Avis juridique important

|

31996D0072

96/72/EC: Commission Decision of 16 January 1996 terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports into certain regions of Germany of Portland cement originating in Poland, the Czech and Slovak Republics

Official Journal L 013 , 18/01/1996 P. 0027 - 0028

COMMISSION DECISION of 16 January 1996 terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports into certain regions of Germany of Portland cement originating in Poland, the Czech and Slovak Republics (96/72/EC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3283/94 of 22 December 1994 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1251/95 (2), and in particular Article 23 thereof,Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88 of 11 July 1988 on protection against dumped and subsidized imports from countries not members of the European Economic Community (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 522/94 (4), and in particular Article 9 thereof,After consulting the Advisory Committee,Whereas:A. PROCEDURE (1) In July 1993, the Commission received a complaint lodged by the Bundesverband der Deutschen Zement Industrie on behalf of German producers of Portland cement representing almost the totality of Portland cement production in the following regions of Germany: Berlin, Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Sachsen, Sachsen-Anhalt, Thüringen, Bayern and Baden-Württemberg, (hereafter referred to as the 'regional market`).The complaint contained evidence of dumping with regard to imports into the regional market of Portland cement originating in Poland and the Czech and Slovak Republics and of material injury resulting therefrom, which was considered sufficient to justify the initiation of a proceeding.(2) The Commission, after consultation, accordingly announced by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Communities the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding (5) concerning imports of Portland cement originating in Poland and the Czech and Slovak Republics into the regional market and commenced an investigation. Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88 applies in this proceeding opened before 1 September 1994.(3) The Commission officially advised the exporters and importers known to be concerned as well as the representatives of the exporting countries and the complainant of the initiation of the proceeding and gave the parties directly concerned the opportunity to make their views known in writing or to request a hearing(4) Several parties, including the Polish authorities made their views known in writing and requested a hearing; all such requests were granted.(5) The Commission sought and verified all information deemed to be necessary for the purpose of a preliminary determination and carried out investigations at the premises of 11 Community producers representing 91 % of the total production in the regional market; 11 Polish producers, eight Czech producers and six Slovak producers, which represented, taken together, the totality of exports to the regional market, and three of the nine importers in the regional market which responded to the notice of initiation within the time limits laid down and replied to the Commission's questionnaires.(6) The period used for the investigation of dumping was 1 April 1993 to 31 March 1994. In view of the important number of parties involved in the proceeding, the investigation exceeded the normal period of one year.B. REGIONAL MARKET (7) The Commission established that the Community producers in the regional market sold 96 % of their total production of the product in question in that market. Furthermore, only 5 % of the total demand in the regional market was supplied by producers located elsewhere in the Community. The Commission also established that 99 % of the imports into the Community from the countries concerned were concentrated in the same market. Therefore, the complaining and cooperating producers in the regional market which represented 91 % of the total output could be considered as constituting a Community industry pursuant to Article 4 (5) of Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88.C. PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION (8) The product concerned is Portland cement, other than white cement, whether or not artificially coloured. The product can be sold loose or in bags and is used in the building industry. It is produced in different types which range from PZ 25 to PZ 55. However the most common types are PZ 35 and PZ 45, which have been the object of the proceeding. The product falls under CN code 2523 29 00.D. WITHDRAWAL OF THE COMPLAINT AND TERMINATION OF THE PROCEEDING (9) In the course of the investigation, the Bundesverband der Deutschen Zement Industrie informed the Commission, by letter of 16 October 1995, that it formally withdrew its complaint.(10) The decision of the complainant, which had received beforehand all necessary information from the Commission on the circumstances of the anti-dumping proceeding, is a sufficient ground to terminate the proceeding unless it is established that such termination would be contrary to the interest of the Community.The Commission has neither received nor is it aware of any indications in the present case that the termination of this proceeding would be against the interest of the Community.(11) In these circumstances, it is considered that protective measures are unnecessary and, that accordingly, the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of Portland cement originating in Poland, the Czech and Slovak Republics should be terminated with the imposition of such measures,HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:Sole Article The anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports into certain regions of Germany of Portland cement originating in Poland, the Czech and Slovak Republics is hereby terminated.Done at Brussels, 16 January 1996.For the CommissionLeon BRITTANVice-President(1) OJ No L 349, 31. 12. 1994, p. 1.(2) OJ No L 122, 2. 6. 1995, p. 1.(3) OJ No L 209, 2. 8. 1988, p. 1.(4) OJ No L 66, 10. 3. 1994, p. 10.(5) OJ No C 117, 28. 4. 1994, p. 3.


Avis juridique important

|

31993D0117

93/117/EEC: Commission Decision of 22 December 1992 approving the administrative arrangements foreseen in the agreements on transit traffic between the European Community and Austria, on the one hand, and between the European Community and Switzerland, on the other

Official Journal L 047 , 25/02/1993 P. 0027 - 0027 Finnish special edition: Chapter 11 Volume 21 P. 0049  Swedish special edition: Chapter 11 Volume 21 P. 0049

COMMISSION DECISION of 22 December 1992 approving the administrative arrangements foreseen in the agreements on transit traffic between the European Community and Austria, on the one hand, and between the European Community and Switzerland, on the  other(93/117/EEC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the agreements on transit traffic between the European Community and Austria, on the one hand, and between the European Community and Switzerland on the other, decisions to conclude which were taken by the Councils of 27 November 1992  and 30 November 1992,  Considering that administrative arrangements are necessary for the implementation of these agreements:  - the agreement with Austria foresees the introduction of a system of Ecopoints intended to balance economic and ecological interests,  - the agreement with Switzerland foresees and exception to the existing weight limit in Switzerland of 28 tonnes for heavy goods vehicles,  DECIDES:  Article 1  The administrative arrangements on transit traffic between the European Community and Austria, on the one hand, and between the European Community and Switzerland on the other, are approved in the name of the Community.  Article 2  The Member of the Commission responsible for transport or the person designated by him, is empowered to sign the administrative arrangements on behalf of the Commission.  Done at Brussels, 22 December 1992.  For the Commission Karel VAN MIERT Member of the Commission


Avis juridique important

|

31993D0114

93/114/EEC: Council Decision of 15 February 1993 concerning the conclusion of the Protocol to the Convention of 8 October 1990 between the Governments of the Federal Republic of Germany and of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and the European Economic Community on the International Commission for the Protection of the Elbe

Official Journal L 045 , 23/02/1993 P. 0025 - 0025 Finnish special edition: Chapter 15 Volume 12 P. 0085  Swedish special edition: Chapter 15 Volume 12 P. 0085

COUNCIL DECISION of 15 February 1993 concerning the conclusion of the Protocol to the Convention of 8 October 1990 between the Governments of the Federal Republic of Germany and of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and the European Economic  Community on the International Commission for the Protection of the Elbe(93/114/EEC)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 130s 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, by Decision 91/598/EEC (4), the Community approved the Convention on the International Commission for the Protection of the Elbe;  Whereas it is essential that the International Commission established by that Convention be given legal personality and capacity in order that it may carry out its tasks;  Whereas, to this end, a Protocol to the Convention was adopted in Magdeburg on 9 December 1991; whereas the Protocol has been signed on behalf of the Community;  Whereas it is therefore necessary that the Community approve the Protocol,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Article 1  The Protocol to the Convention of 8 October 1990 between the Governments of the Federal Republic of Germany and of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and the European Economic Community on the International Commission for the Protection of  the Elbe is hereby approved on behalf of the European Economic Community.  The text of the Protocol is attached hereto.  Article 2  The President of the Council will, on behalf of the European Economic Community, inform the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany, in its capacity as depositary State, that the preconditions for the entry into force of the Protocol  have been fulfilled as far as the Community is concerned, in accordance with Article 2 of the Protocol.  Done at Brussels, 15 February 1993.  For the Council The President M. JELVED (1) OJ No C 185, 22. 7. 1992, p. 14.  (2) OJ No C 305, 23. 11. 1992.  (3) OJ No C 287, 4. 11. 1992, p. 38.  (4) OJ No L 321, 23. 11. 1991, p. 24.


