigation. (18) Poland provided further information on the restructuring process of Gdynia Shipyard Group by letter of 12 September 2006, registered on 13 September 2006, stating in particular that the capital of Gdańsk Shipyard and Gdynia Shipyard Group had been separated. (19) Further information on the privatisation process of Gdynia Shipyard was submitted by letter dated 26 September 2006, registered on 27 September 2006. (20) Poland gave notice of additional new aid for Gdynia Shipyard by letter dated 21 November 2006, registered on 27 November 2006. (21) A meeting took place on 7 December 2006 between Commissioner Kroes and Piotr Woźniak, the Polish Minister for the Economy. The Minister stated that Poland was committed to relaunching the privatisation process of Gdynia Shipyard by way of an open and transparent procedure to be completed by June 2007. Poland confirmed this statement by letter of 27 December 2006, registered on 4 January 2007, referring to the Cabinet decision of 19 December 2006 to endorse a document entitled ‘The state of the shipbuilding industry’. Poland asked the Commission for talks on countervailing measures. (22) Commission representatives visited the yard on 19 December 2006 with the external consultant with a view to collecting the facts and data necessary to evaluate the countervailing measures. The Commission’s external consultant submitted a report on the capacity of the yard on 16 January 2007. (23) The Commission replied to the letter of 27 December 2006 by letter of 29 January 2007 in which it called on Poland to submit a proposal for countervailing measures for Gdynia Shipyard by end-February 2007. (24) By letter dated 28 February 2007, registered on the same day, Poland submitted explanations concerning the privatisation of Gdynia Shipyard and a proposal for countervailing measures. (25) On that basis, a technical meeting was held on 15 March 2007 between the Commission, the Polish authorities and representatives of the yard, focusing mainly on countervailing measures but also on the ongoing privatisation process. The Commission and the Polish authorities agreed that the Commission would enter into technical discussions direct with Gdynia Shipyard with a view to collating all the data necessary for its assessment of the countervailing measures proposed by Poland. Gdynia Shipyard transmitted some initial information on the yard’s capacity by email dated 12 March 2007, registered on 27 April 2007. (26) The Commission requested further information on the countervailing measures by letters of 29 March 2007, 27 April 2007 and 25 May 2007, to which Gdynia Shipyard replied by letters of 20 April 2007, registered on 23 April 2007, 9 May 2007, registered on 10 May 2007 and 30 May 2007, registered on 31 May 2007 respectively. Gdynia Shipyard submitted further information at a meeting with representatives of the Commission on 6 June 2007 and subsequently by letter dated 18 June 2007, registered on 21 June 2007. The Commission asked additional questions by email of 20 June 2007 to which Gdynia Shipyard replied by letter of 25 June 2007, registered on the same day. (27) By letter of 31 July 2007 the Commission informed Poland that its preliminary analysis of the countervailing measures proposed by Poland for Gdynia Shipyard suggested that the measures were acceptable, subject to certain conditions being met. Poland replied by letter of 24 August 2007, registered on 27 August 2007, in which it commented on the conditions governing implementation of the countervailing measure for Gdynia Shipyard. The Commission closed the issue of countervailing measures by letter dated 3 October 2007. (28) In a telephone conversation on 24 May 2007, the Polish authorities informed the Commission that Poland intended to restart the privatisation process of Gdynia Shipyard by way of a public tender. The Commission requested comprehensive information on the latest developments in the privatisation process by letter dated 29 May 2007, reiterating its request by letter of 6 June 2007. Poland replied by letter of 22 June 2007, registered on 25 June 2007 and, following a further request for information dated 28 June 2007, completed its submission by letter of 11 July 2007, registered on the same day. By this letter Poland also submitted to the Commission the information memorandum on Gdynia Shipyard dated 4 July 2007 (hereinafter ‘the information memorandum’). By letter of 31 July 2007 the Commission indicated that the privatisation process could not be delayed any longer. (29) The Commission transmitted its comments on the information memorandum by letter of 30 July 2007. Poland responded by letter dated 21 August 2007, registered on 27 August 2007. By letter of 29 August 2007, registered on the same day, Poland submitted a draft document entitled ‘Supplementary clarifications on the Gdynia Shipyard information memorandum’ dated 29 August 2007, to be annexed to the information memorandum of 4 July 2007 (hereinafter ‘the Annex to the information memorandum’). The Commission presented its comments on the Annex to the information memorandum by letter of 4 September 2007, to which Poland replied by letter of 7 September 2007 in which it submitted an amended version of the Annex to the information memorandum. The Commission presented its final comments by letter dated 14 September 2007. (30) Poland submitted information on the latest developments in the privatisation process by letters of 7 September 2007, registered on the same day, 23 October 2007, registered on 24 October 2007, and 25 October 2007, registered on the same day. (31) In reply to a letter from the Commission dated 30 November 2007, Poland provided further information on the privatisation process by letters dated 13, 19 and 21 December 2007, registered on 14, 20 and 21 December 2007 respectively. In the last letter, Poland informed the Commission that it had received three binding offers for the purchase of Gdynia Shipyard. These offers were submitted to the Commission by letter of 8 February 2008, registered on 11 February 2008. (32) A meeting between representatives of the Commission and the Polish authorities took place in Brussels on 10 January 2008, the conclusions of which were reiterated by the Commission in letters dated 17 and 30 January 2008. (33) By letter of 30 January 2008, Poland informed the Commission that two bidders had been invited to hold negotiations with the Treasury. By letter of 14 February 2008, registered on 19 February 2008, Poland announced that the privatisation process of Gdynia Shipyard would be completed by summer 2008. The Commission replied by letter dated 28 February 2008. (34) By letter dated 29 February 2008, registered on 3 March 2008, Poland submitted the first draft of a new restructuring plan prepared by one of the bidders, Amber Sp. z o.o. The company was granted temporary negotiating exclusivity on 20 March 2008 and provided an update to the draft restructuring plan by email of 9 April 2008, registered on 24 April 2008. Further information was provided by this bidder in ‘Key restructuring directions’, a document submitted to a meeting on 10 April 2008 and registered on 18 April 2008. The information prepared by the second bidder was submitted later, by letter of 7 April 2008, registered on 18 April 2008, following a reminder dated 18 March 2008. (35) Poland submitted information on developments in the negotiations with Amber Sp. z o.o., as the exclusive bidder, by letters of 28 March 2008, registered on the same day, 7 April 2008, registered on 18 April 2008, 23 April 2008, registered on the same day, and 25 April 2008, registered on the same day. A meeting between representatives of the Commission, Gdynia Shipyard, the Amber Sp. z o.o. and the Polish authorities took place in Warsaw on 10 April 2008. Poland submitted its record of the meeting to the Commission by letter dated 7 May 2008, registered on 13 May 2008. (36) The Commission provided comments on the progression of the privatisation process by letters of 21 and 30 April 2008. (37) By letter dated 12 May 2008, registered on the same day, Poland informed the Commission that Amber Sp. z o.o. had withdrawn from the privatisation process. Lastly, by letter of 26 May 2008, registered on 27 May 2008, the Polish authorities informed the Commission that, on 15 May 2008, the Minister for the Treasury had decided to terminate the privatisation process within the framework of the public invitation to engage in negotiations with bidders whose offers had been admitted to the procedure launched in 2007. (38) The Polish authorities also informed the Commission that they were taking action to relaunch the privatisation process with a view to signing privatisation agreements in November 2008. As of 3 June 2008, Poland has submitted daily reports to the Commission on actions taken by various interested parties in the relaunched privatisation process. By letter of 6 June 2008, registered on the same day, Poland submitted the ‘information memorandum on Gdynia Shipyard’ of 2 June 2008 (hereinafter ‘the 2008 information memorandum’) to the Commission. (39) At the request of the Polish authorities, on 10 June 2008 a meeting was held between representatives of the Commission, the Polish authorities and ISD Polska, which was introduced to the Commission as a potential buyer of Gdynia Shipyard. Another meeting between the Commission and the Polish authorities took place on 13 June 2008. (40) By letter of 26 June 2008, registered on the same day, Poland submitted a draft restructuring plan for Gdynia Shipyard and Gdańsk Shipyard prepared by ISD Polska (the owner of Gdańsk Shipyard) and a draft restructuring plan for Gdynia Shipyard prepared by the Polish Shipbuilding Company (hereinafter the PSC). (41) By letter dated 4 July 2008, the Commission requested clarifications on certain issues relating to the draft restructuring plan prepared by ISD Polska. Poland replied by letters of 7 and 8 July 2008, registered on the same days. A meeting between representatives of the Polish authorities, ISD Polska and the Commission took place on 8 July 2008. (42) By letter dated 14 July 2008 Poland undertook to provide the Commission with a complete restructuring plan by 12 September of that year. (43) On 16 July 2008 the Commission endorsed, on a preliminary basis, the assessment and conclusions presented in a draft decision to conclude the formal investigation which stated that the aid granted to Gdynia Shipyard was incompatible with the common market and had to be recovered. However, in the light of the letter from the Polish authorities dated 14 July 2008, the Commission decided to postpone adopting the decision in order to assess whether the new restructuring plan to be submitted by the Polish authorities by 12 September 2008 would significantly improve the situation and would allow the aid to be deemed compatible with the common market. (44) Since then, Poland has been providing the Commission with weekly updates on the privatisation process (letters dated 28 July, 4 August, 12 August, 21 August, 25 August, 1 September, 8 September, 16 September and 23 September, registered on the same days). (45) By letter of 18 July, registered on 21 July, Poland asked for three rounds of consultations with the Commission on the draft restructuring plan with a view to preparing a final version incorporating the Commission’s comments. The Commission agreed to the schedule by letter of 31 July. (46) However, the first unofficial meeting between the Polish authorities and the Commission did not take place until 21 August 2008. Another meeting with the Polish authorities, in the presence of ISD Polska, took place on 2 September 2008. Poland informally submitted ISD Polska’s draft restructuring plan on 28 August 2008 and an amended version of this draft on 8 September 2008. (47) By letter of 12 September 2008, registered on the same day, Poland submitted ISD Polska’s final restructuring plan for Gdynia Shipyard and Gdańsk Shipyard. (48) By letter of 16 September 2008, registered on 17 September 2008, Poland submitted a draft of the privatisation agreement between ISD Polska and the Polish Treasury. (49) On 30 September 2008 a meeting was organised between the Polish authorities and the Commission. Representatives of ISD Polska participated in the meeting. (50) By letter dated 27 October 2008, the Commission informed the Polish authorities of the framework conditions for implementation of this decision. By letter of 3 November 2008, registered on 4 November 2008, Poland undertook to comply in full with these conditions. The Commission accepted this undertaking by letter dated 6 November 2008. (51) By letter of 14 June 2007 the Commission requested the Polish authorities to submit an overview of all State aid granted to the yard since Poland’s accession to the EU on 1 May 2004. Poland responded by letter of 11 July 2007 registered on the same day. The Commission requested further clarifications by letter dated 13 November 2007, to which Poland replied by letter of 9 January 2008, registered on the same day. Poland informed the Commission of additional aid granted to Gdynia Shipyard by letter of 6 December 2007, registered on the same day, by letter of 12 February 2008, registered on 13 February 2008 and by letter of 6 June 2008, registered on the same day. II. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE AID 1. RELEVANT UNDERTAKING (52) The aid recipient is Gdynia Shipyard. The firm is based in the Gdańsk-Gdynia-Sopot region in the north of Poland. (53) The Commission notes that, under the State aid rules, companies in the region are eligible for aid from the Structural Funds under the Convergence objective (4) and from the Cohesion Fund (5). In particular, companies located in the region are potentially eligible for support from the Regional Operational Programme under priority axes designed to support small and medium-sized enterprises, innovation and technology transfer measures (oriented towards job creation in the long-term) and to develop social and educational infrastructure for the purposes of vocational and lifelong training. Companies in the region are also eligible for the Innovative Economy and Human Resources operational programmes, the latter being specifically designed to help companies and the labour market adapt to changes in the economy, including restructuring processes. (54) Gdynia Shipyard is active in shipbuilding, production of hulls, construction of steel bridges, shipbuilding and non-shipbuilding services. (55) Gdynia Shipyard’s biggest shareholders (6) include the Treasury, which owns 32 % of shares, corresponding to 35 % of voting rights, Ray Car Carriers Ltd (16 % and 22 %), Korporacja Polskie Stocznie S.A. (10 % and 6 %), the Industrial Development Agency (Agencja Rozwoju Przemysli S.A.) (9 % and 13 %) and Stoczniowy Fundusz Inwestycyjny S.A. (7 % and 5 %). None of the remaining shareholders has a stake in excess of 4 %. (56) Gdynia Shipyard is the parent company of the Gdynia Shipyard Group, which comprises 12 subsidiaries. Until recently, Stocznia Gdańsk S.A. was one of the subsidiaries but, by agreement of October 2007, Gdynia Shipyard sold its remaining shares in the Gdańsk shipyard to the new majority owner of Stocznia Gdańsk S.A. Nevertheless, from 1998 until autumn 2006, Gdynia Shipyard held the majority of shares in Stocznia Gdańsk S.A. (previously called Stocznia Gdańsk - Grupa Stoczni Gdynia) and therefore restructuring of the two yards was conducted in parallel. (57) Gdynia Shipyard’s main shipbuilding products are container vessels from 1 100 to 5 000 TEU and Ro/Ro car carriers with load capacity ranging from 2 100 to 6 000 cars. Other products include multipurpose vessels, product and chemical carriers, bulk carriers and liquefied petroleum gas carriers. (58) In the segment of container ships up to 3 000 TEU, the main competitors are European shipyards Aker Ostsee and Volkswerft Stralsund in Germany and the Korean and Chinese shipyards. The yard manufactures the largest car carriers in the world (in terms of DWT) and its share of the world order book for these products is 11 % (7). No other yard in the EU produces car carriers of this size, and the only European competitor is Uljanik shipyard in Croatia. Gdynia’s other competitors are the Korean and Japanese shipyards. (59) Between 2002 and 2006 Gdynia Shipyard produced 48 vessels. In 2004 Gdynia ranked as the 13th biggest shipyard worldwide in terms of its order book (measured in CGT). In 2005 it ranked 21st but was still the biggest shipyard in Europe. (60) At present (as at April 2008) (8), its order book comprises 16 contracts (12 car carriers and 4 container vessels) with total volume of 581 000 CGT for delivery in 2008 and 2009. (61) Gdynia Shipyard’s main production facilities include two dry docks, SD I and SD II. (62) As at August 2007, Gdynia Shipyard had a workforce of 4 611, 68 % of whom were directly linked to the production process (9). This represents a reduction of 26 % on December 2004, when the yard employed 6 249 persons (10). (63) Gdynia Shipyard Group first experienced difficulties in 2002. The 2004 restructuring plan explains that the factors which contributed to the difficult financial situation were external, such as Asian competition, the upturn in the zloty against the dollar, rising steel prices and problems with accessing funding following the bankruptcy of Stocznia Szczecin Porta Holding S.A. and the collapse of a gantry crane at the Gdynia yard during a violent storm in 1999. As part of its efforts to fill its order book, especially after the acquisition of Gdańsk Shipyard in 1998 boosted its production potential, Gdynia Shipyard took a number of management decisions which proved to be problematic. The yard took on design, technological, financial and commercial risks (new products, prototypes and loss-making construction of vessels which were new to the yard, such as small bulk carriers, chemical carriers, Ro/Ro vessels, gas tankers, bulk-container carriers and general cargo vessels). The rate at which Gdynia Shipyard reduced its production costs was also unsatisfactory. (64) These difficulties have continued throughout the restructuring process. According to the 2006 restructuring plan, the reasons for these persistent difficulties were the zloty’s appreciation against the dollar and an unprecedented increase in steel prices, which were not reflected in the contracts concluded by the yard. Another reason was the lack of financial resources for extensive restructuring operations. (65) The Group’s financial difficulties led to arrears in public and commercial debts and wages, shortages of materials, slowdowns in production, rising costs (labour consumption, fines) and significant delays in fulfilling contracts. (66) The financial situation of Gdynia Shipyard has gradually worsened. Table 1 Operation of Gdynia Shipyard (PLN million) 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Turnover 1 724 891 1 327 1 599 1 259 1 040 Result - 477 - 190 -77 - 114 - 292 - 311 Equity - 288 - 285 - 576 - 928 Source: 2006 restructuring plan and information memorandum. (67) The yard expects to incur further substantial losses in 2008 and 2009 on its current order book (11). 2. DECISION TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS UNDER ARTICLE 88(2) OF THE EC TREATY (68) In its decision to open a formal investigation, the Commission indicated that some of the measures of which it had been notified under Annex IV, point 3 of the Accession Treaty constituted new aid because they had been granted after Poland’s accession to the EU on 1 May 2004 or had not yet been granted at the time of the decision. The Commission listed these measures in Annex I, part B of the decision. (69) The Commission also decided that a number of measures indicated in Annex I, part A of the decision had been granted to Gdynia Shipyard prior to 1 May 2004 and were not applicable after accession within the meaning of Annex IV, point 3 of the Accession Treaty and, therefore, would not be examined under the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty. These measures are therefore not caught by this decision. Nonetheless, they had to be included in the assessment of compatibility with the common market of the measures granted after accession. (70) In essence, the Commission argued that a legally binding decision had not been taken on the measures listed in Annex I, part B of the decision prior to accession, although it recognised that some preliminary steps had been taken towards such a legally binding decision. (71) With regard to the restructuring of public debt under the Chapter 5a procedure based on the State aid (Enterprises of Special Significance for the Labour Market) Act of 30 October 2002, as amended (12), the Commission concluded that the restructuring decision issued by the Chairman of the Industrial Development Agency, the government agency responsible for administering the Chapter 5a procedure, was legally binding. In this case, however, no such restructuring decision had been issued prior to accession (13). This is because the decision issued by the Chairman of the Industrial Development Agency on 19 April 2004 approving the 2004 restructuring plan did not fulfil the procedural and substantive requirements to qualify as a restructuring decision. (72) The Commission accepted Poland’s explanation that the accrued interest on these public-law debts would automatically be written off together with the principal in view of its ancillary nature, without it being necessary to issue a separate decision. (73) The Commission did not find any evidence of legally binding decisions for a series of measures, including production guarantees and a capital injection, bond issue and debt-for-equity swap, listed as measures 28-34 of Annex I, part B of the decision. The Commission responded in particular to Poland’s main argument, namely that these measures had been included in the 2004 restructuring plan for Gdynia Shipyard, which had been approved by the shipyard’s Supervisory Board, with Treasury representatives obliging the competent authorities to implement the measures by voting in favour of the plan. (74) The Commission found in particular that, in so far as the shareholders had not taken the requisite steps to that end, the Supervisory Board had not been empowered to adopt decisions with financial repercussions for the shareholders. The Commission also found that, even assuming that the Supervisory Board was entitled to take such decisions on behalf and on the account of the shareholders, it remained unclear whether such a decision would create a positive obligation on the part of the Treasury to award State aid, since it is not normally possible to assimilate actions taken by the state as a market player with actions taken by the state in pursuance of various public goals. (75) With regard to measure 32 of Annex I, part B of the decision (capital injection of PLN 40 million), the Commission had doubts as to whether the decision obliging the Treasury to effect a capital increase prior to Poland’s accession was valid in law, given that the requirement to have any capital increase registered with the competent court within 6 months had not been complied with. (76) Having found that a number of measures for Gdynia Shipyard constituted new aid, the Commission expressed doubts that any of the conditions for the aid to be approved as restructuring aid had been met. 3. COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES (a) Comments by Gdynia Shipyard (77) The recipient presented two types of argument: concerning the Commission’s competence in respect of the measures listed in Annex I, part B of the decision and concerning the Commission’s doubts on the compatibility of this aid, in so far as it was deemed to constitute new aid, with the common market. (78) With regard to the restructuring of public debt under Chapter 5a, the recipient argued that the fact of awarding the aid constituted a restructuring decision on the part of the Chairman of the Industrial Development Agency. The recipient maintained, however, as did Poland in the initial phase of the Commission’s investigation, that the relevant decision was adopted by the Chairman of the Industrial Development Agency prior to accession, on 19 April 2004. (79) The recipient argued that it was the agreement of all the individual public creditors with the restructuring under Chapter 5a which constituted the award of the aid, prior to accession (14). (80) Contrary to what Poland stated in the first phase of the Commission’s investigation, the recipient argued that no default interest had accrued after 30 June 2003 on the public-law debts restructured under Chapter 5a. (81) The recipient argued that the State’s precise exposure in respect of measure 32 (capital injection) had been known prior to accession and that therefore the aid should be regarded as having been granted before accession. (82) The recipient also commented on other aspects of the decision. In particular, it stated that the production guarantees provided to the yard by the Export Credit Insurance Corporation did not constitute State aid. The recipient argued that the Export Credit Insurance Corporation guarantee scheme is a self-financing system in which, over the long term, premiums collected exceed risks covered and amounts actually paid out. The recipient described the conditions in which the Export Credit Insurance Corporation issues these guarantees (premiums and type of collateral required). (83) With regard to the requirement that aid be limited to the minimum necessary, the recipient argued that the amount of the aid had been limited to the strict minimum, and that it would be justified to award more aid, if available. The recipient also suggested that even if the Commission defined the restructuring costs narrowly (i.e. as not including the running costs of the yard), the financing component of these costs free of State aid would still be of the order of 30 %, thus satisfying the 1999 Restructuring Guidelines (15). (84) The recipient also argued that the State aid to Gdynia Shipyard does not distort competition in Europe, claiming that the real competitive threat to European shipyards comes from the Far East. The recipient acknowledged that container vessels were also built in other European shipyards, particularly in Germany, but claimed that the container vessels built in Germany differed in terms of design and technical specifications. The recipient asserted that no other EU shipyard built car carriers and that therefore Gdynia Shipyard was not competing in this segment with any other EU shipyard. (85) Lastly, the recipient stated that its restructuring would definitely be completed by end-2007. (b) Comments by other interested parties (86) Denmark and Danish Maritime supported the Commission’s efforts to ensure that State aid was granted in line with the applicable rules. They pointed out that, as a result of the competitive situation in the world shipbuilding market, a number of Danish shipyards had closed or faced bankruptcy without any State aid being provided. They also confirmed that the product range of the Danish yards was similar to that of the Polish yards, with the result that the Danish yards could be affected by any unfair competition. Denmark also urged the Commission to require Gdynia Shipyard to reduce its capacity so that State aid was not used to increase overcapacity worldwide. (87) Ray Car Carriers, as the largest customer of Gdynia Shipyard and a minority shareholder in the company, stressed the importance of Gdynia Shipyard to its own operations in view of its ongoing contracts with the yard. Ray Car Carriers was convinced that, with its highly skilled workforce and management, the yard would become one of the best in Europe, if it were restructured and received State aid for that purpose. (88) The trade union Solidarność highlighted the declining situation at the yard, arguing that speedy restructuring was needed. The trade union described some of the restructuring measures already undertaken at the yard and expressed the belief that, with the technology and workforce available to it, it would join the ranks of the profitable European shipyards. State aid was therefore necessary to implement the restructuring plan. (89) The Polish shipbuilding association Forum Okrętowe explained the reasons for the yard’s difficulties and expressed its support for the restructuring process and for the use of State aid to that end. (c) Comments by Poland (90) Like the recipient, Poland commented on aspects of both competence and compatibility. (91) With regard to the restructuring of public debt under Chapter 5a, Poland did not put forward any additional arguments. However, in its response to the recipient’s comments, Poland expressed disagreement with the latter’s interpretation of Polish law. (92) With regard to measures 28-34 of Annex I, part B of the decision, Poland did not rebut the conclusions of the Commission indicated in the decision to open a formal investigation. However, Poland put forward a new argument to the effect that statements by representatives of various state authorities within the Shipbuilding Industry Team concerning plans to extend these measures should be considered as official undertakings. These statements were made prior to accession. (93) With regard to measure 32 (capital injection), Poland argued that, in so far as the Treasury had acted at the shareholders’ meetings as the owner of Gdynia Shipyard, this action could not be dissociated from its actions as a public aid awarding authority. (94) At the same time Poland recognises that, while actions relating to capital injections belong to the ownership sphere (dominium) and are subject to civil law, when increasing the share capital of companies the Minister (for the Treasury) is obliged to observe additional public-law rules which do not apply to ordinary market players (imperium). (95) Poland then explained that the 6-month rule (the deadline for registering share subscriptions with the court) was merely a formal requirement which did not have any effect on the point in time at which the shareholder’s obligation to subscribe to the shares came into effect. Poland maintained that this obligation came into effect in 2004, prior to accession, and that its fulfilment only required passing a new resolution on an increase of the shipyard’s share capital, which took place on 4 March 2005. The subscription by the Treasury took place subsequently, on 23 June 2005. (96) As regards the compatibility of the new aid with the common market, Poland stated that the 2004 restructuring plan constituted a sound economic basis for the yard’s restructuring process. Poland acknowledged that the restructuring process was carried out with limited financial resources. The Polish authorities then provided a brief description of the restructuring measures enshrined in the 2004 restructuring plan in order to demonstrate that restructuring was not purely financial in scope. They defended the countervailing measures proposed in the 2004 restructuring plan and implemented within the Gdynia Shipyard Group. With regard to the requirement that aid be limited to the minimum necessary, Poland stated that the aid was not used for purposes other than restructuring and claimed that the aid intensity amounted to 31 %, i.e. aid as a percentage of the total restructuring costs, including operating costs. Poland argued that the re-negotiation of contract prices, together with the cumulated profits and positive cash flow generated by the yard in future, should be regarded as constituting the ‘own contribution’. (97) The Polish authorities described in detail how the Export Credit Insurance Corporation’s guarantee system operated and argued that these guarantees did not constitute State aid. 4. CHRONOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION OF DECISIVE EVENTS FOLLOWING THE COMMISSION’S DECISION TO OPEN THE FORMAL INVESTIGATION (98) The Commission investigation and the events which occurred in the course of it are summarised below. (99) In reply to the Commission’s decision to open the formal investigation, the Polish authorities submitted explanations of two types in autumn 2005: first, questioning the competence of the Commission to act on the measures identified as new aid in its decision, and, second, arguing that even if these measures constituted new aid, they were compatible with the common market as restructuring aid. The reaction of Gdynia Shipyard to the Commission’s decision was of a similar nature. Both are described above. (100) In support of its argument on the compatibility of the aid, Poland submitted to the Commission Gdynia Shipyard’s 2004 restructuring plan, which was identical to the restructuring plan for which the Commission opened the formal investigation because of doubts as to its credibility and robustness. Nevertheless, the Commission carefully studied the 2004 restructuring plan and sought assistance from an external consultant. The Commission concluded that the 2004 restructuring plan did not fulfil any of the conditions for the approval of restructuring aid prescribed by the relevant guidelines. At the meeting of 22 February 2006, the Commission explained its main doubts to the Polish authorities. The Commission highlighted the main weaknesses of the 2004 restructuring plan: low investments, low planned productivity, high production costs, in particular overheads and insufficient strengthening of the yard’s own capital base. The aid provided to the yard had to be regarded as operating aid in support of debt restructuring and the yard’s continued operation. (101) In December 2005, the Commission learned from public sources (16) that Korporacja Polskie Stocznia (hereinafter referred to as KPS), a capital group under public ownership, had been created with the aim of integrating the three major Polish shipyards in Gdynia, Gdańsk and Szczecin under one umbrella (hereinafter referred to as the ‘consolidation plan’). The main role of KPS was to finance the shipyards production. Poland did not inform the Commission about the consolidation plan at any stage of the procedure, either prior to or after the decision to open the formal investigation procedure. (102) At the same time, the Commission learned from the press about ongoing talks on the sale of the shipyards in Gdynia and Gdańsk to strategic investors and on the separation of the two companies, which until that date had operated as part of the same group. The Commission asked the Polish Government by letter of 13 January 2006 to spell out what its strategy for Gdynia Shipyard actually was. (103) Poland explained by letter of 20 February 2006 that a consolidation plan had indeed been envisaged previously but that it had been discarded and a new restructuring strategy for the Polish shipbuilding sector would be adopted shortly. (104) At the meeting of 22 February 2006 and by letter of 13 March 2006 the Polish authorities informed the Commission that the 2004 restructuring plan was outdated and had to be amended. The Polish authorities undertook to submit the amended restructuring plan by June 2006. The Polish authorities also presented the main features of the new restructuring strategy for the Polish shipbuilding sector. First, Gdańsk Shipyard was to be separated from the Gdynia Shipyard Group as soon as possible. Second, the Government was to allow an injection of private capital into the Gdańsk and Gdynia shipyards with the long-term objective of fully privatising the yards. (105) The General Assembly of Gdynia Shipyard of 19 April 2006 decided on a capital increase of up to PLN 300 million. The management board was mandated to search for investors interested in participating. Accordingly, the information memorandum of May 2006 was made available as of 10 May 2006 to potential investors, and some 80 such investors were directly approached by Gdynia Shipyard’s privatisation consultant. Gdynia Shipyard received two preliminary offers to participate in the capital increase, from the Ukrainian steelmaker Donbas and the yard’s major customer Ray Car Carriers. These two companies eventually submitted binding offers on 28 August 2006 which were, however, conditional on debt coverage and cancellation by the seller - the State. According to the timetable announced by Poland (letter of 26 September 2006), the negotiations with the two bidders were to be completed by end-October 2006 and the subscription of new shares was to be finalised by 15 December 2006. (106) The Commission received the first draft of the 2006 restructuring plan on 9 June 2006. Having visited the yard and received the opinion of an external consultant, the Commission expressed serious concerns about this draft during the on-site visit on 13 June 2006 and in writing on 17 July, pointing out that the restructuring plan did not appear to be sufficiently far-reaching to restore the yard to long-term viability, that no provision had been made to finance restructuring, that there was no real prospect of financing restructuring from resources free of State aid and, lastly, that no countervailing measures had been proposed. Referring to continuous reliance on ship financing guarantees provided by the Export Credit Insurance Corporation, a Government agency, the Commission warned the yard and the Polish authorities that these guarantees constituted State aid. (107) Despite these warnings, the 2006 restructuring plan eventually submitted by Poland in September 2006, with a 2-month delay, did not differ substantially from the first draft. The Commission’s main criticisms of the 2006 restructuring plan are described below. (108) At a meeting on 7 December 2006 and by letter of 29 January 2007, the Commission indicated to the Polish authorities that a preliminary examination had concluded that the 2006 restructuring plan did not comply with any of the conditions for the approval of restructuring aid under the current guidelines. (109) The Polish authorities announced at that meeting that they intended to re-launch the privatisation of Gdynia Shipyard by way of an open and transparent procedure with a view to attracting a private investor who would take full control over the yard. Poland indicated that the privatisation process was to be finalised by June 2007. Pending preparation of the privatisation documents, Poland asked the Commission to issue a statement on the necessary countervailing measures for Gdynia Shipyard so that potential investors could be provided with the correct information. (110) In the following months, Gdynia Shipyard continued talks with the two investors, Donbas and Ray Car Carriers, who presented their bids in August 2006. At the same time, the Government prepared various privatisation documents with a view to relaunching the privatisation process in the event of the ongoing negotiations failing. In May 2007 the Polish Government announced that the negotiations had failed and that the privatisation process would be relaunched. By letter dated 22 June 2007 Poland submitted a new timetable for the privatisation process, indicating December 2007 as the tentative deadline for its completion, i.e. half a year after the initial deadline which Poland had signed up to in January 2007. By letter of 31 July 2007 the Commission indicated that the privatisation process could not be delayed any longer. The Commission also warned Poland that, at that point, the conditions that the yard’s long-term viability had to be restored and restructuring had to be financed at least in part from resources free of State aid did not appear to have been met. (111) At the same time, following an agreement reached between Commissioner Kroes and Minister Woźniak in December 2006, the Commission was engaged in intensive discussions with the Polish authorities and Gdynia Shipyard with a view to determining the necessary countervailing measures. By letter of 28 February 2007 Poland undertook to close the SD I dock in Gdynia Shipyard after outstanding orders had been processed and the necessary investments in the SD II dry dock had been completed, i.e. as of January 2010. (112) In order to check whether this proposal constituted a genuine countervailing measure, the Commission asked Gdynia Shipyard to provide it with information on a number of matters. Eventually the Commission informed Poland by letter of 31 July 2007 that it was prepared, on a preliminary basis, to consider the closure of dry dock SD I as a sufficient countervailing measure on condition that the closure entailed scrapping the facility in such a way as to irreversibly disable ship assembly and launching activities and that closure was implemented as of 1 September 2009, or earlier if vessel 8185/04, the last one on the yard’s order book as at 8 March 2007, were launched prior to that date. In addition, in 2009, dock SD I could only be used to assemble the two vessels currently scheduled for assembly on that dock in 2009 and which could not be transferred to dock SD II (LPG carriers 8185/03 and 8185/04). The basis for the Commission’s conclusion is described below. (113) The new privatisation procedure based on the Privatisation Act of 30 August 1996 commenced in July 2007. On 5 July 2007 the General Assembly of Gdynia Shipyard adopted a resolution on a capital increase of PLN 515 million, with the shares to be subscribed by the Treasury if the privatisation was completed successfully. An information memorandum was prepared, dated 4 July 2007. It was made available to potential investors as of 10 July 2007, i.e. on the date of publication in the international and Polish press of the invitation to tender. As described in the procedure above, the Commission transmitted comments on the information memorandum of which Poland took due account. (114) Noting further delays in the privatisation process, the Commission urged Poland by letter of 3 October 2007 to complete privatisation without delay. By letter of 23 October 2007 Poland informed the Commission that privatisation would not be completed as planned, i.e. by end-2007. Instead Poland undertook to commence negotiations with selected investors as of January 2008. The Commission reiterated its concerns with regard to the delays by letter dated 30 November 2008 and indicated that it expected the new owner of Gdynia Shipyard to submit the first draft of a new restructuring plan by end-February 2008. This request was subsequently repeated by the Commission on numerous occasions. The Commission frequently insisted on strict adherence to the privatisation schedule, stating that there did not appear to be any justification for Poland to restart the privatisation process. (115) Poland informed the Commission that 11 companies had asked for Gdynia Shipyard’s information memorandum and that four companies had submitted initial offers by the deadline of 1 October 2007. The four companies were accepted for a due diligence examination. Eventually, three binding offers were submitted by the deadline of 20 December 2007. At end-January 2008, Poland decided to enter into negotiations with two of these investors. In mid-February 2008, Poland announced that the privatisation process of Gdynia Shipyard would be completed by summer 2008, i.e. 1 year later than initially promised by Poland in January 2007. (116) As of 20 March 2008, one of these investors, Amber Sp. z o.o. (hereinafter Amber), a subsidiary of Złomrex, a Polish steel trading company, was granted exclusive negotiating rights, which were subsequently extended several times, finally ending on 12 May 2008. (117) Poland forwarded a draft restructuring plan for Gdynia Shipyard prepared by Amber to the Commission on 29 February 2008 (17). Amber submitted updated financial projections by email dated 9 April 2008. The Commission provided verbal comments on this draft at a meeting with representatives of the Polish authorities, Amber and Gdynia Shipyard held in Warsaw on 10 April 2008, and written comments by letter of 21 April 2008. (118) At a meeting with the Polish authorities on 12 May 2008, Amber announced that it had withdrawn from the privatisation process of Gdynia Shipyard. Poland informed the Commission of this development on the same day. In the justification for its decision sent to the Treasury, Amber cited as the main reason for its withdrawal the fact that, after an in-depth due diligence examination of the shipyard’s situation, it had concluded that the yard would not become profitable even after restructuring measures, including significant investments, had been implemented. (119) On 15 May 2008 the Polish authorities decided to close the privatisation process in the form of a public invitation to negotiations with bidders whose offers had been admitted to the procedure started in 2007. (120) On 26 May 2008, Poland informed the Commission that the privatisation process had been relaunched. In subsequent daily reports, the Polish authorities informed the Commission of the actions they had taken to find a buyer for Gdynia Shipyard. Poland forwarded several letters to the Commission in which potential investors expressed an interest in being kept informed of the ongoing privatisation process and in receiving the information memorandum when available. (121) At the meeting of 10 June 2008 it emerged that the Polish authorities were conducting intensive talks with ISD Polska, the current owner of Gdańsk Shipyard, on the possible purchase of Gdynia Shipyard and a merger of the two yards. Poland proposed new countervailing measures and indicated that the new investor had requested additional State aid as a condition for taking part in the privatisation. Poland also informed the Commission that ISD Polska was preparing a joint restructuring plan for both yards to be submitted to the Commission by 26 June 2008, in line with the information injunction adopted by the Commission with regard to State aid case C 18/05 (18). (122) At the request of the Polish authorities, the Commission informed Poland and ISD Polska at the meeting of 10 June 2008 and again at the meeting of 13 June 2008 that certain framework conditions would have to be met if ISD Polska was to purchase Gdynia Shipyard with the intention of operating it jointly with the one in Gdańsk. These framework conditions were that ISD Polska would have to present a joint restructuring plan for both yards by 26 June 2008, contribute significantly to the restructuring costs and adopt meaningful countervailing measures in accordance with the relevant guidelines. The Commission stated that ISD Polska’s proposed contribution to restructuring costs was insufficient, bearing in mind the amount of State aid that the yard had received in the past and the additional aid that ISD Polska had applied for in connection with privatisation. (123) By letter of 6 June 2008, Poland informed the Commission that the Government had adopted a decision on 3 June 2008 to contribute capital of PLN 515 million to Gdynia Shipyard, partly to cover anticipated losses on existing shipbuilding contracts. (124) On 26 June 2008 the Commission received a draft restructuring plan dated June 2008 and prepared by ISD Polska entitled ‘Restructuring Plan of the New Gdańsk-Gdynia Shipyard’, presenting a joint restructuring strategy for the shipyards in Gdańsk and Gdynia (hereinafter the ‘joint restructuring plan (of ISD)’). The Commission also received a draft restructuring plan dated June 2008 and prepared by the Polish Shipbuilding Company entitled ‘Restructuring Plan of Gdynia Shipyard for 2008-2012’ (hereinafter ‘the Restructuring Plan of PSC’). A brief description of the two plans is set out below. (125) By letter of 14 July 2008 Poland informed the Commission that the privatisation of Gdynia Shipyard was continuing and requested additional time for potential investors to finalise the restructuring plan. Poland undertook to submit a definitive restructuring plan for Gdynia Shipyard by 12 September 2008 at the latest. (126) The Commission agreed to wait until a decision had been taken to submit a definitive restructuring plan. (127) On 12 September 2008, Poland submitted the final restructuring plan prepared by ISD Polska entitled ‘Restructuring Plan of the New Gdańsk-Gdynia Shipyard’ (hereinafter ‘the joint restructuring plan of 12 September’), which is essentially an updated version of the joint restructuring plan of 26 June 2008 5. 2006 RESTRUCTURING PLAN (128) According to the 2006 restructuring plan, the amendments to the 2004 restructuring plan were necessary because of a change in the macroeconomic climate, i.e. the appreciation in the zloty against the US dollar from PLN 4,1 to PLN 3,0 per USD and the rise in the steel price from USD 300/t to USD 700/t, which had adversely affected the shipyard’s economic situation, coupled with insufficient State aid, as a result of which the 2004 restructuring plan could not be implemented in full. (129) The 2006 restructuring plan drawn up by the yard with the support of Ernst & Young covers the period from 2006 to 2012. However, most of the measures are to be implemented by end-2009. The 2004 restructuring plan covered the period from 2003 to 2008. (130) The objectives of the 2006 restructuring plan are to effectively limit operating costs, improve efficiency in the shipyard and ensure that shipbuilding is profitable. To that end, the shipyard first intended to renegotiate existing contracts, thereby eliminating anticipated losses on ships scheduled for completion in 2006 and 2007. In addition, a cost reduction programme would aim to lower production costs. (a) Sales strategy (131) The planned sales strategy was to concentrate on standard vessels, which comprised container vessels and car carriers. The shipyard also planned to maintain capacity for niche markets if profitable offers arose. (b) Industrial and operational restructuring (132) The main measures are: - An increase in efficiency through investments of EUR 61 million over the period 2007-2009. The investments are designed to eliminate bottlenecks in the production process (particularly in the pre-fabrication of steel) and increase efficiency. IT investments worth EUR 6,6 million are also planned; - Employment restructuring, i.e. elimination of increasingly commonplace fixed-term employment contracts and measures designed to achieve target employment levels. Introduction of an incentive scheme. The shipyard also plans to increase the wages of workers directly involved in production by 10 % in 2006 and by 4 % p.a. from 2008 to 2010. High absenteeism and a lack of qualified workers are currently the main problems facing the yard; - The plan underlined the importance of protecting the yard against the currency risk. To that end; 70 % of the yard’s revenue is to be hedged against the currency risk from 2007 to 2012 by way of foreign exchange transactions; - There will be further spin-offs of subsidiaries (such as Zakładowa Służba Ratownicza, Wydział Technicznej Obsługi Urządzeń Dźwignicowych etc.) and asset sales; - Improvements to the design process (standardisation of design solutions). This also includes an option to spin-off the Design Office which was to be decided in 2007; - Other measures such as contract renegotiation, application of indexation clauses in contracts to hedge against currency risks, employee incentive scheme, process optimisation and financial asset sales. (c) Financial restructuring measures (133) The shipyard should carry out financial restructuring. At end-2005 equity amounted to - PLN 285,4 million. It was planned to improve the yard’s equity situation in 2006-2007 by way of a capital injection of PLN 1 015 million in total: a capital increase of PLN 500 million in 2006 was to be financed by private investors and a capital increase of PLN 515 million in 2007 by a private or public investor. (d) Target figures at the end of restructuring - restoration of long-term viability (134) At the end of the restructuring period in 2009 the shipyard’s production is expected to be 298 610 CGT, against 279 258 CGT in 2006. The number of ships built will be reduced from 13 in 2006 (8 container ships and 5 car carriers) to 11 (5 container ships and 6 car carriers). Production is expected to increase further to 324 110 CGT in 2012 (12 vessels). (135) Average employment is to be reduced from 5 208 in May 2006 to a target level of 4 530 at end-2007. (136) Productivity (work consumption ratio) is expected to improve from 44,8 man-hours/CGT in 2007 to 37,0 man-hours/CGT in 2012. According to the Commission’s consultant, the productivity of the most efficient comparable yards in Europe is below 20 man-hours/CGT. (137) Turnover is expected to increase from PLN 1,599 million in 2005 to PLN 1,869 in 2012. Operating profit is expected to improve from PLN 7,35 million in 2005 and PLN 233,5 million in 2006 to PLN 67,68 million in 2012, the first profitable year being 2009. (e) Sensitivity analysis (138) The plan includes a sensitivity analysis on the following issues: - Appreciation in the PLN against the USD by PLN 0,05 and 0,1 annually as opposed to a constant exchange rate of PLN/USD 3,00 as in the baseline scenario; - Maintaining ship production at the level of 10 ships in 2009-2010, whereas in the baseline scenario 11 ships are to be produced in 2009-2010 and 12 in 2011-2012; - Faster growth in various settlement rates (remuneration for work and rates for variable and invariable cooperation) in 2008-2012 than in the baseline scenario; - Fall in prices for ships of 5 % and 10 % in 2009-2012; - Increase in prices for materials combined with an increase in prices for ships from 2007 onwards. (f) Countervailing measures (139) The 2006 restructuring plan proposed limiting output to 340 000 CGT per annum as a compensatory measure, assuming that the technical capacity of the yard was 540 000 CGT. As explained in detail below, in February 2007 Poland proposed the irreversible closure of dry dock SD I. The yard provided data demonstrating that current technical capacity is well below 540 000 CGT. Eventually the Commission gave its preliminary agreement to the proposed capacity reduction, which replaced the compensatory measures indicated in the 2006 restructuring plan. 6. JOINT RESTRUCTURING PLAN PREPARED BY ISD (140) ISD Polska, as the majority owner of Gdańsk Shipyard, entered the privatisation process after the withdrawal of Amber from the privatisation round launched in 2007. As indicated above, ISD Polska reviewed the restructuring plan it submitted to the Commission on 26 June 2008, submitting an updated version on 12 September 2008. The following description, where applicable, explains the amendments made in the September joint restructuring plan. (141) The rationale for the joint business strategy prepared by ISD Polska is that synergies between the two yards should be utilised and the best production assets in both facilities should be joined (19). The main storage facilities for materials will be situated in Gdynia Shipyard, where the pre-fabrication of plates and profiles will also take place. Plates and profiles will then be transported by water to Gdańsk Shipyard, where sections and blocks will be produced. Assembly will be carried out on the docks at Gdynia Shipyard and final outfitting will take place at quays in both yards. (142) The joint restructuring plan refers to the failure of the 2006 restructuring plan to restore the yard’s viability and identifies the causes for the current financial difficulties of both shipyards. These include in particular the failure to privatise the yard and the related failure to raise the yard’s capital to levels permitting restructuring, and the fact that the yard did not receive sufficient amounts of State aid. The joint restructuring plan also identifies macroeconomic factors such as the appreciation of the Polish zloty against the US dollar, rising steel prices and internal factors such as the outflow of qualified workers from the yard, low productivity and the conclusion of contracts without the necessary hedging against changes in the exchange rate and cost of materials, resulting in losses to the shipyard. (143) The purpose of the joint restructuring plan is to return the two restructured companies, Gdynia and Gdańsk Shipyards, to viability: Although the present decision concerns Gdynia Shipyard alone, the following description and assessment of the joint restructuring plan must naturally also take into account the existence of Gdańsk Shipyard, its past restructuring efforts and the State aid it has received and will receive in future. (a) Sales strategy (144) According to the joint restructuring plan, the merged shipyards should engage in two activities: shipbuilding and non-shipbuilding. (145) As regards the shipbuilding business, in the short term ISD Polska will target market segments such as container ships (small to medium-sized, 500-3 000 TEU), general cargo vessels (‘classic’ vessels for the transportation of dry cargo, multipurpose vessels and heavy lift) and car carriers (large pure car carriers, size C6600) and will also develop activities in the off-shore vessels segment (e.g. anchor-handling towing supply vessels, platform supply vessels, crew boats), which should become dominant in the medium-term. (146) The market analysis is based on a comparison with the production of other European shipyards and the experience of the merged shipyards. The plan recognised that the requisite know-how for the production of off-shore vessels would have to be developed and that production would be carried out with sub-contractors in the first few years. The joint restructuring plan of September describes Gdańsk Shipyard’s previous experience in constructing hulls of off-shore vessels and explains that the yard has vessels of this type on its order book. The plan also showed that Gdańsk Shipyard had recently signed a letter of intent for 5-year cooperation with a renowned builder of off-shore vessels which would subcontract hulls with an increasing level of complexity to Gdańsk Shipyard. The plan envisaged a gradual move from this subcontractor work to building fully equipped off-shore vessels and recognised the need to gradually acquire the capacity to build fully equipped ships and create a network of suppliers. (147) The planned production portfolio assumes that production of container ships is initially maintained but gradually marginalised until 2011 and then discontinued. The plan then envisages a portfolio comprising off-shore vessels and large C6600 car carriers. Under the joint restructuring plan, after June the merged yards were to conclude contracts for 13 vessels in 2008 (3 container vessels, 5 off-shore vessels and 5 car carriers), 16 vessels in 2009 (2 container vessels, 8 off-shore vessels and 6 car carriers), 15 vessels in 2010 and 2011 (1 container vessel, 7 off-shore vessels and 7 car carriers), 17 vessels in 2012 (10 off-shore vessels and 7 car carriers) and 18 vessels in 2013 and 2014 (14 off-shore vessels and 4 car carriers). The production plan was amended in the Joint Plan of September: between 2009 and 2011 12-13 vessels should be built per annum (5-7 car carriers and 6 off-shore vessels; there are no container vessels on the order book after 2008). (148) As for the non-shipbuilding business, ISD Polska intends to start production of windmills and steel structures in the merged shipyards. The plan envisages that windmill production will start in 2011 (75 items), rising to 350 as of 2014 (planned length 80 metres). (149) The July plan envisaged the production of various steel structures (e.g. jibs, storage structures, steel structures for the building industry, and parts of vessels), rising from 2 174 tons in 2008 to 13 500 tons as of 2011 (20). (150) The September restructuring plan provides details of the know-how of ISD Polska (or other Donbas Group companies) in the area of steel structures. It is planned to move some production from Huta Częstochowa to the merged yards. The plan summarises the results of a market study by an independent consultant (Roland Berger) undertaken in preparation for the development of the steel structures segment at Gdańsk Shipyard after ISD Polska acquired its holding at the beginning of 2007. According to the plan, this study forecasts growth in the steel structures segment in Europe and Poland in particular (e.g. development of infrastructure with the help of the Structural Funds). This study has not been submitted to the Commission. (151) The September plan contains different forecasts for the volume of production of steel structures, as shown in the following Table 1a. Table 1a Planned production of steel structures in tons (joint restructuring plan of September 2008) Products 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Jibs 274 2 000 2 000 2 000 2 000 2 000 2 000 Lifts 0 1 100 1 500 1 500 1 500 1 500 1 500 Storage structures 1 500 6 000 16 000 22 400 36 000 36 000 36 000 Steel structures for building 0 1 100 3 000 4 000 4 000 4 000 4 000 Parts of vessels 0 1 000 1 450 5 000 13 000 13 000 13 000 Total 1 774 11 200 23 950 34 900 56 500 56 500 56 500 (b) Industrial and operational restructuring (152) The joint restructuring plan indicates that the production assets of both yards have deteriorated significantly and are on the same level as those of European shipyards at the beginning of the 1990s. The planned investments amount to EUR 111 million for shipbuilding and PLN 193 million for non-shipbuilding (PLN 175 million for windmills and PLN 18 million for steel structures). (153) Investments in shipbuilding will be implemented in two overlapping stages between 2009 and 2011. The most important investments (21) are in plate cutting, flat panel production, a new pipe shop and a new volume section hall. These investments, together with organisational changes, should result in a productivity improvement from the current 45 man hours/CGT to the target of 20 man hours/CGT (22). (154) The main organisational needs concern: sales (contracts), purchases of materials and services, design capabilities, production, human resources and information technologies. (155) The Joint Restructuring Programme provides for the creation of a Planning Centre which would be responsible for planning production efficiently on all organisational levels of the merged yards. The purpose of setting up this Centre is to iron out any shortcomings in planning, scheduling, budgeting and checking the production process. (156) As regards contracting, ISD Polska intends to introduce indexation clauses to protect the yard from increases in the prices of materials and wages by transferring the risk to the shipowner. The yard should also introduce a new model contract. Extracts from some existing shipbuilding contracts were attached to the September joint restructuring plan to demonstrate that the yard was able to negotiate indexation clauses to hedge against steel price fluctuations. (157) To protect itself from the risk of currency fluctuations, the yard intends to introduce the necessary infrastructure after identifying the costs and revenues generating the currency-related risk and defining permissible levels of exposure to that risk. The risk management system provided for in the joint restructuring plan is based on four main elements: taking this risk into account when determining the yard’s strategy (definition of risk tolerance and risk control), adjusting the organisational structure, using information technologies and adopting various methods to minimise risk (natural hedging, indexation clauses in contracts and purchases of financial products such as currency options and forwards). The September joint restructuring plan describes the proposed currency hedging policy in greater detail. It identifies three hedging instruments the yard should use; it quantifies the order book’s exposure to currency risks up to 2012 and it estimates the costs of these hedging instruments on that basis. In accordance with the plan, ISD Polska contacted a number of banks which, for the purpose of preparing hedging offers, asked it to submit an adequate hedging strategy. According to the plan, this strategy should be drawn up in the first 6 months of restructuring. (158) In the production area, the objective is to address the problem of inefficient logistics at Gdańsk Shipyard and bottlenecks at Gdynia Shipyard. The plan proposes a division of labour between the two facilities and a new material flow diagram. (159) As regards purchases and management of materials, the main objective is to cut costs. The restructuring measures include, for example, purchasing materials on the basis of at least three bids, cooperation on purchases with Huta Częstochowa, stock management, etc. (160) The yard plans to employ and train qualified workers and to extend the use of and modernise existing information technologies. (161) In the employment field, the objective is to cope with high rotation and absenteeism. ISD Polska plans to cooperate with a local recruitment agency. Internally, the plan envisages expanding carrier development systems, introducing incentive-related pay (overtime management, employee evaluation, checks on absenteeism and pay based on work performed, timeliness and quality of implementation) and developing corporate identity. The plan invokes the need to reduce employment from the current workforce of 8 137 employees (2 651 at Gdańsk Shipyard, 4 238 at Gdynia Shipyard and 1 248 in Gdynia subsidiaries) to between 5 000 and 5 395 employees. According to the September joint restructuring plan, redundancies will take place gradually from 2009 to 2012. The updated plan includes a calculation of the costs and effects of employment restructuring. (162) Finally, as regards design activities, the plan provides for the work of the Design Office to be rationalised and more closely linked to the production process. (163) The plan contains a brief, general description of the desired effects of these organisational restructuring measures, which it quantifies with the assertion that the resultant improvement in productivity will be about 12 man hours/CGT (23). (c) Financial restructuring (164) As regards financial restructuring, the plan envisages that the State aid of which the Commission was notified in the course of its formal investigation (see part 9 below) will be implemented It also envisages a capital injection by the State of PLN 385 million to cover public-law liabilities and anticipates that some public-law liabilities (in particular monies owed to ZUS relating to social security) will be made payable in instalments and repaid by 2018 (public-law liabilities with a nominal value of PLN 418,8 million), (24) that the State will inject capital of PLN 250 million to cover expected losses for 2008 and, via the Industrial Development Agency, a further PLN 200 million to finance working capital and, lastly, that it will take over a potential liability of PLN 308 million related to ongoing litigation concerning Gdańsk Shipyard’s tax arrears. (165) The plan provides for some PLN 712 million of restructuring costs to be financed from the company’s future cash flows. (d) Costs of restructuring and own contribution (166) The joint restructuring plan quantifies the restructuring costs incurred by Gdynia Shipyard to date at PLN 936 702 419, including investment costs of PLN 98 million and debt restructuring of PLN 365 million (25). According to the joint restructuring plan, restructuring at Gdańsk has cost PLN 311 533 500, including e.g. investment costs of PLN 23 million and debt restructuring of PLN 48 million (26). The September joint restructuring plan does not amend costs incurred in the past, but it does amend the restructuring cost forecast for the merged yards. The following costs can be identified: investment costs of PLN 552 million, repayment of public-law arrears of PLN 892 million, (27) repayment of commercial arrears of PLN 889 million, coverage of expected losses for 2008 of PLN 250 million, (28) repayment of potential liabilities of PLN 308 million in connection with ongoing litigation concerning the outstanding tax arrears of Gdańsk Shipyard, costs of demolishing redundant production assets (slipways) of PLN 42,8 million and costs of employment restructuring of PLN 69 million. In total, the expected costs are PLN 3 billion. (167) At the meeting on 30 September the Polish authorities proposed disregarding de facto operating aid granted to the yards in the past when assessing the own contribution to cover restructuring costs. The Polish authorities proposed that in its assessment the Commission should consider the restructuring costs incurred as of the time when the investor took control over the yard. ISD Polska became the majority shareholder in Gdańsk Shipyard on 28 November 2008 and the Polish authorities claim that the restructuring costs incurred at the yard since then amount to PLN 62,5 million. Given that ISD Polska does not yet have a shareholding in Gdynia Shipyard, any restructuring costs incurred for that yard in the past should be disregarded. As a result, the restructuring costs as proposed by Poland at the meeting on 30 September would amount to PLN 3,065 billion. (168) ISD Polska maintains that the own contribution of the yard and its shareholders to restructuring costs is as described in the following Table 1b, reflecting the proposals put forward in the September joint restructuring plan. Table 1b Own contribution to restructuring costs according to the joint restructuring plan (PLN) Alleged previous own contribution 1. Sale of assets by Gdynia Shipyard 3 783 515 2. Debt-for-equity swap undertaken by employees and private creditors 70 740 000 3. Sale of financial assets by Gdynia Shipyard between 1 May 2004 and 24 June 2008 72 797 423 4. Lease of production assets - Gdynia 8 335 000 5. Investment expenditure 2004-2007 - Gdynia 98 044 000 6. Purchase of shares by ISD 35 875 059 7. Investment expenditure 2004-2007 - Gdańsk 22 238 900 8. Lease of production assets - Gdańsk 14 700 000 9. Restructuring loan from Bank Nord/LB 20 000 000 10. Loan from ISD 2 000 000 Alleged future own contribution 11. Capital increase by ISD 305 000 000 12. Capital increase by ISD 100 000 000 13. Sale of assets 240 000 000 14. Working capital loan 280 000 000 15. Investment loan for non-shipbuilding production 185 000 000 16. Working capital loan for non-shipbuilding production 45 000 000 17. Purchase of shares from the Industrial Development Agency (29) 69 560 400 (169) According to the explanations on the joint restructuring plan provided by Poland on 7 July 2008 and the September joint restructuring plan, the external financing sources listed under items 14-16 are not known at present. (170) ISD Polska envisages obtaining a working capital loan of PLN 280 million in 2012 and deems this assumption realistic in view of the allegedly favourable debt/EBIDTA ratio anticipated in 2012. (171) With regard to loans for non-shipbuilding production (production of windmills, items 15-16), ISD Polska intends to create a special-purpose subsidiary of the merged shipyards to conduct windmill production, and it expects this business to attract external capital. The September joint restructuring plan provided additional information on the investment loan for the windmill project (item 15). It includes a summary of the windmill project that was to be submitted to various banks for consideration. Two letters of interest referring to this project, from Kredyt Bank (KBC) and Fortis Bank dated 4 August and 4 September 2008 respectively, were attached to the restructuring plan. Fortis Bank claims that it is widely known to be interested in renewable energy projects. It states that ISD’s windmill project seems to be very interesting and that it would welcome further talks on specific issues. Kredyt Bank confirms that it is interested in financing renewable energy projects. The bank lists the analyses which will have to be carried out before it considers a loan application: an evaluation of the business plan and the financial model based on real assumptions which reflect market laws, an evaluation of the project’s profitability and its sensitivity to factors such as prices of materials and the exchange rate, an evaluation of existing supply contracts and the outcome of the ongoing administrative proceedings concerning the legal status of the land on which the project is to be carried out. (172) By letter of 8 July 2008 Poland provided a list of financial and production assets that ISD Polska intended to sell off in order to raise revenue of PLN 189 million. The September joint restructuring plan corrects the figure to PLN 240 million, the main difference lying in the evaluation of the main component of these divestitures - the sale of the land occupied at present by three slipways at Gdańsk Shipyard. Whereas the June restructuring plan indicated the estimated net revenue from the sale (sales price minus cost of preparing the land for sale), the September plan indicates the nominal value of revenue from the sale and includes land preparation costs in its estimate of restructuring costs. An independent valuation of the land was attached to the September plan. This valuation does not indicate the current market price of the land, but estimates its value to an investor purchasing it for development purposes (apartments, office buildings). (173) Poland explained that the slipways at Gdańsk Shipyard and the land adjoining them is currently owned by a company called Synergia 99. Gdynia Shipyard is one of Synergia’s shareholders and, under a shareholder agreement, is entitled to acquire the slipways and the land adjoining them if Synergia is wound up. According to the information provided by Poland, the division of Synergia’s assets between its shareholders depends on progress with ongoing administrative proceedings to establish the boundaries of the port of Gdańsk. (174) The September joint restructuring plan explains that the ongoing administrative proceedings do not concern the plot adjoining the slipways and includes confirmation by Synergia 99 dated 28 August 2008 that it will lodge an application with the competent authorities to exclude the land on which the slipways are located from the port area. (175) The September plan also clarified the arrangements for winding up Synergia 99 as agreed by its shareholders. This will take place in two stages: first, Synergia 99 will be divided in two companies, which will each take over earmarked assets from Synergia 99, and second, Gdynia Shipyard will become the sole owner of the company which had acquired the land on which the slipways are located. According to the plan, the first phase of the winding-up process should take place at a meeting of Synergia shareholders on 15 October 2008. The planned division is, however, conditional on changes being made to the port’s boundaries. The shareholder agreement on the arrangements for winding up Synergia 99 is limited in time. (176) According to Gdynia Shipyard’s balance sheet, the yard’s holding in Synergia 99 amounts to PLN 40 million. According to the September joint restructuring plan (30), in August 2007 the Board of Synergia 99 confirmed, with a view to concluding a shareholder agreement on the division of Synergia’s assets in the event of its being wound up, that the nominal value of Synergia 99’s assets was PLN […] (31) million, which, according to the Board, reflected their market value. An independent expertise forwarded by the Board to the shareholders at the time confirmed that the market value of the land on which the slipways are located was PLN […] million. (e) Financial projections (177) The September joint restructuring plan contains amended financial projections. These are based on certain assumptions as to inflation (WIBOR 3m), the USD/PLN exchange rate and the cost of materials, which in turn are based on estimates by external experts. The PLN/USD exchange rate adopted in June was 2,254 for 2008 and 2,32 for 2009, while the September plan, on the basis of an external report (32), adopted a PLN/USD exchange rate of 2,32 for the whole restructuring period. The steel price adopted in June for 2008 was USD 1 381/t, declining to USD 1 211/t for 2011 and rising again to USD 1 359/t for 2014. The September plan is based on higher steel prices (USD 1 539/t in 2009, USD 1 350/t in 2011 and USD 1 516/t in 2014). The June joint restructuring plan anticipated the following growth trends in wages: 7,6 % in 2009, 7 % in 2010, 6 % in 2011 and around 5 % after 2012. The September plan forecasts a lower rate of increase: 5,8 % in 2009, 5 % in 2010, 4 % in 2011 and 2012 and 3 % p.a. after 2012 (33). The June restructuring plan forecast inflation of around 2,2 %. The September plan forecasts higher inflation, starting at 3,4 % in 2009 (34) and gradually decreasing (to 2,5-2,6 % after 2012) (35). (178) The main change in financial projections in the September plan compared with the June plan concerns revenue from sales of vessels and from non-shipbuilding activities. In particular the September plan forecasts substantially higher prices for car carriers, one of the two main products, a changed assumption which heavily influences the profit and loss account forecasts. (179) The forecast for the consolidated profit and loss account for shipbuilding and non-shipbuilding activities in the September plan shows positive profit margins as of 2009: (4,1 % in 2009, 3,1 % in 2010, 7,4 % in 2011 and 6,4 % at the end of the restructuring period in 2012). Profit margins will decrease to 4,3 % in 2014 (downturn on the market) and then gradually increase to 7,7 % in 2017. (180) The June joint restructuring plan included a short version of a sensitivity analysis which examined the effects of certain changes in the main underlying assumptions on the 10-year EBIDTA and 10-year accumulated profits. In particular, it analyses the effects of a further appreciation of 5 groszy in the PLN and a further 5 % increase in steel prices and wages. The September joint restructuring plan includes a new and more detailed sensitivity analysis, showing, in particular, the impact of a 5 % appreciation in the PLN against the USD. The September joint restructuring plan assumes that Poland will adopt the euro in 2013 and that thereafter the yard’s operations will not be affected by fluctuations in the PLN/USD exchange rate. The new sensitivity analysis shows the impact of a 5 % depreciation in the USD against the euro in 2013-2017 (i.e. after Poland presumably adopts the euro). (181) According to the financial projections in the June plan, non-discounted payback (disregarding the changing value of money over time) will not be achieved until the 11th year of operations, i.e. in 2019. This calculation took into account only the investor’s financial exposure (PLN 440 million), which means that accumulated cash flows for the period under review are compared only with capital injections by the investor and disregard the fact that the state is expected to make a substantial capital injection first. The plan assumes that restructuring costs of PLN 712 million approx. will be financed from the company’s future cash flows. (182) The September joint restructuring plan contains a discounted calculation of the payback period, which amounts to 10 years. The plan also assumes that a large part of the restructuring costs (PLN 712 million) (36) will be covered by future cash flows. 