title: Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/1990 of 14 November 2016 amending Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP on the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244 (1999) and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence. ) (EULEX KOSOVO)

text:
                  15.11.2016

                  EN

                  Official Journal of the European Union

                  L 306/16

            COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2016/1990
      of 14 November 2016
      amending Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP on the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (*) (EULEX KOSOVO)
      THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
      Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 28, Article 42(4) and Article 43(2) thereof,
      Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
      Whereas:

                  (1)

                  On 4 February 2008, the Council adopted Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP (1).

                  (2)

                  On 14 June 2016, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2016/947 (2), which amended Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP, extended the mandate of EULEX KOSOVO until 14 June 2018 and provided a new financial reference amount for the implementation of its mandate in Kosovo until 14 December 2016 and for support to the relocated judicial proceedings within a Member State until 14 June 2017.

                  (3)

                  A new reference amount should be provided for the implementation of the mandate of EULEX KOSOVO until 14 June 2017.

                  (4)

                  Nothing in this Decision should be understood as prejudicing the independence and the autonomy of the judges and prosecutors.

                  (5)

                  Due to the special character of the activities of EULEX KOSOVO in support of the relocated judicial proceedings within a Member State, it is appropriate to identify in this Decision the amount envisaged to cover the support to the relocated judicial proceedings within a Member State and to provide for the implementation of that part of the budget through a grant.

                  (6)

                  The rules on participation in the Mission's procurement procedures and the rules of origin applicable to the goods that it purchases should be aligned with provisions for other civilian CSDP missions.

                  (7)

                  Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP should be amended accordingly.

                  (8)

                  EULEX KOSOVO will be conducted in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union's external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty,

            HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
      Article 1
      Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP is amended as follows:

                  (1)

                  Article 16 is amended as follows:

                              (a)

                              paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:
                              ‘1.   The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure of EULEX KOSOVO until 14 October 2010 shall be EUR 265 000 000.
                              The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure of EULEX KOSOVO from 15 October 2010 until 14 December 2011 shall be EUR 165 000 000.
                              The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure of EULEX KOSOVO from 15 December 2011 until 14 June 2012 shall be EUR 72 800 000.
                              The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure of EULEX KOSOVO from 15 June 2012 until 14 June 2013 shall be EUR 111 000 000.
                              The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure of EULEX KOSOVO from 15 June 2013 until 14 June 2014 shall be EUR 110 000 000.
                              The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure of EULEX KOSOVO from 15 June 2014 until 14 October 2014 shall be EUR 34 000 000.
                              The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure of EULEX KOSOVO from 15 October 2014 until 14 June 2015 shall be EUR 55 820 000.
                              The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure of EULEX KOSOVO from 15 June 2015 until 14 June 2016 shall be EUR 77 000 000.
                              The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure of EULEX KOSOVO from 15 June 2016 until 14 June 2017 shall be EUR 86 850 000.
                              Out of the amount referred to in the ninth subparagraph, the amount intended to cover the expenditure of EULEX KOSOVO for the implementation of its mandate in Kosovo shall be EUR 34 500 000 from 15 June until 14 December 2016 and EUR 23 250 000 from 15 December 2016 until 14 June 2017; EUR 29 100 000 shall cover the support to the relocated judicial proceedings within a Member State from 15 June 2016 until 14 June 2017 and shall also retroactively cover expenditure arising from the support to the relocated judicial proceedings as of 1 April 2016. The Commission shall sign a grant agreement with a registrar acting on behalf of a registry in charge of the administration of the relocated judicial proceedings for that amount. The rules on grants provided for in Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council (**) shall apply to this grant agreement.
                              The financial reference amount for the subsequent period for EULEX KOSOVO shall be decided by the Council.