Avis juridique important

|

31989D0060

89/60/EEC, Euratom, ECSC: COMMISSION Decision of 21 October 1988 adjusting the weightings applicable from 1 December 1987 to the remuneration of officials of the European Communities serving in non-member countries

Official Journal L 029 , 31/01/1989 P. 0047 - 0048

*****COMMISSION  DECISION  of 21 October 1988  adjusting the weightings applicable from 1 December 1987 to the remuneration of officials of the European Communities serving in non-member countries  (89/60/EEC, EURATOM, ECSC)  THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing a Single Council and a Single Commission of the European Communities,  Having regard to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities laid down by Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 (1), as last amended by Regulation (ECSC, EEC, Euratom) No 2339/88 (2), and in particular the second paragraph of Article 13 of Annex X thereto,  Whereas, pursuant to the first paragraph of Article 13 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations, Council Regulation (ECSC, EEC, Euratom) No 2175/88 (3) laid down the weightings to be applied from 10 October 1987 to the remuneration of officials serving in non-member countries payable in the currency of their country of employment;  Whereas, by Decision 89/59/EEC, Euratom, ECSC (4), the Commission adjusted some of these weightings with effect from 1 November 1987 pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 13 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations;  Whereas some of these weightings should be adjusted with effect from 1 December 1987 given that the statistics available to the Commission show that in certain non-member countries the variation in the cost of living measured on the basis of the weighting and the corresponding exchange rate has exceeded 5 % since the weightings were laid down or last adjusted,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Sole Article  With effect from 1 December 1987 the weightings applicable to the remuneration of officials serving in non-member countries payable in the currency of their country of employment are hereby adjusted as shown in the Annex.  The exchange rates for the payment of such remuneration shall be those used for implementation of the budget of the European Communities during the month preceding the date on which this Decision takes effect.  Done at Brussels, 21 October 1988.  For the Commission  Henning CHRISTOPHERSEN  Vice-President  (1) OJ No L 56, 4. 3. 1968, p. 1.  (2) OJ No L 204, 29. 7. 1988, p. 5.  (3) OJ No L 191, 22. 7. 1988, p. 1.  (4) See page 45 of this Official Journal.  ANNEX  1.2 //  //  // Country of employment  // Weighting   //  //   // Brazil   // 46,63   // Ghana   // 44,92   // Lebanon  // 29,32   // Madagascar   // 38,58   // Malawi   // 61,15  // Mexico   // 41,51   // Sierra Leone   // 95,26   // Sudan  // 92,35   // Syria   // 214,28   // Tanzania   // 38,06  // Tonga   // 85,20   // Yugoslavia   // 46,58   // Zaire  // 119,41   //    //


title: 2012/618/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 10 May 2012 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2010

text:
               17.10.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 286/356

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 10 May 2012
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2010
   (2012/618/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2010,

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2010, together with the Agency’s replies (1),

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 21 February 2012 (06083/2012 – C7-0051/2012),

               —

               having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

               —

               having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (2), and in particular Article 185 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1210/90 of 7 May 1990 on the establishment of the European Environment Agency and the European Environment Information and Observation Network (3), and in particular Article 13 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Regulation (EC) No 401/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the European Environment Agency and the European Environment Information and Observation Network (4), and in particular Article 13 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (5), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A7-0105/2012),

               1.

               Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Environment Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2010;

               2.

               Sets out its observations in the Resolution below;

               3.

               Instructs its President to forward this Decision and the resolution that forms an integral part of it to the Executive Director of the European Environment Agency, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

            The President

         Martin SCHULZ

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ C 366, 15.12.2011, p. 57.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 120, 11.5.1990, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ L 126, 21.5.2009, p. 13.

      (5)  OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.
   ANNEX

      EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RECOMMENDATIONS OVER PAST YEARS

               European Environment Agency

               2006

               2007

               2008

               2009

               Performance

               n.a.

               n.a.

                           —

                           Calls on the Agency to set out a diachronic analysis of operations carried out in this and the previous years

                           —

                           Calls on the Agency to continue providing every five years an independent external evaluation on the basis of its founding regulation and the work programmes adopted by the Management Board

                           —

                           Positive trends: the Agency has built up a well-developed activity-based management system, a multiannual work programme, a balanced scorecard with indicators, and a integrated management control system

                           —

                           Calls on the Agency to set out a comparison of the operations that were carried out during the year for which the discharge is to be granted and during the previous financial year

                           —

                           Calls on the Agency to deal with 4 key areas as a matter of priority and to do more to advance their development

                           —

                           Encourages the Agency to continue its efforts to further develop its communication methods in order to attract more media coverage for its findings, such measures may lead to more transparent working methods and greater public interest in the Agency’s work

                           —

                           Requests the Court of Auditors to undertake performance audits of the Agency

               Budgetary and Financial Management

               The budgetary principle of annuality was not strictly applied: more than 30 % of the commitments and 50 % for the operational expenditure had to be carried forward

                           —

                           Weaknesses in the tendering procedures: direct award of services without respecting the requirements of the Financial Regulation, award of a specific contract for services not in line with the framework contract terms

                           —

                           Weaknesses in the management of grant agreements (European Topic Centre)

               n.a.

                           —

                           Encourages the Agency to strengthen the link between the budget and the work programme

                           —

                           Is concerned about the Agency’s practice of making transfers to increase a budget line in order to pay the rent for the Agency’s premises for the first quarter of 2010 and charge it to the 2009 budget, as this practice is at odds with the principle of annuality

                           —

                           Calls on the Agency to improve the accuracy of the information provided by the operational departments on the estimation of accrued operational expenditure

               Human Resources

               n.a.

               Weaknesses in the recruitment procedures: candidates not fulfilling selection criteria were considered for further evaluation and criteria for identifying the best candidates to be invited for interview were not documented

               n.a.

                           —

                           Calls on the Agency to remedy deficiencies in the recruitment procedures which put at risk the transparency of these procedures

                           —

                           Court of Auditors noted the following weaknesses- vacancy notices did not specify the maximum number of candidates to be put on the reserve lists, questions used during written tests & interviews were not decided on before the examination of the applications, the decisions of the selection boards were insufficiently documented, minutes were not completed & thresholds for being invited to interview or put on the reserve list were not set in advance

               Internal Audit

               In breach of the principle of segregation of duties, the same authorising officer by sub-delegation not only performed ex-ante checks but also managed access rights to the IT system for budgetary accounting

               n.a.

               Calls on the Agency to fulfil 17 recommendations out of 27 made by the Internal Audit Service: i.e. establishing financial circuits, promoting on-the-spot controls/verifications of grants, and monitoring and following up grant implementation and the implementation of the internal control standards

               Acknowledges that 3 recommendations from the IAS follow up of past audit recommendations still need to be implemented, these mainly concern sensitive posts, on-the-spot controls/verifications or grants & financial circuits, and are considered very important

          ---documentbreak---

               17.10.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 286/358

         RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 10 May 2012
   with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2010
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2010,

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2010, together with the Agency’s replies (1),

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 21 February 2012 (06083/2012 – C7-0051/2012),

               —

               having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

               —

               having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (2), and in particular Article 185 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1210/90 of 7 May 1990 on the establishment of the European Environment Agency and the European Environment Information and Observation Network (3), and in particular Article 13 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Regulation (EC) No 401/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the European Environment Agency and the European Environment Information and Observation Network (4), and in particular Article 13 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (5), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A7-0105/2012),

               A.

               whereas the Court of Auditors has stated that it has obtained reasonable assurances that the annual accounts for the financial year 2010 are reliable and that the underlying transactions are legal and regular,

               B.

               whereas on 10 May 2011 Parliament granted the Executive Director of the European Environment Agency discharge for implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2009 (6), and in its Resolution accompanying the discharge, inter alia:

                           —

                           encouraged the Agency to continue its efforts to further develop its communication methods in order to attract more media coverage for its findings, as such measures may lead to more transparent working methods and greater public interest in the Agency’s work,

                           —

                           was concerned about the Agency’s practice of making transfers to increase a budget line in order to pay rent for the Agency’s premises for the first quarter of 2010 and charge it to the 2009 budget, as this practice is at odds with the principle of annuality,

                           —

                           called on the Agency to address deficiencies in the recruitment procedures which put at risk the transparency of these procedures,

               C.

               whereas the budget of the Agency for the year 2010 was EUR 50 600 000, which is 26 % higher than in 2009; whereas the contribution of the Union to the budget of the Agency for 2010 was EUR 35 258 000, compared with EUR 34 560 000 in 2009 (7), which represents an increase of 2 %,

               1.