7. RESTRUCTURING PLAN OF PSC (183) PSC was set up in Poland in 2007 for the purpose of acquiring Gdynia Shipyard. It belongs to two companies, Marine Co and Maritim Shipyard, controlled by Polish businessman Mr Janusz Baran. The two companies have operated since the 1990s in Gdynia, Gdańsk and Szczecin, producing ships and boats and working as a subcontractor for larger shipyards, mainly in Germany, Norway, the Netherlands and France, building blocks and sections and providing services. The group as a whole employs 1 500 people. (a) Sales strategy (184) As regards market strategy, the plan assumes that the company will concentrate on container vessels, car carriers and gas tankers and that up to 10 platform supply vessels will be produced per annum. It is also assumed that in future the yard will produce 12 vessels per annum, this being the yard’s capacity after the closure of the small dock. The section on future production assumes that an increasing number of vessels will be produced (rising from 6 in 2008 to 12 in 2009, 17 in 2010 and 21 in 2012). The financial model as submitted, on the basis of which the financial projections were apparently prepared, also assumes that output will increase to 21 vessels in 2012. (185) In addition, the plan envisages diversifying activities and setting up a container terminal within the current area of the yard. According to the plan, following the capacity reduction the yard would have a redundant coastal strip on which a container terminal with capacity of 150 000 TEU p.a. could be built. (b) Industrial and operational restructuring (186) The main restructuring measures proposed are industrial restructuring by implementing an investment programme designed to increase productivity, cut costs and shorten the production cycle. The estimated cost of the shipbuilding investment programme is EUR 80 625 000. Provision has also been made for investments of PLN 50 million (about EUR 15 million) for the development of a container terminal. This would mean total investment costs of EUR 95,6 million. However, another part of the restructuring plan estimates total investments at EUR 131 million (PLN 443 million). The difference between the two figures is not explained in the plan. According to the plan, implementation of these measures should cut costs per vessel by 25 % over the 5-year period. (187) The plan also envisages the implementation of an integrated IT system managing all the areas of the yard’s activity, i.e. design, supplies, stocks, steel processing, planning, production supervision and accounting. (188) The plan envisages either maintaining the current workforce or reducing it by 650. It is not clear which factors would influence the choice of either of the two options. The plan envisages implementing an incentive-based pay system. (189) As regards one of the yard’s main problems, i.e. exposure to exchange-rate fluctuations and rising steel prices, the plan proposes incorporating indexation clauses into contracts and natural hedging (incurring costs in the currency of revenue). (190) The plan also assumes that ship financing will be ensured by way of advance payments guaranteed by the Export Credit Insurance Corporation at an advantageous premium compared with its normal practice for healthy companies, and bridging loans guaranteed by the Treasury. (c) Financial restructuring (191) As regards financial restructuring, the plan assumes that existing contracts will be renegotiated to reduce anticipated losses. According to the plan, restructuring should increase prices by 30 % (to the level prevailing on the market) and generate additional revenue of USD 100 million. (192) Implementation of the plan is contingent on the State awarding additional aid in the form of a capital injection of PLN 515 million, cancelling and rescheduling public-law debt to a total amount of PLN 497 million and covering any other accumulated and potential liabilities of the yard (such as future losses on existing contracts or litigation). Lastly, the investor calls on the State to ensure that the Export Credit Insurance Corporation guarantees production during the restructuring period at an advantageous premium compared with its normal practice for healthy companies and that the Treasury provides guarantees for working capital to an amount of PLN 297 million. (d) Own contribution (193) As regards own contribution, the plan provides for a capital injection by the investor of PLN 500 million to finance the investments and cover expected losses on existing contracts. The plan also suggests that the own contribution to the restructuring process also include revenue of PLN 50 million from the planned sale of assets and revenue from the sale of assets which took place after accession (PLN 124,5 million). It could be argued that this increases the own contribution to PLN 675 million. However, in the restructuring plan the investor declares an own contribution of only PLN 475 million. (e) Financial projections (194) The financial projections are based on a stable currency exchange rate of PLN 3,46 per euro and PLN 2,2 per USD. The forecasts are based on an assumption that the number of vessels built will increase to 21 in 2012 and that the investor actually plans to expand shipbuilding at the yard: sales are expected to amount to PLN 1,2 billion in 2008 and it is assumed that they will increase constantly, reaching PLN 2,6 billion by 2012 (up 116 % on 2008). 8. COUNTERVAILING MEASURES (195) In cooperation with its external consultant and the yard, the Commission adopted the following methodology for evaluating the capacity reduction proposed as a countervailing measure by Poland. (196) For the countervailing measures to be effective, the capacity reduction must be sufficient to ensure that the yard’s future capacity after restructuring is lower than at present. (197) The Commission first assessed the yard’s current technical capacity and stated that the assembly of vessels at the docks was one of the bottlenecks in the yard’s production process which could not be easily resolved by outsourcing. Under the methodology used by the Commission, which is undisputed by the Polish authorities or the yard, capacity is calculated with reference to the duration of assembly time at the dock and a typical portfolio of vessels (since assembly of vessels with varying CGT values may take the same amount of time). (198) Current capacity takes into account the time actually needed for the assembly of a (certain type of) vessel at the docks. This time should reflect all the current shortcomings in the production process, i.e. low productivity, bottlenecks, obsolete assets, inefficient production flows, and problems with the workforce. The financial constraints affecting the yard as a result of its difficult financial situation are the only factor by which assembly time may be adjusted. Irregular or lack of access to working capital can seriously disrupt the production process. Since this is an external factor inherent to all companies in financial difficulty and not linked to inefficiency on the part of the company itself, the Commission took the view that the yard’s actual performance could be adjusted by assuming easy access to working capital. (199) Estimated future capacity takes into account the time probably needed for the assembly of a (certain type of) vessel at the dock, on the assumption that the yard’s productivity is comparable to a benchmark set by other competitive European shipyards. In other words, the effects of the necessary modernisation of the facilities and the introduction of optimal working conditions (organisation, supplies, workforce) should be taken into account. (200) Modernisation is unavoidable if the yard wishes to restore long-term viability. The related productivity increase will mean the yard reduces input and speeds up production. As various aspects of production improve, capacity, understood as the ability to build a certain number of vessels, will increase. It should therefore be noted that the closure of some facilities, such as the proposed closure of the SD I dry dock at Gdynia Shipyard, can be entirely offset by the increase in the capacity of the remaining dock. For the countervailing measures to serve their purpose, the capacity reduction must be such that the yard’s capacity at the end of restructuring, i.e. after investments and the increase in productivity, is lower than at present. Only in this way can the twin goals of long-term viability, which requires an increase in productivity, and limiting any distortion of competition to the minimum be reconciled. (201) To ensure that the calculation method for current and future capacity is consistent, the same product mix, i.e. the same types of vessels, should be used. Alternatively, an ‘average vessel’ (i.e. with average CGT on the basis of the yard’s order book) could be used. (202) At the outset, Gdynia Shipyard indicated that its technical capacity amounted to 540 000 CGT. After the above methodology had been clarified and agreed upon by the Commission and Gdynia Shipyard, the yard indicated that the technical assumptions for calculating its current capacity, in so far as it was free from financial constraints, were a docking cycle of 3 months with the parallel assembly of up to three vessels in various stages of completion (partial use of the semi-tandem method on the SD II large dock), resulting in the construction of up to 14 vessels per annum. The hypothetical portfolio was typical for the yard, which was confirmed by the existing order book and by the sales strategy presented in the 2006 restructuring plan. With an average CGT of 27 000 per vessel, current capacity without financial constraints was estimated at 378 000 CGT. (203) In order to examine the impact of existing financial constraints on the production process (i.e. by how many weeks/months the production cycle is extended as a result of delays in supplies purely because of a lack of working capital) and to assess whether the seriousness of such constraints is over- or underestimated, the Commission compared this figure with the best result in recent years (12 vessels with a total CGT of 272 000 in 2002). First, the Commission noted that the discrepancy between the best result in 2002 and current technical capacity was partly due to differences in the order books. The yard currently produced vessels with a higher CGT value. Had the yard produced vessels with an average CGT of 27 000 in 2002, its total output would have been 324 000 CGT. The remaining difference can be attributed to the impact of financial constraints on the production process and corresponds to about two vessels with an average CGT, i.e. 14 %, which the Commission regarded as a reasonable assumption. (204) As to its future capacity, assuming that both docks were utilised, the yard explained that the large SD II dock could be used for parallel building and for the semi-tandem building method, so that up to four hulls in various stages of completion could be built in parallel. In this way, the yard would be able to build 18 vessels, assuming a docking cycle of 3 months (37). Assuming an average CGT per vessel of 27 000, the yard’s future capacity with both docks would be 486 000 CGT. The yard’s future capacity after the closure of the small SD I dock would be 12 vessels or 324 000 CGT, assuming an average CGT per vessel of 27 000 CGT. (205) On the basis of these figures, the Commission found that capacity reduction after the closure of the small SD I dock would correspond to about 14 %. Taking into account that the yard would be left with only one launching facility, the SD II dry dock, and that it had demonstrated by means of a detailed, credible break-even analysis that any reduction in the capacity of the SD II dry dock, in addition to the closure of the SD I dock, would endanger the yard’s long-term viability, the Commission concluded on a preliminary basis that the closure of the SD I dock proposed by Poland would be a sufficient countervailing measure. (206) ISD Polska’s joint restructuring plan proposed an alternative set of countervailing measures in view of the business strategy adopted. The plan envisages the following countervailing measures in the context of the State aid investigation of Gdańsk Shipyard and Gdynia Shipyard: the closure of three slipways at Gdańsk Shipyard by 31 December 2008 in so far as it is possible to transfer existing production at Gdańsk Shipyard to the small dock at Gdynia in the light of the technical, organisational and legal obstacles. At the meeting on 8 July 2008 ISD Polska stated that it assumed that the work to fit out the small dry dock at Gdynia would not allow the slipways to be closed before the second half of 2009. The September joint restructuring plan proposes deferring the closure of two slipways until June 2009 and a third slipway until October 2009 (38). In addition, the yard’s capacity will be limited to 400 000 CGT per annum for 10 years as of Poland’s accession to the European Union, i.e. until 2014. (207) At the meeting on 30 September ISD Polska informed the Commission that, as an additional countervailing measure, it could further cut its production to 360 000 CGT per annum for a 10-year period as of the point at which the slipways closed. ISD Polska also indicated that it could close the slipways earlier than envisaged in the restructuring plan of 12 September, i.e. it could close slipways B3 and B5 by end-April 2009 and slipway B1 by end-August 2009. (208) PSC’s restructuring plan envisages the sale of the smaller dock at the beginning of 2009. The anticipated revenue of PLN 170 million should increase the yard’s working capital. 9. STATE AID GRANTED TO GDYNIA SHIPYARD (SITUATION IN JUNE 2008) (209) According to the Polish authorities, Gdynia Shipyard has received the State aid listed in Tables 1-4 since 1 May 2004. (210) Table 1 sets out the aid granted between 1 May 2004, the date of Poland’s accession to the EU, and 30 June 2007. Poland notified these measures by letter of 13 July 2007. The list includes some of the measures described in Annex I, part B of the decision to open a formal investigation. (211) Poland provided additional explanations with regard to the restructuring of liabilities under Chapter 5a. The Polish authorities explained that the yard transferred to the Operator (39) assets to the value of at least 45 % of the value of the transferred liabilities (40). According to Poland, the aid element is therefore equivalent to 55 % of the nominal value of the liabilities transferred to the Operator. This nominal value is set out in Table 1 below. (212) The loans benefiting from the Treasury guarantees listed in Table 1 were granted at an interest rate equal to LIBOR 1M + 100 basis points, whereas the risk of default when the guarantees were issued was estimated by the Polish authorities at 60-70 %. The Treasury guarantees were granted against collateral in the form of a blank promissory note issued by the yard and a notarial deed in which the yard agreed to the enforcement of its assets up to 120 % of the value of the guarantee. The Treasury charged a premium equivalent to 0,4 % of the guaranteed amount. (213) Table 1 also includes loans granted by Korporacja Polskie Stocznie (KPS) used to finance the yard’s working capital requirements. Poland claims in its submissions of 11 July 2007 and 9 January 2008 that these loans did not constitute State aid because the interest charged corresponded to the risk assessment of the particular project for which the loans were sought. (214) For the loans granted in 2005-2007, KPS charged interest ranging from 9,6 % to 13,46 %, with an average fixed interest rate of 10,64 %. It also charged a one-off fee ranging from 0,1 % to 0,4 %. According to the Polish authorities, KPS required collateral in the form of acceptance of enforcement, an agreement on cession of receivables, an unconditional payment order, a blank promissory note or asset pledges (41). (215) KPS was created in 2004 as a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Industrial Development Agency to operate as a risk capital fund for the Agency. Its initial role was to serve as a vehicle for the consolidation of the three largest shipyards in Poland, a project abandoned in 2006. According to the information provided by Poland in 2006 (42), KPS was to be financed by a capital injection from the Industrial Development Agency, by a contribution in kind (shares in third companies) provided by the Agency and by a revolving bank loan guaranteed by the Agency, which was specifically earmarked as financial aid for the shipyards. According to the Polish Government’s website, KPS was also to support shipbuilding operations in Poland by issuing bonds fully guaranteed by the Industrial Development Agency. Indeed, the document entitled ‘A strategy for the shipbuilding sector (maritime construction shipyards) in Poland 2006-2010’ (43) confirms that KPS should generate funds by issuing debt instruments to an amount of around USD 100 million, secured on the assets earmarked for restructuring the shipbuilding industry in the form of funds transferred by the Treasury to the Industrial Development Agency. (216) Table 2 indicates the measures which the Commission was informed of after 13 July 2007 by letters of 6 December 2007 and 12 February 2008: two loans from the Industrial Development Agency to finance working capital (wages and commercial liabilities). Table 2 also indicates a loan granted by KPS further to its decision No 02/11/2007, which the Commission was informed of by letter dated 9 January 2008 (44); however, the Commission does not have any detailed information on the amount and life of this loan. KPS charged interest of 10,5 % and a one-off fee of 0,1 %. (217) Considering the yard’s precarious financial situation, the Commission cannot exclude that further State aid of a similar nature has been granted to Gdynia Shipyard. (218) Table 3 lists Gdynia Shipyard’s outstanding public-law liabilities as per 30 September 2007. This information was provided by Poland on 9 January 2008. Poland confirmed in that letter that Gdynia Shipyard had not been settling its public-law liabilities regularly. The yard had been repaying its debts to the social security office (ZUS) in as far as possible in view of its financial situation when these liabilities fell due. (219) According to Annex 1 to the letter from Poland of 9 January 2008, the outstanding liabilities to the relevant public bodies as at 1 May 2004 amounted to PLN 254 million approx. Between 1 May 2005 and 30 September 2007, new liabilities of some PLN 362 million accrued. During that time Gdynia Shipyard actually repaid about PLN 194 million (45). As at 30 September 2007 the outstanding liabilities amounted to about PLN 423 million. (220) Gdynia Shipyard was planning to repay at least part of the outstanding liabilities from the proceeds of the capital injection by the Treasury of PLN 515 million, which was itself conditional on a capital injection from a private investor selected by way of the privatisation process described above. (221) Lastly, after Poland’s accession to the EU, Gdynia Shipyard received some aid that Poland deems to ‘have been granted for purposes other than restructuring’ (Table 4 below). This was State aid for R&D and training totalling PLN 412 000. (222) Gdynia Shipyard has also received aid in addition to the aid listed in Tables 1-4 below. (223) First, in its letter of 11 July 2007 (46), Poland notified a set of measures designated as ‘measures to be granted […] between 1 July 2007 and the end of the restructuring process’. (224) The Commission notes above all that these measures include a possible write-off of the interest accrued between 1 July 2003 and 15 March 2005 on public-law liabilities restructured under Chapter 5a of a total amount of PLN 6 905 304. According to Poland, whether this interest should be written off is the object of a dispute between Gdynia Shipyard and the competent Polish authorities in the national courts. Since this interest is ancillary to the main liabilities restructured under Chapter 5a and listed in Table 1 below, the Commission considers that cancellation of the interest also constitutes State aid up to the full amount (47) and is caught by this decision. (225) The Commission also notes that this table contains several measures consisting of a deferral of payment or write-off of public-law liabilities. It is not clear to what extent these measures overlap with the public-law liabilities listed in Annex 1 to the letter from Poland of 9 January 2008 (and summarised in Table 3 below). (226) Most importantly, Gdynia Shipyard benefited from production guarantees from the Export Credit Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as ‘advance payment guarantees’ or as ‘Export Credit Insurance Corporation guarantees’). Virtually all shipbuilding from 1 May 2004 was financed thanks to these guarantees. In total, between 1 May 2004 and 12 June 2008 Gdynia Shipyard received 108 guarantees for a total value of PLN 3 095 529 638 for vessels built at Gdynia (not at Gdańsk Shipyard, which was previously a subsidiary of Gdynia Shipyard) (48). In its submission of 11 July 2007 Poland informed the Commission that the Export Credit Insurance Corporation would continue to issue guarantees to Gdynia Shipyard until end-2008. (227) A common feature of the industry is that shipyards typically are not able to raise sufficient working capital for the construction of vessels internally and rely on external financing, whether through borrowing (so-called production loans) or advance payments from shipowners to pre-finance production. Shipowners typically pay 80 % of the price upfront in instalments, coinciding with certain decisive stages of the vessel’s completion, the remaining 20 % being paid on delivery. Shipowners’ involvement in financing shipbuilding is therefore crucial. Export Credit Insurance Corporation guarantees were provided to Gdynia Shipyard to secure advance payments from shipowners against the risk of the shipyard defaulting on its obligation to deliver the vessel. (228) Various submissions by Poland on the operation of the Export Credit Insurance Corporation guarantee system (49) indicate that these guarantees were granted to Gdynia Shipyard in the following way. First, a contract was signed with the shipowner, which was typically conditional on the yard proving within a certain period of time that financing of production would be guaranteed by the Export Credit Insurance Corporation. The Export Credit Insurance Corporation issued a resolution undertaking to ensure financing of the ship as a whole by guaranteeing the advance payments. In subsequent individual agreements, the Export Credit Insurance Corporation activated the guarantee for each individual advance payment (typically four). Typically the Export Credit Insurance Corporation’s overall exposure to the risk of the shipyard defaulting on its obligation to deliver the vessel was 80 % of the purchase price, i.e. the total amount of the advance payments made by the shipowner prior to delivery. This overall exposure was known when the Export Credit Insurance Corporation issued the resolution securing the financing of the ship by the shipowner. The guarantee expired on delivery of the vessel. (229) The Export Credit Insurance Corporation’s operations are varied (50) and are essentially divided between commercial activities and activities effected on behalf of, and guaranteed by, the Treasury. A separate bank account in the name of ‘Interes Narodowy’ is kept for the purpose of the latter activities. The guarantees granted to Gdynia Shipyard are part of the business re-guaranteed by the Treasury. (230) According to the information provided by Poland, the Export Credit Insurance Corporation granted advance payment guarantees to Gdynia Shipyard against a fee depending on the amount of the guarantee. The fee amounts to 2 % per annum for guarantees not exceeding PLN 35 million and 1 % per annum for guarantees exceeding PLN 35 million. The Export Credit Insurance Corporation requires as collateral the transfer of ownership of the ship, the ship under construction and the construction materials. The same conditions should apply to Export Credit Insurance Corporation guarantees granted before the end of the restructuring period, i.e. before 2012. (231) Lastly, the Commission notes that on 3 June 2008 Poland adopted a decision to award Gdynia Shipyard an additional capital injection of PLN 515 million. (232) Tables 1-4 and the above information show that Gdynia Shipyard has benefited from aid with a total nominal value of PLN 5 018 862 443 (about EUR 1 434 million) since 1 May 2004. Table 1 State aid granted to Gdynia Shipyard between 1 May 2004 and 30 June 2007, according to the information provided by the Polish authorities Item No Awarding authority Aid instrument Legal basis Number of decision or agreement Date on which aid was granted Entry into force Period for which aid was granted Nominal value of aid (PLN) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1. Treasury Guarantee - vessel No 8276/1 Warranties and guarantees issued by the Treasury and some Legal Persons Act of 8 May 1997 (Journal of Laws 2003/174, item 1689, as amended) Cabinet Decree No 198/2004 of 24.8.2004 24.8.2004 3.9.2004 Until 30.3.2006 75 000 000,00 2. Treasury Guarantee - vessel No 8276/2 Cabinet Decree No 198/2004 of 24.8.2004 24.8.2004 3.9.2004 Until 11.12.2006 75 000 000,00 3. Treasury Guarantee - vessels Nos 8245/1-4 Cabinet Decree No 213/2004 of 7.9.2004 7.9.2004 17.9.2004 Until 27.2.2007 82 531 200,00 4. Treasury Guarantee - vessels Nos 8148/11 and 8184/14-17 Cabinet Decree No 222/2004 of 21.9.2004 21.9.2004 1.10.2004 Until 15.1.2008 147 662 619,46 5. Marshal of Pomerania Province Write-off Act of 30.10.2002 Decision No UPP/11/3/2005 of the Chairman of the Industrial Development Agency of 15.3.2005 4.1.2005 15.3.2005 Single write-off 600 568,04 (51) 6. State Fund for Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons Write-off Decision No UPP/11/3/2005 of the Chairman of the Industrial Development Agency of 15.3.2005 4.1.2005 15.3.2005 Single write-off 5 331 071,54 (51) 7. Pomerania Province Write-off Decision No UPP/11/3/2005 of the Chairman of the Industrial Development Agency of 15.3.2005 4.1.2005 15.3.2005 Single write-off 2 414 962,11 (51) 8. ZUS Write-off Decision No UPP/11/3/2005 of the Chairman of the Industrial Development Agency of 15.3.2005 4.1.2005 15.3.2005 Single write-off 23 048 186,93 (51) 9. Industrial Development Agency Capital injection Article 56, Privatisation Act (Journal of Laws 2002/171, item 1397, as amended) Agreement (Notarial deed Rep. A No 3255/2005) 23.6.2005 27.6.2005 Single capital injection 40 000 000,00 10. Association of municipalities Arrangement of repayment in instalments Act of 30.10.2002 No 200364/1/ZR -Restructuring agreement of 22.11.2004 22.11.2004 Monthly instalments paid from 31.12.2004 to 28.2.2006 Single transaction 419 543,25 11. Treasury Construction guarantee for vessels: 8184/21-25 Warranties and guarantees issued by the Treasury and some Legal Persons Act of 8 May 1997 (Journal of Laws 2003/174, item 1689, as amended) Cabinet Decree No 93/2005 12.4.2005 12.9.2007 Until 31.12.2007 97 098 200,00 12. KPS loan Activity of KPS according to the articles of association Loan agreement No 1/2/2005 10.2.2005 10.2.2005 8.3.2005 7 500 000,00 13. KPS loan Activity of KPS according to the articles of association Loan agreement No 2/4/2005 12.4.2005 20.4.2005 5.5.2005 7 500 000,00 14. KPS loan Activity of KPS according to the articles of association Loan agreement No 4/9/2005 21.9.2005 31.10.2005 4.1.2006 14 500 000,00 15. KPS loan Activity of KPS according to the articles of association Loan agreement No 2/7/2006 24.7.2006 3.8.2006 29.11.2006 10 000 000,00 16. KPS loan Activity of KPS according to the articles of association Loan agreement No 1/4/2006 21.4.2006 26.4.2006 30.7.2007 4 000 000,00 17. KPS loan Activity of KPS according to the articles of association Loan agreement No 1/12/2006 5.12.2006 5.12.2006 7.2.2006 5 500 000,00 11.12.2006 2 300 000,00 18. KPS loan Activity of KPS according to the articles of association Loan agreement No 1/3/2007 20.3.2007 20.3.2007 20.9.2007 6 200 000,00 29.3.2007 2 000 000,00 23.4.2007 5 800 000,00 19. ZUS Arrangement of repayment in instalments Application by the debtor Formally not yet granted but being implemented in practice In instalments until end-2008 In instalments until end-2008 34 272 360,17 Total 648 678 711,50 Table 2 Additional State aid granted to Gdynia Shipyard between 1 June 2007 and 15 July 2008, according to the information provided by the Polish authorities No Awarding authority Aid instrument Legal basis Number of decision or agreement Date on which aid was granted Entry into force Period for which aid was granted Nominal value of aid (PLN) 20. Industrial Development Agency Loan Article 56, Privatisation Act (Journal of Laws 2002/171, item 1397, as amended) Loan agreement No OPP/11/07 4.12.2007 in two instalments: 5.12.2007 4.1.2008 No later than 31.5.2008 40 000 000 21. Industrial Development Agency Loan 5.2.2008 54 000 000 22. KPS Loan Activity of KPS according to the articles of association Loan agreement No 2.11.2007 ? Table 3 Public-law liabilities outstanding as at 30 September 2007 according to the information provided by the Polish authorities No Awarding authority Liabilities concerned Amount outstanding as at 30 September 2007 (PLN) 23. ZUS Deferral of premiums, payment in instalments May 2004 - September 2007 356 708 912 24. State Fund for Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons Deferral of premiums, payment in instalments May 2004 - September 2007 12 192 821 25. City of Gdańsk Deferral of real estate tax, payment in instalments May 2004 - September 2007 50 872 523 26. City of Gdańsk Deferral of land use fee, payment in instalments 2005-2007 2 859 684 27. Marshal of Pomerania Province Deferral of environmental fee, payment in instalments May 2004 - September 2007 361 781 Total 422 995 722 Table 4 State aid to Gdynia Shipyard for purposes other than restructuring, according to the information provided by the Polish authorities No Awarding authority Aid instrument Purpose Legal basis Number of decision or agreement Date on which aid was granted Entry into force Period for which aid was granted Nominal value of aid (PLN) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 28. Industrial Development Agency Grant R&D Project part of INTERREG IIIC - 2005 Budget Act of 22.12.2004, Journal of Laws No 278 of 29.12.2004, item 2755 Payment note No 05/ERR/2006 30.5.2006 30.5.2006 One-off subsidy 1 322,19 29. Ministry of Education and Research Grant Decree of the Chairman of the State Committee for Scientific Research of 30.11.2001 (Journal of Laws No 146, item 1642, as amended) EU project G3RD-CT-2002-00822-FASTPOD 26.6.2006 26.6.2006 One-off subsidy 49 571,98 30. Ministry of Education and Research Grant Decision No 03797/C.ZR6-6/2005 12.12.2005 20.11.2006 Project to be implemented by 31.1.2009 279 825,51 31. Minister for Science and Higher Education Grant Financing of Science Act of 8.10.2004 (Journal of Laws No 238, item 2390, as amended) Decision No 03858/C.ZR8-6/2006 1.9.2006 20.11.2006 Project to be implemented by 31.3.2009 36 509,45 32. Minister for Science and Higher Education Grant R&D State Committee for Scientific Research Act of 12.1.1991 (Journal of Laws No 33 of 2001, item 389) Decision No 960/E-594/SPB/5.PR UE/DZ 29/2003-2005 31.1.2003 30.6.2005 30.6.2005 37 906,00 33. Polish Agency for Enterprise Development Grant Decree of the Minister for the Economy and Labour of 16.9.2004 on the award by Poland (Industrial Development Agency) of financial aid as part of the Human Resources 2004-2006 Sectoral Operational Programme (Journal of Laws 2007, item 2115) Agreement No 30/2006/efs/gdy training financed by ESF of 20.1.2006 2.2.2006 25.5.2006 One-off subsidy 4 253,02 34. Polish Agency for Enterprise Development Grant Decree of the Minister for the Economy and Labour of 16.9.2004 on the award by Poland (Industrial Development Agency) of financial aid as part of the Human Resources 2004-2006 Sectoral Operational Programme (Journal of Laws 2007, item 2115) Agreement Nr WSAiB/039 1.2.2007 13.3.2007 One-off subsidy 2 209,94 Total 411 598,09 III. EVALUATION 1. COMPETENCES OF THE COMMISSION (233) Annex IV, point 3 of the Accession Treaty describes the interim mechanism procedure. It constitutes a legal framework for the assessment of aid schemes and individual aid measures which are put into effect in a new Member State before the date of its accession to the EU and are still applicable after accession. (234) Measures that were put into effect before accession and are not applicable after accession cannot be examined by the Commission either under the interim mechanism procedure or under the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty. (235) However, measures that were not put into effect before accession will be assessed by the Commission as notified aid or as unlawful aid pursuant to the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty. (236) The criterion used to determine the point in time when a given measure was put into effect is the legally binding act by which the competent national authority undertakes to award aid (52). Whether an administrative act is legally binding is a matter of national law. The Commission, however, must be able to review, especially in border-line cases, these administrative acts and, judging on their form and content, to assess whether they could have given rise to legitimate expectations of the beneficiaries enforceable before a Polish court of law. This capacity to review national administrative acts is indispensable for the exercise of the Commission’s exclusive competence to approve derogations from the general prohibition of State aid with regard to measures put into effect in Poland after 1 May 2004. (237) A measure put into effect prior to accession is applicable after accession if it can still give rise to the award of additional aid or to an increase in the amount of aid already granted, i.e. if the precise economic exposure of the State is not known on the date on which the measure was put into effect and remains unknown on the date of accession. (238) In its decision to open the formal investigation, the Commission concluded, on the basis of the information provided by Poland, that a series of measures of which it had been notified on 29 April 2004 actually constituted new aid, either unlawful or notified, because it was granted after 1 May 2004, the date of Poland’s accession to the EU. The comments provided by Poland and third parties after the investigation was opened did not lead the Commission to alter its conclusion. In particular, the Commission maintains that it is competent to assess whether the measures indicated in Annex I, part B to the decision to open the formal investigation are compatible with the common market. The Commission nevertheless notes that some of these measures have been abandoned (measures 33 and 34 of Annex I, part B to the decision to open the formal investigation). (239) Below the Commission indicates why it cannot accept the arguments put forward by Poland and the interested parties. (a) Restructuring of public-law debt under Chapter 5a (240) The Commission agrees with the recipient that the event which gave rise to the partial write-off of public-law liabilities under Chapter 5a was the adoption of the restructuring decision by the Chairman of the Industrial Development Agency. The Commission, however, cannot accept the submission that this decision was adopted on 19 April 2004, i.e. prior to accession. The Commission explained the reasons for its stance in the decision to open the formal investigation, and neither Poland nor the recipient has submitted any further arguments. The Commission reiterates that the decision of 19 April merely approved the 2004 restructuring plan, and did not restructure public-law liabilities pursuant to Chapter 5a. The Chairman of the Industrial Development Agency could not issue the restructuring decision before accession because he did not have, as required by Chapter 5a, the agreement of all the public-law creditors involved in restructuring and of the Operator, the company managing the restructuring operation (53). The Commission notes that the Chairman of the Industrial Development Agency recognised this fact when he mentioned in his decision of 19 April 2004 that a further decision would be necessary to complete restructuring under Chapter 5a and when he eventually issued the restructuring decisions on 4 January 2005, i.e. after accession. (241) The Commission cannot accept the recipient’s argument that the agreement of all the public-law creditors involved to restructure their receivables from Gdynia Shipyard under Chapter 5a constituted the legally binding act required by the Fleuren Compost judgment. The recipient basically argued that Chapter 5a was not lex specialis in relation to other laws permitting restructuring of public-law liabilities and that the function of the Chairman of the Industrial Development Agency was to administer and facilitate the restructuring process, not to replace the authorities involved and competent for specific liabilities. The Commission notes that this interpretation of Polish law is at odds with all the submissions from Poland to date and with the text and logic of Chapter 5a itself. Admittedly, as the recipient argued, the Act of 30 October 2002‘does not prohibit the restructuring authorities from issuing any write-off decisions in so far as they are allowed to do so by general provisions’. Nevertheless, if they did so, those liabilities would no longer fall under Chapter 5a with all the advantages associated therewith and that the recipient itself has enumerated as follows: eligibility for a loan from the Industrial Development Agency, suspension of any ongoing enforcement proceedings, exemption from bankruptcy and non-accrual of interest on amounts due. (242) The Commission cannot accept the recipient’s argument that no interest accrued after 30 June 2006 on the liabilities restructured under Chapter 5a. This interpretation of Polish law was rejected by Poland. In addition, Poland notified as new aid the planned (partial) write-off of interest accrued after 30 June 2006, so it is obvious that this interest had actually accrued. (b) Measures 28-34 of Annex I, part B to the decision to open the formal investigation (243) The Commission cannot accept Poland’s argument that this aid was granted de facto by virtue of the fact that all the relevant awarding authorities made verbal statements at a meeting of the Government working group on the restructuring of shipyards in Poland (the shipbuilding industry team). Such statements, if any, were purely verbal and further implementing measures were clearly necessary to create legitimate expectations under Polish law. (c) Capital injection from the Industrial Development Agency (244) The recipient’s argument that the aid was granted before accession because the precise economic exposure was known before that date stems from a misunderstanding of Annex IV, point 3 to the Accession Treaty. To qualify as previous aid, a measure must fulfil two requirements: it must have been granted before accession (which is equivalent to a legally binding decision by the competent awarding authority) and it must ‘not be applicable after accession’. These are two separate and cumulative conditions. The recipient’s argument that the State’s economic exposure was known before accession refers to the second of these requirements and not to the point in time at which the aid was granted. (245) The Commission cannot accept Poland’s argument that the requirement to register the subscription of new shares within 6 months was purely formal. The Commission notes that, in reality, two distinct new decisions were necessary after the 6-month period expired: a new resolution of the General Assembly on the capital increase and the subscription itself. It seems to be the case that, under Polish commercial law, the entitlement of a company to a capital injection becomes effective on the date when the resolution to increase the capital is adopted (i.e. the first resolution of 17 February 2004). Registration is of significance for the company’s external contacts, not for relations with its shareholders. However, the lack of registration also has legal effects on the relationship between the company and its shareholders: if it is not effected within 6 months, the resolution to increase the company’s capital expires and the capital injection cannot take place. In these circumstances, a new resolution by the shareholders is required in order to increase the company’s capital. Such a resolution was indeed adopted by the General Assembly on 4 March 2005. However, the fact that the resolution was not adopted unanimously (three major shareholders objected) demonstrates that this resolution cannot be regarded as a mere formal requirement. The Commission also notes that the capital was eventually subscribed by the Industrial Development Agency, not the Treasury. The resolution of 17 February 2004 cannot therefore be regarded as a final binding decision to award aid in the form of a capital injection listed as measure 32 of Annex I, part B to the decision to open the formal investigation. (246) Lastly, the Commission notes that neither Poland nor the recipient has contested its conclusion that measures 19-27 of Annex I, part B to the decision to open the formal investigation constituted new aid and thus fall under the remit of the Commission under Article 88 of the EC Treaty. 2. STATE AID WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 87(1) OF THE EC TREATY 2.1. EXISTENCE OF STATE AID (247) Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty states that any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods and affects trade between Member States is incompatible with the common market. (248) The Commission finds that all the aid described in recitals 209-232 was granted by the State or through State resources and, being directed to one particular undertaking, was selective. (249) Gdynia Shipyard is one of the largest European shipyards and actively competes on the container ship market with shipyards in particular in Germany and Denmark, as Poland and the recipient have acknowledged, and as was noted by Denmark and the Danish shipbuilding association in their comments on the Commission’s decision to open the formal investigation. Container vessels accounted for 26 % of European shipyards’ order books at the end of 2006 (54). (250) It appears to be the case that Gdynia Shipyard is the only yard within the EU which produced a certain type of ro-ro vessel: big car carriers. This specialisation, however, does not mean that Gdynia Shipyard is not in competition, at least potentially, with other yards in the EU. The Commission notes that there exists a significant level of supply-side substitutability, at least in the cargo ships segment (55), even though, considering the demand structure for various categories of cargo ship, these vessels do not belong to a single market. (251) This means that other shipyards in the EU may not encounter significant barriers to launching production of car carriers, at least not of a technological nature (production facilities, know-how etc.). However, the continuous subsidising of Gdynia Shipyard, which allowed it to conclude contracts without full recognition and remuneration of all the risks involved, could have constituted a significant barrier for other shipyards to entry on the car carriers market. (252) The Commission notes that Gdynia Shipyard also operates in other cargo ship segments by offering products such as multi-purpose vessels, liquefied petroleum gas carriers, product and chemical tankers and bulk carriers. For example product and chemical tankers constituted about 8 % of the order book of European shipyards at the end of 2006 (56). Yards in Germany and Romania are particularly active in these segments. (253) On the basis of the above, the Commission concludes that the State aid granted to Gdynia Shipyard affected trade between Member States. (254) Lastly, the Commission needs to determine whether the measures granted to Gdynia Shipyard conferred an undue advantage on it and thereby distorted or threatened to distort competition. The Commission notes that the Polish authorities did not dispute the classification of the measures covered by the present decision as State aid, with the exception of the loans granted by KPS and the guarantees provided by the Export Credit Insurance Corporation which, in the view of the Polish authorities, comply with the market economy investor principle. (255) Below the Commission first explains why it took the view that the continuous non-enforcement of public-law debt did not pass the market economy creditor test. The Commission then assesses the measures disputed by Poland. Finally, the Commission considers the circumstances in which the aid covered by this decision was granted and its impact on competition. (a) Continuous non-enforcement of public-law debt (256) The principle that continuous non-enforcement of public-law debt can in itself constitute State aid is established in case-law (57). The information provided by the Polish authorities (58) clearly indicates that Gdynia Shipyard has significant public-law arrears dating back as far as 2004. The yard has been repaying public-law liabilities only irregularly and its outstanding debt has been continuously deferred, in all probability without any formal decision on the part of the relevant public creditors, or was subject to payment schedules. Poland explained that the recipient intended to repay public liabilities outstanding as at 30 September 2007 (PLN 443 million in total) using the capital injection by the Treasury following the yard’s privatisation. This being an uncertain event with an uncertain timing, the yard’s intention suggests that in practice the public-law liabilities were deferred for an unlimited or unspecified period of time and were repaid only occasionally as permitted by the yard’s cash flow. The Commission considers that no market economy creditor would accept such an unlimited deferral of its liabilities, which would be contingent on the uncertain event of privatisation and recapitalisation by the State (this constituting State aid of doubtful legality and compatibility with the single market). In addition, there is no indication whatsoever that the relevant public creditors have undertaken any action to enforce their public-law receivables from Gdynia Shipyard, in particular by way of forced recovery or bankruptcy law. The Commission therefore concludes that continuous non-enforcement of public-law liabilities represents an advantage that the recipient would have not obtained from a market economy creditor and therefore constitutes State aid similar to an (interest-free) loan. (b) Measures which Poland regards as passing the private investor test (257) The Commission cannot accept Poland’s argument that aid in the form of working capital loans was free of State aid. The Commission observes that the interest rate charged by KPS was about 400 basis points above the reference rate. The Commission also notes that Gdynia Shipyard has been in a very precarious financial situation for several years, with its liabilities considerably exceeding its assets. Gdynia Shipyard has not been able to obtain funding for its production from any other external source. Its working capital was financed by advance payments fully covered by guarantees from the Export Credit Insurance Corporation, by loans fully covered by Treasury guarantees and by KPS loans. The interest rate charged by KPS therefore does not appear to correctly reflect the risk incurred. Although KPS did require collateral, its value remains questionable; it should be remembered that the Export Credit Insurance Corporation and Treasury required similar collateral and, considering Gdynia Shipyard’s assets/liabilities ratio, it seems likely that KPS was not able to obtain first-rank collateral on the yard’s assets. In any event, Poland has not provided detailed information enabling the Commission to determine the real value of the required collateral. (258) Furthermore, there is no difference between loans granted by KPS and loans granted by the Industrial Development Agency, which owns KPS. It is difficult to maintain simultaneously, as Poland does, that the loans granted by the Industrial Development Agency constitute State aid whereas the loans granted by its subsidiary, KPS, meet the requirements of the market economy investor principle. (259) Lastly, the Commission notes that KPS was established as a government-controlled fund with public policy objectives, the funding of which was fully provided, or guaranteed, by the State via the Industrial Development Agency. According to the document ‘A strategy for the shipbuilding sector (maritime construction shipyards) in Poland 2006-2010’, KPS was ‘founded to organise the financing of shipyard production until such time as private investors took control’. The strategy, which is designed to achieve not only economic but also social and macroeconomic aims (59), mandates KPS with various powers, along with the Industrial Development Agency, the Treasury and other competent public bodies. The financial links of KPS to the Industrial Development Agency and the Treasury are clear and KPS acts rather like a vehicle for the transfer of assets earmarked by the State budget for shipyards in Poland, including Gdynia. (260) In the light of the above, the Commission concludes that KPS did not act as a market economy investor when it granted working capital loans to Gdynia Shipyard. These loans, listed in recital 158, Tables 1 and 2, therefore constitute State aid. (261) In its comments following the adoption of the decision to open the formal investigation, Poland argued that the guarantees granted by the Export Credit Insurance Corporation to Gdynia Shipyard did not constitute State aid. The Commission cannot accept this assertion. (262) First, the Commission would point out that Export Credit Insurance Corporation advance payment guarantees are guaranteed by the Treasury and that related transactions are entered to a separate bank account in the name of ‘Interes Narodowy’. If insufficient funds are available on that account, the Export Credit Insurance Corporation can either draw down loans from the Treasury or benefit from Treasury loan guarantees. (263) Second, the Commission recalls its decision of 18 July 2007 in Case N 105/07 (60) whereby it approved as free of State aid the scheme under which the Export Credit Insurance Corporation operated its programme of export insurance guaranteed by the Treasury. This scheme currently covers the type of production guarantees that Gdynia Shipyard has been receiving for the last few years. The Commission notes that the scheme explicitly excludes (61) companies in financial difficulty within the meaning of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty. The main feature of the scheme is that guarantee premiums are determined on the basis of a risk assessment. For example the guarantee premium for a company belonging to the highest risk category corresponds to […] % p.a. for guarantees under 2 years and […] % p.a. for guarantees above 2 years. The base premium is equal to […] % p.a. By way of comparison, guarantees to Gdynia Shipyard were given by the Export Credit Insurance Corporation against a premium of 2 % p.a. if the guarantee did not exceed PLN 35 million and against a premium of 1 % p.a. if the guarantee exceeded that amount. (264) It is therefore clear that Gdynia Shipyard is not eligible for guarantees covered by the scheme described above and approved by the Commission as free of aid. Accordingly, the guarantees granted to Gdynia Shipyard are not free of aid. (265) Furthermore, it is obvious that the guarantee premium charged to Gdynia Shipyard is well below the base premium used for guarantees to healthy companies and several times lower than the premium charged to high-risk companies which are, however, still eligible under the scheme described above. The Commission concludes that the guarantee premium applied to Gdynia Shipyard does not correspond to a market premium and that therefore these guarantees constitute State aid. (266) Third, pursuant to the Commission Notice on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid in the form of guarantees (62), for an individual State guarantee not to constitute State aid, the borrower must not be in financial difficulty. This is clearly not the case here. Pursuant to the same Notice, when the borrower is in financial difficulty the aid element of the guarantee may be as high as the amount covered by that guarantee. (267) Finally, the Commission notes that Gdynia Shipyard relied exclusively on guarantees provided by the Export Credit Insurance Corporation and the Treasury and did not manage to obtain any guarantees on the market. (268) In the light of the above, the Commission concludes that the Export Credit Insurance Corporation did not act as a market economy investor when it gave guarantees to Gdynia Shipyard. (c) Distortion of competition caused by the State aid to Gdynia Shipyard (269) The Commission takes the view that full reliance on State aid enabled Gdynia Shipyard to engage in anti-competitive practice such as pricing below production costs without suffering the consequences that such practices normally entail, namely elimination from the market. (270) Furthermore, the Commission notes that one of Gdynia Shipyard’s main long-term problems was the conclusion of contracts which proved to be loss-making as the zloty appreciated against the dollar, the dominant currency in the shipbuilding business, and the price of steel plates increased worldwide. These external factors were already identified as the main threats to the yard’s continued operation in the 2002 restructuring plan, and then subsequently in the amended version of 2004, in the new 2006 restructuring plan and, lastly, in the course of privatisation in 2008. (271) Despite the fact that the yard’s management was aware of these threats, the yard continued to conclude contracts without taking any measures to mitigate the risk. This business practice continued during the unprecedented boom in the shipbuilding market between 2004 and 2008, when shipbuilding prices rose to record levels. As a result of this practice, the yard managed to maintain activity and employment, but at the cost of large losses on regular shipbuilding production. According to the due diligence report produced by Amber in the first half of 2008, the current order book with deliveries scheduled for 2008 and 2009 is also burdened by a risk of significant losses due to loss-making contracts concluded without any risk-mitigating measures; this has been confirmed by Poland. (272) On that basis, the Commission concludes that all the aid granted to Gdynia Shipyard described in Part II, point 7 was such as to distort or threaten to distort competition on the shipbuilding market. (273) In conclusion, the Commission takes the view that all the measures granted to Gdynia Shipyard are State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty. 2.2. Possibility for Poland and third parties to submit comments (274) By its decision of 1 June 2005, the Commission opened a formal investigation into a series of measures, including debt-restructuring (write-offs, deferrals, changes to the payment schedule) based on various legal grounds and concerning a certain number of public creditors, capital injections, Treasury production guarantees and capital-raising measures (bond issues and debt-for-equity swap). (275) The Commission also clearly stated that Poland’s argument that advance payments from shipowners should be considered as an own contribution could not be accepted. In that connection, the Commission expressed doubts as to whether the advance payment guarantees provided by the Export Credit Insurance Corporation constituted State aid and announced that it would investigate the nature of those advance payments. (276) Both Poland and the recipient submitted comments; however, whereas they disputed the competence of the Commission to assess the compatibility of some of the measures concerned, they did not contest the Commission’s conclusion that, in so far as these measures had been granted after Poland’s accession to the EU, they constituted new aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty. The sole exception was the nature of the guarantees provided by the Export Credit Insurance Corporation, which were alleged to be free of State aid. Poland subsequently also argued that the loans granted by KPS did not constitute State aid. The Commission has addressed the arguments put forward by Poland and the recipient above. (277) In the course of the Commission’s investigation, significant changes were made on several occasions to the Polish Government’s strategy as the majority owner of Gdynia Shipyard, as the above description of events shows. The strategy of consolidating the shipbuilding sector changed into a strategy of separating Gdynia and Gdańsk shipyards and into a decision to partially privatise Gdynia Shipyard, which later changed into a strategy of full privatisation. This outlook for this strategy is also questionable given the manifest lack of interest on the part of market operators in purchasing the yard. (278) As indicated above, the Commission maintained regular contacts with the Polish authorities as the owner of Gdynia Shipyard and with Gdynia Shipyard itself. The Commission regularly indicated to both Poland and the yard that all measures granted to the yard from State resources probably constituted State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty, considering the yard’s precarious financial situation and the absence of any external financing free of State aid. The Commission also warned that this State aid had been granted in breach of Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty and was incompatible with the common market. The Commission also pointed out on several occasions that the guarantees provided to Gdynia Shipyard by the Export Credit Insurance Corporation constituted State aid. (279) In the course of its investigation, the Commission also collated details on the operations of KPS and the nature of the working capital loans which it granted to the yard. The Commission indicated to Poland that in all probability these loans constituted State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty. (280) Lastly, the Commission noted in the course of its investigation that Gdynia Shipyard was still accumulating public-law liabilities. The Commission collated information on that subject and informed Poland (in its capacity as the yard’s owner and creditor) that non-enforcement of public-law debt or its restructuring could constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty. 3. COMPATIBILITY OF AID WITH THE SINGLE MARKET - DEROGATION UNDER ARTICLE 87(3) OF THE EC TREATY (281) The primary objective of the measures is to assist a company in financial difficulty and to keep it afloat. In such cases, the exemption provided for in Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty, which authorises State aid granted to facilitate the development of certain economic activities where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the public interest, can be applied if the relevant conditions