                                 (**)  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 (OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1).’;"

                              (b)

                              paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:
                              ‘2.   All expenditure shall be managed in accordance with the rules and procedures applicable to the general budget of the Union. The participation of natural and legal persons in the award of procurement contracts financed out of the Mission's budget shall be open without limitations. Moreover, no rule of origin shall apply for goods purchased by EULEX KOSOVO.’;

                              (c)

                              paragraph 3 is replaced by the following:
                              ‘3.   Subject to the Commission's approval, the Head of Mission may conclude technical arrangements with EU Member States, participating third States and other international actors deployed in Kosovo regarding the provision of equipment, services and premises to EULEX KOSOVO. The position of contract holder of contracts or under arrangements concluded by EUPT Kosovo for EULEX KOSOVO during the planning and preparation phase shall be transferred to EULEX KOSOVO, as appropriate. Assets owned by EUPT Kosovo shall be transferred to EULEX KOSOVO.’.

                  (2)

                  In Article 18, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:
                  ‘1.   The HR shall be authorised to release to the United Nations, NATO/KFOR, other third parties associated with this Joint Action and Frontex EU classified information and documents generated for the purposes of EULEX Kosovo up to the level of the relevant classification respectively for each of them, in accordance with Decision 2013/488/EU. Local technical arrangements shall be drawn up to facilitate this.’.

            Article 2
      This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

         Done at Brussels, 14 November 2016.

               For the Council

               The President

            F. MOGHERINI

         (*)  This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244 (1999) and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence.

         (1)  Council Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP of 4 February 2008 on the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo, EULEX KOSOVO (OJ L 42, 16.2.2008, p. 92).

         (2)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/947 of 14 June 2016 amending Joint Action 2008/124/CFSP on the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX Kosovo) (OJ L 157, 15.6.2016, p. 26).


title: Political and Security Committee Decision (CFSP) 2017/682 of 29 March 2017 on the appointment of the EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina and repealing Decision (CFSP) 2016/332 (BiH/25/2017)

text:
               11.4.2017

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 98/20

         POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE DECISION (CFSP) 2017/682
   of 29 March 2017
   on the appointment of the EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina and repealing Decision (CFSP) 2016/332 (BiH/25/2017)
   THE POLITICAL AND SECURITY COMMITTEE,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 38 thereof,
   Having regard to Council Joint Action 2004/570/CFSP of 12 July 2004 on a European Union military operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina (1), and in particular Article 6 (1) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Pursuant to Article 6(1) of Joint Action 2004/570/CFSP, the Council authorised the Political and Security Committee (PSC) to take the relevant decisions on the appointment of the EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina (the ‘EU Force Commander’).

               (2)

               On 23 February 2016, the PSC adopted Decision (CFSP) 2016/332 (2) appointing Major General Friedrich SCHRÖTTER as EU Force Commander.

               (3)

               The EU Operation Commander has recommended the appointment of Brigadier General Anton WALDNER as the new EU Force Commander to succeed Major General Friedrich SCHRÖTTER as from 28 March 2017.

               (4)

               The EU Military Committee supports that recommendation.

               (5)

               Decision (CFSP) 2016/332 should therefore be repealed.

               (6)

               In accordance with Article 5 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark does not participate in the elaboration and the implementation of decisions and actions of the Union which have defence implications.

               (7)

               On 12 and 13 December 2002, the Copenhagen European Council adopted a declaration stating that the ‘Berlin plus’ arrangements and the implementation thereof will apply only to those Member States of the Union which are also either NATO members or parties to the ‘Partnership for Peace’, and which have consequently concluded bilateral security agreements with NATO,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Brigadier General Anton WALDNER is hereby appointed EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina as from 28 March 2017.
   Article 2
   Decision (CFSP) 2016/332 is hereby repealed.
   Article 3
   This Decision shall enter into force on 28 March 2017.

      Done at Brussels, 29 March 2017.

            For the Political and Security Committee

            The Chairperson

         W. STEVENS

      (1)  OJ L 252, 28.7.2004, p. 10.