               Postpones the discharge to the Agency and awaits substantial replies and actions on the critical remarks and requests made;

      Budget and Financial Management

               2.

               Notes that the Agency’s levels of budget execution in terms of committed appropriations and of payment appropriations were respectively of 100 % and of 90,75 %;

               3.

               Ascertains from the Agency’s Final Accounts that, for the financial year 2010, the total payments of the Agency represented EUR 38 898 533,88;

               4.

               Notes that, for five months, from 22 May 2010 to October 2010, the Agency covered its building with a green façade which cost EUR 294 641 and that the contract was realised by the companies Ramboll, as general contractor, and Green Fortune; is surprised that there has been no public tender; demands from the Agency’s Director details on how the companies were chosen as contractors; takes note from the Agency’s Director, in her letter of 11 April 2012, that these costs were covered by the budget lines ‘2140 — Fitting-out of premises’ (EUR 180 872) and ‘3323 — Communications’ (EUR 113 769); underlines that the commitment appropriations under budget line 2140 increased from EUR 85 000 to EUR 271 049 against the opinion of the Agency’s Head of Administration; notes that also in May 2010 the Head of Administration entered into sick leave and since then the position is occupied by an interim Head; notes from the Director’s letter of 30 April 2012 that budget line 2140 has been reinforced by a budget transfer of EUR 180 872 from the budget line ‘2100 — Rent’; recalls that in December 2009 the Agency paid the rent for Q1 2010, thus avoiding reducing the amount to be repaid to the Commission; therefore calls on the Agency to explain the discharge authority why it has extracted EUR 180 872 from the budget line ‘Rent’, while rent is a fixed sum by contract, and to provide information and written evidence on the procedures with regards to the budgetary transfers; expects the Agency to complete all the requested actions by the end of August 2012;

               5.

               Notes that in December 2011 the Agency awarded a Framework Service Contract for the provision of media monitoring for 48 months, for a total value of EUR 250 000, which is much higher than the costs of similar services in the previous years; observes that based upon this contract the Agency will spend on average EUR 62 500 per year for media monitoring and believes that these costs are excessive and contrary to the principle of efficient use of the taxpayers’ money;

      Carryover appropriations

               6.

               Takes note from the Agency’s Final Accounts that EUR 12 809 551,05 of the 2010 appropriations have been carried forward to 2011; acknowledges that out of the overall amount carried over EUR 8 941 279 are external assigned revenues which are multiannual and hence are not subject of the principle of annuality;

               7.

               Notes from the Agency’s Final Accounts that cancellation of unused payment appropriations carried over from the previous year amounted to EUR 585 282,87; understands from the Agency that this amount is lower than the amount cancelled in 2009, i.e. EUR 693 127,02; notes, therefore, that a cancellation rate of only 1,5 % represents an improved anticipation of financial needs;

               8.

               Regrets that the Court of Auditors did not consider the level of the Agency’s appropriations carried forward and cancelled to be sufficiently high to warrant a mention in its report on the annual accounts of the Agency for the financial year 2010;

      Procurement Procedures

               9.

               Notes the statement from the Agency that the Court of Auditors has carried out in October 2011 an audit on the procurement procedures concerning canteen services, cleaning services, security services and furniture; calls on the Agency to provide the discharge authority with the findings of this audit and its replies and actions undertaken by the end of September 2012;

               10.

               Calls on the Internal Audit Service (IAS) to audit the Agency’s contracts in the area of canteen services, cleaning services, security services and furniture to establish whether the call preparation, publication, evaluation and contract management phases respect the two following principles: maximum competition and value-for-money, and to inform the discharge authority in due course of its findings;

      Human Resources

               11.

               Notes that the Agency has revised its recruitment processes in line with the remarks made by the discharge authority and Court of Auditors in order to address the weaknesses in relation to vacancy notices, to the documentation of the decision of the selection boards, to the thresholds for being invited to interview and to the minutes of the interviews;

               12.

               Acknowledges also from its Annual Management Plan that the Agency implemented the ‘EEA Personnel Policy’ which provides the basis for staff development;

               13.

               Was informed that 7 internal candidates and 40 external applicants were recruited in 2010; acknowledges the split amongst categories of internal candidates of 1 official, 5 temporary agents and 1 contract agent and the split amongst externally recruited staff of 1 official, 13 temporary agents, 29 contract agents and 4 national experts; takes note that, for the last five years, the Agency hosted 12 guest scientists working at its premises; for the sake of transparency, calls on the Agency to complete publishing the curriculum vitae — including at least the educational and work background — of the guest scientists, in order to increase transparency;

      Agency’s strategy for 2009-2013

               14.

               Welcomes the fact that the Agency staff and management activities, quality control processes, products and services, administrative and building services are brought together under the strategic area in the ‘EEA Strategy 2009-2013’;

               15.

               Calls on the Agency to make a more explicit link between measures, resources and results;

      Conflict of interest

               16.

               Notes that, from June 2010 until April 2011, the Executive Director of the Agency was a trustee and a member of the International Advisory Board of Earthwatch — an international environmental charity engaging people in scientific field research and education — and was reported to be a member of the European Advisory Board of Worldwatch Europe; acknowledges that, in accordance with the Executive Director’s statement, she stepped down from her positions in Earthwatch in April 2011 following advice from the President of the Court of Auditors in the context of a possible conflict of interests;

               17.

               Is seriously concerned that in 2010, while the Executive Director was directly involved with Earthwatch, 29 staff members of the Agency, including the Executive Director, went for up to 10 days of research on different biodiversity projects in the Caribbean or Mediterranean managed by Earthwatch and that the Agency paid a total of EUR 33 791,28, to the NGO as stated by the Agency’s Executive Director;

               18.

               Recognises the special training of staff as part of the career development and takes note of the total amount paid for that training;

               19.

               Is surprised that Worldwatch Institute Europe founded on 5 November 2010 indicated as its address that of the Agency and used its premises as its own without any rent to the Agency, thus using premises paid by the EU budget; regrets that the Director’s letter of 30 April 2012 refers only to Worldwatch Institute US based and not to the Worldwatch Institute Europe which used the Agency’s premises without any rent; takes further note that executive director of Worldwatch Institute Europe was an Agency’s guest scientist; calls on the Agency to provide the discharge authority with concrete details and documentary evidence on this matter, including the person in the Agency who authorised this, the concrete date when Worldwatch Institute Europe ceased to use the Agency’s premises, as well as whether the work performed by the respective guest scientist of the Agency was published under the Worldwatch Institute Europe name or that of the Agency by the end of August 2012;

               20.

               Commends the cooperation between the Agency and NGOs working in the environmental area, as it is the case with other specialised agencies, but recalls that even the mere appearance of conflict of interest is damaging trust in the institutions and raises concerns of taxpayers;

               21.

               Calls on the Agency, in an effort to promote greater transparency in terms of preventing and combating conflict of interests, to adopt immediately an action plan to publish on its website the declarations of interest and, when they are not available, the curriculum vitae — including at least the educational and work background — for the management staff, the members of the scientific committee, the experts and the members of the Management Board by 30 June 2012; is of the opinion that such measures would allow the discharge authority and the public to observe their qualifications and to prevent potential conflict of interest;

      Performance

               22.