are complied with. (282) Rescue and restructuring aid to ailing companies is currently regulated by the Community Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty (63) (hereinafter referred to as the Guidelines), which replaced the previous text adopted in 1999 (64) (hereinafter referred to as the 1999 Guidelines). (283) The transitional provisions of the Guidelines stipulate that notifications registered prior to 10 October 2004 are examined in the light of the criteria applicable at the time of notification (point 103). In the present case, the Commission was notified of some of the measures on 29 April 2004 under the interim mechanism pursuant to Annex IV, point 3 to the Accession Treaty, when the 1999 Guidelines were in force. However, the Guidelines also stipulate that they will apply for the assessment of any rescue or restructuring aid granted without the authorisation of the Commission (unlawful aid) if some of or all the aid is granted after 1 October 2004 (point 104, first subparagraph). Given that almost all the measures described in recitals 209-232 were granted unlawfully after that date, the Commission concludes that the 2004 Guidelines apply. (284) The Guidelines apply to firms in all sectors, apart from the exceptions listed in point 18 of the Guidelines. The Framework on State aid to shipbuilding (65), which is the legal framework for the assessment of State aid to this sector, refers to point 12 of the Guidelines as the relevant legal basis for assessing rescue and restructuring aid. A. RESCUE AID (285) The Guidelines provide for rescue aid to be granted as temporary assistance for companies in financial difficulty pending such time as a restructuring plan or liquidation plan has been drawn up or with a view to addressing an acute liquidity crisis. (286) The Commission notes that the State aid granted to Gdynia Shipyard does not meet either the temporality condition, as all the aid measures were granted for periods well beyond the prescribed 6 months, or the reversibility condition, as irreversible measures were authorised such as capital injections and debt write-offs comparable to grants. (287) The Commission therefore concludes that the measures listed in recitals 209-232 are not compatible with the common market as rescue aid. B. RESTRUCTURING AID (288) The definition contained in point 17 of the Guidelines indicates that restructuring aid is based on a feasible, coherent and far-reaching plan to restore the firm’s long-term viability within a reasonable time-frame. Restructuring usually involves the following elements: restructuring of all aspects of the company’s activities, reorganisation and rationalisation of its business, including withdrawal from loss-making activities and financial restructuring. Restructuring operations, if benefiting from State aid, cannot however be limited to financial aid designed to make good past losses without tackling the reasons for those losses, i.e. without undertaking genuine restructuring. Furthermore, restructuring must be financed at least in part from the company’s own resources or from external sources free of State aid, and State aid must be limited to the minimum necessary to restore viability. Lastly, countervailing measures must be adopted to mitigate the distortive effect of the aid. (289) In view of the very distortive nature of restructuring aid, the Commission considers that aid to firms in difficulty can contribute to the development of economic activities without adversely affecting trade to an extent contrary to the Community interest only if all the conditions set out in the Guidelines are met. (290) The Commission analyses below whether these conditions have been met. (a) Eligibility (291) To be eligible for rescue or restructuring aid, the firm must qualify as a firm in difficulty within the meaning of the Guidelines. The Commission believes that the financial situation of Gdynia Shipyard, at least since 2002, has been characterised by continuous illiquidity and insolvency, increasing losses and negative asset value. Gdynia Shipyard is therefore a firm in difficulty within the meaning of the Guidelines. (b) Restoration of long-term viability (292) Pursuant to point 34 of the Guidelines, the granting of aid must be conditional on implementation of a restructuring plan, which must enable the company to restore viability within a reasonable time-frame. Restoration of viability means that the company, after completing restructuring, is able to cover all its costs and generate a sufficient return on capital to compete on its own merits. Restructuring must be carried out as quickly as possible. (293) The Commission notes that, in the course of this investigation, it reviewed two restructuring plans (2004 and 2006) prepared by the yard’s management and approved by its majority owner, the State. The Commission concluded that its serious concerns as to whether the two plans would restore the yard’s viability had not been assuaged. Since the 2006 restructuring plan has replaced the 2004 restructuring plan, the Commission explains below the grounds for its serious doubts concerning the 2006 restructuring plan. The Commission, however, notes that this plan resembles in many aspects the 2004 restructuring plan and the doubts expressed by the Commission in its decision to open a formal investigation with regard to the 2004 restructuring plan also apply in full to the 2006 restructuring plan. (294) The Commission recalls Poland’s claim, after the decision to open the formal investigation had been taken, that the 2004 restructuring plan constituted a sound economic basis for the yard’s restructuring. Reality showed that the 2004 plan was not sufficient to restore the yard’s viability and needed to be amended as early as 2006. (295) The Commission notes that the 2006 restructuring plan focused mainly on financial restructuring and that industrial aspects were not addressed in a convincing manner. No convincing far-reaching industrial strategy emerged from the plan. (296) This is illustrated in particular by the proposed investment strategy, which could be characterised as a collection of small upgrading projects without the global vision which would appear necessary to modernise facilities many of which date from the 1970s. The plan does not analyse in detail the current state of production facilities or their shortcomings and does not identify the yard’s bottlenecks. According to the Commission’s external consultant, the amounts earmarked for investments (PLN 240 million; EUR 69 million) are too low to ensure genuine modernisation. (297) To put the planned investments in perspective, it is also worthwhile considering the forecasts for annual depreciation of the yard’s assets and trends in the value of fixed assets, as estimated by the 2006 restructuring plan. Depreciation over 2007-09, i.e. the investment period, is estimated at PLN 100 million. It follows that at least 40 % of the planned investments of PLN 240 million is needed simply to maintain the assets at their current technical level and the remaining 60 % would be the maximum available for real modernisation. The balance sheet forecast shows a steady increase in fixed assets from PLN 246 million in 2006 to PLN 361 million in 2010; however, that trend should be reversed in 2010, with the value of fixed assets decreasing again to a level of PLN 284 million in 2012 (the last year included in the forecast). (298) In the light of the above, the Commission does not consider that the investment strategy is sufficiently far-reaching to ensure genuine modernisation and viability in the long term. (299) The Commission also notes that the productivity target for 2012 of 37 man-hours/CGT, while an improvement compared with today’s situation, is still modest in comparison with efficient European shipyards attaining productivity of about 20 man-hours/CGT. (300) The plan states that one of the yard’s main problems is high absenteeism and a shortage of qualified workers, who are leaving for better pay at other European yards. The Commission considers that the planned wage increase of 10 % in 2006 and 4 % annually from 2008 onwards will not be sufficient to address this problem. (301) On the basis of the above the Commission does not consider that the planned industrial and organisational restructuring will be sufficient to restore the long-term viability of the yards. (302) Furthermore, the Commission notes that the financial results forecast by the yard did not tally with its sensitivity analysis, based on a scenario involving depreciation of the US dollar, falling prices for vessels and rising prices for materials and wages. The sensitivity analysis shows that depreciation of the US dollar by PLN 0,10 p.a. would mean that viability would not be restored on the basis of the 2006 restructuring plan. The Commission therefore concludes that the 2006 restructuring plan is not sufficiently robust (66). (303) Lastly, the Commission noted that the restructuring measures envisaged in the plan could not be implemented in the absence of an investor and that the new capital required in order to implement what appeared to be a rather modest restructuring was significant, mainly as a result of the need to undertake costly financial restructuring (PLN 1,015 billion) (67). The Commission doubted whether the plan was based on realistic assumptions as to the yard’s capacity to attract new capital. (304) These doubts were confirmed by actual developments in the privatisation process of Gdynia Shipyard. As indicated above, the State as the owner of Gdynia Shipyard has attempted twice to find a private investor ready to take over the yard. None of the privatisation attempts (whether the partial privatisation in 2006 or the sale of all publicly owned shares in 2007) succeeded. The Commission notes that the privatisation attempts took place at a time when the shipbuilding market was characterised by an unprecedented boom and therefore provided optimal conditions for the sale of the yard. The negative outcome of the privatisation process can only be interpreted as reflecting a lack of confidence of market players in the yard’s ability to restore long-term viability. The withdrawal of Amber from the privatisation process after an in-depth due diligence examination only confirms this (68). (305) The Commission took note of the renewed efforts of the Polish authorities to find a private investor for Gdynia Shipyard following the withdrawal of Amber. Until the decision was issued, however, no evidence convinced the Commission that the re-launched privatisation effort could be concluded positively in a short period of time and in line with the Guidelines. As explained below, the joint restructuring plan of ISD Polska and the restructuring plan of PSC are both based on the expectation that significant amounts of additional State aid will be granted to the yard and that it will be possible to return the yard to viability if it is freed from outstanding liabilities and anticipated losses on existing contracts. (306) The Commission concludes that the joint restructuring plan has not demonstrated that the viability of Gdynia Shipyard will be restored after the merger with Gdańsk Shipyard. In particular, the Commission is not convinced by the financial projections or the robustness of the plan. It takes the view that the restructuring measures envisaged in the plan are not sufficiently far-reaching. Although the revised joint restructuring plan has brought about some improvements, the Commission concludes that it will not restore the viability of the merged shipyards. Below the Commission assesses the September restructuring plan which replaced the June draft plan and highlights differences only where they are relevant to its assessment. (307) The assumptions in the June plan that the return on equity would be achieved only in 2020 and the return on investment only in 2016 tend to lead the Commission to the conclusion that the project is not viable. What is more, these results are based on non-discounted amounts; if the amounts were discounted the return on equity and investment would be achieved even later. The September plan brings an improvement in that respect because it indicates discounted forecasts. Nevertheless, the plan assumed that the discounted return on equity would be achieved in 2018, i.e. 10 years after the entry of the new investor in 2009, which is still too long and demonstrates the riskiness of the project. The Commission therefore maintains that the plan does not demonstrate that the project is viable. In addition, the Commission notes that the improvement in financial projections is not based on the adoption of more far-reaching restructuring measures (such as productivity improvements or cost reduction) but on amendments to the main underlying financial assumptions that have not been sufficiently justified, as will be explained below. (308) The financial projections assume that a large part of restructuring costs can be covered from the company’s future cash flows. The Commission regards this as unrealistic for a company which has generated enormous losses in the past and requires substantial restructuring. According to the September plan, cash flow will be affected by past liabilities, which have increased from PLN 592 million to PLN 712 million. Moreover, a large part of the public-law liabilities (more than PLN 400 million) is to be repaid between 2012 and 2018, i.e. long after the envisaged restructuring period (69). The Commission notes that the investor has admitted that the level of expected results is borderline profitable, but he also claims that there is an additional reason why ISD Polska is interested in this project. The investor claims that the yard will create significant demand for another group company, the steel mill Huta Częstochowa, and therefore investment in Gdynia Shipyard makes sense for the whole ISD Polska group. (309) The Commission notes that the joint restructuring plan is based on an assumption that the State aid was awarded in the context of the privatisation to settle the yard’s balance sheet and cover expected losses. The plan is also based on an assumption that the shipyard’s activities will continue to be funded by guarantees from the Export Credit Insurance Corporation on advantageous terms compared with its normal practice for healthy companies. The financial projections take account of this expected State aid. The September joint restructuring plan did not reduce this exposure to additional State aid. On the contrary, the investor identified an additional potential liability of PLN 308 million linked to a tax dispute between Gdańsk Shipyard and the State. The investor expects the Treasury to guarantee payment of this liability if it materialises. (310) The Commission notes that neither the June plan nor the September update contains a fully-fledged business plan for the production of steel structures. This is a serious deficiency, as this business should generate turnover of PLN 300 million at the end of the restructuring period, benefit from the new yard’s considerable steel-processing capacity (increasing from 4 % in 2009 to 20 % in 2012) and should represent around 10 % of the new yard’s sales. (311) The September plan refers to an independent market study which seems to demonstrate that demand for steel structures in Poland and Europe as a whole will grow over the next few years. However, the study does not analyse how this growth could be exploited by the merged yard. The September plan, although more detailed on the steel structure business, does not analyse whether the production volume forecast for the new yard is realistic. On the contrary, it contains further indications that this these forecasts may be unrealistic. (312) The current output of steel structures is 2 000 tons, while the target output is 56 000 tons. Compared with the June plan, the September plan envisages doubling output as early as 2010 (24 000 tons as against 12 000 tons in the June plan) and quadrupling output as of 2012 (56 000 tons as against 13 000 tons in the June plan). Huta Częstochowa, one of the largest steel producers in Poland, has an output of 100 000 tons of steel structures. (313) ISD Polska lists Gdańsk Shipyard’s existing contracts for steel structures, including one contract for oil-storage facilities for about 5 000 tons per annum in 2008 and 2009. Under the plan, output of this particular product would be 16 000 tons by 2010, rising to 36 000 tons in 2012. (314) No market analysis or forecast reports were submitted which would explain the profit forecasts for steel structures (9,5 % in 2010 and around 8 % afterwards). The Commission notes that, according to the Polish Statistical Office, profitability of the steel structures sector in Poland rose to 6 % in 2006 and remained at that level in 2007. (315) On the basis of the information available, the Commission concludes that the steel construction business, which is to form an integral and significant part of the operation of the new yard, is not based on a credible analysis of the competitive position of the new yard. The market analysis does not demonstrate that the output forecast by the new yard is likely to be absorbed by demand on the market. The plan has not demonstrated that it is based on realistic assumptions for the steel structures segment. (316) On the restructuring of contracting, the plan addresses two of the most significant external causes of the yard’s current difficulties (increasing material costs and the appreciation in the zloty) by provided for the series of measures described above. The plan is based mainly on the assumption that it will be possible to incorporate indexation clauses into shipbuilding contracts, at least partially transferring the risks associated with currency fluctuations and the costs of materials to the shipowner. The plan has, however, not shown that such indexation clauses have been or would be accepted by shipowners. The September plan provided some additional information on that subject, in particular extracts from existing contracts of the two yards including indexation clauses of that type. (317) The Commission has examined this evidence and notes that the contracts presented in the plan initially included indexation clauses whereby any increase in steel prices would be covered by the buyer, but these clauses were cancelled by a later addendum, and replaced by an arrangement whereby the shipyard and the buyer would jointly purchase materials and, on completion of this purchase, agree on an adjustment to the price. The arrangements for this price adjustment will be agreed in a later addendum. However, this addendum has not been submitted to the Commission. (318) The Commission also notes that these contracts were concluded and renegotiated in a peak demand period (2005 and afterwards) in which flexibility on the part of the shipowners was a response to supply-side limitations. Whereas the Commission is aware that the practice of steel price indexation has recently developed in the shipbuilding industry, it should be noted that previously these clauses were not accepted, particularly in difficult times. (319) On the basis of the available information, the Commission does not consider that the plan demonstrates that the yard will be able to conclude contracts with indexation clauses. The experience of Gdynia Shipyard in this respect, as described in the plan, is not conclusive in the Commission’s view. (320) The September plan, compared to the June draft, contains more detailed information on the intended hedging strategy to mitigate currency-related risks. However, the plan does not demonstrate that either of the two yards has used these instruments (including cost-free natural hedging), at least in recent years (70). Although the September plan quantifies the costs and effects of the proposed hedging policy, it does not show that the new yard would be able to obtain such hedging on the market. It is clear, on the other hand, that banks require investors to draw up a fully-fledged hedging strategy before deciding whether to offer hedging. (321) Considering the relevance of this factor to the yard’s activities, the plan does not address this issue convincingly. Indeed, the sensitivity analysis suggests that, despite the introduction of these risk-mitigating measures, allegedly factored in the financial projections, the latter remain sensitive to minor changes in the exchange rate, as will be described below. The Commission therefore has not been convinced that the intended hedging policy is sufficiently far-reaching to ensure the yard’s long-term viability. (322) On the employment restructuring front, the plan does not contain any analysis of rationalisation needs but simply states that the workforce will be reduced. The plan mentions, but again without further justification, that this reduction will entail costs of about PLN 69 million. The September plan quantifies the costs and effects of employment restructuring but does not explain or justify the basis on which these costs and effects were estimated. On that basis, the Commission cannot conclude that the plan identifies in detail the reasons for and the effects of redundancies and that the quantification of costs and effects is based on reliable assumptions. (323) With regard to the financial projections, the Commission notes in particular the following weaknesses of the base scenario with which the financial model prepared by ISD Polska works, questioning the credibility of these projections. (324) First, the September plan, compared to the June draft plan, assumes significantly higher sales prices for car carriers, one of the two main products of the new yard. The plan bases the projections for the first few years on existing contracts concluded by Gdynia Shipyard. However, it does not justify the projections for the following years and does not provide any external forecasts in that respect (71). (325) Second, the assumption that wages will rise by some 4-6 % per annum during the restructuring period appears to be an underestimate in view of the serious lack of qualified staff, rotation and absenteeism and the wage competition that both yards have faced from yards abroad and in Poland. The September plan envisages even lower levels of wage growth than the June plan. The Commission notes that, from January 2007 to January 2008, the average gross salary in Poland increased by 11,5 % (72), and further increases are expected. Various sources, including those referred to in the September restructuring plan (such as the National Bank of Poland, the OECD, EC Economic Forecast Spring 2008, Goldman Sachs) forecast a significant surge in wages in Poland in the medium term and growing labour shortages. In any event, this is a factor that should have been taken into account in the sensitivity analysis. (326) Third, the base scenario assumes costs of working capital guarantees of 1,5 %. This estimate is based on the assumption that full advance payment guarantees will be provided by the Export Credit Insurance Corporation and that these guarantees will be given at terms more favourable than Export Credit Insurance Corporation guarantees to other (healthy) companies. If the merged yards were to obtain similar guarantees on the market, as Poland claimed in its clarifications of 7 July 2008, the cost of capital would be considerably higher than assumed in the base scenario (73), with direct negative consequences for financial projections. (327) Considering these assumptions, the plan does not provide sufficient assurances that the base scenario of the financial projections is realistic and achievable. (328) In addition, the sensitivity analysis does not show that the plan is sufficiently robust to withstand some of the principal risk factors associated with the yard’s operation. The September revision of the plan does not show a convincing improvement. (329) The sensitivity analysis shows that a 5 % depreciation in the US dollar against the zloty would cause a 35 % reduction in the 10-year accumulated net profit even if the base scenario took account of restructuring measures to mitigate the exchange-rate risk. (330) A separate analysis attached to the September plan shows that a 5 % appreciation in the euro against the US dollar from 2013 to 2017 (i.e. after Poland is scheduled to adopt the euro) would cause a 44 % reduction in the 10-year accumulated net profit compared with the base scenario. (331) The Commission notes that in the event of these two currencies appreciating (a one-off appreciation in the zloty in 2009 and a one-off appreciation in the euro in 2013) against the US dollar of 5 % compared with the base scenario, the 10-year accumulated profit would be reduced by 80 % as compared with the base scenario. (332) The Commission concludes that the sensitivity analysis demonstrates that financial projections are sensitive to minor changes in the underlying assumptions, in particular concerning the exchange rate, which according to the plan itself is one of the major factors leading to the yard’s current financial difficulties. The Commission cannot conclude on that basis that the joint restructuring plan is sufficiently robust to ensure the restoration of viability of the merged yards in the long-run. (333) In many respects the plan contains serious deficiencies, leading the Commission to the conclusion that it does not demonstrate that viability will be restored within a reasonable time-frame. Serious inconsistencies in the restructuring plan raise significant doubts as to its viability and robustness. Contradictory assumptions are made as regards market strategy and the future production and capacity of the yard. What is more, there is no market analysis to justify the chosen strategy and show that the hypothetical portfolio would yield profits. (334) As regards financial restructuring, the assumptions concerning the cost of capital, arrangements for financing production and the exchange rate show the following serious weaknesses. The plan assumes that exchange rates will be stable throughout the restructuring period at a more optimistic level than is currently the case (PLN 3,46/EUR and PLN 2,23/USD, against the current rates of PLN 3,32/EUR and PLN 2,12/USD). In addition, the assumption that the yard would manage to increase revenue by 30 %, obtaining an additional USD 100 million, by renegotiating existing contracts must be seen in the light of the fact that the yard has already made significant efforts to renegotiate existing contracts and that, as a result, many of these contracts have been cancelled. The plan does not substantiate the assumption that further renegotiation would be possible and therefore the Commission regards it as unrealistic. (335) As for employment restructuring, the very fact that the investor proposes two options (either maintaining employment at the current level or reducing it by 650 employees) may suggest that it does not have a clear strategy for restoring viability to the yard. These alternative assumptions also call the financial projections into question, as it is not explained which level of employment served as a basis for the forecasts. (336) The plan does not explain in detail how various restructuring measures, including investments and various cost-cutting measures, will influence the financial projections. In other words, it is not clear what the link is between the envisaged restructuring measures and the financial projections, in particular regarding production and overheads. For example, the plan does not show how the envisaged 25 % reduction in vessel production costs over a 5-year period could be achieved. The credibility of the projection is also undermined by contradictions concerning the planned level of investments. The Commission is therefore not convinced that the base scenario for the financial projections is credible and based on realistic assumptions. (337) There is no analysis testing the sensitivity of these projections to risk factors such as market trends and changes in prices, costs of materials, exchange rates, wages etc. In the absence of a detailed description and justification of the assumptions underlying the financial projections, the financial model used for these projections and a sensitivity analysis, the Commission considers that the credibility of these projections and the robustness of the plan have not been demonstrated. (338) Lastly, the Commission notes that the investor makes successful implementation of the restructuring plan contingent on the award of additional State aid. (339) In the light of the above, the Commission takes the view that the ability of the June 2008 restructuring plan prepared by PSC to restore the yard’s viability has not been demonstrated. (340) In the absence of a realistic and far-reaching restructuring plan, the Commission concludes that the aid granted to Gdynia Shipyard described in recitals 209-232 is purely operating aid which is incompatible with the common market as restructuring aid. (c) Aid limited to the strict minimum (341) Pursuant to point 43 of the Guidelines, aid must be limited to the strict minimum, i.e. the costs necessary to carry out restructuring. The recipient is expected to make a significant contribution to the financing of restructuring using its own resources or external financing at market rates. This contribution demonstrates the market’s belief that the company’s viability can be restored and it ensures that State aid is limited to the minimum necessary. In the case of large enterprises, such as Gdynia Shipyard, this contribution should amount to at least 50 % of the restructuring costs. The own contribution must be real, which excludes expected profits and cash flow (point 43 of the Guidelines). (342) The Commission assessed whether the 2006 restructuring plan met this criterion and concluded that it did not, for two reasons. First, the plan was based on continuous state financing in the form of guarantees, capital injections and debt waivers and it did not demonstrate that this level of State aid was necessary to restore the yard to viability (in particular that alternative restructuring strategies requiring a lower level of State intervention could not be pursued). Second, the own contribution was very limited and the entry of an investor which could provide external financing at market rates was merely a potential future event. The own contribution could have included measures such as participation in a share capital increase by the management, a debt-for-equity swap by private creditors and the sale of assets. Together these measures contributed some PLN 127 million to the restructuring of the company. Considering the substantial involvement of the State, however, even if these measures had been qualified as an own contribution within the meaning of the Guidelines, this contribution would not have been significant. (343) The Commission also looked at the situation in the yard over the last few years in isolation from the 2006 restructuring plan, which, after all, had not been implemented. (344) First, the above description of the situation at Gdynia Shipyard shows that the yard has not been able to attract virtually any external financing for its restructuring. There are few signs of external participation under market conditions in the yard’s activities. (345) The yard has managed to negotiate some restructuring of its commercial liabilities, in particular in the restructuring agreement concluded in July 2003 (74), which concerned liabilities of some PLN 424 million and the debt-for-equity swap by commercial creditors of some PLN 70 million. At the same time, however, Gdynia Shipyard faces numerous enforcement proceedings and litigations. The Commission also notes that the value of accumulated public-law liabilities as at 30 September 2007 was PLN 423 million. The Commission takes the view that the 2003 restructuring agreement could be considered as an own contribution only if the creditors involved accepted a longer than normal deadline for repayment; in that case additional resources could be made available to the company for restructuring and the extension of the deadline for repayment would constitute a sign that the market regarded it as feasible that the yard would be restored to viability. The same applies to the debt-for-equity swap. However, even if the restructuring agreement were considered as constituting an own contribution, the Commission observes that this contribution would clearly not be sufficient within the meaning of the Guidelines. The level of restructured commercial liabilities is equal to that of unenforced public-law liabilities. Clearly, the yard would have to bear restructuring costs other than the costs of debt restructuring. (346) Poland and the recipient argued after the formal investigation was opened that advance payments from shipowners should be treated as own contributions. The Commission cannot accept this argument. The Guidelines state that the own contribution must not contain any aid, which is not the case, for instance, where a loan is backed by government guarantees containing elements of aid (footnote 1 to point 44 of the Guidelines). The advance payments were backed in full by guarantees from the Export Credit Insurance Corporation which, as explained above, the Commission regards as constituting State aid. Advance payments from shipowners therefore cannot be considered as external financing at market rates. It follows that Poland’s initial claim that aid intensity equalled 31 %, based on the assumption that advance payments covered by guarantees from the Export Credit Insurance Corporation constituted an own contribution, cannot be accepted. (347) The Commission also notes that Ray Car Carriers entered the shareholding structure of Gdynia Shipyard by way of a debt-for-equity swap and therefore did not contribute to the restructuring costs. (348) When considering the expected restructuring costs of PLN 3 billion and comparing them with the expected sources of financing, the Commission notes a financing gap in the plan as shown by Table 5 below. Naturally, the working capital loans of PLN 280 (item 14 of Table 1b) and PLN 45 million (item 16 of Table 1b), as well as working capital loans from the State of PLN 250-350 million are not included here because they are earmarked to finance working capital, which was not included in restructuring costs. The same applies to the Industrial Development Agency capital injection (PLN 200 million). The outstanding payment for the Industrial Development Agency shares in Gdańsk Shipyard (item 17 of Table 1b) cannot be considered as a financing source for restructuring the new yard as it is a payment to the Industrial Development Agency, not to the yard. Table 5 Expected financing sources for anticipated restructuring costs (PLN million) Capital injection by ISD Polska 405 Investment loan 185 Sale of assets 240 Capital injection by the State 515 Capital injection by the State 385 Capital injection by the State 250 Write-off of tax liabilities 308 Total 2 288 Total expected restructuring costs 3 000 Financing gap 712 (349) In the light of this financing gap, the Commission concludes that the joint restructuring plan does not secure the financing of the restructuring. In other words, the plan does not show how the planned restructuring could effectively be implemented, even if substantial additional State aid were granted to the yard. (350) The September joint restructuring plan identifies certain items of revenue in the past as own contributions of Gdynia Shipyard and Gdańsk Shipyard to their restructuring (Table 1b ‘Alleged own contribution realised in the past’). Although some of this revenue (e.g. some of the assets sales) could have been qualified as own contributions within the meaning of the Guidelines (real, actual and free of State aid), the Commission considers, in view of the precarious financial situation of the two yards, that this additional revenue was used to reduce losses and could not have been used for genuine restructuring. Even if the yard were able to implement some restructuring measures (such as minor investments) thanks to, for example, divestiture of assets, the Commission considers that any such revenues would not qualify as free of State aid, because the restructuring and functioning of the yards was possible only by virtue of continuous accumulation of public-law debt, the possibility of continuing loss-making economic activities and ongoing State support. (351) In any case, considering the financial situation of the yard it is clear that any past revenue from the yard’s own resources or external sources have been used to fund the operations of the yard in the past. (352) In addition, the Commission cannot accept the following items of the alleged planned own contribution. (353) First, as mentioned above, the working capital loans of PLN 280 million (item 14 of Table 1b) were not earmarked to cover any of the expected restructuring costs described above but were specifically intended to finance working capital for ongoing production. In addition, these loans cannot be considered as real and actual, but rather as potential and remote in time. The same applies to the working capital loan of PLN 45 million for non-shipbuilding production (item 16 of Table 1b). (354) Second, the investment loan of PLN 185 million for non-shipbuilding production (item 15 of Table 1b) cannot be regarded at this stage as real and accessible. Poland explained in its clarifications of 7 July 2008 that ISD Polska was in talks with several banks with a view to obtaining this loan. The Commission examined two expressions of interest submitted with the September restructuring plan. (355) On that basis, the Commission cannot conclude that the plan has demonstrated that the investment loan is real and actual. The plan only showed that ISD Polska was conducting talks with two banks, one of which seemed to be interested in analysing the project. The fact that ISD Polska started work on this project at the beginning of 2007, when it acquired a stake in Gdańsk Shipyard, and has so far failed to secure financing for that purpose is a significant indication. (356) Third, the Commission notes that the September plan indicates the individual components of the asset sale with a view to generating an own contribution of PLN 240 million (item 13 of Table 1b). (357) In addition, neither ISD Polska nor Gdynia Shipyard currently has the right to dispose of the principal component of these assets (the land on which the slipways at Gdańsk Shipyard are located). At present there are clear obstacles of a legal nature (the need for Gdynia Shipyard to acquire ownership rights to this land, which is fundamentally linked to the dissolution of Synergia 99, in which Gdynia Shipyard is just one of the shareholders; administrative proceedings on the boundaries of the Gdańsk port) and of a practical nature (the land could be sold only after the three slipways had been disassembled and probably only after the site had been cleaned) that prevent Gdynia Shipyard and ISD Polska from selling these assets. In addition, as explained by the investor, the estimated high revenue from the land sale can be achieved only once a change in the conditions for planning permission has been secured (75). The September plan shows that Synergia 99 as the current owner of this plot has not yet taken administrative action to exclude this land from the port area. Although the September plan explains the components of the Synergia 99 project in detail, its actual implementation remains conditional on various events beyond the control of Gdynia Shipyard or ISD Polska, in particular on changes to the boundaries of the port area. The Commission therefore cannot regard this alleged own contribution as real and actual. (358) ISD has provided an independent evaluation of the land on which the three slipways are located (PLN […] million). (359) The Commission notes that the assets of Synergia 99 have been evaluated at PLN […] million by the Board of that company. Since the Board issued a statement to that effect for the purpose of concluding a shareholder agreement on the arrangements for dividing the assets in the event of Synergia 99 being wound up, it can be assumed that the Board did not underestimate the value of those assets. An independent expertise commissioned by the Board at the time estimated the market value of the land in question at PLN […] million (360) In view of the large differences between the two evaluations, reflecting differing assumptions as to the future use of the land, the Commission regards the assumption that the land will be used for upmarket development as optimistic and, in the absence of any specific bids to purchase the land or a more tangible indication of plans to regenerate the area, rather unrealistic. The Commission takes the view that the potential revenue from the sale of the land for industrial or development use should also be estimated, in so far as either scenario is realistic. (361) The Commission also notes that the estimated investment value of the land on which the slipways are located (PLN […] million) was not reflected in the price paid by ISD for shares in Gdynia Shipyard. According to the September restructuring plan, at end-2007 the net asset value of Gdynia Shipyard amounted to PLN ([…] significant negative value) million. Since that time, the Treasury has implemented capital injections of PLN 515 million and PLN 385 million; further capitalisation of PLN 200 million is planned. If all the other items of the balance sheet remain unchanged (76), the yard’s net asset value following these capital injections will amount to PLN ([…] positive value) million, while ISD Polska will pay a symbolic price for the shares in Gdynia Shipyard. If the market value of the land on which the slipways are located were properly reflected in the balance sheet, the net asset value would be even higher. In other words, ISD Polska would buy the Gdynia Shipyard shares at a price below their market value, thus receiving State aid. The Commission therefore considers that these assets are ‘contaminated’ by State aid awarded during the privatisation process and that their sale cannot be regarded as an own contribution free of State aid. (362) With regard to other the assets earmarked for sale currently on the balance sheet of Gdynia Shipyard or Gdańsk Shipyard, the Commission accepts, on the basis of the information available, the sale or rental of some assets as an actual, real own contribution, if an evaluation has been provided and substantiated and the sale or rental is based on existing agreements (sale of shares in Euromedicus, sale of shares in Polskie Linie Lotnicze, rental agreements with Eurocynk and with CRIST). These agreements represent an amount of around PLN […] million. (363) Lastly, in line with established practice (77), the Commission takes the view that future cash-flow cannot be considered as an own contribution within the meaning of the Guidelines because it does not represent a real and actual contribution by the company or its shareholders to restructuring costs. (364) It follows that the only items that can be considered as own contributions are the capital injections to be effected by ISD Polska of PLN 405 million in total and the proceeds from the sale and rental of some assets (PLN 14 million). This own contribution corresponds to 14 % (78) of the expected restructuring costs of PLN 3 billion. If the Commission were to accept the proposal of the Polish authorities presented at the meeting of 30 September 2008 to assess the level of the own contribution by way of comparison with the restructuring costs incurred in the yards as of the point in time at which the investors assumed control over the yards, the outcome would be the same (restructuring costs of PLN 3,065 billion with an actual and real own contribution of PLN 419 million i.e. 14 %). (365) This should be considered in the light of the expected award of additional State aid, which is the basic assumption of the plan: additional capital injection by the State of PLN 1,6 billion (PLN 1,14 billion implemented in June 2008 and PLN 418 million outstanding) and further rescheduling of accumulated public-law liabilities with a nominal value of PLN 496,6 million for 2009-2017. It should be noted that the plan assumes that shipbuilding operations will continue to be dependent on financing by way of advance payment guarantees provided by the Export Credit Insurance Corporation at advantageous terms, this having been incorporated into the financial model of the merged shipyards. The merged yards expect to receive new guarantees by end-2008. In following years too, at least until the end of the restructuring period in 2012, Export Credit Insurance Corporation guarantees should cover the shipbuilding process virtually in full. (366) In addition, the Commission has to take into account the whole restructuring period, starting from 2002. Considering the substantial State aid which the yard has benefited from in this period, the own contribution as a percentage of restructuring costs is even lower. It is therefore obvious that the own contribution does not even remotely reach the threshold of 50 % of restructuring costs required by the Guidelines. (367) Although the investor envisages a capital injection of PLN 500 million to partially finance the investment programme, he has also requested an additional capital injection from the State of PLN 515 million in total, rescheduling of public-law debt in an amount of PLN 560 million and coverage of any potential future liabilities of the yard, estimated at PLN 555 million (future losses, penalties for cancelling contracts, litigation). In addition, the plan lists all the other liabilities of the yard in a total amount of PLN 948 million (commercial liabilities vis-à-vis suppliers, shipowners, etc.) and assumes that they will be covered by the State. Lastly, the investor requests additional guarantees from the Export Credit Insurance Corporation at an advantageous premium compared with its normal practice for healthy companies to finance working capital and Treasury guarantees for bridging loans in an amount of PLN 397 million. (368) The restructuring costs that can be identified on the basis of the limited information contained in the plan cover, at the minimum, accumulated liabilities (accumulated liabilities and loans totalling PLN 1 508 million), expected losses on existing shipbuilding contracts and litigations (PLN 555 million) and investment needs envisaged for the period 2008-2018 (PLN 443 million). (369) Most of these costs are to be covered by State aid. The proposed own contribution is a capital injection by the investor of PLN 500 million. The Commission notes that no information was submitted on the investor’s ability to provide such a capital injection. According to the preliminary offer by PSC, the funds to finance the injection were supposed to be acquired from a third party, a financial investor. In the absence of any proof that the investor is able to provide capital of PLN 500 million, the Commission considers that this measure cannot be regarded as actual and real. In addition, the plan assumes that revenue from the sale of assets generated in the period after accession and revenue from the planned sale of assets to a total amount of PLN 174,5 million should also be regarded as an own contribution within the meaning of the Guidelines. Again, it has not been demonstrated that past transactions were free of State aid and that assumptions concerning planned revenue are realistic. This contradiction concerning the own contribution declared by the investor raises further doubts as to the credibility of assumptions in this respect. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that the plan does not show that the proposed own contribution is significant, actual, real and free of State aid. (370) The Commission notes that even if the proposed measures (capital injection of PLN 500 million and past and future sales of assets) had been regarded as constituting own contributions, they would correspond to 27 % of the restructuring costs as shown above. In addition, the Commission has to take into account the whole restructuring period, starting from 2002. Considering the substantial State aid which the yard has benefited from in this period, the own contribution as a percentage of total restructuring costs is even lower. It is therefore obvious that the own contribution does not even remotely reach the threshold of 50 % of restructuring costs required by the Guidelines. (371) On that basis, the Commission takes the view that the yard has not obtained practically any own contribution within the meaning of the Guidelines in the past, and, in so far as it has done so, that contribution is not significant. Moreover, the restructuring plan submitted by the Polish Shipbuilding Company does not ensure a sufficient level of own contribution. As the purpose of an own contribution is to keep State aid to the minimum, in the absence of an own contribution the Commission must conclude that the requirement to limit aid to the minimum necessary has not been met. On the contrary, the restructuring plan of PSC is based on the assumption that additional State aid is awarded, and it concludes that implementation depends on this additional State aid. (372) On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission concludes that in the past the yard has not obtained practically any own contribution within the meaning of the Guidelines, i.e. which is real, actual and free of State aid. Nor do the joint restructuring plan and the plan presented by PSC ensure a sufficient level of own contribution. As the purpose of an own contribution is to keep State aid to the minimum, in the absence of an own contribution the Commission must conclude that the requirement to limit aid to the minimum necessary has not been met. However, both restructuring plans are based on the assumption that additional State aid is awarded. Overall, there is disproportionate financing of the restructuring by State aid, resulting in undue distortions of competition. (373) Under the Guidelines, the aid must not provide the company with surplus cash, which could be used for aggressive, market-distorting activities not linked to the restructuring process. While the yard has not been provided with surplus cash, thanks to State guarantees it has benefited from access to working capital that was not available to it on the market. As a result, the yard was able not only to continue operating and fill its order books but also to conclude contracts without having to bear the costs of mitigating the risks associated with changing prices for materials and exchange-rate fluctuations. In other words, the yard was able to use State aid for market-distortive activities not linked to the restructuring process by accepting orders at prices which did not cover the costs incurred. This reinforces the Commission’s opinion that State aid was not limited to the minimum necessary for the survival of the yard. (374) Lastly, the Commission recalls that State aid to companies in difficulty should be used to finance restructuring. Operating aid can be allowed only in as far as is necessary to keep the company afloat pending implementation of far-reaching restructuring. In the case in point, however, genuine restructuring efforts bringing long-term effects have been limited. The State aid mainly ensured that the yard was kept afloat and thus constituted mere operating aid. As such, this aid cannot be considered to have been limited to the strict minimum necessary to enable restructuring to be undertaken. (375) In the light of the above, the Commission concludes that the requirement that aid be limited to the minimum and be accompanied by a real and significant contribution free of State aid has not been met. (d) Avoidance of undue distortion of competition (376) The Commission recalls the preliminary agreement with Poland on the closure of SD I dock. However, in the light of further developments following this agreement and the above conclusions on the first two conditions of the Guidelines, there is no need to assess whether the countervailing measures proposed by Poland were sufficient. (e) Conclusion (377) Since the criteria prescribed in the Guidelines for aid to be found compatible with the common market have not been met, the Commission concludes that the measures listed in recitals 209-232 are not compatible with the common market as restructuring aid. C. OTHER AID (378) In its submission of 11 July 2007, Poland stated that Gdynia Shipyard had received aid ‘other than restructuring aid’. This aid is listed in Table 4. (379) The Commission recalls that, given that its very existence is in danger, a firm in difficulty cannot be considered as an appropriate vehicle to promote public policy objectives until such time as its viability is assured (point 20 of the Guidelines). Any aid granted to an undertaking in difficulty during the restructuring period, unless it is covered by the exemption regulations, must be notified as aid for restructuring (point 69 of the Guidelines). (380) Poland has not provided any evidence that the aid referred to in Table 4 above is covered by the exemption regulations. (381) The Commission concludes that these measures, too, are covered by the present decision and constitute illegal and incompatible restructuring aid. IV. CONCLUSION (382) The Commission finds that Poland has unlawfully granted the State aid described in recitals 209-232 in favour of Gdynia Shipyard in breach of Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty. This aid is not compatible with the common market under any derogation laid down in the EC Treaty. (383) To restore the status ex ante, the State aid has to be recovered. V. IMPLEMENTATION (384) The aid component of the measures granted to Gdynia Shipyard presented in recitals 209-158 of the decision must be recovered. In general, the aid component to be recovered, i.e. the advantage received by the recipient, is equal to the difference between the terms that the recipients could obtain on the market and the terms of the measure granted. (385) The reference and discount rates announced by the Commission are applied as a proxy for the market rate to measure the aid component, in particular when aid is disbursed in several instalments, and to calculate the aid component resulting from interest subsidy schemes (79). In the case of companies in difficulty, such as Gdynia Shipyard, the Commission considers that the reference rate should be increased by at least 400 basis points in order to reflect the high risk involved in the transaction and, additionally, by 200 basis points to reflect the lack of or poor collateral offered by the recipient. As explained above, the value of the collateral provided by the yard is questionable in view of the company’s debt/asset ratio. When a company in difficulty cannot obtain any financing on the market, the aid component may be equivalent to as much as 100 % of the nominal value of the funds received (80). (386) In the Commission’s view, in the period in which Gdynia Shipyard received the aid referred to in recitals 209-232, it was in serious financial difficulties (as described in recitals 62-66) and was not able to acquire any financing on the market. The yard had negative equity, continued to make losses and did not obtain virtually any financing from the market during the period under review. In such circumstances a market economy operator would not be willing to provide the yard with any financing in view of the inherent high risk. Consequently, the Commission considers that no bank would have agreed to lend to the yard, even at high interest rates, and no bank would have agreed to award a guarantee, even for a high fee. (387) Since Gdynia Shipyard could not have obtained a loan or guarantee on the market, any loan or guarantee granted to it during the period under review automatically constitutes aid. Accordingly, any guarantee still outstanding has to be terminated immediately, and any loans must be immediately reimbursed. (388) The reimbursement of any loans granted to the yard is, however, not sufficient to restore the initial situation since until the reimbursement date the yard has had financing at its disposal that it could not normally have obtained from the market. In order to restore the initial situation, an amount should therefore also be recovered which is equivalent to the value of this advantage, the size of which can be approximated only on the basis of the interest rate charged on very risky loans. Therefore the Commission must order the recovery of the difference between the interest rate actually paid by Gdynia Shipyard and a theoretically adequate interest rate for a very high risk loan from the point in time when the loan was granted to the yard until reimbursement by the yard. In connection with the need to determine the interest rate for a very high risk loan, the Commission notice on the method for setting the reference and discount rates indicates that the risk premium may be higher than 400 basis points above the reference rate ‘if no private bank would have agreed to grant the relevant loan’, which is the situation in this case. In several decisions the Commission took the view that a premium of 600 basis points above the reference rate was an adequate minimum to reflect a high risk situation (81). The Commission considers that this is the minimum for loans in the present situation. (389) The Commission will take the same approach to guarantees: it must order the recovery of the grant aid equivalent contained in the guarantee from the time of disbursement of the guaranteed loan until termination of the guarantee. (390) As explained in the Commission Notice on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid in the form of guarantees (82), the Commission’s view is that the grant aid equivalent is equal to either the interest subsidy obtained by virtue of the guarantee (when the guarantee covers a loan granted at a rate below the market rate) or to the amount resulting from the risk factor on the guaranteed sum, minus the premium paid for the guarantee. (391) In the event of it not being possible to calculate the aid component using these rules, the Commission would consider it appropriate to calculate the difference between the guarantee premium that would be charged on the market and the premium paid by the recipient. The Commission considers that the difference calculated in this way constitutes the aid component of the guarantee. In the Commission’s opinion, the premium charged for the free-of-State aid scheme on the basis of which the Export Credit Insurance Corporation runs its programme of export insurance guaranteed by the Treasury, endorsed by the Commission decision of 18 July 2007, could serve as the reference premium for the aforementioned calculation. Again, this premium would need to be increased by at least 400 basis points to reflect the fact that the yard was not eligible for guarantees under the scheme. As such, the guarantees given to the yard involved a considerably higher risk. (392) As explained above, given that the yard would not be able to acquire any guarantees on the market owing to its precarious financial situation, in order to stop the distortion of competition created by the aid the outstanding guarantees must be terminated immediately. (393) In the case of guarantees for advance payments, the Commission notes that advance payments guaranteed by the Export Credit Insurance Corporation are a type of sale contract, not a loan contract, and that no interest is charged on advance payments. Therefore the Commission considers that, in order to calculate the aid component received by the recipient, a comparison should be envisaged between the premium paid by the yard and the premium which would normally be charged on the market. Again, the free-of-State aid scheme used by the Export Credit Insurance Corporation may serve as a reference reflecting the fees charged on the market, and such reference fees should be increased to reflect the additional risk involved when granting aid to a company in financial difficulty. (394) As is the case for the other guarantees received by the yard and for the same reasons, the Commission notes that any existing Export Credit Insurance Corporation guarantees should be terminated immediately. (395) Continuous non-enforcement of debts by public authorities also constitutes State aid and must be taken into account (83). It is similar to a revolving loan granted on preferential conditions and therefore the aid component corresponds to the difference between the interest that would be charged by the market (for a company with a similar rating in a similar financial and economic situation and with similar collateral) and the interest charged by the awarding authority. (396) In view of the yard’s continuing precarious financial situation, the Commission is of the opinion that a market economy creditor would enforce its receivables immediately when they fell due. Therefore the fact that the Polish authorities did not undertake enforcement measures immediately constituted aid and thus the maturity date of any unrepaid liability would be the date on which the aid was made available. The aid component would be equal to the difference between the interest that would be charged on the market (for a company with a similar rating in a similar financial and economic situation and with similar collateral) and the interest charged by the awarding authority. (397) As any market economy operator would require immediate repayment of debts by the yard, not only the aid component resulting from the insufficient interest charged must be repaid but, in addition, accumulated liabilities must be repaid immediately. (398) Any cancellation of debt is equivalent to a non-repayable grant and the whole part of the debt that has been written off therefore constitutes aid. (399) Under the Act of 30 October 2002, public liabilities restructured under Chapter 5a are transferred to the Operator, a company fully owned by the Industrial Development Agency, together with asset components which should be worth at least 25 % of the restructured liabilities. The Operator should then sell these assets and use the revenue thus obtained to repay part of the public-law liabilities. The remainder of these liabilities is then written off by the competent authorities. The Commission therefore considers that the State aid component of this transaction is equal to the value of the public-law liabilities transferred to the Operator, minus the actual value of the assets transferred. According to the Act of 30 October 2002, this would mean that the aid component is equivalent to 75 % of the transferred liabilities at most. However if the value of the assets is higher or lower than the 25 % required by law, the aid component needs to be calculated accordingly. (400) The Commission notes that capital injections by the State or State-controlled bodies such as the Industrial Development Agency and KPS into companies in difficulty, where no return can be expected are regarded as non-repayable grants (84). To undo the distortion of competition caused by the capital injection, the yard would have to repay the full amount of the capital injected. (401) By letter of 3 November 2008, Poland undertook to implement this decision by way of a sale of assets at the market price through an open, transparent, unconditional and non-discriminatory tender (conducted in accordance with the specific conditions first set out in the Commission’s letter of 27 October 2008), and the subsequent liquidation of Gdynia Shipyard. All recovery claims resulting from the present decision must be registered by Poland without delay within the framework of the liquidation of Gdynia Shipyard. By letter of 6 November 2008 the Commission informed Poland that, provided these conditions were met, the sale of assets would not involve new aid to the buyer(s) and the assets could be transferred to the buyer(s) free of any liability resulting from the repayment of the unlawful and incompatible State aid granted to the yards in the past in accordance with the requirement to avoid economic continuity between the aid recipients and the buyers’ activity (85). The Commission will closely monitor whether the conditions set out in its letter of 27 October 2008 and accepted by the Polish authorities are met in order to determine whether this decision was implemented correctly. (402) These conditions, which Poland has explicitly undertaken to comply with, are summarised as follows. (403) The assets (without liabilities) will be privatised by way of an open, transparent, non-discriminatory and unconditional tender. Gdynia Shipyard, together with any remaining assets and liabilities, will be liquidated. (404) The assets must be sold at the market price (to the highest bidder). Asset components must be put up for sale separately or in a large number of small bundles defined in order to maximise the sale. These bundles must not consist of organised parts of a company or business. However, this definition of the bundles should not prevent potential buyers from presenting a joint bid for several components/bundles. (405) The tender must be non-discriminatory, i.e. it must ensure that the sale is open to all profiles of potential buyer, without any discrimination as to the purpose of their investment. (406) No conditions may be attached to the tender (such as maintaining employment or the activity, or the takeover of existing contracts). (The sole criterion for selecting the winning bid should be to maximise revenue for the benefit of the yard’s creditors). (407) The yard’s creditors, public and private, including the yard’s clients, should have the same ranking and rights as regards the proceeds from the sale of assets that they would have in a bankruptcy procedure. (408) No new State aid will be granted in the context of the sale, be it in the form of a write-off, State-funded repayment of public-law liabilities or repayment of private creditors, capital injections, loans, guarantees or other measures. Any new public-law liabilities accumulated during the period necessary to complete the sale procedure should be claimed back from the liquidation mass. (409) The sale will be conducted by an independent administrator, with similar rights and obligations to a bankruptcy receiver. A structure must be created permitting creditors to effectively supervise the sale and ensure that it is conducted on market terms and that their ranking and rights as regards the proceeds are respected. In addition, Poland and the Commission will jointly appoint a monitoring trustee with the specific task of helping the Commission to verify that the sale process and recovery of the aid take place in full compliance with the requirements indicated above. For that purpose, the monitoring trustee will submit regular, detailed reports to the Commission on the different stages of the procedure. (410) Poland has indicated that it will need to take legislative action to implement the present decision. The Commission recognises that a longer implementation period than normal is therefore warranted, also in view of the number of individual aid measures concerned by this decision and the diversity in terms of their form and duration. The Commission therefore calls on Poland to implement the present decision within 7 months of receiving it, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 The State aid described in recitals 209-232 of this decision and awarded by Poland in breach of Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty in favour of Gdynia Shipyard is incompatible with the common market. Additionally, any advance payment guarantees granted by Poland in breach of Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty in favour of Gdynia Shipyard as of 1 July 2007 until the date of this decision are incompatible with the common market. Article 2 With regard to the loans obtained from various public bodies referred to in recitals 209-232 of this decision, Poland shall recover aid in an amount equivalent to the difference between the interest rate actually paid by Gdynia Shipyard and the interest rate at which the recipient could have obtained the loan on the market for the period between the point in time when the said loans were granted and the point in time when they were repaid. In addition, if any loan is still outstanding by the time of this decision, it shall be repaid immediately. Article 3 With regard to the guarantees obtained from the Treasury described in recitals 209-232 of this decision, Poland shall recover aid equal to the difference, for the period between the time when the aid was awarded and the time when the guarantee expired, between the interest rate actually paid by Gdynia Shipyard for the loan secured by virtue of the State guarantee and the interest rate at which the recipient could have obtained the loan on the market, equal to the amount guaranteed multiplied by the risk factor (probability of default), less the guarantee premium paid or equal to the difference between the guarantee premium paid by the recipient and the guarantee premium at which the recipient could have obtained the guarantee on the market. In addition, if any of these guarantees is open at the moment when this decision is taken, it shall be terminated immediately. Article 4 With regard to the advance payment guarantees granted by the Export Credit Insurance Corporation described in recitals 209-232 of this decision, Poland shall recover aid equal to the difference, for the period between the time when the aid was awarded and the time when the guarantee expired, between the guarantee premium paid by the recipient and the guarantee premium at which the recipient could have obtained the guarantee on the market. In addition, if any of these guarantees is open at the moment when this decision is taken, it shall be terminated immediately. Article 5 Articles 3 and 4 also apply mutatis mutandis to any advance payment guarantees granted by Poland in breach of Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty in favour of Gdynia Shipyard from 1 July 2007 to the date of this decision. Article 6 With regard to non-enforced liabilities vis-à-vis various public bodies as described in recitals 209-232 of this decision, Poland shall recover aid equal to the difference, for the period between the time when the aid was awarded and the public-law liability was repaid, between the interest rate actually paid by Gdynia Shipyard and the interest rate at which the recipient could have obtained a deferment of maturity of its liabilities from a market economy creditor. In addition, any outstanding public-law liabilities shall be repaid immediately. Article 7 With regard to write-offs of debt vis-à-vis public bodies as described in recitals 209-232 of this decision, Poland shall recover aid equal to the amount of the write-off. Article 8 With regard to public-law liabilities restructured under the Act of 30 October 2002 on State aid to enterprises of special significance for the labour market, as amended, as described in recitals 209-232 of this decision, Poland shall recover aid equal to the amount of the public-law liability transferred to the Operator, less the actual value of the recipient’s assets transferred to the Operator. Article 9 With regard to capital injections from various public bodies as described in recitals 209-232 of this decision, Poland shall recover aid equal to the full amount of the capital injected. Article 10 With regard to direct grants as described in Table 4, recitals 209-232 of this decision, Poland shall recover aid equal to the full amount of the grants. Article 11 1. Poland shall recover the aid defined in the foregoing articles from the recipient. Recovery shall take place in accordance with the guidelines set out in recitals 384-401 of this decision. 