      (2)  Political and Security Committee Decision (CFSP) 2016/332 of 23 February 2016 on the appointment of the EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina and repealing Decision BiH/22/2014 (BiH/23/2016) (OJ L 62, 9.3.2016, p. 14).


title: EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision No 22/04/COL of 25 February 2004 with regard to a notification of a new direct transport aid scheme (Norway)

text:
               30.6.2005

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 168/36

         EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY DECISION
   No 22/04/COL
   of 25 February 2004
   with regard to a notification of a new direct transport aid scheme (Norway)
   THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY,
   Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (1), in particular to Articles 61 to 63 and Protocol 26 thereof,
   Having regard to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice (2), in particular to Article 24 and Protocol 3 thereof,
   Having regard to the Authority’s Guidelines (3) on the application and interpretation of Articles 61 and 62 of the EEA Agreement,
   Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provisions cited above (4),
   Whereas:
   I.   FACTS
   1.   Introduction
   By letter from the Mission of Norway to the European Union dated 26 March 2003 (Doc. No: 03-1846 A), forwarding a letter from the Ministry of Trade and Industry dated 25 March 2003, a letter from the Ministry of Finance dated 25 March 2003 and a letter from the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development dated 25 March 2003, all received and registered by the Authority on 26 March 2003, the Norwegian authorities notified a transition period for the regionally differentiated social security contributions and a new direct transport aid scheme.
   By letter dated 16 May 2003 (Doc. No: 03-2951 D), the Authority acknowledged the receipt of the above letters and requested additional information.
   By letter from the Mission of Norway to the European Union dated 10 June 2003 (Doc. No: 03-3707 A), forwarding a letter from the Ministry of Finance dated 5 June 2003, both received and registered by the Authority on 11 June 2003, the Norwegian authorities submitted additional information.
   By letter from the Mission of Norway to the European Union dated 19 June 2003 (Doc. No: 03-3976 A), forwarding a letter from the Ministry of Trade and Industry dated 10 June 2003, both received and registered by the Authority on 20 June 2003, the Norwegian authorities submitted a survey documenting additional transport costs (5).
   By letter dated 16 July 2003 (Doc. No: 03-4598 D), the Authority informed the Norwegian authorities of its decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 1(2) in Part I of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement, with regard to State aid in the form of regionally differentiated social security contributions and direct transport aid (hereinafter the decision to open an investigation).
   The decision to open an investigation was published in the Official Journal of the European Union
       (6). The Authority invited interested parties to present comments on the aid schemes concerned.
   The official response of the Norwegian authorities to the decision to open an investigation was received by fax from the Ministry of Trade and Industry dated 17 September 2003, forwarding a letter from the Ministry of Finance dated 17 September 2003 (Doc. No: 03-6381 A). The letter from the Ministry of Finance dated 17 September 2003 was also forwarded by letter from the Mission of Norway dated 18 September 2003, received and registered by the Authority on 19 September 2003 (Doc. No: 03-6451 A). The letter from the Ministry of Finance contained, inter alia, an extended version of the survey of additional transport costs that was submitted to the Authority by letter dated 19 June 2003.
   The Authority received comments from 10 interested parties concerning the decision to open an investigation.
   By letters dated 16 October 2003 (Doc. No: 03-7071 D) and 17 October 2003 (Doc. No: 03-7135), respectively, the Authority submitted the comments from third parties to the Norwegian authorities.
   By fax dated 21 October 2003, the Ministry of Trade and Industry forwarded a reply dated 21 October 2003 from the Ministry of Finance (Doc. No: 03-7243 A) concerning the comments from third parties. By letter from the Mission of Norway dated 23 October 2003, received and registered by the Authority on 24 October 2003 (Doc. No: 03-7360 A), the letter from the Ministry of Finance was also forwarded to the Authority.
   By letter from the Mission of Norway to the European Union dated 22 October 2003, forwarding a letter from the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development dated 20 October 2003, both received and registered by the Authority on 24 October 2003 (Doc. No: 03-7362 A), the Norwegian authorities notified an extension of the geographic area eligible for direct transport aid that was notified by letter dated 25 March 2003.
   By letter dated 19 December 2003 (Doc. No: 03-8952 D), the Authority requested additional information and clarification, in particular concerning the cumulation rules contained in the notified scheme.
   By fax dated 21 January 2004, the Ministry of Trade and Industry forwarded a letter dated the same day from the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development (Event No: 187224) containing additional information. By letter from the Mission of Norway to the European Union dated 23 January 2004, received and registered on 26 January 2004 (Event No: 188041), the same letter was forwarded to the Authority.
   By fax dated 9 February 2004, the Ministry of Trade and Industry forwarded a letter dated the same day from the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development (Event No: 189794). By letter from the Mission of Norway to the European Union dated 11 February 2004, received and registered on 12 February 2004 (Event No: 191138), the same letter was forwarded to the Authority. The letter dated 9 February from the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development contained a minor change concerning the administration of the scheme.
   The notification dated 25 March 2003 and the decision to open an investigation referred to above, concerned a three year transitional period, from 2004 to 2007, for the regionally differentiated social security contributions, as well as the introduction of a new direct transport aid scheme. The Authority decided on 12 November 2003 to close — with a positive decision — the investigation concerning the three year transitional period for the regionally differentiated social security contributions (Dec. No: 218/03/COL) (7).
   Consequently, the present decision deals with two aspects concerning the direct transport aid scheme. Firstly, the notification dated 25 March 2003 and the subsequent decision to open an investigation. Secondly, the additional notification dated 22 October 2003 containing a geographical extension of the scheme.
   2.   Description of the aid scheme notified on 25 March 2003
   2.1.   Aim of the scheme
   The Norwegian authorities point out that extra transport cost is one of the permanent disadvantages or costs of distance related handicaps for firms located in peripheral areas and within sparsely populated regions compared to firms located in central areas. According to the Norwegian authorities, the aim of the new scheme is thus partly to offset the competitive disadvantages that additional transport costs represent for enterprises situated long distances from their markets.
   2.2.   Proposed eligible geographic area
   The following /municipalities were proposed as eligible for national direct transport aid:

               —

               Troms: Harstad, Tromsø, Kvæfjord, Skånland, Bjarkøy, Ibestad, Gratangen, Lavangen, Bardu, Salangen, Målselv, Sørreisa, Dyrøy, Tranøy, Torsken, Berg, Lenvik and Balsfjord,

               —

               Nordland: all municipalities,

               —

               Nord-Trøndelag: Leka, Nærøy, Vikna, Flatanger, Fosnes, Overhalla, Høylandet, Grong, Namsos, Namsskogan, Røyrvik, Lierne, Snåsa, Inderøy, Namdalseid, Verran, Mosvik, Verdal, Leksvik, Meråker and Steinkjer,

               —

               Sør-Trøndelag: Hemne, Snillfjord, Hitra, Frøya, Ørland, Agdenes, Rissa, Bjugn, Åfjord, Roan, Osen, Oppdal, Rennebu, Meldal, Røros, Holtålen, Midtre Gauldal, Selbu and Tydal,

               —

               Møre og Romsdal: Kristiansund, Vanylven, Sande, Herøy, Ulstein, Hareid, Norddal, Stranda, Stordal, Rauma, Nesset, Midsund, Sandøy, Aukra, Eide, Averøy, Frei, Gjemnes, Tingvoll, Sunndal, Surnadal, Rindal, Aure, Halsa, Tustna and Smøla,

               —

               Sogn og Fjordane: Gulen, Solund, Hyllestad, Høyanger, Vik, Balestrand, Leikanger, Sogndal, Aurland, Lærdal, Årdal, Luster, Askvoll, Fjaler, Gaular, Jølster, Bremanger, Vågsøy, Selje, Eid, Hornindal, Gloppen and Stryn.