               Notes the Agency’s initiative to provide, on a regular basis, an independent external evaluation on the basis of its founding Regulation (EEC) No 1210/90 and the work programmes adopted by the Management Board; notes in particular that the next evaluation will be undertaken in 2012 and will focus on the efficiency and effectiveness in delivering its corporate strategy;

               23.

               Notes the Agency’s initiative to measure its performance through the environmental management and audit scheme (EMAS) and internal management systems using four inter-related perspectives — financial, client, business and learning and growth;

               24.

               Acknowledges from comments in the Agency’s Annual Management Plan, the Agency’s efforts with various international and Union bodies, Eionet and the Scientific Committee to establish a networking structure in order to be able to maintain links to the research and scientific community, disseminate and utilise the results, particularly information and data, from research activities at European and national levels, in a more systematic way;

               25.

               Notes, in addition, that following the request of the discharge authority for the 2009 discharge, in 2011, the Agency increased its efforts to reach the wider public and initiated pilot projects by using social media as a means of communication directed to the public;

               26.

               Calls on the Agency to inform in detail the budget authority, in particular the Budget Control Authority, of:

                           —

                           the sources used by the Agency to construct its reports, papers and other related outputs,

                           —

                           the number of reports, and other products, delivered in 2010,

                           —

                           the evidence of the possible added value brought by the Agency’s reports compared with other bodies’ reports on environmental matters,

                           —

                           the process, if any, of verification of the data sent by the Member States, the periodicity of this verification and the way in which the data sent by Member States is used by the Agency;

               27.

               Is pleased that in 2010 the Agency placed extra emphasis on biodiversity, the Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES), the Eye on Earth platform and the State of the Environment report (SOER) 2010;

               28.

               Would like to encourage the Agency to continue its efforts to further develop its communication methods in order to attract more media coverage for its findings and thus feed public debate and broaden the scope of the environmental information available to the public on important environmental issues, such as climate change, biodiversity and the management of natural resources;

      Internal audit

               29.

               Acknowledges that in 2010 the IAS concluded an audit of the ‘management plan system (MPS)/monitoring of activities’ whose objective was to assess and provide assurance on the adequacy of the planning and monitoring of the Agency’s activities; notes, in particular, that the IAS made eight recommendations, six of which were rated ‘important’ and two ‘desirable’;

               30.

               Calls in this respect on the Agency to:

                           —

                           promote guidelines for objectives and measurable indicators in project planning and monitoring of progress,

                           —

                           allocate costs on projects,

                           —

                           promote more effective project management and procedures for checking and verifying new data entered into the MPS;

               31.

               Calls, in addition, on the Agency to adopt without further delay measures to address the weaknesses found by the IAS in its previous audits on quality management and on grant management in order to:

                           —

                           develop and use QA/QC checklist for GHG Inventory Report,

                           —

                           plan, describe and document relevant quality checks,

                           —

                           assure supervision of quality controls,

                           —

                           anticipate business continuity issues,

                           —

                           realise on-the-spot controls and verification of grants,

                           —

                           monitor and follow-up grant implementation;

               32.

               Draws attention to its recommendations from previous discharge reports, as set out in the Annex to this Resolution;

               33.

               Refers, in respect of the other observations accompanying its Decision on discharge, which are of a horizontal nature, to its Resolution of 10 May 2012 (8) on the performance, financial management and control of the agencies.

      (1)  OJ C 366, 15.12.2011, p. 57.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 120, 11.5.1990, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ L 126, 21.5.2009, p. 13.

      (5)  OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.

      (6)  OJ L 250, 27.9.2011, p. 155.

      (7)  OJ L 64, 12.3.2010, p. 677.

      (8)  Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0164 (see page 388 of this Official Journal).


Avis juridique important

|

31983D0493

83/493/EEC: Commission Decision of 28 September 1983 terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of xanthan gum originating in the United States of America

Official Journal L 268 , 30/09/1983 P. 0060 - 0061

*****COMMISSION  DECISION  of 28 September 1983  terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of xanthan gum originating in the United States of America  (83/493/EEC)  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 9 thereof,  After consultations within the Advisory Committee as provided for by that Regulation,  Whereas:  A. Procedure  (1) In July 1982 the Commission received a complaint lodged by the European Council of Chemical Manufacturers' Federations (CEFIC) on behalf of the sole Community producer of xanthan gum (Rhône-Poulenc SA).  The complaint contained evidence of dumping and of material injury resulting therefrom, which was considered sufficient to justify initiating a proceeding. The Commission accordingly announced, by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Communities (3), the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports into the Community of xanthan gum falling within subheading ex 39.06 B of the Common Customs Tariff corresponding to NIMEXE code ex 39.06-90, originating in the United States of America and commenced an investigation.  (2) The Commission officially so advised the exporter and importers known to be concerned and the representatives of the exporting country and the complainant and gave the parties directly concerned the opportunity to known their views in writing and to request a hearing. All the parties concerned were heard and made their views known in writing.  (3) For the purposes of arriving at a preliminary finding as to whether dumping and injury had occurred, the Commission requested and received all the information it considered necessary.  (4) Having regard to the injury finding set out below, it was not considered necessary to calculate dumping margins or to verify the information supplied by the exporter with regard to his sales in the United States of America.  (5) In order to verify the injury information received, the Commission carried out checks at the premises of the following companies:  - Community producer:  Rhône-Poulenc SA, France;  - Importers:  - Alginate Industries Ltd, UK,  - Kelco/AIL International Ltd, UK,  - Baltimore Aircoil-Chemviron SA, Bel- gium.  B. Injury  (6) With regard to injury to the Community industry from imports from the United States of America, the confidential information available to the Commission indicates that these imports and their market share have increased substantially in the period 1980 to 1982.  (7) With regard to prices of the imported product on the Community market which were alleged by the complainant to cause price depression, and as such, to be the main source of the injury suffered, the investigation has shown that the prices of the US product when sold in the Community have been consistently above those charged by the complainant for similar quantities and grades.  (8) With regard to the impact of these imports on the Community industry, the evidence available to the Commission shows that:  - the increase in the imports in question coincided with a sharp increase in Community consumption because of the more widespread use of xanthan gum for industrial uses in the food industry,  - the complainant firm was unable to take advantage of this increase in consumption because it was producing at full capacity and a decline in its market share was thus inevitable,  - despite the decline in the complainant's market shares, its production and sales have increased steadily and it sells all of the product which it can produce,  - the low level of the complainant's prices are due to factors other than imports from the United States of America in particular because of the complainant's inability to supply customers on demand due to its limited capacity,  - in addition, xanthan gum was first commercialized by the US exporter thereby giving the firm appreciable advantages in the development of the product resulting in its being able to offer the customer a broader range of products, some of which may have been more suited to customer requirements.  (9) In the light of the above facts, the Commission has concluded that no material injury has been caused to the Community industry from the imports in question.  (10) In these circumstances, protective measures are considered to be unnecessary and the proceeding should therefore be terminated.  (11) No objection to this course of action was raised in the Advisory Committee,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Sole Article  The anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of xanthan gum originating in the United States of America is hereby terminated.  Done at Brussels, 28 September 1983.  For the Commission  Étienne DAVIGNON  Vice-President  (1) OJ No L 339, 31. 12. 1979, p. 1.  (2) OJ No L 178, 22. 6. 1982, p. 9.  (3) OJ No C 253, 28. 9. 1982, p. 2.