2. The amounts to be recovered shall bear interest from the day on which they were made available to Gdynia Shipyard until their actual recovery. 3. Interest shall be calculated on a compound basis in accordance with Chapter V of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 (86) and of Commission Regulation (EC) No 271/2008 (87) amending Regulation (EC) No 794/2004. 4. Poland shall cancel all outstanding payments of the aid referred to in Article 1 with effect from the date of adoption of this decision. Article 12 1. Recovery of the aid referred to in Article 1 shall be immediate and effective. 2. Poland shall ensure that this Decision is implemented within 7 months of the date of notification of this Decision. Article 13 1. Within 2 months of notification of this Decision, Poland shall submit the following information to the Commission: (a) the total amount (principal and interest) to be recovered from the recipient; (b) a detailed description of the measures already taken and planned to comply with this Decision; (c) documents demonstrating that the recipient has been ordered to repay the aid; (d) documents demonstrating that all advance payment guarantees have been terminated. 2. Poland shall keep the Commission informed of progress with the national measures taken to implement this Decision until all the aid referred to in Article 1 has been recovered. It shall immediately submit, at the request of the Commission, information on the measures already taken and planned to comply with this Decision. It shall also provide detailed information on the amounts of aid and interest already recovered from the recipient. This Decision is addressed to Poland. Done at Brussels, 6 November 2008.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COUNCIL DIRECTIVE of 26 May 1983 amending Directive 76/756/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the installation of lighting and light-signalling devices on motor vehicles and their trailers (83/276/EEC) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 100 thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1), Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2), Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (3), Whereas Council Directive 70/156/EEC of 6 February 1970 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the type-approval of motor vehicles and their trailers (4), as last amended by Directive 80/1267/EEC (5), and by the 1979 Act of Accession, stipulates that the provisions necessary for implementing the EEC type-approval procedure in respect of each of the parts and characteristics of vehicles are to be adopted by means of separate Directives; whereas the provisions relating to the installation of lighting and light-signalling devices were adopted by means of Directive 76/756/EEC (6), as amended by Directives 80/233/EEC (7) and 82/244/EEC (8); Whereas, since the method adopted by Directive 70/156/EEC for harmonizing laws is 'optional', manufacturers have chosen not to invoke the Community provisions enacted by Directive 76/756/EEC, on the grounds that the latter provide for dipped-beam alignment (item 4.2.6 of Annex I, as amended Directive 82/244/EEC), and have preferred to have recourse to the relevant national provisions, which do not for the time being include such alignment; whereas, in order to justify their choice, manufacturers cite technical difficulties and the costs of implementing the Community requirement in question, especially in the case of small cars; Whereas, since the provisions concerning dipped-beam alignment came into force, technical developments and factors have arisen which, like dipped-beam alignment, are related to the problem of glare; whereas these developments consist, in particular, of efforts to improve the aerodynamic shape of vehicles, which influences the mounting height of the dipped-beam level lamps, as well as of measures to control light intensity; whereas, in order not to give rise to unnecessary complications, these considerations being inter-related, it is desirable temporarily and adequately to limit application of the provisions, which deal with only a part of the whole; Whereas in order to enable the Community rules on lighting and light-signalling devices to be effectively applied, the date of entry into force of the requirements concerning dipped-beam adjustment on new vehicles should be postponed to 1 October 1984; whereas it is also necessary to provide that the restrictions concerning the first entry into service of vehicles conforming to the type approved before 1 October 1984 shall not enter into force less than three years later, in order to give manufacturers time to adapt their models; Whereas, for the sake of greater clarity, it is now desirable to bring together in a single text all the enacting terms of Directive 76/756/EEC and subsequent amendments, including those made by this Directive, HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE: Article 1 Articles 1 to 5 of Directive 76/756/EEC are hereby replaced by the following: 'Article 1 For the purposes of this Directive, "vehicle'' means any motor vehicle intended for use on the road, with or without bodywork, having at least four wheels and a maximum design speed exceeding 25 kilometres per hours, and its trailers, with the exception of vehicles which run on rails, agricultural or forestry tractors and machinery, and public-works vehicles. Article 2 1. No Member State may: - refuse, in respect of a type of vehicle, to grant EEC type-approval or national type-approval, or - refuse or prohibit the sale, registration, entry into service or use of vehicles, on grounds relating to the installation on the vehicles of the lighting and light-signalling devices, whether mandatory or optional, listed in items 1.5.7 to 1.5.20 of Annex I if these devices are installed in accordance with the requirements set out in Annex I. 2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, compliance with the provisions of item 4.2.6 of Annex I shall be required only with effect from 1 October 1984. However, where devices such as those referred to in item 4.2.6.2 are installed before that date, they must satisfy the requirements set out in item 4.2.6. Where EEC type-approval (or the issue of the document referred to in the last indent of Article 10 (1) of Directive 70/156/EEC) or national type-approval was granted after 1 October 1979 and before 1 October 1984 in respect of a vehicle type that does not comply with the requirements referred to in paragraph 1, Member States may prohibit the first entry into service of vehicles of that type with effect from 1 October 1987. Article 3 A Member State which has granted EEC type-approval shall take the necessary measures to ensure that it is informed of any modification to any of the parts or characteristics referred to in item 1.1 of Annex I. The competent authorities of that Member State shall determine whether further tests should be carried out on the modified vehicle type and a fresh report drawn up. Where such tests reveal failure to comply with the requirements of this Directive, the modification shall not be approved. Article 4 Any amendments necessary in order to adjust the content of the Annexes to take account of technical progress shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 13 of Directive 70/156/EEC. Article 5 1. Member States shall bring into force the provisions necessary in order to comply with this Directive not later than 1 October 1983. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof. 2. Once this Directive has been notified to the Member States (1) they shall ensure that the Commission is informed, in sufficient time to enable it to submit its comments, of any draft laws, regulations or administrative provisions which they intend to adopt in the field covered by this Directive. (1) This Directive was notified to the Member States on 1 June 1983.' Article 2 This Directive is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 26 May 1983.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1455/85 of 31 May 1985 amending Regulation (EEC) No 1599/84 laying down detailed rules for the application of the system of production aid for 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 Council Regulation (EEC) No 516/77 of 14 March 1977 on the common organization of the market in products processed from fruit and vegetables (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 746/85 (2), and in particular Articles 3a (4) and 18 thereof, Whereas Article 4 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1599/84 (3) provides that processors must communicate particulars on production and stocks; whereas Article 19 provides that such particulars must be notified to the Commission; whereas the particulars requested for certain products are not sufficient to follow the market; whereas additional particulars should be communicated; Whereas fresh tomatoes may be used for the manufacture of different products attracting production aid; whereas when contracts are concluded the quality of tomatoes to be delivered is not always known; whereas the final use of the tomatoes can be difficult to determine at that moment; whereas it should be possible to conclude contracts stipulating the possibility of using the tomatoes for processing into alternative products; Whereas fresh tomatoes may in exceptional cases have deteriorated after having been taken over by the processor and thereby have become unfit for their intended use; whereas the competent authorities should be authorized in such cases to permit the use of the fresh tomatoes for the manufacture of other tomato-based products when that is compatible with the production aid system; Whereas processing contracts for Williams pears must be concluded before 10 August; whereas this fact has created practical difficulties; whereas the time limit for the conclusion of such contracts may be postponed without harming the functioning of the aid system; Whereas a comparison of all aid applications submitted in a Member State may smooth the application of the production aid system; whereas processors should forward a copy of their aid application to a central office in cases where there aid application itself is submitted to a local agency; 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 Regulation (EEC) No 1599/84 is hereby amended as follows: A. In Article 4: 1. point (c) is replaced by the following: '(c) not later than 8 June: (i) the quantity of prunes broken down into sold and unsold prunes, (ii) the quantity of dried plums derived from "prunes d'Ente", which were in stock on 1 June of that year, and (iii) the quantity of prunes from the current marketing year which have been processed before 1 June.' 2. point (d) is replaced by the following: 'not later than 31 January, the quantity of other finished products covered by the production aid system which were in stock on 16 January of that year. The quantity shall be broken down into sold and unsold products and according to products carrying a given rate of production aid and, if possible, according to whether or not the products have benefited from aid.' 3. the following point (e) is added: '(e) not later than 1 November, (i) the quantiy of fresh peaches purchased during the delivery period as defined in Article 7 (1) and entered in the records of raw material; (ii) the quantity of fresh tomatoes purchased before 22 October that year and entered in the records of raw materials as well as the quantity of fresh tomatoes expected to be delivered during the remaining part of the delivery period as defined in Article 7 (1); (iii) the quantity of fresh cherries purchased during the delivery period as defined in Article 7 (1) and entered in the records of raw material; (iv) the quantity of fresh pears purchased before 22 October that year and entered in the records of raw material as well as fresh pears expected to be delivered during the remaining part of the delivery period as defined in Article 7 (1); (v) the quantity of finished products obtained or estimated to be obtained from the quantity of fresh products referred to in (i) to (iv). The quantity to be communicated under (i) and (ii) shall be the quantity used or intended to be used for processing into finished products and for which production aid is or will be claimed. The quantity to be communicated under (iii) and (iv) shall be the quantity used or intended to be used for the processing of cherries or pears in syrup and irrespective of whether or not production aid is or will be claimed. The quantity to be communicated under (v) shall in respect of tomato-based product be broken down into - tomato concentrate, converted into concentrate with a dry weight content of 28 % or more but less than 30 %, - preserved whole peeled tomatoes of the San Marzano variety, - preserved whole peeled tomatoes of the Roma and similar varieties, - other tomato-based products.' B. In Article 5, the present paragraph 4 becomes 6 and the following paragraphs are inserted: '4. In respect of tomatoes the contract shall specify the finished products to be obtained. It may be specified that the tomatoes may be used for the manufacture of alternative finished tomato products but in such cases the contract shall also stipulate the price to be paid as a consequence of the possibe uses of the tomatoes. 5. In respect of tomatoes the competent authorities may when the circumstances so justify, in particular when tomatoes have deteriorated after their being taken over by processors, allow processors to use the tomatoes for processing into a finished product different from that stipulated in the processing contract on condition that the price paid or to be paid to the producer is at least equal to the minimum price fixed for tomatoes intended for processing into the finished product actually obtained and that the price indicated in the contract is respected.' C. The third indent of Article 7 (1) is replaced by the following: '- before 25 August in respect of Williams pears to be delivered to the industry during the period 15 July to 15 December.' D. In Article 11 (4) the following subparagraph is added: 'For tomato products a copy of the aid application as described in Article 12 (1) shall be forwarded by the processor to a central office designated by the Member State concerned unless the agency designated under paragraph 1 processes all aid applications submitted in that Member State.' E. In Article 19: 1. the date in point (a), '15 March' is replaced by '1 April'; 2. (v) in point (a) is replaced by the following: '(v) the total quantity, expressed as net weight, of prodicts referred to in (i) and (iii) in stock on 15 January of that year broken down into sold and unsold products; (vi) the total quantity, expressed as net weight, of finished products as referred to in Article 16 (1) which have been produced by processors which started their processing during the previous or the current marketing year;' 3. point (d) is replaced by the following: '(d) not later than 15 June each year of: (i) the total quantity of prunes from the current marketing year which have been processed before 1 June of that year; (ii) the total quantity of dried plums derived from "prunes d'Ente" and the total quantity of prunes in stock on 1 June of that year broken down into sold and unsold prunes; 4. point (f) is replaced by the following: '(f) not later than 16 November each year of: (i) the total quantity of fresh products referred to in Article 4 (e) used or intended to be used for processing into the finished products referred to in that point. The total quantity of fresh products shall be broken down by reference to the finished products to be obtained; (ii) the estimated production during the current marketing year (a) tomato concentrate; (b) preserved whole peeled tomatoes broken down into - peeled tomatoes of the San Marzano variety, and - peeled tomatoes of the Roma and similar varieties; (c) other tomato-based products; (d) peaches in syrup; (e) Williams pears in syrup; (f) cherries in syrup.'. 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, 31 May 1985.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 2223/96 of 25 June 1996 on the European system of national and regional accounts in the Community THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 213 thereof, Having regard to the draft Regulation submitted by the Commission, Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1), Having regard to the opinion of the European Monetary Institute (2), Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (3), (1) Whereas the implementation and supervision of Economic and Monetary Union require comparable, up-to-date and reliable information on the structure and developments in the economic situation of each country and/or region; (2) Whereas the Commission must play a part in the administration of Economic and Monetary Union and, in particular, report to the Council on the progress made by the Member States in fulfilling their obligations for the achievement of Economic and Monetary Union; (3) Whereas economic accounts are a basic tool for analysing the economic situation of a country and/or region on condition that they are drawn up on the basis of a single set of principles that are not open to differing interpretations; (4) Whereas the Commission must use aggregates of national accounts for Community administrative and, in particular, budgetary calculations; (5) Whereas in 1970 an administrative document entitled 'European System of Integrated Economic Accounts` (ESA) was published, covering the field governed by this Regulation, which had been drawn up solely by the Statistical Office of the European Communities and on its responsibility alone; whereas that document was the outcome of several years' work by the Statistical Office of the European Communities, together with Member States' national statistical institutes, to devise a system of national accounts meeting the requirements of the European Communities' economic and social policy, and whereas it constituted the Community version of the United Nations System of National Accounts which had been used by the Community up to that time; (6) Whereas in order to update the original text a second edition of the document was published in 1979 (hereinafter referred to as 'ESA Second edition`) (4); (7) Whereas the United Nations Statistical Commission adopted in February 1993 the new System of National Accounts (SNA) so that the results in all member countries of the United Nations should be internationally comparable; (8) Whereas attention should be paid in the case of environmental accounts to the communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council of 21 December 1994 entitled 'Directions for the European Union on environmental indicators and green national accounting`; (9) Whereas the Community cooperates with third countries to mutual advantage, particularly those in the European Economic Area (EEA); (10) Whereas a European System of Accounts must be established to meet the requirements of Economic and Monetary Union and will have to be used for compiling the national and regional accounts provided for by Community legislation; (11) Whereas the results of the accounts and tables of all the Member States drawn up according to the system set up by this Regulation must be made available by the Commission to users on precise dates, particularly with regard to monitoring the economic convergence and achieving the closest coordination of the Member States' economic policies; (12) Whereas the system set up by this Regulation is gradually to replace all other systems as a reference framework of common standards, definitions, classifications and accounting rules for drawing up the accounts of the Member States for the requirements of the Community, so that results that are comparable between the Member States can be obtained; (13) Whereas these statistical results, must be accessible to citizens in accordance with the principle of transparency; (14) Whereas the system established by this Regulation, which constitutes a version of the SNA adapted to the structures of the Member States' economies, must follow the layout of the SNA so that the Community's data are comparable with those compiled by its main international partners; (15) Whereas the dates must be grouped according to broad category of the accounts and tables, and whereas only the information essential to the requirements of the Community must be processed and communicated to the Commission on precise dates; (16) Whereas, however, in view of the volume and size of the accounts concerned, the level of detail and the geographical coverage, as well as the situation in this respect in the Member States, certain extra periods of time for forwarding data shall be granted exceptionally and temporarily to Member States which objectively are unable to meet the deadlines laid down by this Regulation; (17) Whereas a decision on how financial intermediation services indirectly measured (Fisim) are to be broken down should be taken at a later date; (18) Whereas, according to the principle of subsidiarity, the creation of common statistical standards so that comparable information can be produced is a task that can only be dealt with effectively at Community level and whereas such standards will be implemented in each Member State under the aegis of the organizations and institutions responsible for compiling official statistics; (19) Whereas it is necessary to set up a procedure to adapt and update the provisions of this Regulation in cooperation with the Statistical Programme Committee of the European Community (SPC), established by Council Decision 89/382/EEC, Euratom (5); whereas that adaptation procedure will be limited to amendments which do not increase own resources; (20) Whereas the Statistical Programme Committee and the Committee on Monetary, Financial and Balance of Payments Statistics (CMFB), established by Decision 91/115/EEC (6), have declared themselves in favour of the draft of this Regulation; (21) Whereas Council Directive 89/130/EEC, Euratom of 13 February 1989 on the harmonization of the compilation of gross national product at market prices (GNPmp) (7) stipulates that GNPmp can be comparable only if the definitions and accounting rules of the European System of Integrated Economic Accounts are applied, and whereas Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1553/89 of 29 May 1989 on the definitive uniform arrangements for the collection of own resources accruing from value added tax (8) provides that, in order to calculate the weighted average rate of VAT, the breakdown of transactions liable to tax shall be effected by means of national accounts prepared in accordance with the European System of Integrated Economic Accounts, and whereas for those instruments, and in the context of Council Regulation (EC) No 3605/93 of 22 November 1993 on the application of the Protocol on the excessive deficit procedure (9), Council Decision 94/728/EC, Euratom of 31 October 1994 on the system of the European Communities' own resources (10) and Council Decision 94/729/EC of 31 October 1994 on budgetary discipline (11), a transitional period for implementing the system set up by this Regulation should be provided, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 Purpose 1. The purpose of this Regulation is to set up the European System of Accounts 1995 hereinafter referred to as 'ESA 95`, by providing for: (a) a methodology on common standards, definitions, classifications and accounting rules, intended to be used for compiling accounts and tables on comparable bases for the purposes of the Community, together with results as required under the terms of Article 3; (b) a programme for transmitting for Community purposes on precise dates the accounts and tables compiled according to the ESA 95. 2. Taking into account Articles 7 and 8, this Regulation shall apply to all Community acts that refer to the ESA or its definitions. 3. This Regulation does not oblige any Member State to use the ESA 95 in compiling accounts for its own purposes. Article 2 Methodology 1. The methodology of the ESA 95 referred to in Article 1 (1) (a) is set out in Annex A. 2. Amendments to the ESA 95 methodology which are intended to clarify and improve its content shall be adopted by Commission Decision in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 4, provided that they do not change its underlying concepts, do not require additional resources for their implementation and do not cause an increase in own resources. 3. In accordance with the relevant provisions of the Treaty, the Council shall, not later than 31 December 1997, take a decision on introducing the system for breaking down the financial intermediation services indirectly measured (Fisim) described in Annex I of Annex A, and shall, if appropriate, adopt the necessary measures for the implementation thereof. Article 3 Transmission to the Commission 1. The Member States shall transmit to the Commission (Statistical Office) the accounts and tables set out in Annex B within the time limits specified for each table. The extra periods of time granted to certain Member States in accordance with Annex B shall expire not later than 1 January 2005. The Commission, after consulting the Statistical Programme Committee, shall report to the Council not later than 1 July 2003 on the application of the extra periods of time granted in order to verify whether they are still justified. This report shall, if necessary, be accompanied by a Commission proposal again granting extra periods of time to those Member States requiring them. 2. The Member States shall transmit the results of Annex B, including the data which have been declared confidential by Member States in accordance with national legislation or practice concerning statistical confidentiality, under the provisions of Council Regulation (Euratom, EEC) No 1588/90 of 11 June 1990 on the transmission of data subject to statistical confidentiality to the Statistical Office of the European Communities (12), which governs the confidential treatment of information. Within the limits set in Article 2 (2), any changes - new tables, countries and/or regions concerned - in the data requested from the Member States may be the subject of Commission Decisions in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 4. Article 4 Procedure 1. The Commission shall be assisted by the Statistical Programme Committee, hereinafter referred to as 'the Committee`. 2. The representative of the Commission shall submit to the Committee a draft of the measures to be taken. The Committee shall deliver its opinion on the draft, within a time limit which the chairman may lay down according to the urgency of the matter. The opinion shall be delivered by the majority laid down in Article 148 (2) of the Treaty in the case of decisions which the Council is required to adopt on a proposal from the Commission. The votes of the representatives of the Member States within the Committee shall be weighted in the manner set out in that Article. The chairman shall not vote. 3. The Commission shall adopt measures which apply immediately. However, if these measures are not in accordance with the opinion of the Committee, they shall be communicated by the Commission to the Council forthwith. In that event: (a) the Commission shall defer application of the measures it has decided by three months from the date of communication; (b) the Council, acting by a qualified majority, may take a different decision within the time limit laid down in point (a). Article 5 The Committee's tasks The Committee shall examine all matters that are raised by its chairman relating to the implementation of this Regulation either on his own initiative or at the request of a Member State. Article 6 Cooperation with other committees 1. On all matters falling within the competence of the Committee on Monetary, Financial and Balance of Payments Statistics (CMFB), the Commission shall request the opinion of that Committee in accordance with Article 2 of Decision 91/115/EEC. 2. The Commission shall communicate to the Committee on Gross National Product, set up by Directive 89/130/EEC, Euratom any information concerning the implementation of this Regulation which is necessary for the performance of its duties. Article 7 Date of application and of first transmission of data 1. The ESA 95 shall be applied for the first time to data established in accordance with Annex B to be transmitted in April 1999. 2. The data shall be transmitted to the Commission (Statistical Office) in accordance with the time limits laid down in Annex B. 3. In accordance with paragraph 1, until the first transmission based on the ESA 95, Member States shall continue to send to the Commission (Statistical Office) the accounts and tables established by applying the ESA second edition. 4. Without prejudice to Article 19 of Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1552/89 of 29 May 1989 (13) implementing Decision 88/376/EEC, Euratom on the system of the Communities' own resources, the Commission and the Member State concerned shall check that this Regulation is being applied and shall submit the outcome of those checks to the Committee provided for in Article 4 (1) of this Regulation. Article 8 Transitional provisions 1. For budgetary and own resources purposes and by way of derogation from Article 1 (2) and Article 7, the European system of integrated economic accounts in force within the meaning of Article 1 (1) of Directive 89/130/EEC, Euratom and the legal acts relating thereto, in particular Regulations (EEC, Euratom) No 1552/89 and No 1553/89 and Decisions 94/728/EC, Euratom and 94/729/EC, shall be the ESA second edition while Decision 94/728/EC, Euratom remains in force. 2. For the purpose of the Member States' reports to the Commission under the excessive deficit procedure laid down in Regulation (EC) No 3605/93, the European system of integrated economic accounts shall be the ESA second edition until the 1 September 1999 reports. 3. Application of the ESA second edition as laid down in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article shall be ensured by adjusting the data received by virtue of Article 7 (1) on the basis of the ESA 95 to take account of the changes resulting from any differences in concepts, definitions or nomenclatures between the ESA second edition and the ESA 95. Implementation of this principle shall be established in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 6 of Council Directive 89/130/EEC, Euratom by December 1996 at the latest. Article 9 This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th 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, 25 June 1996.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 574/2009 of 30 June 2009 amending for the 108th time Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 of 27 May 2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 467/2001 prohibiting the export of certain goods and services to Afghanistan, strengthening the flight ban and extending the freeze of funds and other financial resources in respect of the Taliban of Afghanistan, (1) and in particular the first indent of Article 7(1) thereof, Whereas: (1) Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 lists the persons, groups and entities covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources under that Regulation. (2) On 18 June 2009, the Sanctions Committee of the United Nations Security Council decided to amend the list of natural and legal persons, groups and entities to whom the freezing of funds and economic resources should apply, adding one natural person to the list given the information related to their association with Al-Qaida. The Sanctions Committee provided the statement of reasons for this listing decision. (3) Annex I should be amended accordingly. (4) In order to ensure that the measures provided for in this Regulation are effective, this Regulation must enter into force immediately. (5) The Commission will communicate the grounds on which this Regulation is based to the natural person concerned, provide him with the opportunity to comment on these grounds and review this Regulation in view of the comments and possible available additional information, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 is hereby amended as set out in the Annex to this Regulation. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 30 June 2009.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 784/84 of 27 March 1984 amending Regulation (EEC) No 649/78 on the sale at reduced prices of intervention butter for direct consumption as concentrated butter THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 of 27 June 1968 on the common organization of the market in milk and milk products (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1600/83 (2), and in particular Articles 6 (7) and 28 thereof, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 985/68 of 15 July 1968 laying down general rules for intervention on the market in butter and cream (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3521/83 (4), and in particular Article 7a thereof, Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 649/78 (5), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1447/83 (6), provides for the sale at reduced prices of intervention butter for direct consumption as concentrated butter; Whereas, given the consumption habits of certain groups of consumers in the Community and the desirability of disposing of extra quantities of butter, it should be made possible to incorporate in the concentrated butter a derivative of butyric acid that adjusts the taste of the butter to the requirements of those groups of consumers; Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 Regulation (EEC) No 649/78 is hereby amended as follows: 1. Article 5 is replaced by the following: 'Article 5 1. Concentrated butter must: - contain at least 98 % butterfat, - have undergone, to the exclusion of all treatment other than that mentioned in paragraph 4, the incorporation provided for in paragraph 2. 2. During the melting of the butter there shall be incorporated per 100 kilograms of butter used, according to the formula chosen: FORMULA A either 15 grams of stigmasterol (C29H48O = D -5,22-stigmastene-3-betal-ol) at least 95 % pure, calculated on the product ready to be incorporated, or 17 grams of stigmasterol (C29H48O = D -5,22-stigmastene-3-beta-ol) at least 85 % pure, calculated on the product ready to be incorporated, containing not more than 7,5 % brassicasterol (C28H46O = D-5,22-ergostene-3-beta-ol) and not more than 4 % sitosterol (C29H50O = D -5-stigmastene-3-beta-ol). FORMULA B either 10 grams of ethyl ester of butyric acid and 15 grams of stigmasterol (C29H48O = D-5,22-stigmastene-3-beta-ol) at least 95 % pure, calculated on the product ready to be incorporated, or 10 grams of ethyl ester of butyric acid and 17 grams of stigmasterol (C29H48O = D-5,22-stigmastene-3-beta-ol) at least 85 % pure, calculated on the product ready to be incorporated, containing not more than 7,5 % brassicasterol (C28H46O = D -5,22-ergostene-3-beta-ol) and not more than 4 % sitosterol (C29H50O = D-5-stigmastene-3-beta-ol). The competent agency shall ensure that the aforesaid requirements as to the quality and characteristics, in particular the degree of purity, of the products to be incorporated into the melted butter have been complied with. 3. If the cream referred to in Article 1 (2) is used, incorporation shall take place at the final stage in the manufacture of the concentrated butter, and the quantity of products incorporated shall be calculated as a function of the fat content of the cream converted into butter equivalents. 4. Nitrogen gas may be added to concentrated butter meeting the requirements of paragraphs 1 and 2 immediately before packing to cause foaming; the increase in volume resulting from this treatment may not exceed 10 % of the volume of the concentrated butter before treatment. 5. Concentrated butter in which additional substances as specified in Formula A have been incorporated must be marketed in plastic packs of not more than 500 grams, the form of which makes it possible to distinguish between concentrated butter and ordinary butter, bearing on the upper surface in letters at least 5 millimetres high, one or more of the following statements: "Butteroil for cooking" or "concentrated butter for cooking', "Koncentreret smoer til husholdningsbrug", "Butterschmalz" or "Butterreinfett", "Sympyknoméno voýtyro gia mageirikí chrísi", "Beurre concentré pour la cuisine", "Burro concentrato da cucina", "Braadboter" or "boterconcentraat voor keukengebruik". Concentrated butter in which additional substances as specified in Formula B have been incorporated must be marketed in metal containers holding a maximum of 2 kilograms bearing one or more of the following statements in letters at least 1 centimetre high: "Butter ghee for cooking", "Ghee til husholdningsbrug", "Aus Butter gewonnenes Ghee zum Kochen", "Ghee voytýroy gia mageirikí chrísi", "Ghee obtenu du beurre, destiné à la cuisine", "Ghee da burro, destinato alla cucina", "Ghee voor keukengebruik".' 2. Article 9 (4) is replaced by the following: '4. The packed concentrated butter shall be delivered and shall remain until the retail stage in wrappings bearing one or more of the following statements: (a) in the case of concentrated butter in which additional substances as specified in Formula A have been incorporated: "Butteroil for cooking (Regulation (EEC) No 649/78)" or "Concentrated butter for cooking (Regulation (EEC) No 649/78)", "Koncentreret smoer til husholdningsbrug (forordning (EOEF) nr. 649/78)", "Butterschmalz (Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 649/78)" or "Buttereinfett (Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 649/78)", "Sympyknoméno voýtyro gia mageirikí chrísi (kanonismós (EOK) arith. 649/78)", "Beurre concentré pour la cuisine [règlement (CEE) no 649/78]", "Burro concentrato da cucina [regolamento (CEE) n. 649/78]", "Braadboter (Verordening (EEG) nr. 649/78)" or "Boterconcentraat voor keukengebruik [Verordening (EEG) nr. 649/78]"; (b) in the case of concentrated butter in which additional substances as specified in Formula B have been incorporated: "Butter ghee for cooking (Regulation (EEC) No 649/78)", "Ghee til husholdningsbrug [forordning (EOEF) nr. 649/78]", "Aus Butter gewonnenes Ghee zum Kochen (Verordnung (EWG) Nr. 649/78)", "Ghee voytýroy gia mageirikí chrísi (kanonismós (EOK) arith. 649/78)", "Ghee obtenu du beurre, destiné à la cuisine [règlement (CEE) no 649/78]", "Ghee da burro, destinato alla cucina (regolamento (CEE) n. 649/78)", "Ghee voor keukengebruik (Verordening (EEG) nr. 649/78)".' 3. The second paragraph of Article 10 is replaced by the following: 'To this end they shall fix a maximum retail price for concentrated butter, the amount of which shall be shown on the packs or metal containers together with the appropriate statement as specified in Article 5 (5).' 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 March 1984.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 2187/2005 of 21 December 2005 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures in the Baltic Sea, the Belts and the Sound, amending Regulation (EC) No 1434/98 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 88/98 THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 37 thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1), Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2), Whereas: (1) Pursuant to Articles 2 and 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 of 20 December 2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy (3), the Council is to establish, taking into account available scientific, technical and economic advice, Community measures necessary to ensure exploitation of living aquatic resources that provides sustainable economic, environmental and social conditions. To that end, the Council may adopt technical measures to limit fishing mortality and the environmental impact of fishing activities. (2) The accession of the Community to the Convention on Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources in the Baltic Sea and the Belts, as amended by the Protocol to the Conference of the representatives of the States Parties to the Convention (hereinafter referred to as the Gdansk Convention) was approved by Decision 83/414/EEC (4). (3) Since it was established by the Gdansk Convention, the International Baltic Sea Fishery Commission (IBSFC) has adopted a body of measures for the conservation and management of fishery resources in the Baltic Sea. It notified the Contracting Parties of certain recommendations to modify those technical measures. (4) It is appropriate for the Community to give effect to such recommendations. However, since the IBSFC may be superseded by bilateral cooperation with the Russian Federation, the Community rules should not follow strictly those recommendations but should rather seek to establish a comprehensive and consistent system of technical measures for Community waters, based on the existing rules. There is scope for simplification in some cases where the existing rules are unnecessarily detailed and/or cannot be justified for the conservation of resources. (5) Regulation (EC) No 88/98 (5) laid down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources in the waters of the Baltic Sea, the Belts and the Sound. (6) The application of Regulation (EC) No 88/98 has brought to light certain deficiencies in that Regulation which have resulted in problems of application and enforcement and which should be rectified, notably by defining target species and required catch percentages applicable for different mesh size ranges and geographical areas when fishing with certain gears. (7) The manner in which the percentages of target species and of other species are to be calculated should be defined. (8) The minimum size of each species should be fixed taking into account the selectivity of the mesh size of the fishing gear which can be used for that species. (9) Scientific information indicates that there are large by-catches of juvenile cod in eel fishery with trawls. The fishing of eel with active gear should therefore be prohibited. (10) The Gulf of Riga is a unique and rather sensitive marine ecosystem which requires special measures to ensure sustainable exploitation of its resources and to minimise the impact of fishing activities. Article 21 of the 2003 Act of Accession, therefore, provides that the Council is to amend Regulation (EC) No 88/98 before the date of accession with a view to adopting the necessary conservation measures in the Gulf of Riga. (11) In order to control fishing activities, access to the Gulf of Riga should be subject to special fishing permits as referred to in Council Regulation (EC) No 1627/94 of 27 June 1994 laying down general provisions concerning special fishing permits (6). (12) Scientific information indicates that, for cod, towed gears without exit window and with normal diamond knotted netting in the codend and the extension piece are less selective than those with the BACOMA type exit window or where the netting in the codend and extension piece is turned 90°. It is therefore appropriate not to allow, within Community waters and for Community vessels, the use of towed gears without the BACOMA type exit window or without the netting in the codend and extension piece being turned 90° when cod is a target species. (13) Regulation (EC) No 1434/98 (7) laid down conditions under which herring may be landed for industrial purposes other than direct human consumption. (14) In order to simplify the complex rules of Regulation (EC) No 1434/98, the provisions of that Regulation that are of relevance for the Baltic Sea should be replaced by general provisions on unsorted landings in this Regulation. Regulation (EC) No 1434/98 should be amended accordingly. (15) The measures necessary for the implementation of this Regulation should be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission (8). (16) Amendments to Annex I and to Appendices 1 and 2 to Annex II to this Regulation should also be adopted in accordance with Decision 1999/468/EC. (17) By reason of the number and scope of the changes to be made to the rules, Regulation (EC) No 88/98 should be repealed and replaced by a new text, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: CHAPTER I SCOPE AND DEFINITIONS Article 1 Subject matter and scope This Regulation lays down technical conservation measures in relation to the taking and landing of fishery resources in the maritime waters under the sovereignty or jurisdiction of the Member States and situated in the geographical area specified in Annex I. Article 2 Definitions For the purposes of this Regulation: (a) ‘active gear’ means any fishing gear for which the catch operation requires an active movement of the gear, including in particular towed gears and encircling gears; (i) ‘trawl’ means gear which is actively towed by one or more fishing vessels and consisting of a net having a cone- or pyramid-shaped body (as trawl body) closed at the back by a codend; (ii) ‘beam trawl’ means gear with a trawl net open horizontally by a steel or wooden tube, the beam, and netting with ground chains, chain mats or tickler chains, actively towed on the bottom by the vessel engine; (iii) ‘Danish seine’ means encircling and towed gear, operated from a boat by means of two long ropes (seine ropes) designed to herd the fish towards the opening of the seine. The gear made up of net, which is similar to a bottom trawl in design and size, comprises two long wings, a body and a bag (codend); (iv) ‘dredges’ means a net or metal basket mounted on a frame of variable shape and size, the lower part of which carries a scraper blade, sometimes toothed; (v) ‘purse seine’ means encircling gear made up of net where the bottom is drawn together by means of a purse line at the bottom of the net, which passes through a series of rings along the groundrope, enabling the net to be pursed and closed; (b) ‘passive gear’ means any fishing gear for which the catch operation does not require an active movement of the gear, and includes gillnets, entangling nets, trammel nets, trap-nets, lines, pots and traps. The nets may consist of one or more separate nets which are rigged with top, bottom and connecting ropes, and may be equipped with anchoring, floating and navigational gear; (i) ‘gillnet’ and ‘entangling net’ means gear made up of a single piece of net and held vertically in the water by floats and weights. It catches living aquatic resources by entangling or enmeshing; (ii) ‘trammel net’ means gear made up of two or more pieces of net hung jointly in parallel on a single headline and held vertically in the water by floats and weights; (iii) ‘lines’ means a number of connected lines, either set at the bottom or drifting, each bearing a large number of baited hooks; (c) ‘hooks’ means a bent, sharpened piece of steel wire usually with barb; (d) ‘immersion time’ means the period from the point of time when the nets are first put in the water until the point of time when the nets are fully recovered on board the fishing vessel; (e) ‘square-meshed netting’ means a construction of netting mounted so that of the two sets of parallel lines formed by the mesh bars, one set is parallel to, and the other at right angles to the long axis of the net; (f) ‘codend’ means the last 8 m of the trawl, having either a cylindrical shape, i.e. the same circumference throughout, or a tapering shape; (g) ‘strengthening bag’ means a cylindrical piece of netting completely surrounding the codend of a trawl and which may be attached to the codend at intervals; (h) ‘back strap’ means the rearmost round strap attached to the codend, measured when the meshes are stretched lengthwise; (i) ‘lifting strap’ means a piece of rope encircling the circumference of the codend or the strengthening bag, if any, and attached to it by means of loops or rings; (j) ‘round strap’ means a piece of rope encircling the circumference of the codend or the strengthening bag and which is attached to it; (k) ‘flapper’ means a piece of netting fastened inside an active gear net in such a way that it allows catches to pass from the front to the rear of the gear but limits their possibility of return; (l) ‘codend buoy’ means a buoyant unit attached to the codend; (m) ‘buoy rope’ means a rope connecting a cod-end buoy to that part of the fishing gear being supported or marked; (n) ‘extension piece’ means an untapered section of the trawl having a cylindrical shape, i.e. the same circumference as the codend throughout, attached to or a continuation of the codend. CHAPTER II NETS AND CONDITIONS FOR THEIR USE SECTION I Target species Article 3 Target species and minimum mesh sizes 1. For each of the subdivisions listed in Annex I, the ranges of mesh size admissible for each target species shall be as defined in Annex II when fishing with trawls, Danish seines and similar gears and as defined in Annex III when fishing with gillnets, entangling nets and trammel nets. No part of the gears or nets shall have a mesh size less than the smallest mesh size within each mesh size range. 2. The minimum percentage of the target species among the living aquatic resources retained on board for each geographic subdivision and each range of mesh size is set out in Annex II and Annex III. 3. During any fishing voyage when dredges are carried on board, the retention on board and the landing of any quantity of living aquatic resources shall be prohibited unless at least 85 % of the live weight thereof consists of molluscs and/or Furcellaria lumbricalis. 4. The use, within a subdivision, of gillnets or entangling nets having mesh sizes smaller than those referred to in Annex III shall be prohibited. 5. The use, within a subdivision, of trammel nets with mesh size in that part of the net having the largest meshes that does not correspond to one of the categories set out in Annex III unless the mesh size in the part of the net having the smallest meshes is smaller than 16 mm shall be prohibited. If the mesh size in the smallest meshes is less than 16 mm, all meshes with a mesh size above 16 mm shall correspond to the categories set out in Annex III. 6. For each fishing voyage, landings shall be prohibited whenever the catch taken in the subdivisions listed in Annex I, and retained on board, does not comply with the corresponding conditions laid down in Annex II or Annex III. Article 4 Calculation of percentages of target species 1. The percentages of target species referred to in Annexes II and III shall be calculated as the proportion by live weight of all species listed in Annexes II and III which are either retained on board after sorting or landed. 2. The percentage of target species and of other species shall be obtained by aggregating all quantities of target species and of other species listed in Annexes II and III retained on board. 3. The quantities of species listed in Annexes II and III that have been transhipped from a fishing vessel shall be taken into account when calculating the percentages of target species for that vessel. 4. The percentages of target species may be calculated on the basis of one or more representative samples. SECTION II Active gear Article 5 Structure of fishing gear 1. No device shall be used which obstructs or otherwise diminishes the mesh in the codend. 2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, it shall be permitted to attach to the outside of the lower half of the codend of any active gear, any canvas, netting or other material which has the purpose of preventing or reducing wear. Such material shall be attached along the forward and lateral edges of the codend only. 3. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, when fishing with trawls, Danish seines or similar gears with a mesh size less than 90 mm, it shall be permitted to attach to the outside of the codend a strengthening bag. The mesh size of the strengthening bag shall be at least twice as large as that of the codend and in no case less than 80 mm. A strengthening bag may be attached at the following points: (a) at its forward edge; (b) at its rear edge; or (c) circumferentially between the rear and front part. A strengthening bag may be laced: (a) circumferentially to the codend and the extension piece around one row of meshes; or (b) longitudinally along a single row of meshes. 4. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, it shall be permitted to: (a) use in active gear a non-return net or flapper. The flapper may be attached either inside the codend or in front of the codend. The provisions on minimum mesh sizes laid down in Annex II shall not apply to the flapper. The distance from the point of forward attachment of the flapper to the rear end of the codend shall be at least three times the length of the flapper; (b) attach to the outside of any part of the codend a sensor dedicated to the measurement of the volume of the catches; (c) use round straps and a lifting strap attached to the outside of the codend when fishing with trawls, Danish seines or similar gears with a mesh size smaller than 90 mm; (d) use one lifting strap attached to the outside of the codend when fishing with trawls, Danish seines or similar gears with a mesh size equal to or larger than 90 mm; (e) attach floats on the two lateral selvedges of the codend; (f) use a back strap attached to the outside of the codend. The distance between the back strap and the codline shall be equal to or smaller than 50 cm. Article 6 Specific prohibited structures Use of the following shall be prohibited: (a) any codend in which the number of equal sized meshes around any circumference of the codend increases from the front end to the rear end; (b) any extension piece in which the circumference at any point is smaller than the circumference of the foremost end of the codend to which the extension piece is joined; (c) any codend of mesh size equal to or greater than 32 mm in which any mesh is not diamond or square; (d) any trawl, Danish seine or similar gear with a mesh size equal to or larger than 90 mm to which a codend is attached by any means other than being sewn into that part of the net anterior to the codend; (e) any trawl, Danish seine or similar gear with a mesh size equal to or larger than 90 mm having more than 100 open diamond meshes and less than 40 open diamond meshes in any circumference of the codend, excluding the joining or the selvedges; (f) any codend where the stretched length of the top half is not approximately equal to the stretched length of the bottom half. Article 7 Selectivity in trawl fisheries for cod The Commission shall, on the basis of advice from the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, present to the Council not later than September 2007 an assessment of the selectivity on cod of active gears for which cod is recognised as target species. SECTION III Passive gear Article 8 Dimensions and immersion time 1. Where fishing is conducted using gillnets, entangling nets or trammel nets, the use of more than 9 km of nets for vessels with an overall length of up to and including 12 m and 21 km of nets for vessels with an overall length of more than 12 m shall be prohibited. 2. The immersion time of the nets referred to in paragraph 1 shall not exceed 48 hours. 3. By way of derogation from paragraph 2, the immersion time of nets referred to in paragraph 1 when fishing under the ice cover shall not be limited. Article 9 Restrictions on driftnets 1. From 1 January 2008 it shall be prohibited to keep on board, or use for fishing, driftnets. 2. In 2006 and 2007, a vessel may keep on board, or use for fishing, driftnets if authorised to do so by the competent authorities of the flag Member State. 3. In 2006 and 2007, the maximum number of vessels which may be authorised by a Member State to keep on board, or use for fishing, driftnets shall not exceed 40 % and 20 % respectively of the fishing vessels which used driftnets during the period 2001 to 2003. 4. By way of derogation from paragraph 3, in subdivisions 25 to 32 the maximum number of vessels which may be authorised by a Member State to keep driftnets on board or use them for fishing shall not exceed 40 % of the fishing vessels which used driftnets during the period 2001 to 2003. 5. Member States shall communicate to the Commission by 30 April each year the list of vessels authorised to carry out fishing activities using driftnets. Article 10 Conditions for driftnets 1. The master of a fishing vessel using driftnets shall keep a logbook in which he shall record the following information on a day-to-day basis: (a) the total length of the nets on board; (b) the total length of the nets used in each fishing operation; (c) the quantity, date and position of by-catches of cetaceans. 2. All fishing vessels using driftnets shall keep on board the authorisation referred to in Article 9(2). SECTION IV Common provisions on gear and its use Article 11 Determination of mesh size and twine thickness Commission Regulation (EC) No 129/2003 of 24 January 2003 laying down detailed rules for determining the mesh size and thickness of twine of fishing nets (9) shall apply. Article 12 Reaching of required catch percentages 1. Quantities of living aquatic resources caught in excess of permitted percentages specified in Annexes II and III may not be landed but shall be returned to the sea before each landing. 2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, whenever during a fishing voyage a vessel leaves any of the groups of subdivisions listed in Annexes II and III, the minimum percentage of target species as set out in Annexes II and III caught and retained on board from that geographical area shall be met within two hours. Article 13 Conditions for use of gear 1. Gear that may not be used within a certain geographical area or during a certain period shall be stowed away in such a manner that it is not ready for use in the prohibited area or during the prohibited period. Reserve gear shall be stowed away separately and in such a manner that it is not ready for use. 2. Fishing gear shall be considered not ready for use if: (a) in the case of trawls, Danish seines and similar gears with the exception of pair trawl: (i) the trawl boards are made fast to the inner or outer side of the bulwark or the gallows, (ii) sweep lines or warps are unshackled from the trawl boards or weights; (b) in the case of pair trawl, the wing tip weights are unshackled and stowed away; (c) in the case of lines, gillnets, entangling nets and trammel nets: (i) the nets are stowed under a lashed cover, (ii) the lines and hooks are kept in closed boxes; (d) in the case of purse seines, the main or bottom wire is unshackled from the seine. 3. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, where any gear is used for which cod (Gadus morhua) is defined as a target species in accordance with Annexes II or III, no other type of gear shall be kept on board. CHAPTER III MINIMUM LANDING SIZE OF FISH Article 14 Measurement of fish 1. A fish shall be regarded as undersized if it is smaller than the minimum size specified in Annex IV for the relevant species and the relevant geographical area. 2. The size of a fish shall be measured from the tip of the snout, with mouth closed, to the extreme end of the tail fin. Article 15 Retention on board of undersized fish 1. Undersized fish shall not be retained on board or be transhipped, landed, transported, stored, sold, displayed or offered for sale, but shall be returned immediately to the sea. 2. For fish other than those defined in Annex II as target species for the mesh size categories ‘smaller than 16 mm’ or ‘16 to 31 mm’ caught with trawls, Danish seines or similar gears of a mesh size less than 32 mm, or with purse seines, paragraph 1 shall not apply, provided that those fish are not sorted and not sold, displayed or offered for sale for human consumption. CHAPTER IV RESTRICTIONS RELATING TO CERTAIN AREAS, TYPES OF FISHERIES OR LIVING AQUATIC RESOURCES Article 16 Prohibited areas It shall be prohibited throughout the year, to fish with any active gear in the geographical area enclosed by sequentially joining with rhumb lines the following positions, which shall be measured according to the WGS84 coordinate system: 1. 54° 23′ N, 14° 35′ E 2. 54° 21′ N, 14° 40′ E 3. 54° 17′ N, 14° 33′ E 4. 54° 07′ N, 14° 25′ E 5. 54° 10′ N, 14° 21′ E 6. 54° 14′ N, 14° 25′ E 7. 54° 17′ N, 14° 17′ E 8. 54° 24′ N, 14° 11′ E 9. 54° 27′ N, 14° 25′ E 10. 54° 23′ N, 14° 35′ E Article 17 Restrictions on fishing for salmon and sea trout 1. The retention on board of salmon (Salmo salar) or sea trout (Salmo trutta) shall be prohibited: (a) from 1 June to 15 September in waters of subdivisions 22 to 31; (b) from 15 June to 30 September in waters of subdivision 32. 2. The area of prohibition during the closed season shall be beyond four nautical miles measured from the baselines. 3. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the retention on board of salmon (Salmo salar) or sea trout (Salmo trutta) caught with trap-nets shall be permitted. Article 18 Restrictions on fishing for eel The retention on board of eel caught with any active gear shall be prohibited throughout the year. Article 19 Restrictions on unsorted landings 1. Unsorted catches shall be landed only at ports and landings sites where a sampling programme referred to in paragraph 2 is in operation. 2. Member States shall ensure that an adequate sampling programme allowing effective monitoring of unsorted landings by species is in place. CHAPTER V SPECIFIC MEASURES FOR THE GULF OF RIGA Article 20 Special fishing permit 1. In order to fish in subdivision 28-1, vessels shall hold a special fishing permit issued in accordance with Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1627/94. 2. Member States shall ensure that vessels, to which the special fishing permit referred to in paragraph 1 has been issued, are included in a list, containing their name and internal registration number, made publicly available via an Internet website, the address of which shall be provided to the Commission and Member States by each Member State. 3. Vessels included in the list shall satisfy the following conditions: (a) the total engine power (kW) of the vessels within the lists must not exceed that observed for each Member State in the years 2000-2001 in subdivision 28-1; and (b) the engine power of a vessel must not exceed 221 kilowatts (kW) at any time. Article 21 Replacement of vessels or engines 1. Any individual vessel on the list referred to in Article 20(2) may be replaced by another vessel or vessels, provided that: (a) such replacement does not lead to an increase in the total engine power as indicated in Article 20(3)(a) in the Member State concerned, and (b) the engine power of any replacement vessel does not exceed 221 kW at any time. 2. An engine of any individual vessel included in the list referred to in Article 20(2) may be replaced, provided that: (a) the replacement of an engine does not lead to the vessel's engine power exceeding 221 kW at any time, and (b) the power of the replacement engine is not such that replacement leads to an increase in the total engine power as indicated in Article 20(3)(a) for the Member State concerned. Article 22 Trawling prohibition In subdivision 28-1, fishing with trawl shall be prohibited in waters of less than 20 m in depth. CHAPTER VI GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 23 Prohibited fishing gear and practices 1. The catching of living aquatic resources using methods incorporating the use of explosives, poisonous or stupefying substances, electric current or any kind of projectile shall be prohibited. 2. The sale, display or offer for sale of living aquatic resources caught using methods referred to in paragraph 1 shall be prohibited. Article 24 Scientific research 1. This Regulation shall not apply to fishing operations conducted solely for the purpose of scientific investigations subject to the following conditions: (a) the fishing operations must be carried out with the permission and under the authority of the Member State or Member States concerned; (b) the Member State or Member States in whose waters the research is carried out must have been informed in advance of the fishing operations; and (c) the vessel conducting the fishing operations must carry on board an authorisation issued by the Member State whose flag the vessel is flying. 2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, living aquatic resources caught for the purposes specified in paragraph 1 cannot be sold, stored, displayed or offered for sale, unless: (a) they meet the minimum landing sizes listed in Annex IV and, for resources for which fishing opportunities are fixed, such opportunities are not exhausted; or (b) they are sold directly for purposes other than human consumption. Article 25 Artificial restocking and transplantation This Regulation shall not apply to fishing operations conducted solely for the purpose of artificial restocking or transplantation of living aquatic resources which are carried out with the permission and under the authority of the Member State or Member States concerned. Where the artificial restocking or transplantation is carried out in the waters of another Member State or Member States, all the Member States concerned shall be informed in advance. Article 26 Measures taken by Member States applying solely to fishing vessels flying their flag 1. Member States may, for the conservation and management of stocks or to reduce the effect of fishing on the marine eco-system, take technical measures designed to limit fishing opportunities which: (a) supplement measures set out in Community fisheries Regulations; or (b) go beyond minimum requirements set out in Community fisheries Regulations. 2. Measures referred to in paragraph 1 shall apply solely to the fishermen of the Member State concerned and shall be compatible with Community law. 3. The Member State concerned shall communicate such measures without delay to the other Member States and the Commission. 4. Member States shall supply the Commission, on its request, with all information needed for the assessment of whether the measures comply with the conditions laid down in paragraph 1. 