         The proposed areas eligible for direct transport aid are within the eligible area for regional aid, approved by the Authority on 17 December 1999 (327/99/COL), except for the municipalities Herøy (8 374 inhabitants), Ulstein (6 664 inhabitants), Hareid (4 780 inhabitants) and Aukra (3 026 inhabitants) in Møre og Romsdal county. The area for regional aid in Norway covers 25,2 % of the total population (8), while the proposed area for the new direct transport aid scheme, as notified on 25 October 2003, covers 16,0 % of the total population (721 079 inhabitants).
   The Norwegian authorities state that the designation of the area for regional transport aid is based on Annex XI of the State Aid Guidelines, which establishes criteria for granting aid to offset additional transport costs in low population density areas, i.e. regions with fewer than 12,5 inhabitants per square kilometre.
   The counties Troms, Nordland, Nord-Trøndelag and Sogn og Fjordane have a population density of fewer than 12,5 inhabitants per square kilometre.
   The counties Sør-Trøndelag and Møre og Romsdal do not have a low population density, but the parts of these counties proposed eligible for direct transport aid have a low population density (4,1 and 9,6 inhabitants per square kilometre, respectively). The total population of the municipalities in the two counties that are included in the proposed area is 179 792.
   The Norwegian authorities state in the notification that the population covered by the existing indirect transport aid scheme (the geographically differentiated social security contributions scheme) is 23,55 % compared to a population coverage of 16,01 % in the new proposed area, and that this is in accordance with the first condition in the fifth indent in Annex XI (see section II.3 below) of the State Aid Guidelines for national regional aid.
   2.3.   Calculation of the regional direct transport aid
   According to the notification, aid may only be given in respect of the extra costs of transporting goods inside the national territory, calculated on the basis of the most direct and economical mode of transport between the place of production and processing and the nearest commercial outlet. When transporting goods to destinations in Sweden and Finland, the calculation of the total transport distance also includes the distances within Sweden and Finland. However, aid is only given to the transport costs occurred within the national borders.
   Only documented transport costs may form the basis for calculating the aid. The transport aid is calculated as a percentage of the total transport costs. The transport costs must be specified in a consignment note or equivalent document that is dependent on the transport distance inside national boundaries, weight of goods and type of goods and on freight charges and other charges that may be attributed to the actual transport. Compensation is given on the basis of applications from the firms, the year after the transport costs occurred.
   The aid intensity will be differentiated according to two geographical transport zones and according to transport distance (minimum 350 km). The highest aid intensity priority is given to Troms, Nordland and Nord-Trøndelag (zone 1) while Sør-Trøndelag, Møre og Romsdal and Sogn og Fjordane (zone 2) is subject to lower aid intensity. Table 1 below shows the differentiation in aid intensities.
   Table 1
   Aid intensity

               (in %)

               Transport distances in kilometres

               Zone 1

               Zone 2

               350-700

               30

               20

               701-

               40

               30

         2.4.   Documentation of additional transport costs
   By letter dated 10 June 2003, the Ministry of Trade and Industry submitted a survey from the Institute of Transport Economics (TØI) (9) on the extra transport costs in the proposed area for transport aid. The survey is based on interviews with 33 enterprises divided into six samples (geographic areas). The 33 enterprises are selected from the Central Register of Establishments and Enterprises (CRE) at Statistics Norway (10) by using a random sample statistical method. The conclusion from TØI is that sample 1 (the three northernmost counties (Troms, Nordland and Nord-Trøndelag)) and sample 2 (counties in Western-Norway (Sør-Trøndelag, Møre og Romsdal and Sogn og Fjordane)) have on average transport costs per man-year — in total and for transport distances above 350 kilometres — that are significantly above comparable cost figures for the reference area. The reference area is zone 1 of the geographically differentiated social security contributions scheme (mostly Oslo and surrounding areas).
   2.5.   Duration of the scheme
   1 January 2004-31 December 2006.
   2.6.   Budget
   The budget is estimated at approximately NOK 200 million (some EUR 24,5 million) per year.
   2.7.   Cumulation
   By setting the maximum aid intensities as percentages of the total transport costs (see table 1 above), the Norwegian authorities state that they will ensure that firms are not being overcompensated. If undertakings benefit from a reduced social security contribution in the same period, the advantages of this reduction will be deducted from the transport aid grant calculated according to table 1. Furthermore, the undertakings will not receive more in transport aid from the new transport aid scheme and reduced social security contributions, altogether, than the amount equivalent to what they would have received through the existing differentiation of social security contributions.
   2.8.   Sectors exempted from the scheme and sensitive sectors that are subject to specific notification requirements
   The economic activities hereunder cannot, according to the notification, receive direct transport aid.