title: 2004/386/EC:Commission Decision of 28 April 2004 on the financial contribution by the Community towards the World Organisation for Animal Health for the OIE mediated process in 2004 (Text with EEA relevance)

text:
30.4.2004        EN                 Official Journal of the European Union                    L 144/59
                                   COMMISSION DECISION
                                             of 28 April 2004
  on the financial contribution by the Community towards the World Organisation for
                      Animal Health for the OIE mediated process in 2004
                                    (Text with EEA relevance)
                                               (2004/386/EC)
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Decision 90/424/EEC of 26 June 1990 on expenditure in the
veterinary field1, and in particular Article 20 thereof,
Whereas:
(1)     Pursuant to Decision 90/424/EEC the Community is to undertake or assist the Member
        States in undertaking the technical and scientific measures necessary for the
        development of Community veterinary legislation and for the development of
        veterinary education or training.
(2)     At the request of both the European Union and the United States of America, the
        World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) convened a meeting at its headquarters
        on 11 February 2004 with representatives of both parties. The discussions were
        conducted under the auspices of the OIE in order to solve the problems associated with
        the interpretation of and the adherence to the current OIE standards in the Terrestrial
        Animal Health Code of the OIE on BSE (Terrestrial Code).
(3)     The final outcome of the discussions could be of use for further proposals for
        amendment of the Terrestrial Code on BSE and subsequently be part of the further
        development of Community veterinary legislation.
(4)     The Community should consequently support the participation by the European Union
        in the OIE delegated process for which the costs are budgeted at EUR 8 000 for each
        delegation.
(5)     The financial resources necessary for the Community contribution to the OIE
        mediated process in February 2004 should therefore be engaged.
1
        OJ L 224, 18.8.1990, p. 19; Decision as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 806/2003 (OJ L 122,
        16.5.2003, p. 1).
 ---pagebreak--- L 144/60         EN             Official Journal of the European Union               30.4.2004
(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,
 ---pagebreak--- 30.4.2004       EN              Official Journal of the European Union            L 144/61
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
                                            Sole Article
The participation by the European Union in the OIE mediated process to be financed from
budget heading 17 04 02 of the budget of the European Union for 2004 to a maximum amount
of EUR 8 000, is hereby approved.
Done at Brussels, 28 April 2004.
                                                For the Commission
                                                David BYRNE
                                                Member of the Commission


title: Decision (EU) 2016/1594 of the European Parliament of 28 April 2016 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the SESAR Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2014

text:
               14.9.2016

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 246/418

         DECISION (EU) 2016/1594 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 28 April 2016
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the SESAR Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2014
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the SESAR Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2014,

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the SESAR Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2014, together with the Joint Undertaking’s reply (1),

               —

               having regard to the statement of assurance (2) as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2014, pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 12 February 2016 on discharge to be given to the Joint Undertaking in respect of the implementation of the budget for the financial year 2014 (05587/2016 – C8-0053/2016),

               —

               having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

               —

               having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (3), and in particular Article 208 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 219/2007 of 27 February 2007 on the establishment of a Joint Undertaking to develop the new generation European air traffic management system (SESAR) (4), and in particular Article 4b thereof,

               —

               having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (5),

               —

               having regard to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1271/2013 of 30 September 2013 on the framework financial regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 208 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council (6),

               —

               having regard to Rule 94 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A8-0089/2016),

               1.

               Grants the Executive Director of the SESAR Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the joint undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2014;

               2.

               Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

               3.

               Instructs its President to forward this decision and the resolution forming an integral part of it to the Executive Director of the SESAR Joint Undertaking, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

            The President

         Martin SCHULZ

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ C 422, 17.12.2015, p. 70.

      (2)  OJ C 422, 17.12.2015, p. 72.

      (3)  OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ L 64, 2.3.2007, p. 1.

      (5)  OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.

      (6)  OJ L 328, 7.12.2013, p. 42.


title: 2010/615/EU: Council Decision of 17 May 2010 on the signing of a Voluntary Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of the Congo on forest law enforcement, governance and trade in timber and derived products to the European Union (FLEGT)

text:
               15.10.2010

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 271/1

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 17 May 2010
   on the signing of a Voluntary Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of the Congo on forest law enforcement, governance and trade in timber and derived products to the European Union (FLEGT)
   (2010/615/EU)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 207 in conjunction with Article 218(5) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               In May 2003 the European Commission adopted a Communication to the European Parliament and to the Council entitled ‘Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT): Proposal for an EU Action Plan’ which called for measures to address illegal logging through the development of Voluntary Partnership Agreements with timber-producing countries. Council conclusions on that Action Plan were adopted in October 2003 (1).

               (2)

               On 5 December 2005 the Council authorised the Commission to open negotiations on Partnership Agreements to implement the EU Action Plan for FLEGT.

               (3)

               On 20 December 2005 the Council adopted Regulation (EC) No 2173/2005 (2) which established a FLEGT licensing scheme for imports of timber into the Union from countries with which the Union has concluded Voluntary Partnership Agreements.

               (4)

               The negotiations with the Republic of the Congo have been concluded, and the Voluntary Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of the Congo on forest law enforcement, governance and trade in timber and derived products to the European Union (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’) was initialled on 9 May 2009.

               (5)

               Subject to its conclusion at a later date, the Agreement should be signed,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The signing of the Voluntary Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of the Congo on forest law enforcement, governance and trade in timber and derived products to the European Union (FLEGT) is hereby authorised on behalf of the Union, subject to the conclusion of the said Agreement (3).
   Article 2
   The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person empowered to sign the Agreement on behalf of the Union subject to its conclusion.
   Article 3
   This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 17 May 2010.

            For the Council

            The President

         E. ESPINOSA

      (1)  OJ C 268, 7.11.2003, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 347, 30.12.2005, p. 1.

      (3)  The text of the Agreement will be published together with the decision on its conclusion.


title: 2011/32/EU: Commission Decision of 19 January 2011 terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of purified terephthalic acid and its salts originating in Thailand

text:
               20.1.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 15/22

         COMMISSION DECISION
   of 19 January 2011
   terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of purified terephthalic acid and its salts originating in Thailand
   (2011/32/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (1) (the basic Regulation), and in particular Article 9 thereof,
   After consulting the Advisory Committee,
   Whereas:
   1.   PROCEDURE

   1.1.   Initiation

               (1)

               On 22 December 2009, the European Commission (the ‘Commission’) announced by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union
                   (2) (Notice of initiation), the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports into the Union of purified terephthalic acid and its salts (PTA) originating in Thailand (the country concerned).

               (2)

               The anti-dumping proceeding was initiated following a complaint lodged on 13 November 2009 by BP Aromatics Limited NV and CEPSA Quimica S.A. (the complainants) representing a major proportion, in this case more than 50 %, of the total Union production of PTA. The complaint contained prima facie evidence of dumping of the product concerned originating in the country concerned and of material injury resulting therefrom, which was considered sufficient to justify the opening of a proceeding.

               (3)

               On the same day, the Commission announced, by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union
                   (3), the initiation of an anti-subsidy proceeding with regard to imports into the Union of PTA originating in Thailand. This investigation has been terminated by means of Commission Decision 2011/31/EU (4).

         1.2.   Parties concerned by the proceeding

               (4)

               The Commission officially advised the complainants, other known producers in the Union, the known exporting producers in Thailand, the representatives of the exporting country concerned and known importers and users of the initiation of the proceeding. Interested parties were given the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing within the time limit set out in the Notice of initiation. All interested parties who so requested and showed that there were particular reasons why they should be heard were granted a hearing.

               (5)

               The Commission sent questionnaires to the complainants, other known producers in the Union, the known exporting producers in Thailand and to the known importers and users of the product concerned and to all other parties that requested a questionnaire within the deadlines set out in the Notice of initiation.

               (6)

               Questionnaire replies were received from the three known Thai exporting producers, from three Union producers, from one Union importer and from five Union users.