5. If the Commission concludes that the measures do not comply with the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 it shall adopt a decision requiring the Member State to withdraw or modify the measures. Article 27 Scientific assessment of gear types By 1 January 2008, the Commission shall ensure that a scientific assessment of the effects of using in particular gillnets, trammel nets and entangling nets on cetaceans is conducted and its findings presented to the European Parliament and Council. CHAPTER VII FINAL PROVISIONS Article 28 Implementing rules Detailed rules for the implementation of this Regulation shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 30(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002. Article 29 Amendments to the Annexes Amendments to Annex I and to Appendices 1 and 2 to Annex II shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 30(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002. Article 30 Amendments to Regulation (EC) No 1434/98 Regulation (EC) No 1434/98 is hereby amended as follows: 1. in Article 1, paragraph 2 shall be deleted; 2. in Article 2, paragraphs 2 and 3 shall be deleted; 3. in Article 3, paragraph 1 shall be replaced by the following: ‘1. Catches of herring taken: - in Regions 1 and 2 with towed nets of minimum mesh size equal to or greater than 32 mm, or - in Region 3 with towed nets of minimum mesh size equal to or greater than 40 mm, or - in Regions 1, 2 or 3 with any fishing gear other than towed nets, shall not be landed for purposes other than direct human consumption unless they are first offered for sale for direct human consumption and fail to find a buyer.’; 4. in Article 3, paragraph 2 shall be replaced by the following: ‘2. However, any herring caught with any fishing gear within the conditions specified in Article 2 may be landed for purposes other than direct human consumption.’ Article 31 Repeal Regulation (EC) No 88/98 shall be 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 V. Article 32 Entry into force This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. It shall apply from 1 January 2006. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 21 December 2005.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Directive 2004/46/EC of 16 April 2004 amending Directive 95/31/EC as regards E 955 sucralose and E 962 salt of aspartame-acesulfame (Text with EEA relevance) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Directive 89/107/EEC of 21 December 1988 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States concerning food additives authorised for use in foodstuffs intended for human consumption(1), and in particular Article 3(3)(a) thereof, After consulting the Scientific Committee on Food, Whereas: (1) Commission Directive 95/31/EC of 5 July 1995 laying down specific criteria of purity concerning sweeteners for use in foodstuffs(2) sets out the purity criteria for the sweeteners mentioned in Directive 94/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 1994 on sweeteners for use in foodstuffs(3). (2) It is necessary to establish purity criteria for E 955 sucralose and E 962 salt of aspartame-acesulfame. (3) It is necessary to take into account the specifications and analytical techniques for additives as set out in the Codex Alimentarius as drafted by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA). (4) Directive 95/31/EC should therefore be amended accordingly. (5) 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 The Annex to Directive 95/31/EC is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Directive. Article 2 1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 1 April 2005 at the latest. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions and a correlation table between those provisions and this Directive. When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such 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 that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. Article 4 This Directive is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 16 April 2004.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 10 November 1994 on Community financial assistance for improvement of the facilities for veterinary checks on Austria's external borders (Only the German text is authentic) (94/755/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Decision 90/424/EEC on expenditure in the veterinary field (1), as last amended by Decision 94/370/EC (2), and in particular Article 38 thereof, Whereas Council Directives 90/675/EEC (3) and 91/496/EEC (4), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Norway, Austria, Finland and Sweden, lay down principles governing the organization of veterinary checks on products and animals entering the Community from third countries and allow for Member States, in particular Austria, to be granted financial assistance from the Community for the purposes of implementation of these checks; Whereas, given its geographical situation, Austria will have particularly heavy responsibilities in performing checks on live animals and animal products from third countries; whereas inspection posts will be required on the borders with six third countries; Whereas Austria has submitted to the Commission a national programme for improving its checking arrangements at external borders for animals and animal products; whereas the programme includes construction and renovation of the necessary infrastructure, purchase of equipment and recruitment of additional personnel, and is accompanied by the appropriate financial information; Whereas reinforcement of veterinary control at external borders is, on account of the establishment of the internal market, one of the priorities for Community action; Whereas however the Community's financial contribution must fall within the limits of the appropriations available; whereas it is accordingly necessary to decide on priorities for action so that Community funds are used most effectively; Whereas the measures provided for by this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 The programme indicated in the Annex hereto is approved for three years from 1 January 1995. Article 2 1. The Community's financial contribution shall be 50 % of the total cost of the programme up to a maximum of ECU 5 million. 2. Each year, for the first time in 1995, the Community financial contribution shall be granted in the following way: - an advance of 50 % of eligible expenditure for the year in question at the beginning of that year. In the case of the first year operations must commence by 1 January 1995, - the balance at the end of the year. In the case of the last year the balance shall be paid on termination of operations, which must be by 31 December 1997. Article 3 1. Payments shall be made in ecus. 2. The payment referred to in the first indent of Article 2 (2) shall be made on submission to the Commission of an application for an advance. 3. The payment referred to in the second indent of Article 2 (2) shall be made on submission of supporting documents. Article 4 This Decision shall apply as from 1 January 1995, subject to the entry into force of the Treaty concerning the accession of Norway, Austria, Finland and Sweden. Article 5 This Decision is addressed to the Republic of Austria. Done at Brussels, 10 November 1994.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Regulation (EC) No 2015/2002 of 14 November 2002 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1947/2002(2), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof, Whereas: (1) Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto. (2) In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 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: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 9 December 1998 on the procedures for implementing Council Directive 95/57/EC on the collection of statistical information in the field of tourism (notified under document number C(1998) 3950) (Text with EEA relevance) (1999/34/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Directive 95/57/EC of 23 November 1995 on the collection of statistical information in the field of tourism (1), and in particular Articles 3, 7 and 10 thereof, Whereas, to facilitate the collection of harmonised statistics, the definitions to be applied to the data collection characteristics need to be determined; Whereas, to facilitate data collection, it is necessary to determine the transmission procedures for the data required; Whereas, during the transition period, it is appropriate to grant the necessary derogations to the Member States, to allow them to adapt their national statistical systems to the requirements of Directive 95/57/EC; Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Statistical Programme Committee established by Decision 89/382/EEC, Euratom, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 The definitions to be applied to the data collection characteristics and the adjustments to the breakdown by geographical areas, in application of Article 3 of Directive 95/57/EC, are those set out in Annex I. Article 2 The detailed rules for data transmission procedures, in application of Article 7 of Directive 95/57/EC, are those set out in Annex II. Article 3 The derogations to be granted to the Member States, in application of Article 10 of Directive 95/57/EC, are those set out in Annex III. Article 4 This Decision is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 9 December 1998.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION DECISION of 29 September 1988 concerning the conclusion of a Memorandum of Understanding between the European Atomic Energy Community and the Government of Canada on the involvement of Canada in the European Atomic Energy Community contribution to the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) Conceptual Design Activities, by the Commission for and on behalf of the Community (88/528/Euratom) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular the second paragraph of Article 101 thereof, Whereas the Council, in its decision of 25 July 1988, approved the conclusion of the Memorandum of Understanding between the European Atomic Energy Community and the Government of Canada on the involvement of Canada in the European Atomic Energy Community contribution to the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) Conceptual Design Activities, HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS: Article 1 The Memorandum of Understanding between the European Atomic Energy Community and the Government of Canada on the involvement of Canada in the European Atomic Energy Community contribution to the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor Conceptual Design Activities shall be concluded on behalf of the Community. The text of the Memorandum of Understanding is appended to this Decision. Article 2 The President of the Commission is empowered to designate the person authorized to sign the Memorandum of Understanding for the purpose of committing the European Atomic Energy Community. Done at Brussels, 29 September 1988.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 812/2005 of 27 May 2005 concerning the 336th special invitation to tender opened under the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EEC) No 429/90 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 Article 10 thereof, Whereas: (1) In accordance with Commission Regulation (EEC) No 429/90 of 20 February 1990 on the granting by invitation to tender of an aid for concentrated butter intended for direct consumption in the Community (2), the intervention agencies are opening a standing invitation to tender for the granting of aid for concentrated butter. Article 6 of that Regulation provides that in the light of the tenders received in response to each special invitation to tender, a maximum amount of aid is to be fixed for concentrated butter with a minimum fat content of 96 % or a decision is to be taken to make no award; the end-use security must be fixed accordingly. (2) On the basis of the examination of the offers received, the tendering procedure should not be proceeded with. (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 336th tender under the standing invitation to tender opened by Regulation (EEC) No 429/90 no award shall be made. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 28 May 2005. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 27 May 2005.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1980/98 of 17 September 1998 opening and providing for the administration of Community tariff quotas and tariff ceilings and establishing a Community surveillance in the framework of reference quantities for certain agricultural products originating in the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1706/98 of 20 July 1998 on the arrangements applicable to agricultural products and goods resulting from the processing of agricultural products originating in the African, Caribbean and Pacific States (ACP States) and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 715/90 (1), and in particular Article 30 thereof, Whereas the fourth ACP-EC Convention (2), hereinafter referred to as ‘the Convention’, provides for customs duties on imports into the Community of certain products originating in the ACP States to be waived or reduced within the framework of tariff quotas, tariff ceilings or reference quantities; whereas the tariff quotas, tariff ceilings or reference quantities provided for in the Convention are to be opened annually until the Convention expires; Whereas it falls to the Commission to adopt implementing measures relating to the opening and administration of Community tariff quotas, tariff ceilings and reference quantities; Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1677/98 (4), has consolidated the provisions for the management of tariff quotas to be used according to the chronological order of dates of acceptance of declarations for release for free circulation and the provisions governing the surveillance of preferential imports; Whereas it was agreed at the negotiations for the midterm revision of the Lomé Convention that changes to the arrangements should take effect from 1 January 1996; whereas provision should therefore be made for the application of this Regulation and the repeal of Commission Regulations (EC) No 1280/94 (5), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 896/95 (6) (EC) No 2763/94 (7), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2411/96 (8), and (EC) No 2942/95 (9), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 982/ 96 (10), to take effect from that date; Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Customs Code Committee, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 1. Customs duties on products listed in Annex A originating in the ACP States, released for free circulation in the Community and accompanied by proof of origin in accordance with the Origin Protocol to the Convention may be waived or reduced within the limits of the tariff quotas specified in that Annex. 2. The tariff quotas referred to in this Article shall be managed by the Commission in accordance with Article 308a to 308c of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93. 3. Each Member State shall ensure that importers of the products in question have equal and continuous access to the quotas for as long as the balance of the relevant quota volume so permits. Article 2 1. Duties on products listed in Annex B originating in the ACP States, released for free circulation in the Community and accompanied by proof of origin in accordance with the Origin Protocol to the Convention may be waived within the limits of the tariff ceiling specified in that Annex. 2. The tariff ceiling referred to in this Article shall be subject to Community surveillance by the Commission, in close cooperation with the Member States, in accordance with Article 308d of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93. Article 3 1. Duties on products listed in Annex C originating in the ACP States, released for free circulation in the Community and accompanied by proof of origin in accordance with the Origin Protocol to the Convention may be waived within the limits of the reference quantities specified in that Annex, such products being subject to Community surveillance. 2. The take up of reference quantities shall be recorded at Community level using data sent to the Commission by the Member States in accordance with Article 308d of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93. Article 4 The Commission, in close cooperation with the Member States, shall take whatever steps are necessary for the application of this Regulation. Article 5 Regulations (EC) No 1280/94, (EC) No 2763/94 and (EC) No 2942/95 are hereby repealed. Article 6 This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. It shall apply with effect from 1 January 1996. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 17 September 1998.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 16 May 1994 amending Decision 91/637/EEC establishing the model for the message to be transmitted by means of the 'Animo' computerized network (94/307/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 20 thereof, Having regard to Council Directive 91/628/EEC of 19 November 1991 on the protection of animals during transport and amending Directives 90/425/EEC and 91/496/EEC (3), as amended by Decision 92/438/EEC (4), and in particular Article 6 (3) thereof, Whereas the information needed to comply with the animal protection requirements laid down in Directive 91/628/EEC needs to the included in the Animo computerized network; Whereas the message to be transmitted by means of the Animo network should be supplemented to this end and the software employed should be adapted accordingly; Whereas the adaptation of the application software will take account of the conditions in the Member States so as to ensure that it meets their operating requirements; 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 Commission Decision 91/637/EEC (5) is amended as follows: 1. Article 2 is hereby replaced by the following: 'Article 2 The Commission shall update the application software with a view to the inclusion of information relating to the protection of animals and the trends in the various computer files needed for application. The Commission shall make the updated software available to the Member States no later than 1 March 1995.' 2. The Annex is replaced by the Annex hereto. Article 2 This Decision is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 16 May 1994.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COUNCIL DECISION of 19 December 1988 amending Council Decision 81/121/EEC on the granting of daily allowances to members of the Economic and Social Committee, alternates and experts (88/641/EEC) (88/641/EEC) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing a Single Council and a Single Commission of the European Communities, and in particular Article 6 thereof, Whereas, owing to the trend in hotel and restaurant prices since the last adjustment, the amounts of the daily allowances granted to members of the Economic and Social Committee and to alternates and experts, laid down by Council Decision 81/121/EEC of 3 March 1981 (1), as last amended by Council Decision 85/538/EEC of 5 December 1985 (2), should be adapted with effect from 1 January 1989, HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS: Article 1 Council Decision 81/121/EEC, as last amended by Decision 85/538/EEC, is hereby amended as follows: - in Article 2, first indent, Bfrs 4 000 shall be replaced by Bfrs 4 450, - in Article 2, second indent, Bfrs 2 600 shall be replaced by Bfrs 3 000. Article 2 This Decision shall take effect on 1 January 1989. Done at Brussels, 19 December 1988.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

FIRST COMMISSION DIRECTIVE of 13 November 1979 laying down Community methods of analysis for testing certain partly or wholly dehydrated preserved milk for human consumption (79/1067/EEC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Directive 76/118/EEC of 18 December 1975 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to certain partly or wholly dehydrated preserved milk for human consumption (1), and in particular Article 11 thereof, Whereas under Article 11 of Directive 76/118/EEC, the composition of certain partly or wholly dehydrated preserved milk is required to be verified by Community methods of analysis; Whereas it is desirable to adopt an initial series of methods in respect of which studies have been completed; Whereas the measures provided for in this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee of Foodstuffs, HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE: Article 1 Member States shall take all measures necessary to ensure that the analyses necessary for verification of the criteria set out in Annex I are carried out in accordance with the methods described in Annex II. Article 2 Where alternative methods for a single determination are specified, the sample may be analysed by either method. The test report referred to in Annex II must state the method which has been employed. Article 3 Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive within 18 months of its notification. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof. Article 4 This Directive is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 13 November 1979.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Directive 2003/101/EC of 3 November 2003 amending Council Directive 92/109/EEC on the manufacture and placing on the market of certain substances used in the illicit manufacture of narcotic drugs and psychotropic 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 92/109/EEC of 14 December 1992 on the manufacture and placing on the market of certain substances used in the illicit manufacture of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances(1), as last amended by Commission Directive 2001/8/EC(2), and in particular Article 10(3) thereof, Whereas: (1) With regard to the Community's obligations pursuant to Council Decision 90/611/EEC concerning conclusion, on behalf of the European Economic Community, of the United Nations Convention against illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances(3), it is necessary to give effect to the decision taken by the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs in March 2001 to add acetic anhydride and potassium permanganate to table 1 of the Annex to the 1988 United Nations Convention. (2) It is also appropriate to bring Directive 92/109/EEC in line with Council Regulation (EEC) No 3677/90 of 13 December 1990 laying down measures to discourage the diversion of certain substances to the illicit manufacture of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances(4), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1232/2002(5). (3) Potassium permanganate should be included among the substances listed in Category 2 of Annex I to Directive 92/109/EEC and deleted from Category 3 in that Annex. (4) In order to ensure that Community trade is not adversely affected, thresholds should be fixed for potassium permanganate as well as for acetic anhydride. (5) Directive 92/109/EEC should be amended accordingly. (6) The measures provided for in this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee set up pursuant to Article 10 of Regulation (EEC) No 3677/90, HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE: Article 1 The Annexes I and II to Directive 92/109/EEC shall be replaced by the text in the Annex to this Directive. Article 2 Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 1 January 2004 at the latest. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof. 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. Article 3 This Directive shall enter into force on the 20th day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. Article 4 This Directive is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 3 November 2003.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Directive 2000/67/EC of 23 October 2000 including an active substance (esfenvalerate) in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market(1), as last amended by Commission Directive 2000/10/EC(2), and in particular Article 6(1) and the fourth subparagraph of Article 8(2) thereof, Whereas: (1) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3600/92(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2266/2000(4), laid down the detailed rules for the implementation of the first stage of the programme of work referred to in Article 8(2) of Directive 91/414/EEC (hereinafter referred to as "the Directive"). Pursuant to that Regulation, Commission Regulation (EC) No 933/94(5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2230/95(6), laid down the list of active substances of plant protection products to be assessed, with a view to their possible inclusion in Annex I to the Directive. (2) In accordance with Article 5(1) of the Directive, an active substance should be included in Annex I if it may be expected that neither the use of, nor residues from, plant protection products containing that active substance will have any harmful effects on human or animal health or on groundwatr or any unacceptable influence on the environment. (3) Such an active substance may be included in Annex I for a period not exceeding 10 years. (4) For esfenvalerate the effects on human health and the environment have been assessed in accordance with the provisions laid down in Regulation (EEC) No 3600/92 for a range of uses proposed by the notifier. Portugal was designated as rapporteur Member State under Regulation (EC) No 933/94 laying down the active substance of plant protection products and designating the rapporteur Member State for the implementation of Regulation (EEC) No 3600/92. It submitted the relevant assessment report to the Commission on 11 October 1996, in accordance with Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EEC) No 3600/92. (5) The assessment report has been reviewed by the Member States and the Commission within the Standing Committee on Plant Health. This review was finalised on 13 July 2000 in the format of the Commission review report for esfenvalerate. (6) The dossier and the information from the review have also been submitted to the Scientific Committee for Plants for consultation. The Scientific Committee for Plants in its opinion(7) noted that Member States must apply appropriate risk mitigation measures to protect the aquatic environment and non-target arthropods. (7) It has appeared from the assessments made that plant protection products containing the active substance concerned may be expected to satisfy in general the requirements laid down in Article 5(1)(a) and (b) of the Directive, in particular with regard to the uses which were examined. It is appropriate therefore to include the active substance concerned in Annex I, in order to ensure that in all Member States the granting, varying or withdrawing, as appropriate, of the authorisations of plant protection products containing esfenvalerate can be undertaken in accordance with the provisions of the Directive. (8) Article 8(2) of the Directive provides that after inclusion of an active substance in its Annex I, Member States shall, within a prescribed period, grant, vary or withdraw, as appropriate, the authorisations of the plant protection products containing the active substance. In particular, Articles 4(1) and 13(1) of the Directive require that plant protection products are not authorised unless account is taken of the conditions associated with the inclusion of the active substance in Annex I and the uniform principles laid down in Annex VI on the basis of a dossier satisfying the data requirements laid down in its Article 13. (9) Before inclusion, a reasonable deadline is necessary to permit Member States and the interested parties to prepare themselves to meet the new requirements which will result from the inclusion. Moreover, after inclusion, a reasonable period is necessary for the Member States to implement the Directive and in particular to vary or withdraw, as appropriate, existing authorisations or grant new authorisations in accordance with the provisions of Directive 91/414/EEC. A longer period should be provided for the submission and assessment of the complete Annex III dossier of each plant protection product in accordance with the uniform principles laid down in Annex VI to the Directive. For plant protection products containing several active substances, the complete evaluation on the basis of the uniform principles can only be carried out when all the active substances concerned have been included in Annex I to the Directive. (10) It is appropriate to provide that the finalised review report (except for confidential information in the meaning of Article 14 of the Directive) is kept available or made available by the Member States for consultation by any interested parties. (11) The review report is required for the proper implementation by the Member States of several sections of the uniform principles laid down in Annex VI to the Directive, where these principles refer to the evaluation of the Annex II data which were submitted for the purpose of the inclusion of the active substance in Annex I to the Directive. (12) The measures provided for in this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plant Health, HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE: Article 1 Esfenvalerate is hereby designated as an active substance in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC, as set out in the Annex hereto. Article 2 1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive, at the latest by 31 January 2002 and shall immediately inform the Commission thereof. In particular they shall, in accordance with the provisions of Directive 91/414/EEC, where necessary, amend or withdraw existing authorisations for plant protection products containing esfenvalerate as an active substance within such period. 2. However, with regard to evaluation and decision-making pursuant to 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 thereto, the period laid down in the first paragraph is extended: - for plant protection products containing esfenvalerate as the only active substance, to four years from the entry into force of this Directive, - for plant protection products containing esfenvalerate together with another active substance which is in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC, to four years from the entry into force of such Directive as shall include the last of those substances in Annex I. 3. Member States shall keep available the review report (except for confidential information within the meaning of Article 14 of the Directive) for consultation by any interested parties or shall make it available to them on specific request. 4. When Member States adopt the provisions referred to in paragraph 1, these shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such reference at the time of their official publication. The procedure for such reference shall be adopted by Member States. Article 3 This Directive shall enter into force on 1 August 2001. Article 4 This Directive is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 23 October 2000.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 3660/92 of 18 December 1992 amending Regulations (EEC) No 693/88, (EEC) No 809/88 and (EEC) No 343/92 on the definition of the concept of originating products and methods of administrative cooperation with regard to imports into the Community of products originating in developing countries, in the Occupied Territories and in the Republics of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia and Slovenia and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3587/91 of 3 December 1991 extending into 1992 the application of Regulations (EEC) No 3831/90, (EEC) No 3832/90, (EEC) No 3833/90 and (EEC) No 3835/90 applying generalized tariff preferences for 1991 in respect of certain products originating in developing countries (1), and in particular Article 1 thereof, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1134/91 of 29 April 1991 on the tariff arrangements applicable to imports into the Community of products originating in the Occupied Territories and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 3363/86 (2), and in particular Article 4 thereof, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 545/92 if 3 February 1992 concerning the arrangements applicable to the import into the Community of products originating in the Republics of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia and Slovenia and the Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3105/92 (4), and in particular Article 10a thereof, Whereas Commission Regulations (EEC) No 693/88 (5), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2743/91 (6), (EEC) No 809/88 (7), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3674/90 (8) and (EEC) No 343/92 (9) exclude from the coõncept of originating products certain mineral products and certain products of the chemical or allied industries from their scope; Whereas, for all those products imported under the above Regulatioans, the Member States define the concept of originating products in accordance with their own national rules; Whereas the establishment of the internal market in 1993 will result in the creation of an area without international frontiers in which inter alia the free movement of goods is assured; whereas it is therefore necessary to ensure uniform implementation of the provisions concerning the establishment of origin for the purposes of the tariff preferences granted by the Community in respect of the products concerned imported from the abovementioned countries, territories or Republics; Whereas rules should be established for all the abovementioned products, to define the conditions in which they acquire originating status for the purposes of the tariff preferences referred to above, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 14 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 802/68 of 27 June 1968 concerning the common definition of the concept of the origin og goods (10), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 456/91 (11); Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Origin, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 Regulations (EEC) No 693/88, (EEC) No 809/88 and (EEC) No 343/92 are hereby amended as follows: 1. Article 1 (2) of and Annex II to Regulations (EEC) No 693/88 and (EEC) No 809/88, and Article 26 of and Annex V to Regulation (EEC) No 343/92 are deleted; 2. in Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 693/88, point (j) is replaced by the following: '(j) products extracted from marine soil or subsoil outside its territorial waters, provided that it has sole rights to work that soil or subsoil'; 3. the following point (k) is added to Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 693/88: '(k) products produced these exclusively from products specified in (a) to (j)'; 4. the following point (d) is added to Article 6 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 693/88: '(d) products which are transported by pipeline across territory other than of the exporting beneficiary country'; 5. in Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 809/88, point (h) is replaced by the following: '(h) products extracted from marine soil or subsoil outside their territorial waters, provided that the territory concerned has sole rights to work that soil or subsoil'; 6. the following point (i) is added to Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 809/88: '(i) products produced there exclusively from products specified in (a) to (h)'; 7. the following point (c) is added to Article 5 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 809/88: '(c) products which are transported by pipeline across territory other than that of the Occupied Territories'; 8. in Article 2 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 343/92, point (j) is replaced by the following: '(j) products extracted from marine soil or subsoil outside their territorial waters, provided that the beneficiary Republic concerned or a Member State has soloe rights to work that soil or subsoil'; 9. the following point (k) is added to Article 2 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 343/92: '(k) goods produced there exclusively from products specified in (a) to (j)'; 10. the following subparagraph is added to Article 7 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 343/92: 'Products originating in the beneficiary Republic or in the Community may be transported by pipeline across territory other than that of the Community or of the beneficiary Republic'; 11. the following is added to Annex II to Regulation (EEC) No 693/88 as introductory note 7, to Annex III to Regulation (EEC) No 809/88 as introductory note 8 and to Annex I to Regulation (EEC) No 343/92 as note 8: '1. For the purposes of heading Nos ex 2707, 2713 to 2715, ex 2901, ex 2902 and ex 3403, the "specific processes" are the following: (a) vacuum distillation; (b) redistillation by a very thorough fractionation process (12); (c) cracking; (d) reforming; (e) extraction by means of selective solvents; (f) the process comprising all the following operations: processing with concentrated sulphuric acid, oleum or sulphuric anhydride; neutralization with alkaline agents; decolorization and purification with naturally active earth, activated earth, activated charcoal or bauxite; (g) polymerization; (h) alkylation; (i) isomerization. 2. For the purposes of heading Nos 2710, 2711 and 2712, the "specific processes" are the following: (a) vacuum distillation; (b) redistillation by a very thorough fractionation process; (c) cracking; (d) reforming; (e) extraction by means of selective solvents; (f) the process comprising all the following operations: processing with concentrated sulphuric acid, oleum or sulphuric anhydride; neutralization with alkaline agents; decolorization and purification with naturally active earth, activated earth, activated charcoal or bauxite; (g) polymerization; (h) alkylation; (ij) isomerization; (k) (in respect of heavy oils falling within heading No ex 2710 only) desulphurization with hydrogen resulting in a reduction of at least 85 % of thesulphur content of the products processed (ASTM D 1266-59 T method); (l) (in respect of products falling within heading No 2710 only) deparaffining by a process other than filtering; (m) (in respect of heavy oils falling within heading No ex 2710 only) treatment with hydrogen at a pressure of more than 20 bar and a temperature of more than 250 °C with the use of a catalyst, other than to effect desulphurization, when the hydrogen constitutes an active element in a chemical reaction. The further treatment with hydrogen of lubricating oils of heading No ex 2710 (e.g. hydrofinishing or decolorization) in order, more especially, to improve colour or stability shall not, however, be deemed to be a specific process; (n) (in respect of fuel oils falling within heading No ex 2710 only) atmospheric distillation, on condition that less then 30 % of these products distils, by volume, including losses, at 300 °C by the ASTM D 86 method; (o) (in respect of heavy oils other than gas oils and fuel oils falling within heading No ex 2710 only) treatment by means of a high-frequency electrical brush-discharge. 3. For the purposes of heading Nos ex 2707, 2713 to 2715, ex 2901, ex 2902 and ex 3403, simple operations such as cleaning, decanting, desalting, water separation, filtering, colouring, marketing obtaining a sulphur content as a result of mixting products with different sulphur contents, any combination of these operations or like operations do not confer origin.'; 12. in Annex III to Regulations (EEC) No 693/88 and (EEC) No 809/88 and in Annex II to Regulation (EEC) No 343/92, the wording under columns (1), (2) and (3) corresponding to HS codes ex 2707, 2709 to 2715, ex 2901, ex 2902, ex 3403, ex 3404 and ex 3811 is replaced by the wording shown in the Annex to this Regulation. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 January 1993. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 18 December 1992.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COUNCIL DECISION of 29 June 1998 concerning a request for exemption submitted by the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg pursuant to Article 8(2)(c) of Directive 70/156/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the type-approval of motor vehicles and their trailers (98/468/EC) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Directive 70/156/EEC of 6 February 1970 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the type-approval of motor vehicles and their trailers (1), and in particular Article 8(2)(c) and Article 13(3) thereof, Whereas the request submitted by the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg on 6 November 1997, which reached the Commission on 10 November 1997, contained the information required by Article 8(2)(c) of the said Directive; whereas the request concerns the fuelling with compressed natural gas of a class M1 type of vehicle; Whereas the reasons given in the said request are well founded; whereas, according to them, such fuelling systems do not meet the requirements of the Directives concerned, in particular Council Directive 70/220/EEC of 20 March 1970 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to measures to be taken against air pollution by gases from spark-ignition engines of motor vehicles (2) and Council Directive 80/1268/EEC of 16 December 1980 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the fuel consumption of motor vehicles (3); whereas, however, the tests performed in accordance with the abovementioned Directives were conducted using both petrol and natural gas as fuel; whereas the relevant limit values were respected with both types of fuel, while recorded emissions of pollutants were lower with natural gas; whereas equivalent environmental protection is thus ensured; Whereas, in order to assure themselves of the safety of vehicles in service, Member States may periodically carry out leak-tightness tests at a pressure of at least the service pressure; Whereas the Directives concerned will be amended in order to permit the production of vehicles powered by compressed natural gas; Whereas the measure provided for by this Decision was submitted on 5 February 1998 to the Committee on Adaptation to Technical Progress set up by Article 12 of Directive 70/156/EEC for its opinion; whereas the outcome of the vote was such that no opinion was delivered, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 The request submitted by Luxembourg for an exemption concerning the production and placing on the market of a class M1 type of vehicle powered by compressed natural gas is hereby approved. Article 2 This Decision is addressed to the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. Done at Luxembourg, 29 June 1998.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 24/98 of 7 January 1998 laying down detailed rules for granting the aid provided for in Article 3 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 3763/91 for the supply of products for animal feed to French Guiana for the period 1 July 1994 to 30 April 1996 THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3763/91 of 16 December 1991 introducing specific measures in respect of certain agricultural products for the benefit of the French overseas departments (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2598/95 (2), and in particular Article 3 (5) thereof, Whereas Regulation (EC) No 2598/95 provides that, from 1 July 1994 and until such time as the corresponding manufacturing plants in the department of French Guiana actually commence production, products falling within CN codes 2309 90 31, 2309 90 33, 2309 90 41, 2309 90 43, 2309 90 51 and 2309 90 53 which are used there for animal feed are to be covered by the supply arrangements under the conditions laid down in Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) and (3) to (6) of Regulation (EEC) No 3763/91; whereas, in view of the retroactive application of those provisions, the quantities of the products concerned supplied to the department of French Guiana and likely to qualify for aid for supply and the amount of such aid must be determined; Whereas Commission Regulation (EC) No 795/96 of 30 April 1996 establishing the forecast supply balance and Community aid for the supply to French Guiana of products falling within CN codes 2309 90 31, 2309 90 33, 2309 90 41, 2309 90 43, 2309 90 51 and 2309 90 53 used in feedingstuffs for the period 1 May to 31 December 1996 (3) lays down the quantities likely to qualify for supply aid and the amount of such aid during that period; whereas, as from 1 January 1997, the same measures were adopted for 1997 by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2415/96 (4); whereas the supply situation regarding the products concerned during the period 1 July 1994 to 30 April 1996 should accordingly be settled; Whereas, at the Commission's request, the French authorities have communicated the quantities of products as referred to in Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 3763/91 sent to French Guiana and eligible for the aid for the period 1 July 1994 to 30 April 1996 and the delivery periods and supporting documents required for the quantities declared; whereas those authorities have also declared that the selling price, as a precautionary measure, reflects an amount equivalent to the aid and have communicated the types of checks and controls conducted; whereas the quantities eligible for the aid communicated by the French authorities for the period in question amounted to 6 692,36 tonnes as regards products covered by CN codes 2309 90 31, 2309 90 41 and 2309 90 51 and 56,70 tonnes as regards products covered by CN codes 2309 90 33, 2309 90 43 and 2309 90 53; Whereas, in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 3763/91 and until 30 June 1994, the method for calculating the aid for the supply of the products concerned was set out in Article 2 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 646/92 (5), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1670/93 (6); whereas, in accordance with those provisions, the aid is equal in amount to the export refund applicable on the products in question on the day of application for the aid certificate, plus ECU 20/tonne; whereas, according to the French authorities, pending the adoption by the Council of the Commission proposal extending those aid arrangements, importers have actually passed on an amount equal to the aid thus calculated during the period 1 July 1994 to 30 April 1996; whereas Regulation (EC) No 795/96 re-established that calculation method with effect from 1 May 1996; Whereas, since the relevant provisions were lacking, no aid certificate could be applied for in respect of the period 1 July 1994 to 30 April 1996 with a view to the supply of the products in question; whereas, as a consequence, the aid should be maintained as laid down in Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 646/92 for supplies during the period in question, by replacing the date of application of the licence by that of supply, for the purposes of calculating the aid applicable; Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 Products used for animal feed and supplied to the department of French Guiana in the period 1 July 1994 to 30 April 1996 shall be eligible for the aid pursuant to Article 3 (1) and (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 3763/91 subject to the following limits: (a) 6 692,36 tonnes as regards products covered by CN codes 2309 90 31, 2309 90 41 and 2309 90 51; (b) 56,70 tonnes as regards products covered by CN codes 2309 90 33, 2309 90 43 and 2309 90 53. Article 2 1. The aid for the supply of animal feed as referred to in Article 1 and manufactured from cereals processed in the rest of the Community shall be equal to the export refund applicable to such products on the day they are actually delivered to French Guiana, plus ECU 20 per tonne. 2. The competent French authorities shall pay the aid, on application from the operators, up to the limits laid down in Article 1; they shall pay the aid only in respect of the quantities covered by proof provided to their satisfaction to the effect that they been delivered in the department of French Guiana and that an amount equivalent to the aid has been passed on, as a precaution, in the selling price. 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, 7 January 1998.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 977/84 of 10 April 1984 concerning the putting up for sale on the internal market of 142 600 tonnes of common wheat of bread-making quality held by the Danish intervention agency and amending Regulation (EEC) No 1687/76 THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2727/75 of 29 October 1975 on the common organization of the market in cereals (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1451/82 (2), and in particular Article 8 (4) thereof, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1055/77 of 17 May 1977 on the storage and movement of products bought in by an intervention agency (3), and in particular Article 4 thereof, Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 1146/76 of 17 May 1976 on particular and special intervention measures for cereals (4) lays down the general rules applicable in this field; Whereas, for the 1983/84 marketing year, the market in common wheat shows an imbalance between supply and demand which has resulted in particularly large deliveries into intervention; Whereas the accumulation of these stocks of common wheat combined with budgetary constraints threatens to create serious disturbances in the operation of the common organization of the market, particularly at intervention level; Whereas, in order to remedy this situation, measures have been taken to facilitate the disposal on the Community market of the stocks held by the intervention agencies; whereas these measures, which have taken the form of the sale of common wheat for use in animal feedingstuffs, are due to expire on 31 March 1984; Whereas further outlets for disposal in this sector currently exist in Denmark; whereas the stocks existing in Denmark allow for such action; Whereas the envisaged action should produce its full effect before the beginning of the 1984/85 marketing year; Whereas it is appropriate that this sale should take place in accordance with the provisions of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1836/82 of 7 July 1982 laying down the procedure and conditions for the disposal of cereals held by intervention agencies (5) subject, however, to certain special provisions designed to ensure that the operation is conducted in conformity with the aim pursued; Whereas, in particular, the intended use of the cereal in question calls for the fixing of special price conditions; whereas these conditions should serve to attenuate the tension on the cereals market and prevent any deterioration; whereas, moreover, in view of the fixing of special price conditions, provision should be made for a security to be lodged in order to ensure that the operators enjoying such conditions genuinely put the cereals concerned to the use provided for; Whereas, in order to facilitate supervision of the use of the cereals to be put up for sale by the Danish intervention agency, the minimum quantity to be covered by tenders should be fixed at 200 tonnes; Whereas, moreover, where supervision is concerned, the provisions of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1687/76 of 30 June 1976 laying down common detailed rules for verifying the use and/or destination of products from intervention (6), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 783/84 (7), are applicable; whereas, however, it is appropriate to strengthen the said detailed rules; whereas, to this effect, provision should be made for the systematic inspection of accounts as well as on-the-spot verification, possibly based on sampling; whereas, moreover, provision should be made for the cereals in question to be treated in such a manner that they can be identified; Whereas, in view of the special use provided for in this Regulation, Regulation (EEC) No 1687/76 should be amended; Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 1. The Danish intervention agency shall put up for sale on the internal market by means of an invitation to tender about 142 600 tonnes of common wheat of bread-making quality to be used in animal feedingstuffs. 2. Without prejudice to the provisions of this Regulation, the provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 1836/82 shall apply to the sale provided for in paragraph 1. Article 2 The sale of the common wheat referred to in Article 1 shall take place on the basis of a standing invitation to tender. The invitation to tender shall be open for the period April until the end of May 1984. The Danish intervention agency shall issue partial invitations to tender at least once a week. Article 3 1. By way of derogation from Article 5 (1) and (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1836/82, the successful offer price must correspond to not less than 215,67 ECU per tonne during April 1984; this price shall be adjusted upwards by the amount of a monthly increase provided for in respect of the reference price during the following month. 2. By way of derogation from Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 1836/82, to be admissible, tenders must be for a quantity of not less than 200 tonnes. Article 4 Without prejudice to Article 13 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1836/82, where the offer price is less than the amount given by the reference price in force during the month in which the contract is awarded, reduced by 11,62 ECU per tonne and increased by 1 %, the tender shall be valid only if accompanied by a written undertaking by the tenderer: - to lodge, no later than two working days following the day of receipt of notification of the award of contract, a security amounting to the difference between those two prices, - to keep a stock record showing the quantities purchased and the use to which they have been put and, in the event of sale, the name and address of the purchaser and the quantities sold. The security shall be released only for those quantities in respect of which the successful tenderer can prove they were used in animal feedingstuffs before 1 August 1984. Such proof must be furnished not later than 31 December 1984. Article 5 The control referred to in Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 1687/76 shall comprise systematic verification of accounts and on-the-spot controls. The latter may take the form of sampling. The intervention agency concerned may treat the cereals concerned in a manner permitting their identification. The treatment must be carried out at the lowest possible cost. Article 6 Regulation (EEC) No 1687/76 is hereby amended as follows: In the Annex, part II 'Products subject to a use and/or destination other than that mentioned under I', the following point 22 and related footnote are added: '22. Commission Regulation (EEC) No 977/84 of 10 April 1984 concerning the putting up for sale on the internal market of 142 600 tonnes of common wheat of bread-making quality held by the Danish intervention agency and amending Regulation (EEC) No 1687/76 (22): On the dispatch of common wheat for processing: - Section 104: "Intended for processing (Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 977/84)." - Section 106: The date on which the common wheat was withdrawn from the intervention stocks. (22) OJ No L 99, 11. 4. 1984, p. 9.' Article 7 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, 10 April 1984.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 24 November 1998 on a derogation from Decision 71/128/EEC on the Advisory Committee on Fisheries (notified under document number C(1998) 3591) (98/726/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Whereas an Advisory Committee on Fisheries was set up by Commission Decision 71/128/EEC (1), as last amended by Decision 97/246/EC (2); Whereas by Decision 97/246/EC a limit of 18 months was set on the terms of office of the members of the Committee so that the Committee's role and the way it functions could be adjusted to take account of changes which have occurred since it was set up, by improving the consultation process and the conditions under which the Committee operates; Whereas the Commission has not completed work on drawing up suitable provisions on the structure of the Committee and its working procedures in time for a new Decision to be adopted before the expiry of the present Committee's terms of office; Whereas the Committee should continue to function until a new Decision can be adopted, HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS: Article 1 By way of derogation from Articles 4 and 5 of Decision 71/128/EEC, the members of the Advisory Committee on Fisheries as well as the Chairman and the two Vice-Chairmen, shall remain in office until the date of the appointment of the new Committee or until 31 July 1999 at the latest. Article 2 This Decision shall apply with effect from 15 November 1998. Done at Brussels, 24 November 1998.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 223/93 of 1 February 1993 opening and providing for the administration of Community tariff quotas for certain agricultural products originating in Israel (1993) 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 Articles 1 and 2 of the Fourth Additional Protocol to the Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the State of Israel (1) provide for the opening of Community tariff quotas for the import into the Community of: - 17 000 tonnes of new potatoes, falling with CN code ex 0701 90 51 (1 January to 31 March), - 11 200 tonnes of onions, fresh or chilled, falling with CN codes 0703 10 11, 0703 10 19 and ex 0709 90 90 (15 February to 15 May), - 3 100 tonnes of carrots, falling with CN code ex 0706 10 00 (1 January to 31 March), - 10 800 tonnes of celery sticks, falling with CN code ex 0709 40 00 (1 January to 30 April), - 7 400 tonnes of sweet peppers and peppers, falling with CN code 0709 60 10, - 6 400 tonnes of lemons, falling with CN code 0805 30 10, - 7 800 tonnes of watermelons, falling with CN code 0807 10 10 (1 April to 15 June), - 2 200 tonnes of fresh strawberries, falling with CN code 0810 10 90 (1 January to 31 March), - 5 900 tonnes of oranges, finely ground, falling with CN code ex 0812 90 20, - 2 800 tonnes of peeled tomatoes, falling with CN code ex 2002 10 10, - 150 tonnes of apricot pulp, falling with CN code 2008 50 91, - 82 700 tonnes of orange juice, falling with CN codes 2009 11 11, 2009 11 19, 2009 11 91, 2009 11 99, 2009 19 11, 2009 19 19, 2009 19 91 and 2009 19 99, of which not more than 20 000 tonnes may be imported in packing of a capacity of two litres or less, - 8 500 tonnes of tomato juice, falling with CN codes 2009 50 10 and 2009 50 90, originating in Israel; Whereas, however, the volumes of the tariff quotas must be increased by 3 or 5 % each year, as from 1 January 1992 and whereas the customs duties applicable in the Community, as constituted on 31 December 1985, are being eliminated in two equal steps on 1 January 1992 and 1 January 1993, by application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1764/92 of 29 June 1992 amending the arrangements for the import into the Community of certain agricultural products originating in Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Syria and Tunisa (2); Whereas, within the limits of these tariff quotas, the Portuguese Republic shall apply customs duties calculated in accordance with the relevant provisions of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4162/87 of 21 December 1987 laying down arrangements for Spain's and Portugal's trade with Israel (3); whereas the Community tariff quotas in question should therefore be opened for 1993; Whereas it is necessary, in particular, to ensure for all Community importers equal and uninterrupted access to the said quotas and to ensure the uninterrupted application of the rates laid down for the quotas to all imports of the products concerned into all Member States until the quotas have been used up; Whereas, the decision for the opening of tariff quotas should be taken by the Community in the execution of its international obligations; whereas, to ensure the efficiency of a common administration of these quotas, there is no reasonable obstacle to authorizing the Member States to draw from the quota-volumes the necessary quantities corresponding to actual imports; whereas this method of administration requires close cooperation between the Member States and the Commission and the latter must in particular be able to monitor the rate at which the quotas are used up and inform the Member States accordingly; 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 these quotas may be carried out by any of its members, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The customs duties applicable to imports into the Community of the products listed below originating in Israel shall be suspended during the periods, at the levels and within the limits of the Community tariff quotas shown below: 09.1309 ex 0701 90 51 New potatoes 1. 1. - 31. 3. 1993 18 020 0 09.1335 ex 0703 10 11 ex 0703 10 19 ex 0709 90 90 Onions, fresh or chilled Wild onions of the species Muscari comosum 15. 2. - 15. 5. 1993 12 320 0 09.1317 ex 0706 10 00 Carrots 1. 1. - 31. 3. 1993 3 410 0 09.1321 ex 0709 40 00 Celery sticks 1. 1. - 30. 4. 1993 11 880 0 09.1303 0709 60 10 Sweet peppers and peppers 1. 1. - 31. 12. 1993 8 140 0 09.1315 ex 0805 30 10 Lemons, fresh 1. 1. - 31. 12. 1993 7 040 0 09.1327 ex 0807 10 10 Watermelons 1. 4. - 15. 6. 1993 8 580 0 09.1339 ex 0810 10 90 Fresh strawberries 1. 1. - 31. 3. 1993 2 420 0 09.1337 ex 0812 90 20 Oranges finely ground 1. 1. - 31. 12. 1993 6 254 0 09.1307 ex 2002 10 10 Peeled tomatoes 1. 1. - 31. 12. 1993 2 968 0 09.1301 ex 2008 50 91 Apricot pulp, not containing added alcohol or sugar, in immediate packings of a net content of 4,5 kg or more 1. 1. - 31. 12. 1993 165 0 09.1331 2009 11 11 2009 11 19 2009 11 91 2009 11 99 2009 19 11 2009 19 19 2009 19 91 2009 19 99 Orange juice 1. 1. - 31. 12. 1993 87 662 0 + AGR 0 0 + AGR 0 0 + AGR 0 0 + AGR 0 09.1333 ex 2009 11 11 ex 2009 11 19 ex 2009 11 91 ex 2009 11 99 ex 2009 19 11 ex 2009 19 19 ex 2009 19 91 ex 2009 19 99 Of which: Orange juice imported in packings of a capacity of two litres or less 1. 1. - 31. 12. 1993 21 200 0 + AGR 0 0 + AGR 0 0 + AGR 0 0 + AGR 0 09.1319 2009 50 10 2009 50 90 Tomato juice 1. 1. - 31. 12. 1993 9 350 0 (a) The Taric codes appear in the Annex. Within the limits of these tariff quotas the Portuguese Republic shall apply customs duties calculated in accordance with the relevant provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 4162/87. Article 2 The tariff quotas referred to in Article 1 shall be managed by the Commission, which may take all appropriate administrative measures in order to ensure efficient management thereof. Article 3 Where an importer enters a product covered by this Regulation under a declaration for free circulation in a Member State and applies to take advantage of the preferential arrangements and that declaration is accepted by the customs authorities the Member State concerned shall, by notifying the Commission, draw an amount corresponding to its requirements from the quota volume. Requests for drawing, indicating the date of acceptance of the said declarations, must be sent to the Commission without delay. The drawings shall be granted by the Commission by reference to the date of acceptance of the declaration of entry for free circulation, to the extent that the available balance so permits. If a Member States does not use the quantities drawn it shall return them to the corresponding quota volume as soon as possible. If the quantities requested are greater than the available balance of the quota volume, the balance shall be allocated among applicatins pro rata. The Commission shall inform the Member States of the drawings made. Article 4 Each Member State shall ensure that importers of the products in question have equal and continuous access to the quotas for as long as the balance of the relevant quota volume so permits. Article 5 Member States and the Commission shall cooporate closely to ensure that this Regulation is complied with. Article 6 This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. It shall apply as from 1 January 1993. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 1 February 1993.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 1038/84 of 10 April 1984 opening, allocating and providing for the administration of a Community tariff quota for new potatoes falling within subheading 07.01 A II b) of the Common Customs Tariff and originating in Cyprus (1984) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 113 thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Whereas Article 2 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3700/83 of 22 December 1983 laying down the arrangements applicable to trade with Cyprus beyond 31 December 1983 (1), provides for the opening of a Community tariff quota of 60 000 tonnes of new potatoes, originating in Cyprus and falling within subheading 07.01 A II b) of the Common Customs Tariff, at a rate of customs duty equal to 45 % of the customs duty in the Common Customs Tariff, for the period 16 May to 30 June 1984, whereas it is necessary to open this Community tariff quota for the period in question; Whereas it is in particular necessary to ensure for all Community importers equal and uninterrupted access to the abovementioned quota and uninterrupted application of the rates laid down for that quota to all imports of the products concerned into all Member States until the quota has been used up; whereas, having regard to the above principles, the Community nature of the quota can be respected by allocating the Community tariff quota among the Member States; whereas, in order to reflect as accurately as possible the true trend of the market in the products in question, such allocation should be in proportion to the requirements of the Member States, calculated by reference to the statistics for imports from Cyprus over a representative reference period and also to the economic outlook for the quota period in question; Whereas, during the last three years for which statistics are available, the corresponding imports by each of the Member States represent the following percentages of the imports into the Community from Cyprus of the products concerned: 1.2.3.4 // // // // // Member States // 1981 // 1982 // 1983 // // // // // Benelux // 4,0 // 4,0 // 6,2 // Denmark // - // - // - // Germany // 3,5 // 4,4 // 1,9 // Greece // - // - // - // France // - // - // - // Ireland // 0,1 // - // 0,2 // Italy // - // - // - // United Kingdom // 92,4 // 91,6 // 91,7 // // // // Whereas, in view of these factors of market forecasts for the products in question and in particular of the estimates submitted by certain Member States, initial quota shares may be fixed approximately at the following percentages: Benelux 5,0 Denmark 0,1 Germany 4,2 Greece 0,1 France 0,1 Ireland 0,2 Italy 0,1 United Kingdom 90,2 Whereas, in order to take into account import trends for the products concerned in the various Member States, the quota amount should be divided into two instalments, the first being shared among the Member States and the second constituting a reserve to cover at a later date the requirements of the Member States which have used up their initial quota shares; whereas, in order to give importers in each Member State a certain degree of security, the first instalment of the Community quota should under the circumstances be fixed at 94 % of the quota volume; Whereas the Member States' initial shares may be used up at different times; whereas, in order to take this fact into account and avoid any break in continuity, any Member State which has almost used up its initial quota share should draw an additional share from the corresponding reserve; whereas this must be done by each Member State as and when each of its additional shares is almost used up, and repeated as many times as the reserve allows; whereas the initial and additional shares must be valid until the end of the quota period; whereas this method of administration requires close cooperation between the Member States and the Commission, and the latter must be in a position to monitor the extent to which the quota volume has been used up and to inform the Member States thereof; Whereas if, at a given date in the quota period, a substantial quantity remains unused in any Member State, it is essential that that Member State should return a significant proportion to the reserve to prevent a part of any tariff quota from remaining unused in one Member State when it could be used in others; 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 relating to the administration of the quota shares allocated to that economic union may be carried out by any of its members, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 From 16 May to 30 June 1984, the Common Customs Tariff duty for new potatoes falling within subheading 07.01 A II b) of the Common Customs Tariff and originating in Cyprus shall be suspended at 9,4 % within the limits of a Community tariff quota of 60 000 tonnes. Within the limits of this tariff quota, Greece shall apply the customs duties calculated in accordance with the relevant provisions in the 1979 Act of Accession and the Protocol of Adaptation. The protocol on the definition of the concept of 'originating products' and on methods of administrative cooperation (1), annexed to the Additional Protocol to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and Cyprus, shall be applicable. Article 2 1. The Community tariff quota referred to in Article 1 shall be divided into two instalments. 