               (a)

               The scheme does not apply to transport or transmission of products of the following sectors and/or products of businesses without an alternative location:

                           —

                           production and distribution of electricity,

                           —

                           extraction of crude petroleum and natural gas,

                           —

                           service activities incidental to oil and gas extraction excluding surveying,

                           —

                           mining of metal ores,

                           —

                           extraction of the industrial minerals nepheline syenite and olivine.

               (b)

               Industries covered by specific sectoral rules
               The following sectors may not receive regional transport aid due to specific sectoral rules:

                           —

                           enterprises covered by the Act referred to in point 1a and b of Annex XV to the EEA Agreement (on aid to the steel industry and aid to shipbuilding).

               (c)

               Economic activities within the agriculture/forestry-and-fisheries-sectors that will still be subject to the current system of differentiated rates of social security contribution.

         Direct transport aid given to the motor vehicle industry or industrial production of synthetic fibres will, according to the notification, be subject to prior notification and approval by the Authority in accordance with the State Aid Guidelines.
   2.9.   The decision to open an investigation
   In its decision of 16 July 2003 to open an investigation, the Authority expressed two doubts in respect of the direct aid scheme.
   Firstly, the Authority noted that four of the notified municipalities proposed eligible for direct transport aid are outside the approved regional aid map (Herøy, Ulstein, Hareid and Aukra). As the Norwegian authorities have not notified an adjustment of the map of assisted areas, the Authority considered that direct transport aid to these four municipalities would be incompatible with the State aid provisions of the EEA Agreement.
   Secondly, the Authority considered that the documentation submitted by the Norwegian authorities did not, to a sufficient degree, prove that additional transport costs exist in the geographical areas in southern Norway proposed eligible for direct transport aid (Sogn og Fjordane, Møre og Romsdal and Sør-Trøndelag).
   2.10.   Comments from Norway to the decision to open an investigation
   By letter dated 17 September 2003 from the Ministry of Finance, the Norwegian authorities submitted comments on the Authority’s decision to open an investigation. The Norwegian authorities stated that, to ensure the validity of the previously presented documentation for extra transport costs in the notified area for transport aid, they had carried out a more extended survey compared to the one submitted by letter dated 19 June 2003 (enclosed with the comments). This survey confirmed the results of the previous survey, according to the Norwegian authorities.
   The extended survey (11) covers 39 enterprises, including firms in the area not proposed eligible for the new national transport aid. Transport costs in zone 1 of the geographically differentiated social security contributions scheme are established as reference transport costs compared to extra transport costs in areas proposed eligible for direct transport aid. The conclusions of the study confirm, according to the Norwegian authorities, that enterprises in the counties of Troms, Nordland, Nord-Trøndelag, Sør-Trøndelag, Møre og Romsdal and Sogn and Fjordane have average transport costs — both in total and for distances above 350 kilometres — that are significantly higher than for enterprises in the reference area. The transport costs in the counties Troms, Nordland and Nord-Trøndelag are 220 % higher than the reference area for transport distances above 350 kilometres. The transport costs in the counties Sør-Trøndelag, Møre og Romsdal and Sogn og Fjordane are 143 % higher than the reference area for transport distances above 350 kilometres.
   2.11.   Comments from interested parties to the decision to open an investigation
   Ten organisations and undertakings from Norway submitted comments to the decision to open an investigation. The main part of the comments concerned the geographically differentiated social security contributions scheme (transition period). The interested parties commenting upon the direct transport aid scheme, inter alia, stated that they do not know how the direct transport aid scheme will work, or what the effects of the scheme will be. Some comments also claim that the new direct transport aid scheme will only, to a limited extent, reduce the additional transport costs for enterprises located in the peripheral regions in Norway.
   By letter dated 23 October 2003 from the Mission of Norway to the European Union, forwarding a letter dated 21 October 2003 from the Ministry of Trade and Industry and a letter dated 21 October 2003 from the Ministry of Finance, all received and registered by the Authority on 24 October (Doc. No: 03-7360 A), the Norwegian authorities briefly commented upon the comments from third parties. The Norwegian authorities note that the considerations and figures put forward in the comments from third parties substantiate the arguments that have been presented previously to the Authority. The Norwegian authorities also note that no third parties have raised any objections to the notified direct transport aid scheme.
   3.   Description of the notification of 22 October 2003
   3.1.   Extension of the geographical scope
   On 22 October 2003 the Norwegian authorities notified an extension of the geographical scope of the scheme notified on 25 March 2003. The following 13 municipalities were also proposed as eligible for national direct transport aid:

               in Hedmark county: Rendalen, Engerdal, Tolga, Tynset, Alvdal, Folldal and Os,

               in Oppland county: Dovre, Lesja, Lom, Skjåk, Vågå and Sel.