               (7)

               The Commission sought and verified all the information deemed necessary for the determination of dumping, resulting injury and Union interest. Verification visits were carried out at the premises of the following companies:

                           (a)

                           Union producers:

                                       —

                                       BP Aromatics Limited NV, Geel, Belgium

                                       —

                                       CEPSA Química, S.A., Madrid, Spain

                                       —

                                       Lotte Chemical UK Ltd (formerly Artenius), Wilton, Redcar, United Kingdom

                           (b)

                           Union importers:

                                       —

                                       Mitsui & Co. Benelux NV, Brussels, Belgium

                           (c)

                           Union users:

                                       —

                                       DSM Powder Coating Resins BV, Zwolle, Holland

                                       —

                                       M&G Polimeri Italia SpA, Patrica (Frosinone), Italy

                                       —

                                       NOVAPET S.A., Barbastro (Huesca), Spain

                                       —

                                       UAB NEO Group, Klaipeda, Lithuania

                           (d)

                           Exporting producers in Thailand:

                                       —

                                       TPT Petrochemicals Public Company Ltd, Bangkok, Thailand (hereinafter ‘TPT’)

                                       —

                                       Indorama Petrochem Ltd, Bangkok, Thailand (hereinafter ‘Indorama’)

                                       —

                                       Siam Mitsui PTA Company Ltd, Bangkok, Thailand (hereinafter ‘SMPC’)

                           (e)

                           Related exporter:

                                       —

                                       Mitsui Chemicals Inc, Tokyo, Japan (hereinafter ‘MCI’) — export sales representative and shareholder of SMPC.

               (8)

               Given that both TPT and Indorama are owned by the same holding company, they will be referred to in this document as the ‘Indorama group’.

         1.3.   Investigation period and period considered

               (9)

               The investigation of dumping and injury covered the period from 1 December 2008 to 30 November 2009 (the ‘investigation period’ or ‘IP’). The examination of trends relevant for the assessment of injury covered the period from 1 January 2006 to the end of the investigation period (the period considered).

         2.   PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT

   2.1.   Product concerned

               (10)

               The product concerned is terephthalic acid and its salts of a purity by weight of 99,5 % or more, currently falling within CN code ex 2917 36 00 (the product concerned).

               (11)

               PTA is obtained by the purification of crude terephthalic acid, which is a result of making paraxylene (PX) react with a solvent and a catalyst solution.

         2.2.   Like product

               (12)

               The product concerned and the PTA produced and sold on the domestic market of Thailand, as well as the PTA produced and sold in the Union by the Union industry were found to have the same basic physical and chemical characteristics and uses. They were therefore considered to be alike within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation.

         3.   DUMPING

   3.1.   Preliminary remarks

               (13)

               All three Thai exporting producers named in the complaint submitted questionnaires responses. The investigation revealed that no other Thai exporting producers of PTA exist and that the responses covered 100 % of Thai exports to the EU market.

               (14)

               The three companies requested dumping calculations to be performed on the basis of monthly data on the grounds that costs of the main raw material and consequently prices for the product concerned varied significantly through the IP. For the reasons shown in recital 26 below, the use of the requested methodology was not considered warranted.

               (15)

               It should be noted that sales on the domestic and EU markets were based on either spot prices or contracts based on the PX cost (the main raw material) or a formula based on a PTA pricing index in China. In the latter case, there was a significant time lag in a number of instances after which the final index was available. In order to implement the formula, an invoicing arrangement had to be operated whereby the final price could be settled some months after the initial provisional invoice was issued. Debit/credit notes were issued to correct the final price agreed in the contract.

               (16)

               The general methodology set out below has been applied to all the cooperating exporting producers in Thailand.

         3.2.   Normal value

               (17)

               In accordance with Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation, the Commission first established whether the domestic sales of the Thai producers were sufficiently representative, i.e. whether the total volume of such sales represented at least 5 % of their total volume of export sales of the product concerned to the Union. The domestic sales of the Thai producers were considered sufficiently representative during the investigation period.

               (18)

               The Commission subsequently examined whether the domestic sales of the like product could be regarded as being sold in the ordinary course of trade pursuant to Article 2(4) of the basic Regulation. This was done by establishing for the like product sold on the domestic market the proportion of profitable domestic sales to independent customers during the IP.

               (19)

               Since the volume of profitable sales of the like product represented more than 80 % of the total domestic sales volume of the like product for all 3 producers, normal value was based on the actual domestic price, calculated as a weighted average of all domestic sales.

         3.3.   Export price

               (20)

               This investigation showed that one of the cooperating exporting producers (SMPC) sold to the EU market via its largest shareholder (MCI, a company located in Japan), which then resold to a series of Japanese traders, which ultimately sold to parties on the EU market. It was investigated whether MCI and the largest Japanese trader were related and if such a relationship had an impact on prices.

               (21)

               It was found that the most important relationship concerned common shareholdings at a very low percentage held by Japanese banks on behalf of numerous trustees. It was, therefore, established that the relationship was not of such a nature to impact price levels. Indeed, given (i) the pricing/contractual arrangements outlined above which are typical for this industry and (ii) the nature of the relationship between the companies described above, prices are at arm’s length. It was therefore determined that the export price of the product concerned could be established on the basis of MCI’s sales to the Japanese traders.

               (22)

               A letter was sent to MCI informing it of the consequences of non-cooperation because during the verification in Tokyo the case handlers involved were not granted full access to accounting information relating to certain allowances.

               (23)

               It was therefore decided to calculate the allowances on the basis of facts available, in accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation. As a result the following methodology was used. For freight costs the allowance was adjusted upwards on the basis of information gathered on spot. For the remaining allowances the amounts reported as well as the net sales prices were also checked by reference to other independent sources, in this case information established for the other two Thai exporting producers and were found to be in line for the same type of sales. An alternative method of using Eurostat prices as a substitute was considered but not used because for this product the value in Eurostat was the cif price at the date of importation and not the adjusted final price established in accordance with the sales contract and the invoicing systems outlined above. This approach was exceptionally appropriate given the structure of the market as explained in recital 15 above. Note that the vast majority of allowances had already been verified in Thailand.

         3.4.   Comparison

               (24)

               The comparison between normal value and export price was made on an ex-works basis.

               (25)

               For the purpose of ensuring a fair comparison between the normal value and the export price, due allowance in the form of adjustments was made for differences affecting prices and price comparability in accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation. On this basis, adjustments for differences in transport, insurance, packing, credit, handling and commission costs were made where applicable and justified.

               (26)

               The comparison between export price and normal value was made on an annual basis. The request of the exporting producers to make comparisons on a monthly basis was considered but not pursued since it was obvious that it would not have changed the overall conclusion with respect to dumping, i.e. the countrywide de minimis dumping.

         3.5.   Dumping margin

               (27)

               Pursuant to Article 2(11) and (12) of the basic Regulation, the dumping margin for the cooperating exporting producers in Thailand were established on the basis of a comparison of a weighted average normal value with a weighted average export price as established above.

               (28)

               On the basis of the above methodology the dumping margins, expressed as a percentage of the cif Union frontier price, duty unpaid, were set as follows:

                           Dumping Margin

                           Indorama group

                           3,7 %

                           SMPC

                           No dumping

               (29)

               The three exporting producers (the two of the Indorama group and SMPC) represent the entirety of exports originating in Thailand when compared to the Eurostat data. In order to assess whether, on a countrywide basis, the dumping margin was below de minimis, a weighted average countrywide dumping margin was established. It was found that this margin was below de minimis, i.e. 1,8 %.

               (30)

               In view of the countrywide de minimis dumping margin, provisional measures on imports of PTA originating in Thailand should not be imposed.

         4.   INJURY, CAUSATION AND UNION INTEREST

               (31)

               In view of the above findings with respect to dumping it is not considered necessary to present any analysis on injury, causation and Union interest.

         5.   TERMINATION OF THE PROCEEDING

               (32)

               The proceeding should therefore be terminated as the dumping margin determined for Thailand is less than 2 %. Interested parties were informed accordingly and were given the opportunity to comment.

               (33)

               As to dumping issues, comments were received from one of the complainants which considered that the Commission should have imputed to SMPC the dumping margin established for the other two exporting producers (3,7 %) as a consequence of facts available. In such a case it was argued that there would have been a de minimis dumping margin. This had to be rejected. The Commission did apply facts available with respect to the Japanese related company by using the company’s available data, adjusting it upwards and comparing it to other verifiable sources. To impute in these circumstances the dumping margin of the other exporters would not have been in line with the provisions of Article 18.