2. A first instalment amounting to 56 300 tonnes shall be allocated among the Member States; the respective shares, which subject to Article 5 shall be valid until 30 June 1984 shall be as follows: 1.2 // // (tonnes) // Benelux // 2 800 // Denmark // 50 // Germany // 2 390 // Greece // 50 // France // 50 // Ireland // 110 // Italy // 50 // United Kingdom // 50 800 3. The second instalment of 3 700 tonnes shall constitute the reserve. Article 3 1. If 90 % or more of a Member State's initial share as specified in Article 2 (2) or 90 % of that share minus the portion returned to the reserve where Article 5 has been applied, has been used up, then, to the extent permitted by the amount of the reserve, that Member State shall forthwith, by notifying the Commission, draw a second share equal to 15 % of its initial share, rounded up where necessary to the next unit. 2. If, after its initial share has been used up, 90 % or more of the second share drawn by a Member State has been used up, then, to the extent permitted by the amount of the reserve, that Member State shall, in accordance with the conditions laid down in paragraph 1, draw a third share equal to 7,5 % of its initial share, rounded up where neccessary to the next unit. 3. If, after its second share has been used up, 90 % or more of the third share drawn by a Member State has been used up, that Member State shall, in accordance with the conditions laid down in paragraph 1, draw a fourth share equal to the third. This process shall continue until the reserve is used up. 4. By way of derogation from paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, a Member State may draw shares smaller than those fixed in those paragraphs if there is reason to believe that they might not be used up. It shall inform the Commission of its reasons for applying this paragraph. Article 4 The additional shares drawn pursuant to Article 3 shall be valid until 30 June 1984. Article 5 The Member States shall return to the reserve, not later than 15 June 1984, such unused portion of their initial share as, on 10 June 1984, in excess of 20 % of the initial volume. They may return a larger quantity if there are grounds for believing that this quantity may not be used. The Member States shall notify the Commission, not later than 15 June 1984, of the total quantities of the products in question imported up to 10 June 1984 and charged against the tariff quota and of any quantity of the initial shares returned to the reserve. Article 6 The Commission shall keep an account of the shares opened by the Member States pursuant to Articles 2 and 3 and, as soon as it is notified, shall inform each Member State of the extent to which the reserve has been used up. It shall inform the Member States, not later than 20 June 1984, of the amount in the reserve after quantities have been returned thereto pursuant to Article 5. It shall ensure that the drawing which exhausts the reserve does not exceed the balance available and, to this end, notify the amount of that balance to the Member State making the last drawing. Article 7 1. The Member States shall take all measures necessary to ensure that additional shares drawn pursuant to Article 3 are opened in such a way that imports may be charged without interruption against their accumulated shares of the tariff quota. 2. The Member States shall ensure that importers of the products in question have free access to the shares allocated to them. 3. The Member States shall charge the imports of the products concerned against their shares as and when the products are entered with customs authorities for free circulation. 4. The extent to which a Member State has used up its shares shall be determined on the basis of the imports charged in accordance with paragraph 3. Article 8 At the Commission's request, the Member States shall inform it of imports of the products concerned actually charged against their shares. Article 9 The Member States and the Commission shall cooperate closely to ensure that this Regulation is complied with. Article 10 This Regulation shall enter into force on 16 May 1984. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Luxembourg, 10 April 1984.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 2380/89 of 2 August 1989 laying down provisions for the implementation of Article 5 (2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1697/79 on the post-clearance recovery of import duties or export duties which have not been required of the person liable for payment on goods entered for a customs procedure involving the obligation to pay such duties THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1697/79 of 24 July 1979 on the post-clearance recovery of import duties or export duties which have not been required of the person liable for payment on goods entered for a customs procedure involving the obligation to pay such duties (1), and in particular Article 10 (2) thereof, Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1573/80 (2), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 946/83 (3), laid down provisions for the implementation of Article 5 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1697/79; whereas those provisions consist mainly or procedural rules specifying the circumstances in which the competent authorities of the Member States may decide for themselves whether or not to take action for post-clearance recovery and the circumstances in which such decision must be taken by the Commission; whereas a Commission decision is always required where the duties in question total ECU 2 000 or more; Whereas experience has shown that in certain cases in which preferential tariff treatment has been granted when the limits within which such treatment could be granted have already been reached, failure by the competent authorities to require of the person liable for payment all or part of the amount of the import duties legally due on goods generally constitutes an error on their part which could not reasonably have been detected by the said liable person; Whereas in such cases responsibility for taking a decision according to Article 5 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1697/79 may be transferred to the competent authorities of the Member States; Whereas where the Commission has adopted a decision establishing that Article 5 (2) is applicable and where exceptional issues of fact or of law are involved which may arise again, it is advisable to provide for authorizing one or more Member States by that same decision to refrain from recovering the amount of duties in question in comparable cases without referring such cases to the Commission; Whereas the Commission's decision-making procedure should be brought into line with that laid down in Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3799/86 of 12 December 1986 laying down provisions for the implementation of Articles 4a, 6a, 11a and 13 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 on the repayment or remission of import or export duties (4); Whereas it is desirable, for the sake of clarity, to set out in a new Commission Regulation all the provisions henceforth applicable for the practical implementation of Regulation (EEC) No 1697/79 and, consequently, to repeal Regulation (EEC) No 1573/80; Whereas it is appropriate to restrict the validity of the present Regulation to a period of two years in order to examine it in the light of experience; Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Duty Free Arrangements, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 This Regulation lays down provisions for the implementation of Article 5 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1697/79, hereinafter referred to as the 'basic Regulation'. Article 2 The competent authority of the Member State in which the error was committed or noticed and which resulted in insufficient duty being collected shall itself decide not to take action for the post-clearance recovery of the uncollected duties: (a) in cases in which preferential tariff treatment has been applied in the context of a tariff quota or an allocated tariff ceiling when the limits laid down by that quota or tariff ceiling were reached at the time of acceptance of the customs declaration without that fact having, before the release for free circulation of the goods in question, been published in the Official Journal of the European Communities or, where such fact is not published, been made known in an appropriate manner in the Member State concerned, the person liable having for his part acted in good faith and observed all the provisions laid down by the rules in force as far as his customs declaration is concerned; (b) in cases in which it considers that the conditions laid down in Article 5 (2) of the basic Regulation are fulfilled and provided that the amount not collected from the person concerned in consequence of the same error and relating, where applicable, to a number of import or export operations, is less than ECU 2 000; (c) in cases in which the Member State to which the said authority is subject has been so authorized in accordance with Article 8. Article 3 1. Each Member State shall send the Commission a list of the cases in which the provisions of Article 2 (a), (b) or (c) have been applied, giving a short summary of each case. 2. The list referred to in paragraph 1 shall be forwarded during the first and third quarters of each year for all cases where a decision not to recover was taken during the preceding half-year. 3. The Commission shall circulate the lists to all other Member States. 4. The lists shall be examined periodically by the Committee on Duty Free Arrangements. Article 4 Where, other than in the cases referred to in Article 2, the competent authority of the Member State in which the error was committed either considers that the conditions laid down in Article 5 (2) of the basic Regulation are fulfilled or is in doubt as to the precise scope of the criteria of that provision with regard to a particular case, that authority shall submit the case to the Commission, so that a decision may be taken in accordance with the procedure laid down in Articles 5 to 7. The relevant documents submitted to the Commission shall contain all the information required to enable a comprehensive examination of the case to be carried out. As soon as it receives the relevant documents the Commission shall inform the Member State concerned accordingly. Should it be found that the information supplied by the Member State is not sufficient to enable a decision to be taken on the case concerned in full knowledge of the facts, the Commission may request that additional information be supplied. Article 5 Within 15 days following receipt of the documents referred to in the first paragraph of Article 4 the Commission shall forward a copy thereof to the Member States. Consideration of the case in question shall be included as soon as possible on the agenda of a meeting of the Committee on Duty Free Arrangements. Article 6 After consulting a group of experts composed of representatives of all Member States, meeting within the framework of the Committee on Duty Free Arrangements to consider the case in question, the Commission shall decide whether the circumstances under consideration are such that no action need to taken for recovery of the duties concerned, or that such is not the case. Such decision shall be taken within six months of the date on which the documents referred to in the first paragraph of Article 4 are received by the Commission. Where the Commission has found it necessary to request additional information from the Member State in order that it may give a ruling, the period of six months shall be extended by a period equivalent to that between the date the Commission sent the request for additional information and the date it received that information. Article 7 The Member State concerned shall be notified of the decision referred to in Article 6 as soon as possible and in any event within 30 days of the expiry of the period specified in Article 6. A copy of the decision shall be sent to the other Member States. Article 8 Where it is established by the decision referred to in Article 6 that the circumstances under consideration are such that no action need be taken for recovery of the duties concerned, the Commission may, under conditions which it shall determine, authorize one or more Member States to refrain from taking action for the recovery of duties in cases involving comparable issues of fact and of law. In such a case, the decision referred to in Article 6 shall also be notified to each Member State so authorized. Article 9 If the Commission fails to take a decision within the period referred to in Article 6 or fails to notify a decision to the Member State concerned within the period in Article 7, the competent authorities of that Member State shall not recover the duties in question. Article 10 Regulation (EEC) No 1573/80 is hereby repealed. Article 11 This Regulation shall enter into force on the first day of the month following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. It will cease to apply two years after its entry into force. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 2 August 1989.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 407/85 of 18 February 1985 fixing the amount of aid for peas and field beans referred to in Article 3 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1431/82 THE COMMISSION 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 1032/84 (2), and in particular Article 3 (7) (b) thereof, Whereas, in accordance with Article 3 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1431/82, aid is granted for peas and field beans harvested in the Community when the average world market price for these products is lower than the guide price; whereas this aid is equal to the difference between the two prices; Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 1033/84 (3) fixed the guide price for peas and field beans for the 1984/85 marketing year; Whereas the world market price for the products concerned was determined by Commission Decision 85/142/EEC (4), pursuant to Article 3 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1431/82, concerning the determination of the world market price for peas and field beans; Whereas, if the aid system is to operate normally, refunds should be calculated on the following basis: - in the case of currencies which are maintained in relation to each other at any moment within a band of 2,25 %, a rate of exchange based on their central rate, multiplied by the coefficient provided for in Article 2b (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 974/71 (5), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 855/84 (6), - for other currencies, an exchange rate based on the arithmetic mean of the spot market rates of each of these currencies recorded over a given period in relation to the Community currencies referred to in the previous indent, and the aforesaid coefficient; Whereas the aid must be fixed at least once every marketing year; Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Dried Fodder, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The amount of aid referred to in Article 3 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1431/82 shall be 5,41 ECU per 100 kilograms. 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, 18 February 1985.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 549/89 of 1 March 1989 re-establishing the levying of customs duties on footwear with outer soles and uppers of rubber, falling within CN codes 6401 and 6402, originating in Thailand, to which the preferential tariff arrangements set out in Council Regulation (EEC) No 4257/88 apply THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4257/88 of 19 December 1988 applying generalized tariff preferences for 1989 in respect of certain industrial products originating in developing countries (1), and in particular Article 15 thereof, Whereas, pursuant to Articles 1 and 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 4257/88, suspension of customs duties shall be accorded to each of the countries or territories listed in Annex III other than those listed in column 4 of Annex I within the framework of the preferential tariff ceiling fixed in column 7 of Annex I; Whereas, as provided for in Article 13 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 footwear with outer soles and uppers of rubber falling within CN codes 6401 and 6402 the individual ceiling was fixed at ECU 1 100 000; whereas, on 24 January 1989, imports of these products into the Community originating in Thailand 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 Thailand, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 As from 6 March 1989, the levying of customs duties suspended pursuant to Regulation (EEC) No 4257/88 shall be re-established on imports into the Community of the following products originating in Thailand: // // // // Order No // CN code // Description // // // // 10.0660 // 6401 // Waterproof footwear with outer soles and uppers of rubber or of plastics, the uppers of which are neither fixed to the sole nor assembled by stitching, riveting, nailing, screwing, plugging or similar processes // // 6402 // Other footwear with outer soles and uppers of rubber or plastics // // // 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.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 2 August 2007 recognising in principle the completeness of the dossiers submitted for detailed examination in view of the possible inclusion of chlorantraniliprole, heptamaloxyglucan, spirotetramat and Helicoverpa armigera nucleopolyhedrovirus in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC (notified under document number C(2007) 3669) (Text with EEA relevance) (2007/560/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant-protection on the market (1), and in particular Article 6(3) thereof, Whereas: (1) Directive 91/414/EEC provides for the development of a Community list of active substances authorised for incorporation in plant protection products. (2) A dossier for the active substance chlorantraniliprole was submitted by DuPont International Operations Sarl to the authorities of Ireland on 2 February 2007 with an application to obtain its inclusion in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC. For heptamaloxyglucan a dossier was submitted by ELICITYL to the authorities of France on 9 May 2006 with an application to obtain its inclusion in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC. For spirotetramat a dossier was submitted by Bayer CropScience AG to the authorities of Austria on 9 October 2006 with an application to obtain its inclusion in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC. For Helicoverpa armigera nucleopolyhedrovirus a dossier was submitted by Andermatt Biocontrol GmbH to the authorities of Estonia on 7 August 2006 with an application to obtain its inclusion in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC. (3) The authorities of Ireland, France, Austria and Estonia have indicated to the Commission that, on preliminary examination, the dossiers for the active substances concerned appear to satisfy the data and information requirements set out in Annex II to Directive 91/414/EEC. The dossiers submitted appear also to satisfy the data and information requirements set out in Annex III to Directive 91/414/EEC in respect of one plant protection product containing the active substance concerned. In accordance with Article 6(2) of Directive 91/414/EEC, the dossiers were subsequently forwarded by the applicant to the Commission and other Member States, and were referred to the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health. (4) By this Decision it should be formally confirmed at Community level that the dossiers are considered as satisfying in principle the data and information requirements set out in Annex II and, for at least one plant protection product containing the active substance concerned, the requirements set out in Annex III to Directive 91/414/EEC. (5) This Decision should not prejudice the right of the Commission to request the applicant to submit further data or information in order to clarify certain points in the dossier. (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 Without prejudice to Article 6(4) of Directive 91/414/EEC, the dossiers concerning the active substances identified in the Annex to this Decision, which were submitted to the Commission and the Member States with a view to obtaining the inclusion of those substances in Annex I to that Directive, satisfy in principle the data and information requirements set out in Annex II to that Directive. The dossiers also satisfy the data and information requirements set out in Annex III to that Directive in respect of one plant protection product containing the active substance, taking into account the uses proposed. Article 2 The rapporteur Member States shall pursue the detailed examination for the dossiers referred to in Article 1 and shall communicate to the Commission the conclusions of their examination accompanied by a recommendation on the inclusion or non-inclusion in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC of the active substances referred to in Article 1 and any conditions for those inclusions as soon as possible and at the latest within a period of one year from the date of publication of this Decision in the Official Journal of the European Union. Article 3 This Decision is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 2 August 2007.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1823/2002 of 11 October 2002 amending for the fifth time Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 467/2001 THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 of 27 May 2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 467/2001 prohibiting the export of certain goods and services to Afghanistan, strengthening the flight ban and extending the freeze of funds and other financial resources in respect of the Taliban of Afghanistan(1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1754/2002(2), and in particular Article 7(1), first indent, thereof, Whereas: (1) Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 lists the persons, groups and entities covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources under that Regulation. (2) On 10 October 2002, the Sanctions Committee decided to amend the list of persons, groups and entities to whom the freezing of funds and economic resources shall apply and, therefore, Annex I should be amended accordingly. (3) In order to ensure that the measures provided for in this Regulation are effective, this Regulation must enter into force immediately, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Regulation. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 11 October 2002.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) N° 1320/90 of 14 May 1990 fixing the minimum price for soya beans for the 1990/91 marketing year 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 89 (1) thereof, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) N° 1491/85 of 23 May 1985 laying down special measures in respect of soya beans (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2217/88 (2), and in particular Article 2 (6) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (3), Whereas Article 2 (6) of Regulation (EEC) N° 1491/85 provides that the Council shall fix each year a minimum price for soya beans; whereas the price is fixed so as to guarantee sales for bean producers at a price as close as possible to the guide price, taking into account market fluctuations and the cost of transporting the beans from the production areas to the processing areas; Whereas, in order to achieve the abovementioned objective, this minimum price must be fixed for a well-defined standard quality and marketing stage; quality and marketing stage; quality and marketing stage; Whereas, under Article 68 of the Act of Accession, prices in Spain were set at levels differing from that of the common prices; whereas, pursuant to Article 70 (1) of that Act, the Spanish prices should be aligned on the common prices each year at the beginning of the marketing year; whereas the rules laid down for this alignment give the Spanish prices set out below, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 For the 1990/91 marketing year, the minimum price for soya beans referred to in Article 2 (6) of Regulation (EEC) No 1491/85 shall be: (a) ECU 40,72 per 100 kilograms for Spain; (b) ECU 48,94 per 100 kilograms for the other Member States. Article 2 The price referred to in Article 1 shall apply to beans which meet the criteria referred to in Article 2 of Council Regulation (EEC) N° 1319/90 of 14 May 1990 fixing the guide price for soya beans for the 1990/91 marketing year (4). The said price shall relate to goods ready for dispatch from the production areas. Article 3 This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. It shall apply from 1 September 1990. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 14 May 1990.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2011/2005 of 8 December 2005 concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of oats issued in Regulation (EC) No 1438/2005 THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 7 thereof, Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (2), and in particular Article 7 thereof, Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1438/2005 of 2 September 2005 on a special intervention measure for cereals in Finland and Sweden for the 2005/2006 marketing year (3), Whereas: (1) An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of oats produced in Finland and Sweden for export from Finland and Sweden to all third countries, with the exception of Bulgaria, Norway, Romania and Switzerland was opened pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1438/2005. (2) On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should not 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 No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 2 to 8 December 2005 in response to the invitation to tender for the refund for the export of oats issued in Regulation (EC) No 1438/2005. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 9 December 2005. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States Done at Brussels, 8 December 2005.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 35/88 of 5 January 1988 correcting Regulation (EEC) No 2161/87 in regard to the amount of the production aid for sultanas and currants THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 426/86 of 24 February 1986 on the common organisation of the market in products processed from fruit and vegetables (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3909/87 (2), and in particular Article 5 (5) thereof, Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 1277/84 of 8 May 1984 laying down general rules for the system of production aid for processed fruit and vegetables (3) contains provisions on methods of determining the production aid; Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2161/87 (4) set the production aid for sultanas and currants for the 1987/88 marketing year; whereas certain factors in the determination of the aid require correction; whereas the correction, which is to the advantage of recipients of the aid, must be operative from the beginning of the 1987/88 marketing year; Whereas the Management Committee for Products Processed from Fruit and Vegetables has not issued an opinion within the time limit set by its Chairman, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 In the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 2161/87 the amount of 52,224 ECU per 100 kilograms net given as the production aid for dried sultanas of category 4 is replaced by 60,924 ECU per 100 kilograms net. The balance of the aid shall be paid on request by recipients. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. It shall be applicable with effect from 1 September 1987. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 5 January 1988.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1339/2003 of 28 July 2003 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1947/2002(2), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof, Whereas: (1) Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto. (2) In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex hereto. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 29 July 2003. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 28 July 2003.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1248/93 of 24 May 1993 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2252/92 laying down detailed rules for applying the special scheme for raspberries intended for processing THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1991/92 of 13 July 1992 establishing a special scheme for raspberries intended for processing (1), and in particular Article 8 thereof, Whereas Article 8 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2252/92 (2), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 839/93 (3), lays down the conditions and procedures for approving the programmes submitted by recognized producers' organizations and which once approved cannot undergo revision; whereas it now appears appropriate to introduce such an option for those aspects of the programme linked to research and studies so that account may be taken of any new scientific and technical information; Whereas under Article 11 (1) of the said Regulation the producers' organizations can submit only one aid application per year within the two months following the end of the marketing year for work carried out during the marketing year in question; whereas this time scale is lengthy when account is taken of the producers' organizations' precarious financial situation; whereas provision should therefore be made for aid applications to be submitted at the end of both halves of the marketing year; 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 Regulation (EEC) No 2252/92 is hereby amended as follows: 1. The following point (d) is added to Article 8 (3): '(d) At the end of a minimum period of two years from the date the programme is approved, the measures may be revised according to the same procedure as used for the initial approval. The programme may be revised only twice at the most and in any event with account being taken of the outcome of the checks referred to in paragraph 5 below.' 2. Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of Article 11 are replaced by the following: '1. To obtain Community aid for their programme to improve the competitiveness of the sector producing raspberries for processing, the producers' organizations qualifying therefor shall submit an aid application to the competent national authority at the end of each half of the marketing year. 2. Aid applications shall be submitted in accordance with Annex III within the two months following the end of each half of the marketing year, and must be accompanied by the invoices and all other equivalent documents relating to the work done. 3. Financing of expenditure incurred for measures implemented jointly by several producers' organizations shall be shared among those organizations and be equal to the expenditure incurred during each half year in question.' 3. Article 12 is replaced by the following: 'Article 12 The competent authorities of the Member States, having checked the aid applications and the documentary evidence produced in support thereof, shall pay, within the three months following the lodgment of the application for aid, the aid granted by the Member State and the Community in accordance with Article 6 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 1991/92.' Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh 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 May 1993.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Regulation (EC) No 409/2004 of 4 March 2004 concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the import of sorghum issued in Regulation (EC) No 238/2004 THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30 June 1992, on the common organization of the market in cereals(1), and in particular Article 12(1) thereof, Whereas: (1) An invitation to tender for the maximum reduction in the duty on sorghum imported into Spain was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 238/2004(2). (2) Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1839/95(3), allows the Commission to decide, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 and on the basis of the tenders notified to make no award. (3) On the basis of the criteria laid down in Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 a maximum reduction in the duty should not be fixed. (4) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 27 February to 4 March 2004 in response to the invitation to tender for the reduction in the duty on imported sorghum issued in Regulation (EC) No 238/2004. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 5 March 2004. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 4 March 2004.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 2 July 1999 amending Decision 94/269/EC laying down special conditions governing imports of fishery products originating in Colombia (notified under document number C(1999) 1826) (Text with EEA relevance) (1999/486/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Directive 91/493/EEC of 22 July 1991 laying down the health conditions for the production and the placing on the market of fishery products(1), as last amended by Directive 97/79/EC(2), and in particular Article 11 thereof, (1) Whereas the Article 1 of Commission Decision 94/269/EC of 8 April 1994 laying down special conditions governing import of fishery and aquaculture products origination in Colombia(3), as last amended by Decision 96/31/EC(4), which states that the Ministerio de Salud - División de Alimentos shall be the competent authority in Colombia for verifying and certifying compiance of fishery and aquaculture products with the requirements of Directive 91/493/EEC; (2) Whereas, following a restructuring of the Colombian Movement, the competent authority for health certificates for fishery products has changed from the Ministerio de Salud - División de Alimentos to the Instituto Nacional de Vigilancia de Medicamentos y alimentos (Invima) and this new authority is capable of effectively verifying the application of the laws in force; whereas it is, therefore, necessary to modify the nomination of the competent authority named by Decision 94/269/EC; (3) Whereas it is convenient to harmonise the wording of Decision 94/269/EC with the wording of the more recently adopted Commission Decisions laying down special conditions governing imports of fishery and aquaculture products originating in certain third countries; (4) Whereas the measures provided for in the Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 Commission Decision 94/269/EC is amended as follows: 1. Article 1 shall be replaced by the following: "Article 1 The Instituto Nacional de Vigilancia de Medicamentos y Alimentos (Invima) shall be the competent authority in Colombia for verifying and certifying compliance of fishery aquaculture products with the requirements of Directive 91/493/EEC." 2. Article 2 shall be replaced by the following: "Article 2 Fishery and aquaculature products originating in Colombia must meet the following conditions. 1. Each consignment must be accompanied by a numbered original health certificate, duly completed, signed, dated and comprising a single sheet in accordance with the model in Annex A hereto; 2. the products must come from approved establishments, factory vessels, cold stores or registered freezer vessels listed in Annex B hereto; 3. except in the case of frozen fishery products in bulk and intended for the manufacture of preserved foods, all packages must bear the word 'Colombia' and the approval/registration number of the establishment, factory vessel, cold store or freezer vessel of origin in indelible letters." 3. Annex A shall be replaced by the Annex hereto. Article 2 This Decision is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 2 July 1999.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1477/2007 of 13 December 2007 amending Regulation (EC) No 622/2003 laying down measures for the implementation of the common basic standards on aviation security (Text with EEA relevance) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 2320/2002 of the European Parliament and the Council of 16 December 2002 establishing common rules in the field of civil aviation security (1), and in particular Article 4(2) thereof, Whereas: (1) The Commission is required, by virtue of Regulation (EC) No 2320/2002, when necessary, to adopt measures for the implementation of common basic standards for aviation security throughout the Community. Commission Regulation (EC) No 622/2003 of 4 April 2003 laying down measures for the implementation of the common basic standards on aviation security (2) was the first act laying down such measures. (2) The measures provided for by Regulation (EC) No 622/2003 on restricting liquids carried by passengers arriving on flights from third countries and transferring at Community airports are subject to review in the light of technical developments, operational implications at airports and the impact on passengers. (3) Such a review has shown that the restrictions on liquids carried by passengers arriving on flights from third countries and transferring at Community airports create certain operational difficulties at these airports and cause inconvenience to the passengers concerned. (4) In particular, the Commission has verified certain security standards at an airport in a third country and found them satisfactory, and that country has a good record of cooperation with the Community and its Member States. On that basis the Commission has decided to take steps to alleviate the problems identified above, in the case of passengers carrying liquids obtained at that airport. (5) Regulation (EC) No 622/2003 should be amended accordingly. (6) The measures contained in the present Regulation are not included among those which, according to Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2320/2002, shall be secret and not published. (7) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Civil Aviation Security, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The Annex to Regulation (EC) No 622/2003 is amended as set out in the Annex to this Regulation. Article 3 of that Regulation shall not apply as regards the confidential nature of this Annex. 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, 13 December 2007.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1828/83 of 30 June 1983 on the form of prior authorizations to be granted for the economic outward processing traffic in textile and clothing products and the procedures for issuing and checking such authorizations THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 636/82 of 16 March 1982 establishing economic outward processing arrangements applicable to certain textile and clothing products reimported into the Community after working or processing in certain third countries (1), and in particular Article 12 thereof, Whereas Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 636/82 provides that the competent authorities of the Member States shall issue prior authorizations to applicants eligible to use the economic outward processing arrangements in respect of textile and clothing products; Whereas the operation of the said arrangements should be improved by harmonizing the form of such prior authorizations and the issuing and checking of procedures; Whereas the introduction of a standard prior authorization form should facilitate administrative cooperation among Member States and the third countries where processing operations are carried out; Whereas procedures for issuing and checking prior authorizations should be designed to ensure conformity with the purposes of the economic outward processing arrangements and to enable checks to be carried out on essential items such as the origin of goods and whether the set quantities are exported; Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Economic Outward Processing Arrangements for Textiles, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The form of the prior authorizations referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 636/82 and the procedures whereby such authorizations are to be issued and checked by the competent authorities of the Member States shall be those laid down by this Regulation, subject to the transitional arrangements provided for in Article 18. Article 2 Prior authorization forms shall conform to the specimen in the Annex, except as specified in Article 4. Article 3 Prior authorizations may be made out in the form specified in Article 2 to cover part only of a quantity of compensating products in respect of which an initial prior authorization has previously been issued. The procedure for the issue of such partial prior authorizations is laid down in Article 9. Article 4 Article 2 shall not apply to the initial prior authorizations on the basis of which partial prior authorizations are subsequently to be issued. Article 5 The amounts of compensating products shall be charged against any quantitative limits or entered under any surveillance arrangements established as specific measures as referred to in Article 1 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 636/82 at the time when the prior authorization is issued. Article 6 Article 5 shall not be held to prevent the competent authorities from provisionally allocating in advance to applicants for the economic outward processing arrangements the quantity of compensating products to which they may be entitled under Article 2 (2) (b) of Regulation (EEC) No 636/82. Article 7 Each prior authorization shall be issued in respect of one category of compensating product and one processing country only. However, a prior authorization may be issued in respect of more than one category where the categories in question are covered by a single specific measure within the meaning of Article 1 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 636/82. Article 8 Prior authorizations may be issued without any indication having been given of the quantity of goods of Community origin to be exported or of the procedures for identifying them. Such indications shall, in that case, be supplied by the customs authority of the Member State issuing the prior authorization. Article 9 Partial prior authorizations shall be issued in accordance with one of the following procedures, as specified by the competent authorities: - they may be issued progressively by the authority which issued the initial prior authorization, - they may be issued by a customs office upon presentation of the initial prior authorization, provided such office is situated in the Member State where the said initial prior authorization was issued, - they may be issued, in accordance with a simplified advance endorsement procedure, by the authority which issued the initial prior authorization. Article 10 The procedure described in the third indent of Article 9 may be used only for firms that have been approved by the competent authorities which issued the initial prior authorization and that offer such guarantees as the said authorities may consider relevant. Article 11 When issuing prior authorizations, the competent authorities may set time limits for the completion of temporary export formalities. They may also require that the holder of the authorization carry out the temporary export and/or reimport formalities at a specific customs office. However, such requirement may not constitute an obstacle to the procedure described in Article 14. Article 12 The customs office where the temporary export formalities are carried out shall: (a) carry out any necessary checks on the goods to be temporarily exported; (b) charge against the prior authorization the quantity of temporarily exported goods in respect of which a derogation has been accorded under Article 2 (2) (c) of Regulation (EEC) No 636/82; (c) return the prior authorization to the holder, with the official proof of temporary export of the goods which is to be presented upon reimport of the compensating products. Article 13 Where the holder of a prior authorization is asked to supply further proof of the declared origin of the goods, such a request may not in itself be used to prevent the export of the goods. Article 14 1. Temporary export formalities may be completed in a customs office of a Member State other than that which issued the prior authorization. The said customs office shall carry out the checks and formalities specified in Article 12 as though the authorization had been issued by the Member State where that office is situated. 2. The customs authorities of the Member State of temporary export may require that the holder of the authorization carry out the temporary export formalities in a specific customs office. 3. The customs authorities of the Member State of export shall, at the request of the holder of the prior authorizations, issue an INF 2 sheet conforming to the model laid down in Commission Directive 76/447/EEC (1). Article 15 1. Upon reimport of the compensating products, the prior authorization in the form specified in Article 2 shall be presented at the customs office where the reimport formalities are to be carried out. Where products are reimported in split consignments, the prior authorization shall be presented at the time of reimport of each such consignment. 2. Official proof of the temporary export of the quantity and type of good covered by the prior authorization shall be presented at the customs office of reimport. 3. The customs office may take appropriate measures to ensure that the conditions of the prior authorization have been met. 4. The customs office shall only accept the prior authorization for the compensating products corresponding to the quantity and type of goods actually exported. Article 16 1. The authority which issued the prior authorization shall be notified without delay of any contravention of this Regulation. 2. Where a prior authorization is withdrawn from the holder or expires before some or all of the compensating products have been reimported, the competent authority shall cancel in whole or in part entries against quantitative limits or surveillance arrangements made at the time when such authorization was issued pursuant to Article 5. 3. The Commission shall be notified, should it so request, of action taken pursuant to paragraph 2. Article 17 Member States shall take the necessary steps to see that prior authorizations issued under this Regulation replace any import licence or authorization currently required on import of products to which Regulation (EEC) No 636/82 applies. Article 18 Member States may defer implementation of Article 2 until 31 December 1983. Article 19 This Regulation shall enter into force on the 45th 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, 30 June 1983.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 558/84 of 29 February 1984 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of hardboard originating in the Soviet Union and re-opening the anti-dumping proceeding concerning those imports THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3017/79 of 20 December 1979 on protection against dumped or subsidized imports from countries not members of the European Economic Community (1), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1580/82 (2), and in particular Article 10 thereof, After consultations within the advisory committee as provided for under the above Regulation, Whereas: (1) On 4 July 1981 the Commission published in the Official Journal of the European Communities (3) a notice of review of its decision of 4 June 1980 to accept undertakings in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of fibre building board originating in Czechoslovakia, Finland, Norway, Poland, Romania, Spain, the Soviet Union and Sweden. (2) The Commission conducted a preliminary examination of dumping and injury showing, as set out in Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1633/82 (4), that there was dumping and material injury resulting therefrom and withdrew its acceptance of the existing undertakings. (3) Voluntary price undertakings were offered by the exporters concerned including the Soviet exporter V/O Exportles represented by the Russian Wood Agency, London. These undertakings were accepted by the Commission and the anti-dumping proceeding was terminated. (4) The undertakings provide that half-yearly reports on quantities and prices of exports of fibre building board to the EEC have to be submitted by the companies to the Commission. Based on the data supplied by the Russian Wood Agency, acting on behalf of V/O Exportles, the Commission established that during the period October 1982 to October 1983 V/O Exportles exported significant quantities of hardboard to the Community in violation of the provisions of the undertakings. (5) The Commission informed the Russian Wood Agency of its findings and provided the opportunity for comments. The company availed itself of this opportunity but its reply was incomplete and did not in substance contest the findings of the Commission. (6) The significant violation of the undertaking by V/O Exportles threatens to undermine the stability of the pricing structure established by Regulation (EEC) No 1633/82. (7) In these circumstances, the protection of the Community's interests calls for the withdrawal of acceptance of the undertaking offered by the Soviet exporter and for the re-opening of the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of hardboard from the Soviet Union and for the immediate application of provisional measures based on the information available in accordance with Article 10 (6) of Regulation (EEC) No 3017/79. (8) The price undertakings were accepted in lieu of the application of anti-dumping duties on the basis of the findings as set out in the said Regulation (EEC) No 1633/82. Those findings showed that the extent of the injury caused by the dumped imports of hardboard required elimination of the full dumping margin. Under these circumstances the Commission considers it appropriate that the provisional duties should be equal to the dumping margins established in the course of the preceding anti-dumping enquiry which led to the acceptance of the undertakings. During the subsequent procedure the Commission will verify whether exports made during the period for which the violation of the undertaking has been established were at prices resulting in a different dumping margin, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The Commission hereby withdraws its acceptance of the price undertaking offered by the Russian Wood Agency, London, on behalf of V/O Exportles, Moscow, USSR, concerning exports of hardboard to the European Economic Community and re-opens the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of hardboard originating in the Soviet Union. Article 2 1. A provisional anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of fibre building board weighing more than 0,8 g/cm3 (hardboard), falling within heading No ex 44.11 of the Common Customs Tariff, corresponding to NIMEXE codes 44.11-10 and 20, originating in the Soviet Union. 2. The rate of the duty shall be 27,7 % based on the customs value. 3. The provisions in force with regard to customs duties shall apply. 4. The release for free circulation in the Community of the products referred to in paragraph 1 shall be subject to the provision of a security equivalent to the amount of the provisional duty. Article 3 Without prejudice to Article 7 (4) (b) and (c) of Regulation (EEC) No 3017/79, the parties concerned may make known their views and apply to be heard orally by the Commission within one month of the entry into force of this Regulation. Article 4 This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. Subject to Articles 11, 12 and 14 of Regulation (EEC) No 3017/79, it shall apply for a period of four months, unless the Council adopts definitive measures before the expiry of that period. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 29 February 1984.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

{COM} COMMISSION DECISION of 18 December 1991 on the establishment of the Community support framework for Community structural assistance in the areas eligible under Objective 2 in Groningen/South-east Drenthe (Kingdom of the Netherlands) (Only the Dutch text is authentic) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic 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), and in particular Article 9 (9) thereof, Whereas, in accordance with Article 9 (9) of Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88, the Commission, on the basis of the regional and social conversion plans submitted by the Member States, shall establish, through partnership and in agreement with the Member State concerned, the Community support frameworks for Community structural operations; Whereas, in accordance with the second paragraph of that provision, Community support frameworks shall cover in particular the priorities adopted, the forms of assistance and the indicative financing plan, with details of the amount of assistance and its source, and the duration of the assistance; Whereas Title III of 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 (2) sets out the conditions for the preparation and implementation of Community support frameworks; Whereas by Decision 89/288/EEC (3) the Commission adopted an initial list of areas eligible under Objective 2; Whereas by Decision 90/400/EEC (4) the Commission extended that list to take account of the Decision of 17 December 1989 concerning the Rechar Community initiative (5); Whereas on 30 April 1991 the Commission decided to retain that list for 1992 and 1993; Whereas on 19 November 1991 the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands submitted to the Commission the regional and social conversion plan referred to in Article 9 (8) of Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 in respect of the areas eligible under Objective 2 in Groningen/South-east Drenthe (Kingdom of the Netherlands) in accordance with the abovementioned list; Whereas the plan submitted by the Member State includes a description of the priorities selected and an indication of the use to be made of assistance from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund (ESF), the European Investment Bank (EIB) and the other financial instruments in implementing it; Whereas, pursuant to Article 9 (9) of Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88, on 20 December 1989 the Commission adopted the Community support framework for Groningen/South-east Drenthe for 1989 to 1991; whereas this Community support framework constitutes the second phase (1992 to 1993) of Community assistance to this area under Objective 2; Whereas this Community support framework has been established in agreement with the Member State concerned within the framework of partnership defined in Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88; Whereas the EIB has also been involved in the preparation of the Community support framework in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88; whereas it has declared its readiness to help implement this framework on the basis of the estimated loan arrangements indicated in this Decision and in accordance with its Statute; Whereas the Commission is prepared to examine the possibility of the other Community lending instruments contributing to the financing of this framework in accordance with the specific provisions governing them; Whereas this Decision is consistent with the opinion of the Advisory Committee on the Development and Conversion of Regions and of the European Social Fund Committee; Whereas, in accordance with Article 10 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88, this Decision is to be sent as a Declaration of Intent to the Member State; Whereas, in accordance with Article 20 (1) and (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88, the budgetary commitments relating to the contribution from the Structural Funds to the financing of the operations covered by this Community support framework will be made on the basis of subsequent Commission decisions approving the operations concerned, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 The Community support framework for Community structural assistance in the areas eligible under Objective 2 in Groningen/South-east Drenthe, covering the period 1 January 1992 to 31 December 1993, is hereby approved. The Commission declares that it intends to contribute to the implementation of this Community support framework in accordance with the detailed provisions thereof and in compliance with the rules and guidelines governing the Structural Funds and the other existing financial instruments and the guidelines relating to them. Article 2 The Community support framework contains the following essential information: (a) the priorities for joint action: - development of industry and services, - further development of tourism potential, - improvement of the supply of business premises, - further development of cross-border activities; (b) an outline of the forms of assistance (mainly operational programmes) to be provided; (c) an indicative financing plan specifying, at constant 1992 prices, the total cost of the new national measures to implement the priorities selected for joint action by the Community and the Member State (ECU 141,73 million over the whole period), and the total amount of the expected contribution from the Community budget, broken down as follows: ERDF ECU 25,2 million ESF ECU 16,8 million Total for Structural Funds ECU 42 million. The resultant national financing required (some ECU 65,41 million from the public sector and ECU 34,33 million from the private sector) may be partially covered by Community loans from the European Investment Bank and the other lending instruments. Article 3 This Declaration of Intent is addressed to the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Done at Brussels, 18 December 1991,

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1701/2005 of 18 October 2005 amending Regulation (EC) No 795/2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of the single payment scheme provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers and amending Regulations (EEC) No 2019/93, (EC) No 1452/2001, (EC) No 1453/2001, (EC) No 1454/2001, (EC) No 1868/94, (EC) No 1251/1999, (EC) No 1254/1999, (EC) No 1673/2000, (EEC) No 2358/71 and (EC) No 2529/2001 (1), and in particular Article 145(c), (d) and (f) thereof, Whereas: (1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 795/2004 (2) introduces the implementing rules for the single payment scheme as from 2005. Experience of the administrative and operational implementation of that scheme at national level has shown that in certain respects further detailed rules are needed and in other respects the existing rules need to be clarified and adapted. (2) In particular, it is appropriate to specify the application of the definition of permanent crops and multiannual crops in relation to the eligibility conditions for the single payment scheme in case of use of land set aside for the production of raw materials as laid down in Chapter 16 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 (3) and in relation to the energy crops aid scheme referred to in Article 88 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003. (3) In particular, under the previous regime for arable crops provided for by Council Regulation (EC) No 1251/1999 of 17 May 1999 establishing a support system for producers of certain arable crops (4), set-aside land which was planted with permanent crops used for the production of raw materials or land planted with multiannual crops were eligible to area payments. Article 54(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 limits the eligibility to areas which were not under permanent crops at the date of application for 2003 whilst it does not exclude, in application of Article 53 of that Regulation those areas under permanent crops used for the production of raw materials from the establishment of the payment entitlements as those areas were granted direct payments in the reference period. It is therefore appropriate to allow farmers who cultivated in 2003 such crops under that specific regime for set-aside or multiannual crops to use that land respectively for the establishment of set-aside entitlements referred to in Article 53 of that Regulation and for the use of the established set-aside entitlements. (4) Moreover, as far as in the regional model provided for by Article 59 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, the reference year for the establishment of the payment entitlements is the first year of application of the scheme as provided for by Article 38(1) of Regulation (EC) No 795/2004, it is appropriate to specify that set-aside land planted with permanent crops used for the purposes referred to in Article 55(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and land planted with permanent crops and which are also subject to an application for the aid for energy crops provided for in Article 88 of that Regulation should be considered as eligible hectares for the establishment and use of payment entitlements. (5) In addition, it is necessary to specify which crops are allowed on set-aside land and which crops are allowed for energy purposes on land subject to an application for the single payment scheme. It is therefore appropriate to provide for the possibility to use payment entitlements in accordance with the eligibility conditions set up for areas under permanent crops used for the production of raw materials as laid down in Chapter 16 of Regulation (EC) No 1973/2004 and for crops used for the production of energy products under the scheme provided for in Article 88 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003. (6) Regulation (EC) No 795/2004 should therefore be amended accordingly. (7) Due to the fact that Regulation (EC) No 795/2004 applies as from 1 January 2005, it is appropriate to provide that this Regulation applies retroactively from that date and consequently authorise farmers concerned by the application in 2005 to modify their single application. (8) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Direct Payments, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 Regulation (EC) No 795/2004 is amended as follows: 1. In Article 2, points (c) and (d) are replaced by the following: ‘(c) “permanent crops” shall mean non-rotational crops other than permanent pasture that occupy the land for five years or longer and yield repeated harvests, including nurseries as defined in point G/05 of Annex I to Commission Decision 2000/115/EC (5), and short rotation coppice (CN code ex 0602 90 41), with the exception of multiannual crops and nurseries of multiannual crops. (d) “multiannual crops” shall mean crops of the following products and the nurseries of such multiannual crops: CN code 0709 10 00 Artichokes 0709 20 00 Asparagus 0709 90 90 Rhubarb 0810 20 Raspberries, blackberries, mulberries and loganberries 0810 30 Black-, white- or redcurrants and gooseberries 0810 40 Cranberries, bilberries and other fruits of the genus Vaccinium 2. The following Article 3b is inserted: ‘Article 3b Eligibility 1. For the purpose of Article 44(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, the following shall be considered as eligible hectares for the establishment and use of the payment entitlements: (a) the areas planted with short rotation coppice (CN code ex 0602 90 41), Miscanthus sinensis (CN code ex 0602 90 51) or Phalaris arundicea (Reed canary grass) between 30 April 2004 and 10 March 2005; (b) the areas planted with short rotation coppice (CN code ex 0602 90 41), Miscanthus sinensis (CN code ex 0602 90 51) or Phalaris arundicea (Reed canary grass) before 30 April 2004 and leased or acquired, between 30 April 2004 and 10 March 2005, in view of applying for the single payment scheme. 2. For the purpose of Article 51 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, set-aside land planted with permanent crops used for the purposes referred to in Article 55(b) of that Regulation and land planted with permanent crops and which are also subject to an application for the aid for energy crops provided for in Article 88 of that Regulation shall be considered as eligible hectares for the use of, respectively, set-aside entitlements and payment entitlements. 3. For the purpose of Article 54(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, set-aside land which was planted with permanent crops, to be used for the purposes referred to in Article 6(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1251/1999 (6) and which was granted the area payment referred to in Article 2(2) of that Regulation for 2003 shall be considered as eligible hectares for the use of set-aside entitlements referred to in Article 53 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003. 4. Without prejudice to Article 51 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, for the purpose of Article 54(2) of that Regulation, land which was planted with multiannual crops, at the date provided for the area aid applications for 2003, shall be considered as eligible hectares for the use of set-aside entitlements referred to in Article 53 of that Regulation. 5. Without prejudice to Article 60 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, where a Member State makes use of the option referred to in Article 59 of that Regulation, (a) for the purpose of Article 63(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 set-aside land which was planted with permanent crops, to be used for the purposes referred to in Article 6(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1251/1999 and which was granted the area payment referred to in Article 2(2) of that Regulation for 2003, shall be considered as eligible hectares for the establishment of set-aside entitlements; (b) for the purpose of Article 63(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 land which is planted with permanent crops used for the purposes referred to in Article 55(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 shall be considered as eligible hectares for the establishment of set-aside entitlements; (c) for the purpose of Article 59(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 land planted with permanent crops and which is also subject to an application for the aid for energy crops provided for in Article 88 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 shall be considered as eligible hectares for the establishment of payment entitlements; (d) for the purpose of Article 59(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 land planted with multiannual crops, shall be considered as eligible hectares for the establishment of payment entitlements. 6. The farmers concerned by the application in 2005 of paragraphs 2 to 5 of this Article may modify their single application within four weeks starting from 19 October 2005 or a date to be fixed by the Member States concerned. 3. Article 48a is amended as follows: 1. Paragraph 4 is replaced by the following text: ‘Any reference to Articles 58 and 59 or 58(1) and 59(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 in Article 3b and Chapters 6 and 7 of this Regulation shall be construed as a reference to Article 71e of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003’. 2. Paragraph 6 is replaced by the following text: ‘Any reference to Article 60 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 in Article 3b, Article 8(2), Article 9(1)(e), Article 41 and Article 50a of this Regulation shall be construed as a reference to Article 71g of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003’. 3. Paragraph 7 is replaced by the following text: ‘Any reference to Article 63(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 in Articles 39, 43 and 48b of this Regulation shall be construed as a reference to Article 71j(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003’. 4. Paragraph 8 is replaced by the following text: ‘Articles 3a, 3b(1), (3) and (4), 7, 10, 12 to 17, 27, 28, 30, 31, 31a, 40, 42, 45 to 46 and 49 shall not apply’. 5. A new Paragraph 10 is inserted as follows: ‘Any reference to Article 59(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 in Article 3b of this Regulation shall be construed as a reference to Article 71f(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003’. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. It shall apply from 1 January 2005. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 18 October 2005.