               (34)

               The same complainant also argued that other governments take a different view on investigations concerning PTA for a similar IP. This had to be rejected. In this respect it is noted that the evidence provided by the party refers to an anti-dumping duty imposed by the People’s Republic of China on imports of PTA from Korea and Thailand. The information provided cannot corroborate the party’s claim since no evidence exists on how normal value and export price were established in this Chinese anti-dumping investigation. Furthermore, in the investigation by the Chinese authorities, the IP runs from 1 October 2007 to 30 September 2008, while the IP used in the current EU investigation runs from 1 December 2008 to 30 November 2009. Therefore the periods taken into consideration in the EU and the Chinese investigations were very different.

               (35)

               As far as injury aspects are concerned no representations were submitted by any interested party.

               (36)

               In conclusion, no comments from any interested party undermine the finding that protective measures are unnecessary.

               (37)

               In light of all the above, the Commission therefore concludes that the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports into the Union of purified terephthalic acid and its salts originating in Thailand should be terminated without the imposition of anti-dumping measures,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Sole Article
   The anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of terephthalic acid and its salts of a purity by weight of 99,5 % or more, currently falling within CN code ex 2917 36 00, originating in Thailand, is hereby terminated.

      Done at Brussels, 19 January 2011.

            For the Commission

            The President

         José Manuel BARROSO

      (1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.

      (2)  OJ C 313, 22.12.2009, p. 17.

      (3)  OJ C 313, 22.12.2009, p. 22.

      (4)  See page 17 of this Official Journal.


Avis juridique important

|

31979D0842

79/842/EEC: Council Decision of 9 October 1979 adopting a research and development programme in the field of reference materials and methods (Community Bureau of Reference - BCR) and applied metrology (non-nuclear indirect action) (1979 to 1982)

Official Journal L 258 , 13/10/1979 P. 0032 - 0034 Greek special edition: Chapter 16 Volume 1 P. 0067

****( 1 ) OJ NO C 176 , 25 . 7 . 1978 , P . 5 AND OJ NO C 17 , 19 . 1 . 1979 , P . 4 .  ( 2 ) OJ NO C 6 , 8 . 1 . 1979 , P . 20 .  ( 3 ) OPINION DELIVERED ON 19 AND 20 DECEMBER 1978 ( NOT YET PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL ).  ( 4 ) OJ NO C 7 , 29 . 1 . 1974 , P . 6 .  ( 5 ) OJ NO C 192 , 11 . 8 . 1977 , P . 1 .  ( 6 ) OJ NO L 200 , 8 . 8 . 1977 , P . 4 .  ( 1 ) OJ NO L 255 , 20 . 9 . 1974 , P . 1 .    COUNCIL DECISION   OF 9 OCTOBER 1979   ADOPTING A RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME IN THE FIELD OF REFERENCE MATERIALS AND METHODS ( COMMUNITY BUREAU OF REFERENCE  -  BCR ) AND APPLIED METROLOGY ( NON-NUCLEAR INDIRECT ACTION ) ( 1979 TO 1982 )  ( 79/842/EEC )   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN   COMMUNITIES ,   HAVING REGARD TO THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY , AND IN PARTICULAR ARTICLE 235 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 ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 3 ( A ) AND ( H ) OF THE TREATY , THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMUNITY SHALL INCLUDE INTER ALIA THE ELIMINATION , AS BETWEEN MEMBER STATES , OF QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS ON THE IMPORT AND EXPORT OF GOODS , AND OF ALL OTHER MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT , TOGETHER WITH THE APPROXIMATION OF THE LAWS OF MEMBER STATES TO THE EXTENT REQUIRED FOR THE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF THE COMMON MARKET ;   WHEREAS THE PROJECTS COVERED BY THIS DECISION ARE OF SUCH A NATURE AS TO MAKE AN EFFECTIVE CONTRIBUTION TO THE CARRYING OUT OF THESE TASKS AND WHEREAS , THEREFORE , THEY ARE NECESSARY WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE FUNCTIONING OF THE COMMON MARKET FOR THE ACHIEVEMENT OF THE SAID OBJECTIVES ;   WHEREAS THE TREATY DOES NOT PROVIDE THE NECESSARY POWERS FOR THIS PURPOSE ;   WHEREAS , IN ITS RESOLUTION OF 14 JANUARY 1974 ON A FIRST ACTION PROGRAMME OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES IN THE FIELD OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ( 4 ), THE COUNCIL STATED THAT THE WHOLE RANGE OF AVAILABLE WAYS AND MEANS , INCLUDING INDIRECT ACTION , SHOULD BE USED AS APPROPRIATE ;   HAVING REGARD TO THE OPINION DELIVERED BY THE SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL RESEARCH COMMITTEE ( CREST ),   HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS :   ARTICLE 1   A RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME IN THE FIELD OF REFERENCE MATERIALS AND METHODS AND OF APPLIED METROLOGY , IS HEREBY ADOPTED FOR A PERIOD OF FOUR YEARS WITH EFFECT FROM 1 JANUARY 1979 .   THE TEXT OF THE PROGRAMME IS ANNEXED TO THIS DECISION .   ARTICLE 2   THE APPROPRIATIONS NECESSARY FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAMME , THE AMOUNT OF WHICH IS FIXED AT 10.3 MILLION EUROPEAN UNITS OF ACCOUNT , INCLUDING 14 STAFF SHALL BE ENTERED IN THE BUDGET OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES .   THE EUROPEAN UNIT OF ACCOUNT IS DEFINED IN ARTICLE 10 OF THE FINANCIAL REGULATION OF 21 DECEMBER 1977 APPLICABLE TO THE GENERAL BUDGET OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES .   ARTICLE 3   THE COMMISSION SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAMME . IT SHALL BE ASSISTED IN THIS TASK BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT ( REFERENCE MATERIALS AND METHODS ), THE TERMS OF REFERENCE OF WHICH ARE SET OUT BY THE COUNCIL IN ITS RESOLUTION OF 18 JULY 1977  ( 5 ), AND WHOSE POWERS ARE HEREBY EXTENDED TO PROJECTS COVERED BY THIS DECISION .   WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE FOUR-YEAR PROGRAMME OF THE JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE ( JRC ) ADOPTED BY DECISION 77/488/EEC , EURATOM ( 6 ), DIRECT ACTION BY THE JRC IN THE SAME FIELD SHALL REMAIN ASSOCIATED WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECTS 1 AND 2 OF THE PROGRAMME ADOPTED BY THIS DECISION .   ARTICLE 4   IN ORDER THAT DUE ACCOUNT MAY BE TAKEN OF THE CONTENT OF THE NEW FOUR-YEAR PROGRAMME OF THE JRC , THE PROGRAMME ADOPTED BY THIS DECISION SHALL , WITHIN THE SIX MONTHS FOLLOWING THE ADOPTION OF THE NEW JRC PROGRAMME , BE REVIEWED AND POSSIBLY REVISED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROPRIATE PROCEDURE AND AFTER CONSULTATION OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT .   DURING THE THIRD YEAR , THERE SHALL ALSO BE A GENERAL REVIEW OF THE PROGRAMME WHICH WILL POSSIBLY BE REVISED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROPRIATE PROCEDURE AND AFTER CONSULTATION OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT .   ARTICLE 5   THE KNOWLEDGE RESULTING FROM THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAMME SHALL BE DISSEMINATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNCIL REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 2380/74 OF 17 SEPTEMBER 1974 ADOPTING PROVISIONS FOR THE DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION RELATING TO RESEARCH PROGRAMMES FOR THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY ( 1 ).   DONE AT LUXEMBOURG , 9 OCTOBER 1979 .   FOR THE COUNCIL   THE PRESIDENT   D . O ' MALLEY ****    ANNEX   RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME IN THE FIELD OF REFERENCE MATERIALS AND METHODS ( COMMUNITY BUREAU OF REFERENCE  -  BCR ) AND APPLIED METROLOGY ( NON-NUCLEAR INDIRECT ACTION )   THE PROGRAMME COMPRISES THREE PROJECTS AS DESCRIBED BELOW . THE FIRST TWO ARE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMUNITY BUREAU OF REFERENCE .   THE AIM OF THE PROGRAMME IS TO STRENGTHEN , SUPPLEMENT AND HARMONIZE NATIONAL ACTIVITIES IN THE FIELD OF REFERENCE MATERIALS , ANALYTICAL AND MEASURING METHODS AND APPLIED METROLOGY .   1 . REFERENCE MATERIALS AND METHODS   THIS PROJECT SHALL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES :   -  EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION ON REFERENCE MATERIALS AND METHODS AND IN PARTICULAR ON NATIONAL ACTIVITIES IN THESE FIELDS ;   -  DETERMINATION OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR REFERENCE MATERIALS AND METHODS ;   -  CHARACTERIZATION OF MATERIALS ;   -  ORGANIZATION OF INTER-LABORATORY COMPARISONS ;   -  JOINT PREPARATION OF REFERENCE MATERIALS ;   -  CERTIFICATION OF THE PROPERTIES OF REFERENCE MATERIALS AT COMMUNITY LEVEL ;   -  JOINT DEFINITION OF REFERENCE METHODS .   2 . MANAGEMENT AND DISTRIBUTION OF COMMUNITY REFERENCE MATERIALS   THIS PROJECT COMPRISES THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES :   -  STORAGE AND PRESERVATION OF BCR REFERENCE MATERIALS IN JRC LABORATORIES AND NATIONAL LABORATORIES ;   -  PREPARATION OF INFORMATION TO BE DISSEMINATED TO PUBLICIZE REFERENCE MATERIALS BY SUITABLE MEANS WITHIN AND OUTSIDE THE COMMUNITY ;   -  DISTRIBUTION OF SAMPLES .   3 . APPLIED METROLOGY   THIS PROJECT COMPRISES THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES :   -  INTER-LABORATORY COMPARISONS OF SECONDARY AND TRANSFER STANDARDS FOR DERIVED UNITS OF MEASUREMENT ;   -  IMPROVEMENT OF MEASURING TECHNIQUES AND THEIR ACCURACY ;   -  DEVELOPMENT OF NEW MEASURING TECHNIQUES ;   -  EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION AND OF SCIENTIFIC PERSONNEL .   STUDIES AND RESEARCH WORK WILL BE CARRIED OUT UNDER CONTRACT .