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 20 June 2005 amending Decision 92/452/EEC as regards embryo collection teams in New Zealand and the United States of America (notified under document number C(2005) 1812) (Text with EEA relevance) (2005/450/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Directive 89/556/EEC of 25 September 1989 on animal health conditions governing intra-Community trade in and importation from third countries of embryos of domestic animals of the bovine species (1), and in particular Article 8(1) thereof, Whereas: (1) Commission Decision 92/452/EEC of 30 July 1992 establishing lists of embryo collection teams and embryo production teams approved in third countries for export of bovine embryos to the Community (2) provides that Member States are only to import embryos from third countries where they have been collected, processed and stored by embryo collection teams listed in that Decision. (2) New Zealand has requested that amendments should be made to the list as regards entries for that country, notably the deletion of seven centres and amendments to the addresses of three centres. Furthermore, New Zealand has changed the lettering in the approval number of centres. (3) The United States of America have requested that amendments should be made to the list as regards entries for that country, notably the addition of one centre and amendments to the addresses of three centres. (4) New Zealand and the United States of America have provided guarantees regarding compliance with the appropriate rules set out in Directive 89/556/EEC and the embryo collection teams concerned have been officially approved for exports to the Community by the veterinary services of those countries. (5) Decision 92/452/EEC should therefore be amended accordingly. (6) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 The Annex to Decision 92/452/EEC is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Decision. Article 2 This Decision shall apply from 24 June 2005. Article 3 This Decision is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 20 June 2005.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1937/2003 of 31 October 2003 determining the world market price for unginned cotton THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Protocol 4 on cotton, annexed to the Act of Accession of Greece, as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1050/2001(1), Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1051/2001 of 22 May 2001 on production aid for cotton(2), and in particular Article 4 thereof, Whereas: (1) In accordance with Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1051/2001, a world market price for unginned cotton is to be determined periodically from the price for ginned cotton recorded on the world market and by reference to the historical relationship between the price recorded for ginned cotton and that calculated for unginned cotton. That historical relationship has been established in Article 2(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1591/2001 of 2 August 2001(3), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1486/2002(4). Where the world market price cannot be determined in this way, it is to be based on the most recent price determined. (2) In accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1051/2001, the world market price for unginned cotton is to be determined in respect of a product of specific characteristics and by reference to the most favourable offers and quotations on the world market among those considered representative of the real market trend. To that end, an average is to be calculated of offers and quotations recorded on one or more European exchanges for a product delivered cif to a port in the Community and coming from the various supplier countries considered the most representative in terms of international trade. However, there is provision for adjusting the criteria for determining the world market price for ginned cotton to reflect differences justified by the quality of the product delivered and the offers and quotations concerned. Those adjustments are specified in Article 3(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1591/2001. (3) The application of the above criteria gives the world market price for unginned cotton determined hereinafter, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The world price for unginned cotton as referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1051/2001 is hereby determined as equalling EUR 35,867/100 kg. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 November 2003. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 31 October 2003.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2333/96 of 5 December 1996 amending Regulation (EC) No 2051/96 laying down certain detailed rules for granting of assistance for the export of beef and veal which may benefit from a special import treatment in Canada and amending Regulation (EC) No 1445/95 THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 of 27 June 1968 on the common organization of the market in beef and veal (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2222/96 (2), and in particular Articles 9 and 13 thereof, Whereas Commission Regulation (EC) No 2051/96 (3) lays down certain detailed rules for export of beef to Canada in particular by providing for a quarterly management of certificates; whereas in the light of the Canadian rules of implementation of the WTO tariff quota for beef certain provisions of Commission Regulations (EC) No 2051/96 and (EC) No 1445/95 (4), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2051/96, should be amended; Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Beef and Veal, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 Article 1 (1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2051/96 is replaced by the following: '1. This Regulation establishes certain detailed rules of application in respect of exports to Canada of 5 000 tonnes per calendar year of beef and veal of Community origin, fresh, chilled or frozen, qualifying for special treatment.` Article 2 Commission Regulation (EC) No 1445/95 is hereby amended as follows: 1. Article 12 a (6) is replaced by the following: '6. Licence applications may be lodged only in the first five days of each month.`; 2. in the last sentence of Article 12 a (8) the word 'quarter` shall be replaced by the word 'month.`; 3. Article 12 a (9) is replaced by the following: '9. Licences shall be issued on the 21 st day of each month at the latest.` Article 3 This Regulation enters into force on the seventh day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. It shall apply from 1 January 1997. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 5 December 1996.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 19 July 1996 on the Community's financial contribution to a programme for the control of organisms harmful to plants and plant products in Madeira for 1996 (Only the Portuguese text is authentic) (96/491/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 of 15 June 1992 introducing specific measures in respect of certain agricultural products for the benefit of the Azores and Madeira (1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2537/95 (2), and in particular Article 33 (3) thereof, Whereas Commission Decision 93/522/EEC (3) defines what measures are eligible for Community financing as regards programmes for the control of organisms harmful to plants and plant products in the French overseas departments, the Azores and Madeira; Whereas specific agricultural production conditions in Madeira call for particular attention, and action must be taken or reinforced as regards crop production, in particular the phytosanitary aspects for this region; Whereas the action to be taken or reinforced on the phytosanitary side is particularly costly; Whereas the programme of action is to be presented to the Commission by the relevant Portuguese authorities; whereas this programme specifies the objectives to be achieved, the measures to be carried out, their duration and their cost so that the Community may contribute to financing them; Whereas the Community's financial contribution may cover up to 75 % of eligible expenditure, protective measures for bananas excluded; Whereas the technical information provided by Portugal has enabled the Standing Committee on Plant Health to analyse the situation accurately and comprehensively; Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plant Health, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 The Community's financial contribution to the official programme for the control of organisms harmful to plants and plant products on the Island of Madeira presented for 1996 by the relevant Portuguese authorities is hereby approved. Article 2 The official programme is made up of three sub-programmes: 1. a sub-programme for the autocidal control of the fruit fly (Ceratitis capitata Wied); 2. a sub-programme for the control of the white citrus fly (Aleurothrixus floccosus Maskell); 3. a sub-programme for the control of (Trialeurodes vaporariorum Westwood). Article 3 The Community contribution to financing the programme is limited to 75 % maximum of expenditure on eligible measures as defined by Commission Decision 93/522/EEC, and is set for 1996 at ECU 600 000 out of total expenditure of ECU 800 000 (VAT excluded). The schedule of programme costs and their financing is set out as Annex I to this Decision. In the case when the total eligible expenditure for 1996 presented by Portugal would be less than the forecast amount of ECU 800 000, the Community's contribution would be reduced in proportion. The Community reimbursement will be made in accordance with the provisions of the first paragraph of this Article and the financial rate of the ecu on 1 March 1996, i.e. ECU 1 = Esc 196,329. Article 4 A first instalment of ECU 250 000 shall be paid to Portugal immediately after the official notification of the present Decision. Article 5 The Community assistance shall relate to the eligible measures associated with the operations covered by the programme set up in Portugal by provisions for which the necessary financial resources have been committed between 1 January and 30 September 1996. The final date for payments in connection with the operations shall be 31 December 1995, and non-compliance without justification of delay shall entail loss of entitlement to Community financing. In the case where a request for extension of the final date for payment is necessary, the responsible official authorities have to introduce this request before the final date and present the justification concerning this request. Article 6 Specific provisions relating to the financing of the programme, provisions on compliance with Community policies and the information to be provided to the Commission by Portugal are set out in Annex II. Article 7 Public contracts in connection with investments covered by this Decision must be awarded in compliance with Community law, in particular the Directives coordinating procedures for awarding public works and supply contracts, and Articles 30, 52 and 59 of the EC Treaty. Article 8 This Decision is addressed to the Portuguese Republic. Done at Brussels, 19 July 1996.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1538/2003 of 29 August 2003 fixing the maximum aid for concentrated butter for the 297th special invitation to tender opened under the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EEC) No 429/90 THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 806/2003(2), and in particular Article 10 thereof, Whereas: (1) In accordance with Commission Regulation (EEC) No 429/90 of 20 February 1990 on the granting by invitation to tender of an aid for concentrated butter intended for direct consumption in the Community(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 124/1999(4), the intervention agencies are opening a standing invitation to tender for the granting of aid for concentrated butter; Article 6 of that Regulation provides that in the light of the tenders received in response to each special invitation to tender, a maximum amount of aid is to be fixed for concentrated butter with a minimum fat content of 96 % or a decision is to be taken to make no award; the end-use security must be fixed accordingly. (2) In the light of the tenders received, the maximum aid should be fixed at the level specified below and the end-use security determined accordingly. (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 For the 297th special invitation to tender under the standing invitation to tender opened by Regulation (EEC) No 429/90, the maximum aid and the amount of the end-use security shall be as follows: TABLE Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 30 August 2003. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 29 August 2003.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 609/2006 of 19 April 2006 amending Regulation (EC) No 1374/2005 as regards the quantity covered by the standing invitation to tender for the export of barley held by the Slovak intervention agency 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 6 thereof, Whereas: (1) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2131/93 (2) lays down the procedure and conditions for the disposal of cereals held by intervention agencies. (2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1374/2005 (3) has opened a standing invitation to tender for the export of 64 016 tonnes of barley held by the Slovak intervention agency. (3) Slovakia has informed the Commission of its intervention agency’s intention to increase by 26 366 tonnes the quantity put out to tender for export. In view of the market situation, the request made by Slovakia should be granted. (4) Regulation (EC) No 1374/2005 should therefore be amended. (5) 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 Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 1374/2005 is replaced by the following: ‘Article 2 The invitation to tender shall cover a maximum of 90 382 tonnes of barley for export to third countries with the exception of Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Liechtenstein, Mexico, Romania, Serbia and Montenegro (4), Switzerland and the United States of America. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 19 April 2006.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1511/2004 of 25 August 2004 fixing the import duties in the rice sector THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 of 22 December 1995 on the common organisation of the market in rice (1), Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1503/96 of 29 July 1996 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 as regards import duties in the rice sector (2), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof, Whereas: (1) Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 provides that the rates of duty in the Common Customs Tariff are to be charged on import of the products referred to in Article 1 of that Regulation. However, in the case of the products referred to in paragraph 2 of that Article, the import duty is to be equal to the intervention price valid for such products on importation and increased by a certain percentage according to whether it is husked or milled rice, minus the cif import price provided that duty does not exceed the rate of the Common Customs Tariff duties. (2) Pursuant to Article 12(3) of Regulation (EC) No 3072/95, the cif import prices are calculated on the basis of the representative prices for the product in question on the world market or on the Community import market for the product. (3) Regulation (EC) No 1503/96 lays down detailed rules for the application of Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 as regards import duties in the rice sector. (4) The import duties are applicable until new duties are fixed and enter into force. They also remain in force in cases where no quotation is available from the source referred to in Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1503/96 during the two weeks preceding the next periodical fixing. (5) In order to allow the import duty system to function normally, the market rates recorded during a reference period should be used for calculating the duties. (6) Application of Regulation (EC) No 1503/96 results in an adjustment of the import duties as set out in the Annexes to this Regulation, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The import duties in the rice sector referred to in Article 11(1) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 are fixed in Annex I to this Regulation on the basis of the information given in Annex II. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 26 August 2004. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 25 August 2004.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) N° 2460/87 of 4 August 1987 on the application of Decision N° 1/87 of the EEC-Finland Joint Committee modifying the limits expressed in ECU in Article 8 of Protocol 3 concerning the definition of the concept of originating products and methods of administrative cooperation 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 Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Finland (1), signed on 5 October 1973, entered into force on 1 January 1974; Whereas, by virtue of Article 28 of Protocol 3 concerning the definition of the concept of originating products and methods of administrative cooperation, which forms an integral part of the said Agreement, the Joint Committee adopted Decision N° 1/87 further amending Article 8 of that Protocol; Whereas it is necessary to apply that Decision in the Community, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 Decision N° 1/87 of the EEC-Finland Joint Committee shall apply in the Community. The text of the Decision is attached to this Regulation. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 4 August 1987.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 2321/90 of 24 July 1990 on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Cape Verde on fishing off Cape Verde THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 43 thereof, Having regard to the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal, and in particular Article 155 (2) (b) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1), Whereas the Community and Cape Verde have negotiated and initialled an Agreement on fishing which provides fishing opportunities for Community fishermen in waters over which Cape Verde has sovereignty or jurisdiction; Whereas, pursuant to Article 155 (2) (b) of the Act of Accession, it is for the Council to determine the procedures appropriate to take into consideration all or part of the interests of the Canary Islands when it adopts decisions, case by case, particularly with a view to the conclusion of fisheries agreements with third countries; whereas the case in point calls for the said procedures to be determined; Whereas it is in the Community's interest to approve this Agreement, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Cape Verde on fishing off Gape Verde is hereby approved on behalf of the Community. The text of the Agreement is attached to this Regulation. Article 2 With a view to taking into consideration the interests of the Canary Islands, the Agreement referred to in Article 1 and, in so far as is necessary for its application, the provisions of the common fisheries policy relating to the conservation and management of fishery resources shall also apply to vessels which sail under the flag of Spain, which are recorded on a permanent basis in the registers of the relevant authorites at local level (‘registros de base’) in the Canary Islands, under the conditions specified in Note 6 to Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1135/88 of 7 March 1988 concerning the definition of the concept of ‘originating products’ and methods of administrative cooperation in trade between the customs territory of the Community, Ceuta and Melilla and the Canary Islands (2), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3902/89 (3). Article 3 The President of the Council shall give the notification provided for in Article 14 of the Agreement (4). Article 4 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 July 1990.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COUNCIL DECISION of 8 June 2004 establishing the Visa Information System (VIS) (2004/512/EC) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 66 thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament, Whereas: (1) The Seville European Council on 21 and 22 June 2002 considered the establishment of a common identification system for visa data as a top priority and called for its introduction, as soon as possible, in the light of a feasibility study and on the basis of guidelines adopted by the Council on 13 June 2002. (2) On 5 and 6 June 2003 the Council welcomed the feasibility study, as presented by the Commission in May 2003, confirmed the objectives for a VIS as set out in the guidelines and invited the Commission to continue its preparatory work on the development of the VIS in cooperation with Member States on the basis of a centralised architecture, taking into account the option of a common technical platform with the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II). (3) The European Council in Thessaloniki on 19 and 20 June 2003 deemed it necessary that, following the feasibility study, orientations should be determined as soon as possible, with regard to the planning for the development of the VIS, and the appropriate legal basis which will permit its establishment, and the engagement of the necessary financial means. (4) This Decision constitutes the required legal basis to allow for the inclusion in the general budget of the European Union of the necessary appropriations for the development of VIS and the execution of that part of the budget. (5) 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 (1). The committee assisting the Commission should meet, as necessary, in two distinct formations depending on the agenda. (6) Since the objective of this Decision, namely the development of a common VIS, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale and impact of the action, be better achieved at 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 Decision does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve this objective. (7) This Decision respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. (8) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is therefore not bound by it or subject to its application. As this Decision builds upon the Schengen acquis under the provisions of Title IV of Part Three of the Treaty establishing the European Community, Denmark shall, in accordance with Article 5 of the said Protocol, decide within a period of six months after the Council has adopted this Decision whether or not it will transpose it into its national law. (9) As regards Iceland and Norway, this Decision constitutes a development of provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning the association of those two States with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis (2), which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point B of Council Decision 1999/437/EC (3) on certain arrangements for the application of that Agreement. (10) An arrangement has to be made to allow representatives of Iceland and Norway to be associated with the work of committees assisting the Commission in the exercise of its implementing powers. Such an arrangement has been contemplated in the Exchange of Letters between the Community and Iceland and Norway (4), annexed to the abovementioned Agreement. (11) This Decision constitutes a development of provisions of the Schengen acquis in which the United Kingdom does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2000/365/EC of 29 May 2000 concerning the request of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to take part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis (5); the United Kingdom is therefore not taking part in its adoption and is not bound by it or subject to its application. (12) This Decision constitutes a development of provisions of the Schengen acquis in which Ireland does not take part, in accordance with Council Decision 2002/192/EC of 28 February 2002 concerning Ireland's request to take part in some of the provisions of the Schengen acquis (6); Ireland is therefore not taking part in its adoption and is not bound by it or subject to its application, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 1. A system for the exchange of visa data between Member States, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Visa Information System’ (VIS), is hereby established, which shall enable authorised national authorities to enter and update visa data and to consult these data electronically. 2. The Visa Information System shall be based on a centralised architecture and consist of a central information system, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Central Visa Information System’ (CS-VIS), an interface in each Member State, hereinafter referred to as ‘the National Interface’ (NI-VIS) which shall provide the connection to the relevant central national authority of the respective Member State, and the communication infrastructure between the Central Visa Information System and the National Interfaces. Article 2 1. The Central Visa Information System, the National Interface in each Member State, and the communication infrastructure between the Central Visa Information System and the National Interfaces shall be developed by the Commission. 2. The national infrastructures shall be adapted and/or developed by the Member States. Article 3 The measures necessary for the development of the Central Visa Information System, the National Interface in each Member State, and the communication infrastructure between the Central Visa Information System and the National Interfaces shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 5(2) where they concern matters other than those listed in Article 4. Article 4 The measures necessary for the development of the Central Visa Information System, the National Interface in each Member State, and the communication infrastructure between the Central Visa Information System and the National Interfaces concerning the following matters shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 5(3): (a) the design of the physical architecture of the system including its communication network; (b) technical aspects which have a bearing on the protection of personal data; (c) technical aspects which have serious financial implications for the budgets of the Member States or which have serious technical implications for the national systems of the Member States; (d) the development of security requirements, including biometric aspects. Article 5 1. The Commission shall be assisted by the committee set up by Article 5(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2424/2001 of 6 December 2001 on the development of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) (7). 2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Articles 4 and 7 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall apply. The period laid down in Article 4(3) of Decision 1999/468/EC shall be set at two months. 3. 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 two months. 4. The Committee shall adopt its Rules of Procedure. Article 6 The Commission shall submit a yearly progress report to the European Parliament and the Council concerning the development of the Central Visa Information System, the National Interface in each Member State, and the communication infrastructure between the Central Visa Information System and the National Interfaces, and for the first time by the end of the year after signing the contract for the development of the VIS. Article 7 This Decision shall apply from the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. Article 8 This Decision is addressed to the Member States in accordance with the Treaty establishing the European Community. Done at Luxembourg, 8 June 2004.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COUNCIL DECISION of 26 February 1990 concerning the conclusion of a Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Austria in the field of medical and health research (90/129/EEC) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 130q (2) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1), In cooperation with the European Parliament (2), Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (3), Whereas by Decision 87/551/EEC (4), the Council adopted a research and development coordination programme of the Community in the field of medical and health research (1987 to 1991); whereas Article 7 (2) of that Decision authorizes the Commission to negotiate Agreements with the non- member States participating in European cooperation in the field of scientific and technical research (COST) with a view to associating them wholly or partly with that programme; Whereas by Decision 87/177/EEC (5), the Council approved the conclusion on behalf of the European Economic Community of the Framework Agreement for scientific and technical cooperation between the European Communities and, among others, the Republic of Austria; Whereas the Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Austria in the field of medical and health research should be approved, HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS: Article 1 The Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Austria in the field of medical and health research is hereby approved on behalf of the Community. The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision. Article 2 The President of the Council shall carry out, on behalf of the Community, the notification as provided for in Article 7 of the Agreement (6). Done at Brussels, 26 February 1990.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 1929/88 of 29 June 1988 amending Regulation (EEC) No 3978/87 allocating, for 1988, certain catch quotas between Member States for vessels fishing in the Norwegian exclusive economic zone and the fishing zone around Jan Mayen THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 170/83 of 25 January 1983 establishing a Community system for the conservation and management of fishery resources (1), as amended by the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal (2), and in particular Article 11 thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Whereas catch quotas in Norwegian waters for 1988 were allocated by Regulation (EEC) No 3978/87 (3); Whereas the Community and the Kingdom of Norway have held further consultations regarding an additional catch quota of sand-eel in the Nowegian fishing zone for Community vessels in 1988; Whereas it is for the Community, pursuant to Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 170/83, to determine the conditions subject to which these additional catch quotas may be used by Community fishermen; Whereas, to ensure efficient management of the catch possibilities available, they should be shared among the Member States by means of quotas in accordance with Article 4 of the said Regulation; Whereas the fishing activities covered by this Regulation are subject to the relevant control measures provided for by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2241/87 of 23 July 1987 establishing certain control measures for fishing activities (4), HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The figures in Annex II to Regulation (EEC) No 3978/87 relating to sand-eel in ICES area IV are hereby replaced by those set out in the Annex to this Regulation. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Luxembourg, 29 June 1988.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1939/2000 of 12 September 2000 establishing unit values for the determination of the customs value of certain perishable goods THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 955/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council(2), Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1602/2000(4), and in particular Article 173 (1) thereof, Whereas: (1) Articles 173 to 177 of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 provide that the Commission shall periodically establish unit values for the products referred to in the classification in Annex 26 to that Regulation. (2) The result of applying the rules and criteria laid down in the abovementioned Articles to the elements communicated to the Commission in accordance with Article 173 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 is that unit values set out in the Annex to this Regulation should be established in regard to the products in question, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The unit values provided for in Article 173 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 are hereby established as set out in the table in the Annex hereto. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 15 September 2000. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 12 September 2000.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1273/96 of 1 July 1996 concerning the stopping of fishing for Greenland halibut by vessels flying the flag of a Member State 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 amended by Regulation (EC) No 2870/95 (2), and in particular Article 21 (3) thereof, Whereas Council Regulation (EC) No 3076/95 of 22 December 1995 allocating, for 1996, certain catch quotas between Member States for vessels fishing in the Norwegian exclusive economic zone and the fishing zone around Jan Mayen (3), provides for Greenland halibut quotas for 1996; Whereas, in order to ensure compliance with the provisions relating to the quantitative limitations on catches of stocks subject to quotas, it is necessary for the Commission to fix the date by which catches made by vessels flying the flag of a Member State are deemed to have exhausted the quota allocated; Whereas, according to the information communicated to the Commission, catches of Greenland halibut in the waters of ICES division I, IIa, b (Norwegian waters North of 62° N) by vessels flying the flag of a Member State or registered in a Member State have reached the quota allocated for 1996, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 Catches of Greenland halibut in the waters of ICES division I, IIa, b (Norwegian waters North of 62° N) by vessels flying the flag of a Member State or registered in a Member State are deemed to have exhausted the quota allocated to the Community for 1996. Fishing for Greenland halibut in the waters of ICES division I, IIa, b (Norwegian waters North of 62° N) by vessels flying the flag of Member State or registered in a Member State is prohibited, as well as the retention on board, the transhipment and the landing of such stock captured by the above mentioned vessels after the date of entry into force of this Regulation. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 1 July 1996.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 9 July 2007 amending Decision 2006/415/EC concerning certain protection measures in relation to highly pathogenic avian influenza of the subtype H5N1 in poultry in Germany (notified under document number C(2007) 3413) (Text with EEA relevance) (2007/483/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Directive 89/662/EEC of 11 December 1989 concerning veterinary checks in intra-Community trade with a view to the completion of the internal market (1), and in particular Article 9(3) thereof, Having regard to Council Directive 90/425/EEC of 26 June 1990 concerning veterinary and zootechnical checks applicable in intra-Community trade in certain live animals and products with a view to the completion of the internal market (2), and in particular Article 10(3) thereof, Whereas: (1) Commission Decision 2006/415/EC of 14 June 2006 concerning certain protection measures in relation to highly pathogenic avian influenza of the subtype H5N1 in poultry in the Community and repealing Decision 2006/135/EC (3) lays down certain protection measures to be applied in order to prevent the spread of that disease, including the establishment of areas A and B following a suspected or confirmed outbreak of the disease. (2) Germany has notified the Commission of an outbreak of H5N1 in a backyard poultry holding on its territory and has taken the appropriate measures as provided for in Decision 2006/415/EC, including the establishment of areas A and B as provided for in Article 4 of that Decision. (3) The Commission has examined those measures in collaboration with Germany, and is satisfied that the borders of Areas A and B established by the competent authority in that Member State are at a sufficient distance to the actual location of the outbreak. Areas A and B in Germany can therefore be confirmed and the duration of that regionalisation fixed. (4) Decision 2006/415/EC should therefore be amended accordingly. (5) The measures provided for in this Decision should be reviewed at the next meeting of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 The Annex to Decision 2006/415/EC is amended in accordance with the text in the Annex to this Decision. Article 2 This Decision is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 9 July 2007.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1673/2002 of 19 September 2002 fixing the maximum export refund on common wheat in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 899/2002 THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in cereals(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1666/2000(2), Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1163/2002(4), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1324/2002(5), and in particular Article 4 thereof, Whereas: (1) An invitation to tender for the refund on exportation of common wheat to all third countries with the exclusion of Poland, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 899/2002(6), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1520/2002(7). (2) Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 provides that the Commission may, on the basis of the tenders notified, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92, decide to fix a maximum export refund taking account of the criteria referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95. In that case a contract is awarded to any tenderer whose bid is equal to or lower than the maximum refund. (3) The application of the abovementioned criteria to the current market situation for the cereal in question results in the maximum export refund being fixed at the amount specified in Article 1. (4) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 For tenders notified from 13 to 19 September 2002, pursuant to the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 899/2002, the maximum refund on exportation of common wheat shall be EUR 0,00/t. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 20 September 2002. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 19 September 2002.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION DECISION of 3 May 1989 concerning the areas referred to in Article 3 (2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 328/88 instituting a Community programme to assist the conversion of steel areas (Resider programme) (Only the Portuguese text is authentic) (89/326/EEC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 328/88 of 2 February 1988 instituting a Community programme to assist the conversion of steel areas (Resider programme) (1), and in particular Article 3 (2) thereof, Whereas the said Article stipulates that the Community programme shall apply to areas which satisfy the criteria specified in Article 3 (1) and the thresholds set out in Article 4 (1) of that Regulation; Whereas the Member States concerned must submit an application for approval of the areas to which the Community programme is to apply; whereas Portugal has submitted such an application in respect of the area of Setubal; Whereas that area satisfies the abovementioned criteria, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 The area of Setubal is hereby found to satisfy the criteria in Article 3 (1) and the thresholds in Article 4 (1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 328/88. The Community programme instituted by that Regulation shall therefore apply to that area. Article 2 This Decision is addressed to the Portuguese Republic. Done at Brussels, 3 May 1989.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 79/2010 of 27 January 2010 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION, Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, 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 28 January 2010. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 27 January 2010.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 659/85 of 14 March 1985 amending 1985 quantitative limits concerning economic outward processing traffic applicable to certain textile products of category 73 originating in Yugoslavia THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3588/82 of 23 December 1982 on rules for imports of certain textile products originating in Yugoslavia (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1475/84 (2), and in particular Article 8 (2) thereof, Whereas Annex VII to Regulation (EEC) No 3588/82 establishes Community quantitative limits specified to outward processing trade (OPT) imports for 1983 to 1986; whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3561/84 (3) provides for the allocation of these limits between Member States for the year 1985; Whereas, for 1985, an additional need has arisen for reimports of products of category 73 after processing in Yugoslavia; Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Textile Committee 'Yugoslavia'. HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The quantitative limits concerning economic outward processing traffic for textile products originating in Yugoslavia as set out in Annex B to Regulation (EEC) No 3561/84 are hereby amended as laid down in the Annex hereto. 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, 14 March 1985 F

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2613/95 of 9 November 1995 amending Regulations (EC) No 1305/95 and (EC) No 1739/95 adopting certain transitional measures relating to the entry price arrangements applicable to cucumbers for processing and sour cherries respectively THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3290/94 of 22 December 1994 on the adjustments and transitional arrangements required in the agricultural sector in order to implement the agreements concluded during the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations (1), and in particular Article 3 (1) thereof, Whereas the Annexes to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1305/95 (2), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2124/95 (3), and (EC) No 1739/95 (4) lay down entry prices for the tariff classification of cucumbers for processing and sour cherries respectively; whereas the same conversion rates should be used for converting those new entry prices into national currency as are used for other entry prices pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (5), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 (6) and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1482/95 of 28 June 1995 determining as a transitional measure the conversion rates to be applied under the Common Customs Tariff to agricultural products and certain products obtained from the processing thereof (7); whereas, in order to avoid any ambiguity, the two Regulations concerned must be clarified; 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 The following paragraph is hereby added to Article 1 of Regulations (EC) No 1305/95 and (EC) No 1739/95: 'Entry prices and import duties shall be converted into national currency using the rate given in Article 18 of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 and, from 1 July 1995, the rate derogating therefrom pursuant to Article 1 (2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1482/95 (*). ` Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. At a trader's request, however, the competent authorities shall apply Article 1 from 1 May 1995 with respect to Regulation (EC) No 1305/95 and from 15 June 1995 with respect to Regulation (EC) No 1739/95. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 9 November 1995.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION DECISION of 15 December 1989 amending for the third time Decision 89/224/EEC recognizing certain parts of Belgium as being officially swine fever free (Only the French and Dutch texts are authentic) (90/3/EEC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Directive 80/1095/EEC of 11 November 1980 laying down conditions designed to render and keep the territory of the Community free from classical swine fever (1), as last amended by Directive 87/487/EEC (2), and in particular Article 7 (2) thereof, Having regard to Commission Decision 88/529/EEC approving the plan for the eradication of classical swine fever presented by the Kingdom of Belgium (3), Whereas the development of the disease situation has led the Belgian authorities, in conformity with their plan, to instigate measures which guarantee the protection and maintenance of the status of certain regions; Whereas, following a favourable development in the disease situation, the Commission adopted Decision 89/224/EEC (4), as last amended by Decision 89/553/EEC (5), recognizing certain parts of the territory of Belgium as officially swine fever free; Whereas no swine fever has been detected and vaccination against swine fever has been stopped for more than 15 months within the areas designated to be recognized as officially swine fever free; Whereas the status of the designated officially swine fever free regions will be maintained by the application of the measures foreseen in Article 7 (2) of Directive 80/1095/EEC; 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 the Annex to Commission Decision 89/224/EEC the indent is replaced by the following: '- The Provinces of East Flanders, West Flanders, Liege, Luxembourg, Namur, Brabant, Henegouwen and Limburg.' Article 2 This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Belgium. Done at Brussels, 15 December 1989.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COUNCIL DECISION of 27 November 1992 concerning the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Austria on the transit of goods by road and rail (92/577/EEC) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 75 thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1), Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (2), Whereas the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Austria on the transit of goods by road and rail can provide a solution to the various current problems of trans-Alpine goods traffic; whereas it is necessary to ensure the non-discriminatory development of transit so as to enable international trade to be conducted at the least possible cost to the public at large and to reduce to a minimum the administrative and technical obstacles which affect transit; Whereas these objectives must, at the same time, take account of respect for users' freedom of choice and aspects relating to road safety, protection of public health and the environment in Alpine regions; Whereas the objectives and the content of the Agreement fall within the scope of the common transport policy and the technical standards play their part in attaining these objectives; Whereas it is appropriate to lay down a procedure with a view to approving the administrative agreement provided for by the Agreement, HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS: Article 1 The Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Austria on the transit of goods by road and rail is hereby approved on behalf of the Community. The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision. Article 2 The President of the Council shall give the notification provided for in Article 24 of the Agreement (3). Article 3 The administrative agreement provided for in Article 24 (4) of the Agreement shall be approved in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 4 of this Decision. Article 4 The Commission shall be assisted by a committee composed of the representatives of the Member States and chaired by the Commission representative. Official Journal of the European Communities No L 373/5 21. 12. 92 The representative of the Commission shall submit to the committee a draft of the measures to be taken. The committee shall deliver its opinion on the draft within a time limit which the chairman may lay down according to the urgency of the matter. The opinion shall be delivered by the majority laid down in Article 148 (2) of the Treaty in the case of decisions which the Council is required to adopt on a proposal from the Commission. The votes of the representatives of the Member States within the Commission shall be weighted in the manner set out in that Article. The chairman shall not vote. The Commission shall adopt the provisions envisaged if they are in accordance with the opinion of the committee. If the measures envisaged are not in accordance with the opinion of the Committee, or if no opinion is delivered, the Commission shall, without delay, submit to the Council a proposal relating to the measures to be taken. The Council shall act by a qualified majority. If, on the expiry of a period of four weeks from the date of referral to the Council, the Council has not acted, the proposed measures shall be adopted by the Commission. Article 5 The Commission shall adopt the necessary measures for implementing the administrative agreement referred to in Article 3 in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 4. Done at Brussels, 27 November 1992.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COUNCIL DECISION of 22 December 2004 concerning the conclusion and the provisional application of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation amending the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Swiss Confederation of 22 July 1972 as regards the provisions applicable to processed agricultural products (2005/45/EC) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 133 in conjunction with Article 300(2) and Article 300(4) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Whereas: (1) The Council authorised the Commission to negotiate with the Swiss Confederation an Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation amending the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Swiss Confederation of 22 July 1972 as regards the provisions applicable to processed agricultural products. (2) By Council Decision of 20 October 2004 (1), and subject to its conclusion at a later date, the Agreement was signed on behalf of the Community on 26 October 2004. (3) The Agreement provides for its provisional application pending its entry into force. (4) The Agreement should be approved, HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS: Article 1 The Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation amending the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Swiss Confederation of 22 July 1972 as regards the provisions applicable to processed agricultural products is hereby approved on behalf of the Community. The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision. Article 2 The position to be taken by the Community as regards decisions or recommendations of the Joint Committee that are based on Article 7 of Protocol 2 to the Agreement shall be laid down by the Commission. Article 3 The President of the Council shall effect the notification provided for in Article 5(1) of the Agreement on behalf of the Community (2). Article 4 In accordance with Article 5(2) of the Agreement and pending its entry into force, the Agreement shall be applied on a provisional basis from 1 February 2005, provided that the implementation measures as defined in Article 5(4) of Protocol 2 are adopted at the same time. Article 5 This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union. Done at Brussels, 22 December 2004.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1188/85 of 7 May 1985 re-establishing the levying of customs duties on gramophone records and other sound or similar recordings falling within heading No 92.12, originating in Hong Kong, to which the preferential tariff arrangements set out in Council Regulation (EEC) No 3562/84 apply THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3562/84 of 18 December 1984 applying generalized tariff preferences for 1985 in respect of certain industrial products originating in developing countries (1), and in particular Article 13 thereof, Whereas, pursuant to Articles 1 and 10 of that Regulation, suspension of customs duties shall be accorded to each of the countries or territories listed in Annex III other than those listed in column 4 of Annex I, within the framework of the preferential tariff ceiling fixed in column 9 of Annex I; whereas, as provided for in Article 11 of that Regulation, as soon as the individual ceilings in question are reached at Community level, the levying of customs duties on imports of the products in question originating in each of the countries and territories concerned may at any time be re-established; Whereas, in the case of gramophone records and other sound or similar recordings falling within heading No 92.12, the individual ceiling was fixed at 3 468 600 ECU; whereas, on 3 May 1985, imports of these products into the Community originating in Hong Kong 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 Hong Kong, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 As from 11 May 1985, the levying of customs duties, suspended pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3562/84 shall be re-established on imports into the Community of the following products originating in Hong Kong: 1.2 // // // CCT heading No // Description // // // 92.12 (NIMEXE code 92.12-all numbers) // Gramophone records and other sound or similar recordings; matrices for the production of records, prepared record blanks, film for mechanical sound recording, prepared tapes, wires, strips and like articles of a kind commonly used for sound or similar recording // // Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 7 May 1985.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1270/2003 of 17 July 2003 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), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 680/2002(2), 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(3), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 79/2003(4), 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(5). 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 18 July 2003. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 17 July 2003.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 265/2007 of 13 March 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 14 March 2007. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 13 March 2007.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 2445/93 of 1 September 1993 re-establishing the levying of customs duties on products of categories 47, 86 and 90 (order Nos 40.0470, 40.0860 and 40.0900), originating in China, to which the preferential tariff arrangements set out in Council Regulation (EEC) No 3832/90 apply THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3832/90 of 20 December 1990 applying generalized tariff preferences for 1991 in respect of textile products originating in developing countries (1), extended for 1993 by Regulation (EEC) No 3917/92 (2), and in particular Article 12 thereof, Whereas Article 10 of Regulation (EEC) No 3832/90 provides that preferential tariff treatment shall be accorded for 1993 for each category of products subjected in Annexes I and II thereto to individual ceilings, within the limits of the quantities specified in column 8 of Annex I and column 7 of Annex II, in respect of certain or each of the countries or territories of origin referred to in column 5 of the same Annexes; Whereas Article 11 of the abovementioned Regulation provides that the levying of customs duties may be re-established at any time in respect of imports of the products in question once the relevant individual ceilings have been reached at Community level; Whereas, in respect of products of category 47, 86 and 90 (order Nos 40.0470, 40.0860 and 40.0900) originating in China, the relevant ceiling amounts to three tonnes, 28 000 pieces and 15 tonnes respectively; Whereas on 15 May 1993 imports of the products in question into the Community, originating in China, a country covered by preferential tariff arrangements, reached and were charged against that ceiling; Whereas it is appropriate to re-establish the levying of customs duties for the products in question with regard to China, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 As from 6 September 1993 the levying of customs duties, suspended pursuant to Regulation (EEC) No 3832/90, shall be re-established in respect of the following products, imported into the Community and originating in China: /* Tables: see OJ */ 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 September 1993.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 192/2005 of 3 February 2005 fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar to certain third countries for the 18th partial invitation to tender issued within the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1327/2004 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 indent of Article 27(5) thereof, Whereas: (1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1327/2004 of 19 July 2004 on a standing invitation to tender to determine levies and/or refunds on exports of white sugar (2), for the 2004/2005 marketing year, requires partial invitations to tender to be issued for the export of this sugar to certain third countries. (2) Pursuant to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1327/2004 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) 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 18th partial invitation to tender for white sugar issued pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1327/2004 the maximum amount of the export refund shall be 40,889 EUR/100 kg. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 4 February 2005. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 3 February 2005.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Regulation (EC) No 19/2002 of 7 January 2002 suspending the preferential customs duties and re-establishing the Common Customs Tariff duty on imports of uniflorous (bloom) carnations originating in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4088/87 of 21 December 1987 fixing conditions for the application of preferential customs duties on imports of certain flowers originating in Cyprus, Israel, Jordan and Morocco and the West Bank and the Gaza Strip(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1300/97(2), and in particular Article 5(2)(b) thereof, Whereas: (1) Regulation (EEC) No 4088/87 lays down the conditions for applying a preferential duty on large-flowered roses, small-flowered roses, uniflorous (bloom) carnations and multiflorous (spray) carnations within the limit of tariff quotas opened annually for imports into the Community of fresh cut flowers. (2) Council Regulation (EC) No 747/2001(3) opens and provides for the administration of Community tariff quotas for certain products originating in Cyprus, Egypt, Israel, Malta, Morocco, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, Tunisia and Turkey, and providing detailed rules for extending and adapting these tariff quotas. (3) Commission Regulation (EC) No 17/2002(4) fixes the Community producer and import prices for carnations and roses for the application of the import arrangements. (4) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 700/88(5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2062/97(6), lays down the detailed rules for the application of the arrangements. (5) On the basis of prices recorded pursuant to Regulations (EEC) No 4088/87 and (EEC) No 700/88, it must be concluded that the conditions laid down in Article 2(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 4088/87 for suspension of the preferential customs duty are met for uniflorous (bloom) carnations originating in the West Bank and the Gaza strip; the Customs duty should be re-established. (6) The quota for the products in question covers the period 1 January to 31 December 2001. As a result, the suspension of the preferential duty and the reintroduction of the Common Customs Tariff duty apply up to the end of that period at the latest. (7) In between meetings of the Management Committee for Live Plants and Floriculture Products, the Commission must adopt such measures, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 For imports of uniflorous (bloom) carnations (CN code ex 0603 10 20 ) originating in the West Bank and the Gaza strip, the preferential customs duty fixed by Regulation (EC) No 747/2001 is hereby suspended and the Common Customs Tariff duty is hereby re-established. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 9 January 2002. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 7 January 2002.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Regulation (EC) No 2519/2000 of 16 November 2000 prohibiting fishing for herring by vessels flying the flag of France THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2846/98(2), and in particular Article 21(3) thereof, Whereas: (1) Council Regulation (EC) No 2742/1999 of 17 December 1999 fixing for 2000 the fishing opportunities and associated conditions for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Community waters and, for Community vessels, in waters where limitations in catch are required and amending Regulation (EC) No 66/98(3), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1902/2000(4), lays down quotas for herring for 2000. (2) In order to ensure compliance with the provisions relating to the quantity limits on catches of stocks subject to quotas, the Commission must fix the date by which catches made by vessels flying the flag of a Member State are deemed to have exhausted the quota allocated. (3) According to the information received by the Commission, catches of herring in the waters of ICES zones Vb (EC zones), VIaN(5) and VIb by vessels flying the flag of France or registered in France have exhausted the quota allocated for 2000. France has prohibited fishing for this stock from 17 October 2000. This date should be adopted in this Regulation also, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 Catches of herring in the waters of ICES zones Vb (EC waters), VIaN and VIb by vessels flying the flag of France or registered in France are hereby deemed to have exhausted the quota allocated for 2000. Fishing for herring in the waters of ICES zones Vb (EC waters), VIaN and VIb by vessels flying the flag of France or registered in France is hereby prohibited, as are the retention on board, transhipment and landing of this stock caught by the above vessels after the date of application of this Regulation. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. It shall apply from 17 October 2000. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 16 November 2000.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1895/2002 of 24 October 2002 opening an invitation to tender for the subsidy on consignments of husked long-grain B rice to Réunion THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 of 22 December 1995 on the common organisation of the market in rice(1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 411/2002(2), and in particular Article 10(1) thereof, Whereas: (1) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2692/89(3), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1453/1999(4), lays down detailed rules for exports of rice to Réunion. (2) Examination of the supply situation on the island of Réunion shows a shortage of rice. In view of the availability of rice on the Community market, Réunion should be allowed to obtain supplies on that market. Because of the special situation of Réunion, it is appropriate to limit the quantities to be delivered and, therefore, to fix the amount of the subsidy by tendering procedure. (3) Pursuant to Article 14 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2808/98 of 22 December 1998 laying down detailed rules for the application of the agrimonetary system for the euro in agriculture(5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2452/2000(6), amounts quoted in tenders submitted in response to invitations to tender organised under an instrument forming part of the common agricultural policy must be expressed in euro. Article 5(1) of that Regulation provides that in such cases the operative event for the agricultural exchange rate is the final day for the submission of tenders. Paragraphs 3 and 4 of that Article specify the operative events applicable to advances and securities. (4) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 1. A tendering procedure is hereby opened for the subsidy for consignments of husked long-grain B rice falling within CN code 1006 20 98, referred to in Article 10(1) of Regulation (EC) No 3072/95, to Réunion. 2. The tendering procedure referred to in paragraph 1 shall be open until 26 June 2003. During that period, weekly invitations to tender shall be made for which the date for submission of tenders shall be set out in the notice of invitation to tender. 3. The tendering procedure shall take place in accordance with the provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 2692/89 and this Regulation. Article 2 A tender shall be admissible only if it covers a quantity of at least 50 tonnes but not more than 3000 tonnes. Article 3 The security referred to in Article 7(3)(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 2692/89 shall be EUR 30 per tonne. Article 4 The subsidy documents issued in the context of this tendering procedure shall, for the purposes of determining their period of validity, be considered as having been issued on the final day of the period for the submission of tenders. Article 5 Tenders must reach the Commission via the Member States not later than one and a half hours after expiry of the deadline for weekly submission of tenders as laid down in the notice of invitation to tender. They must be transmitted in accordance with the table given in the Annex. If no tenders are submitted, Member States shall inform the Commission accordingly within the same deadline as that given in the proceeding paragraph. Article 6 The time laid down for submitting tenders shall be Belgian time. Article 7 1. On the basis of tenders submitted, the Commission shall decide in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 22 of Regulation (EC) No 3072/95: - either to fix a maximum subsidy, - or not to take any action on the tenders. 2. Where a maximum subsidy is fixed, an award shall be made to the tenderer or tenderers whose tenders are at or below the maximum subsidy level. Article 8 The deadline for submission of tenders for the first partial invitation to tender shall expire on 7 November 2002 at 10 a.m. The final date for submission of tenders shall be 26 June 2003. Article 9 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 2002.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 311/2006 of 22 February 2006 amending Regulation (EC) No 27/2006 as regards the quantity covered by the standing invitation to tender for the export of common wheat held by the German intervention agency 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 6 thereof, Whereas: (1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 27/2006 (2) has opened a standing invitation to tender for the export of 500 000 tonnes of common wheat held by the German intervention agency. (2) The invitations to tender made since this invitation to tender was opened have almost completely exhausted the quantities made available to the economic operators. In view of the strong demand recorded in recent weeks and the market situation, new quantities should be made available and the German intervention agency should be authorised to increase by 500 000 tonnes the quantity put out to tender for export. (3) Regulation (EC) No 27/2006 should be amended accordingly. (4) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 27/2006 is hereby replaced by the following: ‘Article 2 The invitation to tender shall cover a maximum of 1 000 000 tonnes of common wheat for export to third countries with the exception of Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Liechtenstein, Romania, Serbia and Montenegro (3) and Switzerland. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 22 February 2006.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Regulation (EC) No 2275/2002 of 19 December 2002 fixing the maximum export refund on common wheat in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 899/2002 THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in cereals(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1666/2000(2), Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1163/2002(4), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1324/2002(5), and in particular Article 4 thereof, Whereas: (1) An invitation to tender for the refund on exportation of common wheat to all third countries with the exclusion of Poland, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 899/2002(6), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1520/2002(7). (2) Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 provides that the Commission may, on the basis of the tenders notified, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92, decide to fix a maximum export refund taking account of the criteria referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95. In that case a contract is awarded to any tenderer whose bid is equal to or lower than the maximum refund. (3) The application of the abovementioned criteria to the current market situation for the cereal in question results in the maximum export refund being fixed at the amount specified in Article 1. (4) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 For tenders notified from 13 to 19 December 2002, pursuant to the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 899/2002, the maximum refund on exportation of common wheat shall be EUR 4,00/t. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 20 December 2002. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 19 December 2002.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1784/2001 of 10 September 2001 determining the world market price for unginned cotton THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Protocol 4 on cotton, annexed to the Act of Accession of Greece, as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1050/2001(1), Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1051/2001 of 22 May 2001 on production aid for cotton(2), and in particular Article 4 thereof, Whereas: (1) In accordance with Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1051/2001, a world market price for unginned cotton is to be determined periodically from the price for ginned cotton recorded on the world market and by reference to the historical relationship between the price recorded for ginned cotton and that calculated for unginned cotton. That historical relationship has been established in Article 2(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1591/2001 of 2 August 2001(3). Where the world market price cannot be determined in this way, it is to be based on the most recent price determined. (2) In accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1051/2001, the world market price for unginned cotton is to be determined in respect of a product of specific characteristics and by reference to the most favourable offers and quotations on the world market among those considered representative of the real market trend. To that end, an average is to be calculated of offers and quotations recorded on one or more European exchanges for a product delivered cif to a port in the Community and coming from the various supplier countries considered the most representative in terms of international trade. However, there is provision for adjusting the criteria for determining the world market price for ginned cotton to reflect differences justified by the quality of the product delivered and the offers and quotations concerned. Those adjustments are specified in Article 3(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1591/2001. (3) The application of the above criteria gives the world market price for unginned cotton determined hereinafter, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The world price for unginned cotton as referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1051/2001 is hereby determined as equalling EUR 21,130/100 kg. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 11 September 2001. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 10 September 2001.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 13 August 1999 accepting undertakings offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceedings concerning imports of steel wire ropes and cables originating in the People's Republic of China, Hungary, India, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Poland, South Africa and Ukraine (notified under document number C(1999) 2701) (1999/572/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), amended by Regulation (EC) No 905/98(2), and in particular Article 8(1) thereof, After consulting the Advisory Committee, Whereas: (1) By Regulationg (EC) No 362/99(3), the Commission imposed provisional anti-dumping duties on imports in the Community of steel ropes and cables originating in the People's Republic of China, Hungary, India, Mexico, Poland, South Africa and Ukraine and accepted price undertakings offered by certain exporting producers in Poland and Hungary. (2) Following the adoption of the provisional anti-dumping measures, in accordance with Article 8(6) of Regulation 384/96 (hereinafter referred to as the "Basic Regulation"), the Commission continued the investigation of dumping, injury and Community interest. The definitive findings and conclusions of the investigation are set out in Council Regulation (EC) No 1796/1999 of 12 August 1999 imposing a definitive duty on imports of steel ropes and cables originating in the People's Republic of China, Hungary, India, Mexico, Poland, South Africa and Ukraine and terminating the anti-dumping proceeding in respect of imports originating in the Republic of Korea(4). (3) The investigation confirmed the provisional findings of injurious dumping relating to imports originating in the People's Republic of China, Hungary, India, Mexico, Poland, South Africa and Ukraine. (4) Subsequent to the adoption of provisional anti-dumping measures, one exporting producer in India, the exporting producers in Mexico and South Africa and the exporting producer in the Ukraine, in conjunction with the Ukrainian authorities, have also offered price undertakings in accordance with Article 8(1) of the Basic Regulation. (5) The terms of these undertakings, in particular the minimum prices for sales for exports to the Community set out therein, ensure that the injurious effects of dumpins as established in the framework of the present anti-dumping proceedings are eliminated. (6) In addition, since the exporting producers and the Ukrainian authorities have undertaken to submit detailed and regular sales information to the Commission and not to enter into direct or indirect compensatory agreements with their customers in the Community, is has been concluded that the observance of the undertakings can effectively be monitored by the Commission. (7) As regards the undertakings offered by the Ukrainian exporting producer, the export licensing system to be set up by the Ukrainian government, which will operate for the duration of the undertaking, will ensure that all imports into the EU covered by the undertaking will be in line with the provisions contained therein. (8) In view of the above, the undertakings offered by one exporting producer in India, by the exporting producers in Mexico and South Africa as well as by the exporting producer in Ukraine are considered acceptable and the investigation can, therefore, be terminated with respect to the exporting producers concerned. (9) In the event of a breach or withdrawal of the undertaking, a definitive anti-dumping duty may be imposed pursuant to Article 8(9) and (10) of the Basic Regulation, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 1. The undertakings offered by the producers mentioned below, in the framework of the anti-dumping proceedings concerning imports of steel ropes and cables originating in the People's Republic of China, Hungary, India, Mexico, Poland, South Africa and Ukraine are hereby accepted. TABLE 2. The investigation in connection with the anti-dumping proceedings referred to in paragraph 1 is hereby terminated with regard to the parties named in that paragraph. Done at Brussels, 13 August 1999.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 378/1999 of 19 February 1999 supplementing the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 2400/96 on the entry of certain names in the 'Register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications` provided for in Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 of 14 July 1992 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1068/97 (2), and in particular Article 6(3) and (4) thereof, Whereas, pursuant to Article 5 of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92, Greece, Spain and France have sent the Commission applications for the registration of a number of names as designations of origin; Whereas, pursuant to Article 6(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92, those applications have been found to meet all the requirements laid down therein and in particular to contain all the information required pursuant to Article 4 thereof; Whereas no statement of objection has been received by the Commission pursuant to Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 for any of the names given in the Annex hereto following their publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities (3); Whereas those names should therefore be entered in the 'Register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications` and hence be protected throughout the Community as protected designations of origin; Whereas the Annex hereto supplements the Annex to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2400/96 (4), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 38/1999 (5), HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The names in the Annex hereto are added to the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 2400/96 and entered as protected designations of origin (PDO) in the 'Register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications` provided for in Article 6(3) of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92. 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, 19 February 1999.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 13 December 2007 on the continuation in the year 2008 of Community comparative trials and tests on seeds and propagating material of Asparagus officinalis under Council Directive 2002/55/EC started in 2005 (Text with EEA relevance) (2007/853/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Directive 2002/55/EC of 13 June 2002 on the marketing of vegetable seed (1), Having regard to Commission Decision 2005/5/EC of 27 December 2004 setting out the arrangements for Community comparative trials and tests on seeds and propagating material of certain plants of agricultural and vegetable species and vine under Council Directives 66/401/EEC, 66/402/EEC, 68/193/EEC, 92/33/EEC, 2002/54/EC, 2002/55/EC, 2002/56/EC and 2002/57/EC for the years 2005 to 2009 (2), and in particular Article 3 thereof, Whereas: (1) Decision 2005/5/EC sets out the arrangements for the comparative trials and tests to be carried out under Council Directive 2002/55/EC as regards Asparagus officinalis from 2005 to 2009. (2) Trials and tests carried out in 2005, 2006 and 2007 should be continued in 2008, HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS: Sole Article Community comparative trials and tests which began in 2005 on seeds and propagating material of Asparagus officinalis shall be continued in 2008 in accordance with Decision 2005/5/EC. Done at Brussels, 13 December 2007.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 14 December 2004 concerning the acquisition of land belonging to Aircraft Services Lemwerder by the municipality of Lemwerder (notified under document number C(2004) 4748) (Only the German text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) (2005/664/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 88(2) thereof, Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 62(1)(a) thereof, Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to those provisions (1) and having regard to their comments, Whereas: I. PROCEDURE (1) The Commission has received a complaint concerning a land transaction between the municipality of Lemwerder and Aircraft Services Lemwerder (hereinafter ASL). According to the complaint, the acquisition contained an aid element in favour of ASL. The Commission requested information from Germany by letter of 30 January 2003. Germany replied by letter of 18 March 2003. (2) By decision of 17 September 2003, the Commission initiated the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of the notified measure. The case was registered under number C 56/2003. The decision was communicated to Germany by letter of 18 September 2003 and was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). The Commission did not receive any comments from third parties. (3) The German authorities commented on the Commission decision by letters of 14 and 18 November 2003. The Commission requested further information by letters of 13 January and 10 May 2004. Germany replied by letters of 13 February and 31 August 2004. A meeting between representatives of the Commission and of Germany and the person who made a property valuation that had been submitted took place on 13 October 2004. Following the meeting, Germany sent additional information by letter of 23 November 2004. II. MEASURE 1. Recipient (4) ASL (in Lemwerder, Lower Saxony, near Bremen) provides services, such as aircraft maintenance. In 2002/2003 it had around 700 employees and a turnover of EUR 53,4 million. Until 1993 it formed part of Deutsche Aerospace AG (DASA). When DASA wanted to close it down, the Land of Lower Saxony took measures to secure ASL’s survival. These measures were approved by the Commission by Decision 97/753/EC of 12 March 1997 concerning State aid for Aircraft Services Lemwerder (ASL) (3). On 1 January 2004 EADS acquired a majority holding of 51 % in the company. Since then, ASL has been undergoing a restructuring process. Civil aircraft maintenance activities will be discontinued. In future, repair and maintenance work on military aircraft components (Transall C-160, Tornado) and the assembly of military components (Eurofighter, A400M) will be carried out there. The workforce in 2006 is planned to total 210 employees (4). 2. Description of the measure (5) The municipality bought land that ASL Lemwerder did not need. According to Germany, the price included a volume discount. Date Land Surface area (m2) Price/m2 (DEM/EUR) Total price (DEM/EUR) 28.6.2000 West and central sites 241 643 (97 828 and 143 815) […] (5)/[…] […]/[…] 16.8.2001 South site 37 328 1,50/0,77 55 992/28 628 (6) Developing the ‘west’ site involved a total cost of EUR 1 355 040. For several reasons, it was assumed that the cost for the ‘central’ site would be some 10 % lower. (7) The municipality assumed that, after putting in place the necessary infrastructure, it would be able to sell the ‘west’ and ‘central’ sites for DEM […]/m2 (EUR […]/m2). This is a relatively high value, reflecting the quality of the sites: next to ASL's landing strip, direct link to the rail network and access to ASL's port facilities on the Weser. In 1999 and 2002 land was sold for the same price in the neighbouring area of Edenbüttel, although access by rail, air and river was more difficult. Germany provided two further valuations for land to the north of ASL that was reckoned to have a comparable value. (8) For developing the ‘west’ site, the municipality received aid of EUR 562 200, with 50 % co-financing under the ERDF Objective 2. It contributed from its own resources an amount of EUR 132 125. The proceeds from the sale was put at EUR […]. (9) The municipality and the Lower Saxony Development Agency (NILEG) are looking primarily to the aerospace industry but have not imposed any restriction as regards potential buyers. In 2000 the property market collapsed. Since the second half of 2002 demand for this type of land has picked up but, so far, no land has been sold. III. REASONS FOR INITIATING THE PROCEDURE (10) In its decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty, the Commission doubted whether the price paid by the municipality corresponded to the market price. The land was sold as bare land, and ASL or any private or public buyer would have to invest a substantial amount in order to be able to sell it as developed land. In the absence of a valuation of the bare land, the Commission made an estimate by subtracting the cost of development from the value of the developed land, taking into account the expected delay in selling the land in plots, the financial cost of the project and the land required for infrastructure. This estimate suggests that the value of the undeveloped land is significantly below the price paid by the municipality. In addition, the Commission doubted whether a private investor would have started developing the land at all, taking into account also the overall market situation in the direct vicinity of ASL. Furthermore, it was doubted whether a private investor would have received similar aid to that received by the municipality. As Germany has not provided any justification for the acquisition of the ‘south’ site, this transaction could constitute a further aid element. (11) The Commission doubted whether possible aid in the land transactions would be compatible with the common market. There are, for example, no investment or restructuring conditions attached to the land sale and, according to Germany, the company was not in difficulties. Decision 97/753/EC had approved the aid on condition that the authorities did not grant ad hoc aid for a period of five years. Any aid for the land transactions would, however, have been granted during this five year period. IV. COMMENTS FROM GERMANY (12) For Germany, the appropriate starting point for the market value of the bare land would be the value of comparable plots of bare land that took account of the locational and infrastructure links. A new land valuation of the bare land was submitted. It was based on a direct comparison with other plots of bare land within a radius of 80 km and took account of the differing quality of the plots. The expert visited the land in question and the other plots, taking particular account of the infrastructure links that could be developed. He arrived at a value of EUR […] per m2. Since this is higher than the price paid by the municipality, there could be no aid. In Germany’s view, there is no need to take into account any delays in reselling the plots of land, the costs of development and aid. (13) The public authorities, furthermore, have long term considerations when it comes to developing industrial land, such as tax revenue from companies setting up there. The State aid rules would make it impossible for municipalities to achieve such objectives if they had to sell at a specific price. In addition, municipalities could, it is true, organise a bidding procedure when they wish to sell land but not when they wish to acquire a plot of land that fits into their development plan. The seller could here find itself in a very favourable negotiating position. A transaction under such conditions would not depend on aid being granted to the seller. (14) It was also claimed that the estimate by the Commission was flawed. A private investor, for example, is not subject to the same rules as a municipality. Under Section 127 et seq. of the Federal Building Code (Baugesetzbuch), municipalities have to bear at least 10 % of eligible development costs. In addition, the costs of ordnance disposal were unforeseen. Consequently, at the time of the purchase, such costs could not influence the price. Moreover, the Commission communication on State aid elements in sales of land and buildings by public authorities (6) (the communication) does not require additional infrastructure costs to be included in the valuation. In addition, it allows a higher price (e.g. with a 5 % tolerance rule) if certain conditions are met. (15) Whether a private investor would have developed the land is irrelevant here. The development of land is a public task and ranks as a service of general economic interest. A municipality develops land only if, as in the present case, it expects sufficient demand. The Lower Saxony Economic Research Institute had predicted bottlenecks in the supply of land. The innovative restructuring of the entire area, from the link with the new Weser tunnel and the planned coastal motorway to the envisaged deep water port in Wilhelmshaven, has boosted the demand for business sites. The Lower Saxony Investment and Promotion Agency also explained that the sites in question were, therefore, particularly valuable and that the municipality would be missing out on a ‘unique selling point’ if it did not buy the land. And so it recommended that the municipality buy the land, especially as this would enable it to exploit the entire area between the Bahnhof Altenesch industrial estate and the ASL site. (16) As regards acquisition of the ‘south’ site, Germany notes that this plot is a necessary component of the overall plan as it will serve as the replacement and exchange area for the infrastructure to develop the ‘central’ site. V. ASSESSMENT (17) Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty provides that ‘any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods, shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the common market’. In this case, it has to be ascertained whether the land transaction has favoured ASL in a selective manner. This would be the case if the municipality had paid a price above the market value. (18) The Commission agrees with Germany that the relevant market price is the price for the bare land. The method of calculating the value of the bare land by deducting the development costs from the value of the developed land is a standby method should a more direct valuation not be available. Consequently, the Commission has assessed carefully the new valuation of the bare land submitted by Germany. (19) If public authorities wish to buy a specific plot of land, they must deal with the owner. Organising an unconditional bidding procedure is not a solution. Although the principles in Section II.1 of the communication regarding sale through an unconditional bidding procedure are not applicable in the present case, those in Section II.2 can be applied to a certain extent. (20) The report was drafted by an independent expert in conformity with point II.2(a) of the communication. No orders were given to the expert and his independence was guaranteed by his public appointment and swearing in. For the rest, he is active as a certified expert on behalf of the Commission and the Court of Justice of the European Communities. He is particularly competent in valuing land in the area concerned. Although the valuation is dated 6 November 2003, i.e. after the sale, it can be accepted in the context of this procedure. The Commission considers that the method applied by the expert, which takes account of the value of other plots and of the differing quality, is appropriate. It assessed the report in detail, and in particular the size and nature of the plots that were used in the comparison, the way in which potential contamination was taken into account, the independent nature of the expert, the meaning of specific references to infrastructure links, the type of soil, and the method used for calculating the final result. The prices of the relevant plots range from EUR 16 to EUR 36 per m2. The Commission notes that the calculation of the final result of EUR […] per m2 was perhaps not entirely correct but, in any event, alternative calculations would give a higher value. On the basis of this assessment, the Commission comes to the conclusion that the value of EUR […] per m2 may be taken as a rough indication of the market value of the bare land at the time of the sale. In any event, on the basis of the valuation, the Commission can rule out the possibility that the market value is lower than the actual price for which the land was sold, i.e. EUR […] per m2. (21) The Commission notes that in the present case the municipality did not buy the land in the interests of ASL but intended to develop and sell the land in accordance with its integrated planning and on the basis of wider policy considerations (see recital 15). This is illustrated by the ERDF grant (see recital 8). The choice of precisely this land belonging to ASL is consistent with the political considerations and is attributable to its unique infrastructure links, as confirmed by the Lower Saxony Investment and Promotion Agency. (22) The Commission acknowledges that, for this price, a private developer would not be able to buy the bare land, to develop it, to provide the required infrastructure and to sell the developed land at a profit. Some of the arguments put forward by Germany, e.g. the legal framework applicable to municipalities, may explain this. A further assessment is, however, not necessary since, given the basic conditions of this case, the two conclusions referred to above, firstly that the municipality did not buy the land at a price above the market price and secondly that it did not buy the land in the interests of ASL but in accordance with its integrated planning and on the basis of wider political considerations, are sufficient for it to be stated that no specific advantage was conferred on ASL. The remaining doubts expressed in the Commission decision initiating the procedure are no longer relevant. (23) As regards the acquisition of the ‘south’ site, the Commission can accept Germany’s arguments. Moreover, any aid in this connection would, under no circumstances, exceed the de minimis threshold of EUR 100 000. VI. CONCLUSION (24) The Commission concludes that the municipality of Lemwerder acquired ASL’s land at a price that was not above the market price. Accordingly, no advantage was conferred on the seller and thus no State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty was granted, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 The land transaction between the municipality of Lemwerder and Aircraft Services Lemwerder does not contain any elements of State aid pursuant to Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty. Article 2 This Decision is addressed to the Federal Republic of Germany. Done at Brussels, 14 December 2004.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING DECISION of 19 January 2010 authorising the Portuguese Republic to apply a measure derogating from Articles 168, 193 and 250 of Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax (2010/39/EU) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 113 thereof, Having regard to Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (1), and in particular Article 395(1) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission, Whereas: (1) The Portuguese Republic (hereinafter referred to as Portugal) was authorised by Council Decision 2004/738/EC (2) to apply until 31 December 2009 a special optional scheme for the taxation of doorstep sales, whereby, firstly, by way of derogation from Article 21(1)(a) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes - Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (3), any firm operating in this sector which has been authorised to apply this scheme is liable for the value added tax (VAT) payable on goods supplied by its resellers to final consumers. Secondly, by way of derogation from Article 22 of the said Directive, the resellers are exempt from the obligations laid down in that Article for those goods supplied. In order to obtain such an authorisation, the firm must derive its entire turnover from doorstep sales by resellers working in their own name and on their own account. Moreover, all products sold by the firm must appear in a pre-established list of the prices applicable at the final consumption stage and the firm must sell its products direct to resellers who, in turn, sell direct to final consumers. (2) By letter registered by the Secretariat-General of the Commission on 30 June 2009, Portugal requested an extension of this special scheme for derogating from Articles 193 and 250 of Directive 2006/112/EC and, by additional letter registered by the Secretariat-General of the Commission on 9 September 2009, requested that resellers, by way of derogation from Article 168 of Directive 2006/112/EC, should not be allowed to deduct the VAT payable on the goods covered by the derogation. (3) In accordance with Article 395(2) of Directive 2006/112/EC, the Commission informed the other Member States of that request, by letter of 27 October 2009. By letter of 29 October 2009, the Commission notified Portugal that it had all the necessary information. (4) This special scheme has the effect of conferring on duly authorised firms, rather than numerous travelling salesmen, the right to deduct VAT payable or paid by these resellers on the goods these firms have supplied to them, and making the firms liable for the VAT payable on the supply of these goods to the final consumers by the resellers. These authorised firms are also responsible for fulfilling the corresponding obligations to submit a VAT return and pay VAT, from which their resellers are exempt. (5) This special scheme therefore ensures that the VAT collected at the retail sale stage on sales of products coming from these firms is actually paid to the Treasury, thereby helping to prevent tax fraud. It also benefits the administration by simplifying the arrangements for collecting VAT and reduces the resellers obligations in relation to VAT. (6) The derogation will not alter the amount of VAT collected at the stage of final consumption and will not have a negative effect on the European Union’s own resources obtained from VAT, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 Portugal is hereby authorised to apply a special scheme for the taxation of doorstep sales that contains provisions derogating from Directive 2006/112/EC. Firms whose total turnover is derived from doorstep sales made by resellers acting in their own name and on their own account may request authorisation from the administration to apply the special scheme provided the following conditions are met: (a) all products sold by the firm appear in a pre-established list of the prices applicable at the final consumption stage; (b) the firm sells its products direct to resellers who, in turn, sell direct to final consumers. Article 2 The firms authorised to apply this special scheme shall be entitled, by way of derogation from Article 168 of Directive 2006/112/EC, to deduct the VAT payable or paid by their resellers for the goods which they have supplied to them and shall be liable, by way of derogation from Article 193 of the said Directive, for the VAT payable on the supply of these goods to the final consumers by their resellers. Article 3 The resellers who obtain their supplies from a firm authorised to apply this special scheme shall be exempt from the obligation to submit a VAT return, set out in Article 250 of Directive 2006/112/EC, in relation to the goods which they have received from that firm and the supply of those goods to final consumers. That obligation shall be fulfilled by the authorised firm. Article 4 This Decision shall take effect on the date of its notification to the Portuguese Republic. It shall apply from 1 January 2010 until 31 December 2012. Article 5 This Decision is addressed to the Portuguese Republic. Article 6 This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union. Done at Brussels, 19 January 2010.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 29 April 1991 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 (149th derogation) (91/257/ECSC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, Having regard to High Authority recommendation 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 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 Council Decision 90/672/ECSC (3) as amended by Decision 90/673/ECSC (4) 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 90/672/ECSC. Article 2 This Decision is addressed to the Member States. It shall apply from 1 January 1991 until 31 December 1991. Done at Brussels, 29 April 1991.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1168/97 of 26 June 1997 extending the provisional anti-dumping duties on imports of sacks and bags made of polyethylene or polypropylene originating in India, Indonesia and Thailand THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (1), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2331/96 (2), and in particular Article 7 thereof, Whereas Commission Regulation (EC) No 45/97 (3) imposed provisional anti-dumping duties on imports of sacks and bags made of polyethylene or polypropylene originating in India, Indonesia and Thailand; Whereas examination of the facts has not yet been completed and the Commission has informed the exporters known to be concerned of its intention to propose an extension of the validity of the provisional duties for an additional period of three months; Whereas exporters representing a significant percentage of the trade involved did not object upon notification by the Commission; After consulting the Advisory Committee, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The validity of the provisional anti-dumping duties on imports of sacks and bags made of polyethylene or polypropylene originating in India, Indonesia and Thailand imposed by Regulation (EC) No 45/97 is hereby extended for a period of three months and shall expire on 15 October 1997. It shall cease to apply if, before this date, the Council adopts definitive measures or the proceeding is terminated pursuant to Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 384/96. 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, 26 June 1997.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

***** COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 2025/87 of 8 July 1987 re-establishing the levying of customs duties on outer garments, products of category 7 (code 40.0070), outer garments, products of category 26 (code 40.0260), women's or girls' suits and ensembles, products of category 74 (code 40.0740), originating in Brazil to which the preferential tariff arrangements of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3925/86 apply THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3925/86 of 16 December 1986 applying generalized tariff preferences for 1987 in respect of textile products originating in developing countries (1), and in particular Article 4 thereof, Whereas Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 3925/86 provides that preferential tariff treatment shall be accorded, for each category of products subjected to individual ceilings not allocated among the Member States, within the limits of the quantities specified in column 7 of its Annexes I or II, in respect of certain or each of the countries or territories of origin referred to in column 5 of the same Annexes; whereas Article 3 of that Regulation provides that the levying of customs duties may be re-established at any time in respect of imports of the products in question once the relevant individual ceilings have been reached at Community level, Whereas, in respect of outer garments, products of category 7 (code 40.0070), outer garments, products of category 26 (code 40.0260) and women's or girl's suits and ensembles, products of category 74 (code 40.0740) the relevant ceiling amounts to 18 600, 74 000 and 2 000 pieces respectively; whereas on 1 June 1987 imports of the products in question into the Community originating in Brazil a country covered by preferential tariff arrangements, reached and were charged against that ceiling; Whereas it is appropriate to re-establish the levying of customs duties for the products in question with regard to Brazil, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 As from 13 July 1987 the levying of customs duties, suspended in pursuance of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3925/86, shall be re-established in respect of the following products, imported into the Community and originating in Brazil: 1.2.3.4.5 // // // // // // Code // Category // CCT heading No // NIMEXE code (1986) // Description // // // // // // // (1) // (2) // (3) // (4) // // // // // // // // // // // 40.0070 // 7 // 60.05 ex A // // Outer garments and other articles, knitted or crocheted, not elastic or rubberized: // // // // // A. Outer garments and clothing accessories: // // // // // II. Other // // 7 // 61.02 ex B // 60.05-22, 23, 24, 25 // Women's girls' and infants' outer garments: // // // // // B. Other: // // // // 61.02-78, 82, 85 // Women's and girl's blouses, shirts and shirt-blouses, whether or not knitted or crocheted, of (1) OJ No L 373, 31. 12. 1986, p. 68. // // // // // // Code // Category // CCT heading No // NIMEXE code (1986) // Description // // // // // // // (1) // (2) // (3) // (4) // // // // // // // 40.0260 // 26 // 60.05 ex A // // Outer garments and other articles, knitted or crocheted, not elastic or rubberized: // // // // // A. Outer garments and clothing accessories: // // // // // II. Other: // // // 61.02 ex B // 60.05-46, 47, 48, 49 // Women's, girls' and infants' outer garments: // // // // // B. Other: // // // // 61.02-48, 52, 53, 54 // Women's or girls' dresses, of wool, of cotton or manmade fibres // // // // // // 40.0740 // 74 // 60.05 ex A // // Outer garments and other articles, knitted or crocheted, not elastic or rubberized: // // // // // A. Outer garments and clothing accessories: // // // // // II. Other: // // // // 60.05-70, 71, 72, 73 // Women's or girls' knitted or crocheted suits and ensembles, of wool, of cotton or man-made fibres, excluding ski suits // // // // // 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, 8 July 1987.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 21 December 1993 authorizing common financial arrangements in respect of individual programmes involving the closure of production capacity in the Community steel industry for heavy sections, hot-rolled wide coils and strip, and reversing-mill plate (Only the Spanish, Danish, German, English, French, Italian and Dutch texts are authentic) (94/6/ECSC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, and in particular point (a) of the first paragraph of Article 53 thereof, Having regard to the application made in Brussels on 14 July 1993 by the European Confederation of the Iron and Steel Industry (Eurofer) on behalf of 17 Community steel companies, After consulting the ECSC Consultative Committee and the Council, Whereas: I. THE FACTS For over a year the Community steel industry in general has had to contend with a steady loss of outlets and a decline in prices. There are several factors that explain this situation, which presents both cyclical and structural problems. The Commission communication to the Council and the European Parliament of 23 November 1992 stressed that overcapacity was one of the main causes of the structural problems. Three million tonnes of new capacity for the production of hot-rolled wide strip were added to existing capacity between 1986 and 1991. In order to identify the product categories and quantities that should be the subject of a reorganization, the Commission, in agreement with the Council, requested an appraisal of the reductions in production capacity needed following individual consultations with a large number of steel company managers. A report on the results of this appraisal was presented to the Council meeting of 25 February 1993, which was devoted to the restructuring of the steel industry. The Council announced that it would take prompt action as regards the procedures for monitoring State aid pursuant to Article 95 of the ECSC Treaty in cases where production capacity was to be closed down; it also noted that the report stressed that companies should consider making a greater effort to reduce production capacity and restore profitability. The Council welcomed the Commission's intention of examining the common financial arrangements provided for in point (a) of the first paragraph of Article 53 of the ECSC Treaty, as part of this effort. Through Eurofer three groups of companies producing three separate categories of products applied on 14 July 1993 for authorization for common financing arrangements in respect of individual and unilateral closure programmes involving production capacity for heavy sections, hot-rolled wide coils and strip, and reversing-mill plate. In the communication it sent to the Council and the ECSC Consultative Committee on 8 September 1993, pursuant to point (a) of the first paragraph of Article 53, the Commission asked the Council and the Committee for their views and informed them of the approach it was considering with a view to authorizing these arrangements. The arrangements are as follows: - the parties to the financial arrangements that neither reduce nor close down capacity (hereinafter referred to as 'the other parties') will contribute to the financing of the capacity reductions of the parties that opt for closure (hereinafter referred to as 'the parties opting for closure'); the aim is to reduce heavy section capacity by 2,5 million tonnes, hot-rolled wide coils and strip capacity by 6 million tonnes, and reversing-mill plate capacity by 2 million tonnes, - the unit amount chosen as the flat-rate reference for the industrial cost of an eligible capacity closure in the case of rolling mills is ECU 60 per tonne for coils, strip and reversing-mill plate, and ECU 40 per tonne for heavy sections. This may be supplemented, in the case of corresponding closure of upstream plant, by ECU 50 per tonne in the case of electric steelworks and by ECU 100 per tonne in the case of oxygenblown steelworks and other upstream plant, - the capacity eligible for a contribution to costs from the other parties will be determined on the basis of the production capacity declared in the Commission's questionnaires 2-61, the rate of capacity utilization in 1991 and 1992 and, where appropriate, the residual capacity of the same company, - plant closures will be deemed permanent when they are carried out in accordance with Article 8 of Commission Decision No 3010/91/ECSC (1). Any export of plant for reassembly at a location where exports to the Community market would be improbable could be deemed a permanent closure, - parties opting for closure will undertake, for five years, not to increase their residual capacity for the products in question that are covered by the financial arrangements on pain of a fine, payable to the other parties, of ECU 100 per tonne of increased capacity. For a period of five years, capacity increases stemming from maintenance work or current productivity investment are limited to 2 % per year. Investment in new technologies is not excluded where it replaces existing capacity without leading to a net increase in capacity, - individual capacity closure programmes will be notified to the Commission with details of the plant to be closed. In principle, closures should take place before 31 December 1994. II. ASSESSMENT Pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 2 of the ECSC Treaty, the Community is required to bring about conditions which will of themselves ensure the most rational distribution of production at the highest possible level of productivity. The mechanism described is necessary to achieve the tasks defined in Article 3 of the Treaty. To this end each individual capacity closure programme may, within the framework of the financing arrangements, help to improve the normal return on part of the capital invested in the steel industry since, provided that demand does not decline, the closure of some plant may lead to an improvement in the productivity of the remaining plant. As regards production, the Commission, pursuant to the third indent of the second paragraph of Article 5 and to Article 57 of the Treaty, gives preference to indirect means of action rather than to direct action. The Commission's action must be limited and may involve cooperation with the parties involved; from this point of view, the companies' offer to cooperate in the Community's anti-crisis policy, which is based on the principle of solidarity, is to be welcomed. The financial arrangements referred to in Article 53 constitute indirect action within the meaning of Article 57 in that they have only an indirect effect on supply and demand. This is especially true of financial arrangements whereby certain parties propose, on a voluntary basis, to finance jointly the individual capacity closure programme of other parties so as to offset the associated industrial costs and to reduce overcapacity for the relevant product in the Community. In order to be compatible with the Treaty rules, and in particular point (d) of Article 4 and Article 65, the programmes in question must not provide parties with an opportunity for joint price fixing or for concerted policies on output, investment or sales. To this end, participating companies should be subject to the following condition and obligations: 1. the companies must not, under the financial arrangements, establish any agreement or concerted practice or make unilateral declarations concerning prices, rates of capacity utilization or the level of production remaining under the control of each of the parties following the closures, and the parties to them will not, for the duration of these arrangements, participate in any concerted practice or agreement for exchanging information that could restrict competition without first informing the Commission; 2. each plant closure programme and the corresponding financial plan will have to be notified to the Commission for appraisal not later than three months after the Commission has notified the interested parties of this Decision. The Commission will check that plant closures comply with Article 8 of Decision No 3010/91/ECSC; 3. the Commission will have to be given access to any information necessary for checking the operation of each programme and of the financial arrangements. It will require activity reports to be submitted and may request additional information, particularly from the parties opting for closure. The Commission will monitor the situation at all times to ensure that the parties remain within the limits imposed by the authorization granted, and in particular that they comply with the condition and the obligations laid down therein, and that the measures taken by the parties do not have a more restrictive effect on competition than is required by their purpose or conflict with other provisions of the Treaty, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 Authorization is hereby given for the financial arrangements designed to ensure joint financing by companies operating in each of three product categories for plant closures leading to capacity reductions of 2,5 million tonnes for heavy sections, 6 million tonnes for hot-rolled wide coils and strip, and 2 million tonnes for reversing-mill plate. Article 2 Not later than three months from the date of notification of this Decision, each party opting for closure shall notify to the Commission, by means of the form set out in Annex II, its programme for the closure of production capacity for the relevant product. The Commission shall publish the essential particulars of the application. Unless the Commission informs the company concerned within two months of the date of publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities that there are doubts as to whether the programme complies with this Decision, the programme shall be deemed to have been authorized. If, after that period has elapsed, the Commission finds that the programme concerned, as amended by the parties, fulfils the conditions laid down in this Decision, it may grant express authorization for the programme. Article 3 The authorization shall be conditional on the companies refraining, under the financial arrangements, from establishing any agreement or concerted practice or making unilateral declarations concerning prices, rates of capacity utilization or the level of production remaining under the control of each of the parties following the closures, and on the parties refraining, for the duration of these arrangements, from participating in any concerted practice or agreement for exchanging information that could restrict competition without first informing the Commission. Article 4 The authorization shall be conditional on the Confederation and the companies referred to in Article 6, including their parent companies and subsidiaries under their control, agreeing to any checks that the Commission may deem necessary for the proper application of the financial arrangements and capacity closure programmes, in accordance with Article 8 of Decision No 3010/91/ECSC. Article 5 The Commission may withdraw the authorization granted for a capacity closure programme if it finds that the party opting for closure and the other parties to the financial arrangements have failed to comply with this Decision. Article 6 This Decision is addressed to the European Confederation of the Iron and Steel Industry (Eurofer) and to the companies concerned according to the list set out in Annex I. Done at Brussels, 21 December 1993.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 5 September 2007 setting up the stakeholder dialogue group in the areas of public health and consumer protection (2007/602/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Whereas: (1) Article 153 of the Treaty assigns the Community the task of ensuring a high level of consumer protection, as well as promoting their right to information and to organise themselves in order to safeguard their interests. In addition, consumer protection requirements are to be taken into account in defining and implementing other Community policies and activities. (2) In accordance with Protocol (No 30) on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality (1997) (1), the Commission should consult widely before proposing legislation. (3) The Commission undertook, in its White Paper on European Governance (2), to help reinforcing the culture of consultation and dialogue in the Community. (4) The Communication from the Commission entitled: Follow-up to the Green Paper ‘European Transparency Initiative’ (3) announced the intention to raise further the general level of quality of Commission's consultations. (5) With a view to advising the Commission on improving the stakeholder consultation process in the areas of public health and consumer protection, the Commission may need to call upon the expertise of specialists in an advisory body. (6) It is therefore necessary to set up a stakeholder dialogue group in the areas of public health and consumer protection and to define its tasks and its structure. (7) The stakeholder dialogue group should advise the Commission on best practice in the consultation process and also help it to better tailor its stakeholder involvement processes to stakeholders' needs in the areas of public health and consumer protection. (8) The stakeholder dialogue group should be composed of a balanced representation of stakeholders, from both industry (federations and individual companies) and non-governmental organisations, concerned by the different policy areas covered by the Directorate-General for Health and Consumer Protection. (9) Members of the stakeholder dialogue group should be appointed in such a way as to secure the highest standards of competence, a broad range of relevant expertise and, consistent with these criteria, the broadest possible geographic distribution within the Community, as well as a gender balance. (10) Rules on the disclosure of information by members of the stakeholder dialogue group should be provided for in this Decision. Such rules should be without prejudice to the Commission’s rules on security as set out in the Annex to Commission Decision 2001/844/EC, ECSC, Euratom of 29 November 2001 amending its internal Rules of Procedure (4). (11) Personal data relating to members of the stakeholder dialogue group should be processed in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data (5), HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS: Article 1 The stakeholder dialogue group The stakeholder dialogue group, hereinafter referred to as ‘the group’, is hereby established with effect from 10 October 2007. Article 2 Task 1. The Commission may consult the group on any matter relating to the general improvement of the stakeholder consultation process in the areas of public health and consumer protection. 2. The group's task is to: (a) consider the issue of stakeholder representativeness; (b) discuss the issue of stakeholder asymmetries and advise the Commission on possible methods for consultation which respect and adapt to the context of the stakeholders; (c) examine criteria for consultations, which need a more flexible and longer timeframe (more than eight weeks); (d) consider the role of national platforms in building the capacity of non-governmental organisations from the Member States which acceded to the Community in 2004 and 2007 and look into the role of Member States in going local. 3. The chairperson of the group may advise the Commission that it is desirable to consult the group on a specific question. Article 3 Membership - Appointment 1. The members of the group, ‘members’, shall be appointed by the Commission from specialists with competence in the areas referred to in Article 2(2) and who have responded to the call for an expression of interest. 2. The group shall be composed of a maximum of 20 members. 3. The members shall be appointed in a personal capacity and shall advise the Commission independently of any outside influence. 4. Members shall be appointed for a four-year non-renewable term of office. However, with regards to the first appointment of members only, half of the members shall be appointed for a two-year non-renewable term of office. Members shall remain in office until such time as they are replaced or their term of office ends. 5. Members who are no longer capable of contributing effectively to the group’s deliberations, who resign or who do not respect the conditions set out in paragraph 3 of this Article, or Article 287 of the Treaty may be replaced for the remainder of their term of office. 6. Members appointed in a personal capacity shall each year sign an undertaking to act in the public interest and a declaration indicating the absence or existence of any interest which may undermine their objectivity. 7. The names of members appointed in a personal capacity shall be published on the Internet site of the Health and Consumer Protection Directorate-General. The names of members shall be collected, processed and published in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001. Article 4 Operation 1. The group shall be chaired by the Commission. 2. In agreement with the Commission, sub-groups may be set up to examine specific questions under terms of reference established by the group. Such groups shall be dissolved as soon as their mandates are fulfilled. 3. The chairperson may ask experts or observers with specific competence on a subject on the agenda to participate in the group’s or sub-group’s deliberations if this is useful and/or necessary. 4. Information obtained by participating in the deliberations of a group or sub-group shall not be divulged if the Commission states that such information relates to confidential matters, without prejudice to the Annex to Decision 2001/844/EC, ECSC, Euratom. 5. The group and its sub-groups shall normally meet on Commission premises in accordance with the procedures and schedule established by it. The Commission shall provide secretarial services. Other Commission officials with an interest in the proceedings may attend meetings of the group and its sub-groups. 6. The group shall adopt its rules of procedure on the basis of the standard rules of procedure of the group of experts adopted by the Commission (6). 7. The Commission shall publish on the Internet site of the Health and Consumer Protection Directorate-General, in the original language of the document concerned, any summary, conclusion, or partial conclusion or working document of the group. Article 5 Meeting expenses The Commission shall reimburse travel and, where appropriate, subsistence expenses for members, experts and observers in connection with the group’s activities in accordance with the Commission’s rules on the compensation of external experts. The members, experts and observers shall not be remunerated for the services they render. Meeting expenses shall be reimbursed within the limits of the annual budget allocated to the group by the responsible Commission services. Done at Brussels, 5 September 2007.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION DECISION of 23 April 2007 fixing for the marketing year 2007/2008 the amounts of the aid for diversification and the additional aid for diversification to be granted under the temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry of the Community (notified under document number C(2007) 1717) (Only the Spanish, Czech, Greek, Italian, Latvian, Hungarian, Portuguese, Slovak, Slovenian, Swedish and Finnish texts are authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) (2007/278/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 of 20 February 2006 establishing a temporary scheme restructuring of the sugar industry in the Community and amending Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (1), Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 968/2006 of 27 June 2006 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 establishing a temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry in the Community (2), and in particular Article 13(1) thereof, Whereas: (1) By 31 March 2007, the Commission has to fix the amounts attributed to each Member State concerned for the aid for diversification provided for in Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 320/2006, the additional aid for diversification provided for in Article 7 of that Regulation and the transitional aid to certain Member States as provided for in Article 9 of that Regulation. (2) The amounts of the aid for diversification and additional aid for diversification are calculated on the basis of the tonnes of sugar quota renounced in the 2007/2008 marketing year in the Member State concerned, as provided for in Article 13(2) of Regulation (EC) No 968/2006, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 The amounts per Member State concerned of the aid for diversification and the additional aid for diversification provided for in Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 respectively, as fixed in respect of the quotas renounced in the 2007/2008 marketing year, are set out in the Annex to this Decision. Article 2 This Decision is addressed to the Czech Republic, the Hellenic Republic, the Kingdom of Spain, the Italian Republic, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Hungary, the Portuguese Republic, the Republic of Slovenia, the Slovak Republic and the Republic of Finland. Done at Brussels, 23 April 2007.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 289/94 of 9 February 1994 fixing for the 1994 marketing year the reference prices for cucumbers THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European 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 (EC) No 3669/93 (2), and in particular Article 27 (1) thereof, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3813/92 of 28 December 1992 on the unit of account and the conversion rates to be applied for the purposes of the common agricultural policy (3), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 3528/94 (4), and in particular Article 9 (1) thereof, Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3824/92 of 28 December 1992 laying down the prices and amounts fixed in ecus as a result of the monetary realignments (5), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1663/93 (6), and in particular Article 2 thereof, Whereas, under Article 23 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72, reference prices valid for the whole Community are to be fixed at the beginning of the marketing year; Whereas cucumbers are produced in such quantities in the Community that reference prices should be fixed for them; Whereas cucumbers harvested during a given crop year are marketed from January to December; Whereas the quantities harvested during January and the first 10 days of February and during the last 20 days of November and December are so small that there is no need to fix reference prices for all the year; whereas reference prices should be fixed only for the period 11 February up to and including 10 November; Whereas Article 23 (2) (b) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 stipulates that reference prices are to be fixed at the same level as for the preceding marketing year, adjusted, after deducting the standard cost of transporting Community products between production areas and Community consumption centres in the preceding year, by: - the increase in production costs for fruit and vegetables, less productivity growth, and - the standard rate of transport costs in the current marketing year; Whereas the resulting figure may nevertheless not exceed the arithmetic mean of producer prices in each Member State plus transport costs for the current year, after this amount has been increased by the rise in production costs less productivity growth; whereas the reference price may, however, not be lower than in the preceding marketing year; Whereas, to take seasonal variations into account, the year should be divided into several periods and a reference price fixed for each of these periods; Whereas producer prices are to correspond to the average of the prices recorded on the representative market or markets situated in the production areas where prices are lowest, during the three years prior to the date on which the reference price is fixed, for a home-grown product with defined commerial characteristics, being a product or variety representing a substantial proportion of the production marketed over the year or over part thereof and satisfying specified requirements as regards market preparation; whereas, when the average of prices recorded on each representative market is being calculated, prices which could be considered excessively high or excessively low in relation to normal price fluctuations on that market are to be disregarded; Whereas Community-produced cucumbers are grown mainly under glass; whereas the reference prices for the marketing year must therefore be fixed for a product of that type; whereas cucumbers imported from certain third countries during the same period will have been grown in the open; whereas, although such cucumbers may be classed in class I, their quality and price are not comparable with those of products grown under glass; whereas the prices for cucumbers not grown under glass should therefore be adjusted by a conversion factor; Whereas Regulation (EEC) No 3824/92 establishes a list of prices and amounts for the fruit and vegetables sector which are to be divided by a coefficient of 1,002583, fixing by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 537/93 (7), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1331/93 (8), as from the beginning of the 1993/94 marketing year; Whereas Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 3824/92 lays down that the resulting reduction in the prices and amounts for each sector concerned shall be specified and the level of such reduced prices fixed; whereas, however, this adjustment may not result in a reference price level below that of the preceding marketing year, in accordance with Article 23 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72; 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 1. For the 1994 marketing year, the reference prices for cucumbers (CN code 0707 00 11, 19), expressed in ecus per 100 kilograms net of packed products of class I, of all sizes, shall be as follows: - February (from 11 to 20): 144,61, (from 21 to 28): 122,42, - March: 112,14, - April: 92,76, - May: 76,12, - June: 63,76, - July: 48,28, - August: 48,65, - September: 57,62, - from 1 October to 10 November: 81,62. 2. For the purpose of calculating the entry price, the prices for cucumbers, not produced under glass, imported from third countries shall, after deduction of customs duties, be multiplied by the following conversion factors: - from 11 February to 30 September: 1,30, - from 1 October to 10 November: 1,00. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 11 February 1994. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 9 February 1994.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 3596/93 of 21 December 1993 fixing the standard values to be used in calculating the financial compensation and the advance pertaining thereto in respect of fishery products withdrawn from the market during the 1994 fishing year THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3759/92 of 17 December 1992 on the common organization of the market in fishery and aquaculture products (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1891/93 (2), and in particular Article 12 (6) thereof, Whereas Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 3759/92 provides for the payment of financial compensation to producers' organizations which intervene, on certain conditions, in respect of the products listed in Annex I (A) and (D) to that Regulation; whereas the amount of such financial compensation must be reduced by standard values in the case of products intended for purposes other than human consumption; Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1501/83 (3) specifies the ways in which the products withdrawn must be disposed of; whereas the value of such products must be fixed at a standard level for each of these modes of disposal, taking into account the average receipts which may be obtained from such disposal; Whereas, on the basis of the relevant information on this value, it should be fixed for the 1994 fishing year as shown in the Annex hereto; Whereas, pursuant to Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3902/92 (4), the body responsible for payment of the financial compensation is that of the Member State in which the producers' organization was recognized; Whereas the standard value deductible should therefore be the value applied in that Member State; Whereas the abovementioned provisions are equally applicable to the advance on the financial compensation provided for in Article 6 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 3902/92; Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Fishery Products, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The standard values to be used in calculating the financial compensation and the advance pertaining thereto in respect of products withdrawn by producers' organizations and used for purposes other than human consumption shall be for the 1994 fishing year as shown in the Annex hereto for each of the uses indicated therein. Article 2 The standard value to be deducted from the financial compensation and the advance pertaining thereto shall be that applied in the Member State in which the producers' organization was recognized. Article 3 This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 January 1994. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 21 December 1993.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}

Commission Regulation (EC) No 130/2002 of 24 January 2002 concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of rye issued in Regulation (EC) No 1005/2001 THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in cereals(1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1666/2000(2), Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals(3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 602/2001(4), and in particular Article 7 thereof, Whereas: (1) An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of rye to all third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1005/2001(5). (2) Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 allows the Commission to decide, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 and on the basis of the tenders notified, to make no award. (3) On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 a maximum refund should not be fixed. (4) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for cereals, HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 18 to 24 January 2002 in response to the invitation to tender for the refund for the export of rye issued in Regulation (EC) No 1005/2001. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 25 January 2002. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 24 January 2002.

{0: '100149', 1: '100160', 2: '100148', 3: '100147', 4: '100152', 5: '100143', 6: '100156', 7: '100158', 8: '100154', 9: '100153', 10: '100142', 11: '100145', 12: '100150', 13: '100162', 14: '100159', 15: '100144', 16: '100151', 17: '100157', 18: '100161', 19: '100146', 20: '100155'}

{'100149': 0, '100160': 1, '100148': 2, '100147': 3, '100152': 4, '100143': 5, '100156': 6, '100158': 7, '100154': 8, '100153': 9, '100142': 10, '100145': 11, '100150': 12, '100162': 13, '100159': 14, '100144': 15, '100151': 16, '100157': 17, '100161': 18, '100146': 19, '100155': 20}