title: Council Decision (EU) 2016/1623 of 1 June 2016 on the signing, on behalf of the European Union and provisional application of the Economic Partnership Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the SADC EPA States, of the other part

text:
               16.9.2016

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 250/1

         COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2016/1623
   of 1 June 2016
   on the signing, on behalf of the European Union and provisional application of the Economic Partnership Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the SADC EPA States, of the other part
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 207(3) and (4) and Article 209(2), in conjunction with Article 218(5) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 12 June 2002, the Council authorised the Commission to open negotiations for Economic Partnership Agreements with the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States.

               (2)

               The negotiations have been concluded and the Economic Partnership Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the SADC EPA States (comprising Botswana, Lesotho, Mozambique, Namibia, Swaziland and South Africa), of the other part (‘the Agreement’), was initialled on 15 July 2014.

               (3)

               The Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000, calls for the conclusion of WTO-compatible Economic Partnership Agreements.

               (4)

               Article 113(3) of the Agreement provides for its provisional application by the Union and the SADC EPA States pending its entry into force.

               (5)

               The Agreement should be signed on behalf of the Union and it should be applied, as regards those elements falling within the competence of the Union, on a provisional basis, pending the completion of the procedures for its conclusion,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   1.   The signing on behalf of the European Union of the Economic Partnership Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the SADC EPA States, of the other part is hereby authorised on behalf of the Union, subject to the conclusion of the said Agreement.
   2.   The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision.
   Article 2
   The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person(s) empowered to sign the Agreement on behalf of the Union.
   Article 3
   1.   As regards those elements falling within the competence of the Union, the Agreement shall be applied by the Union on a provisional basis as provided for in Article 113(3) thereof, pending the completion of the procedures for its conclusion. This does not prejudge the allocation of competences between the Union and its Member States in accordance with the Treaties.
   2.   Article 12(4) of the Agreement shall not be provisionally applied by the Union.
   3.   The Commission shall publish a notice indicating the date of provisional application of the Agreement.
   Article 4
   The Agreement shall not be construed as conferring rights or imposing obligations which can be directly invoked before Union or Member State courts or tribunals.
   Article 5
   This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 1 June 2016.

            For the Council

            The President

         A.G. KOENDERS


title: 2010/758/EU: Council Decision of 2 December 2010 on the launch of automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in Bulgaria

text:
               8.12.2010

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 322/43

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 2 December 2010
   on the launch of automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in Bulgaria
   (2010/758/EU)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (1), in particular Article 25 thereof,
   Having regard to Council Decision 2008/616/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the implementation of Decision 2008/615/JHA (2), in particular Article 20 and Chapter 4 of the Annex thereto,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               According to the Protocol on Transitional Provisions annexed to the Treaty on European Union, to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, the legal effects of the acts of the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union adopted prior to the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon are preserved until those acts are repealed, annulled or amended in implementation of the Treaties.

               (2)

               Accordingly, Article 25 of Decision 2008/615/JHA is applicable and the Council must unanimously decide whether the Member States have implemented the provisions of Chapter 6 of that Decision.

               (3)

               Article 20 of Decision 2008/616/JHA provides that decisions referred to in Article 25(2) of Decision 2008/615/JHA are to be taken on the basis of an evaluation report based on a questionnaire. With respect to automated data exchange in accordance with Chapter 2 of Decision 2008/615/JHA, the evaluation report is to be based on an evaluation visit and a pilot run.

               (4)

               According to Chapter 4, point 1.1 of the Annex to Decision 2008/616/JHA, the questionnaire drawn up by the relevant Council Working Group concerns each of the automated data exchanges and has to be answered by a Member State as soon as it believes it fulfils the prerequisites for sharing data in the relevant data category.

               (5)

               Bulgaria has completed the questionnaire on data protection and the questionnaire on dactyloscopic data exchange.

               (6)

               A successful pilot run has been carried out by Bulgaria with Austria.

               (7)

               An evaluation visit has taken place in Bulgaria and a report on the evaluation visit has been produced by the Austrian/Spanish evaluation team and forwarded to the relevant Council Working Group.

               (8)

               An overall evaluation report, summarising the results of the questionnaire, the evaluation visit and the pilot run concerning dactyloscopic data exchange has been presented to the Council,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   For the purposes of automated searching of dactyloscopic data, Bulgaria has fully implemented the general provisions on data protection of Chapter 6 of Decision 2008/615/JHA and is entitled to receive and supply personal data pursuant to Article 9 of that Decision as from the date of the entry into force of this Decision.
   Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 2 December 2010.

            For the Council

            The President

         M. WATHELET

      (1)  OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 12.


Important legal notice

|

E1999C0805(02)

Authorisation of State aid pursuant to Article 61 of the EEA Agreement and Article 1(3) of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement - EFTA Surveillance Authority decision not to raise objections

Official Journal C 223 , 05/08/1999 P. 0008

Authorisation of State aid pursuant to Article 61 of the EEA Agreement and Article 1(3) of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court AgreementEFTA Surveillance Authority decision not to raise objections(1999/C 223/11)Date of adoption: 10 March 1999EFTA Staate: NorwayAid No: 98-015Title: Notification of individual grant from the Rural Development Fund managed by the Country Commissioner of Hordaland to Granvin Bruk P/LObjective: Aid for regional development within the map of assisted areas for NorwayLegal basis: Regulations for Rural Development Fund by Ministry of Agriculture, 9 February 1996Aid intensity: 3,05 % NGE of the investment costs in fixed production assetsAmount of aid: Aid from Rural Development Fund: NOK 3 millionDuration: Individual award of aid