         The total population in these 13 municipalities is 37 271 persons. Both Hedmark and Oppland have a population density of fewer than 12,5 inhabitants per square kilometre. The population density for the area in Hedmark proposed as eligible for direct transport aid is 1,5 inhabitants per square kilometre, while it is 2,0 inhabitants per square kilometre for the proposed eligible area in Oppland county.
   3.2.   Amended justification for including municipalities from non-low population density counties (Møre og Romsdal and Sør-Trøndelag)
   In the notification dated 22 October 2003, the Norwegian authorities amended their justification for including municipalities from counties that do not have a low population density in the proposed area eligible for direct transport aid (see last paragraph in point I.2.2 above).
   The Norwegian authorities now argue that it is justified to include municipalities in Sør-Trøndelag and Møre og Romsdal according to Annex XI of the State Aid Guidelines, because the population of Sør-Trøndelag and Møre og Romsdal within the proposed area for direct transport aid is 179 792 inhabitants, while the population in other low density population counties (12) within the regional aid map, but outside the proposed transport aid map, is 172 322 inhabitants. The population within the proposed direct transport aid area in Sør-Trøndelag and Møre og Romsdal (counties with a population density higher than 12,5 inhabitants per square kilometre) is thus slightly higher (7 470 inhabitants) than the population within the regional aid map, but outside the proposed direct transport aid map, in counties with a low population density. The Norwegian authorities consider that it is within the Authority’s discretionary powers to approve this limited increase in the population covered by the scheme.
   3.3.   Additional documentation of transport costs
   As part of the amended notification of 22 October 2003, the Norwegian authorities submitted a new survey covering enterprises in notified municipalities in Hedmark and Oppland. The method used is the same as in the first survey (see point 2.4 above).
   The survey (13) — also carried out by TØI — covers 13 enterprises in 13 municipalities in the northern parts of the counties of Hedmark and Oppland. Engerdal municipality was not covered by the survey, but is included in the additional notification. The survey confirms, according to the Norwegian authorities, that the enterprises in these 12 municipalities have transport costs — both in total and for distances above 350 kilometres — that on average are significantly higher than the costs of enterprises in the reference area. The reference area is the same as for the first study. The survey concludes that the transport costs in the 12 municipalities are 120 % higher than the reference area for transport distances above 350 kilometres.
   II.   APPRECIATION
   1.   The existence of aid
   Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement reads as follows:

      ‘Save as otherwise provided in this Agreement, any aid granted by EC Member States, EFTA States 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 Contracting Parties, be incompatible with the functioning of this Agreement.’

   The notified aid is being funded by State resources and will favour certain undertakings in the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. The benefiting enterprises are actually or potentially in competition with similar undertakings in Norway and other EEA States. As the proposed aid distorts or threatens to distort competition and affects trade within the EEA, the scheme therefore constitutes State aid in the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.
   2.   Notification requirement
   Article 1(3) in Part I of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement states: ‘The EFTA Surveillance Authority shall be informed, in sufficient time to enable it to submit its comments, of any plans to grant or alter aid.’ Aid provided without notification or aid that is notified late, i.e. notified after being ‘put into effect’ is considered unlawful aid.
   By letters from the Mission of Norway to the European Union dated 26 March 2003 (Doc. No: 03-1846 A), 10 June 2003 (Doc. No: 03-3707 A), 22 October 2003 (Doc. No: 03-7362 A), 23 January 2004 (Event No: 188041) and 11 February 2004 (Event No: 191138) the Norwegian authorities have complied with their obligation under Article 1(3) in Part I of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement by notifying the aid measure before putting it into effect.
   3.   Relevant legal basis
   In their notifications, the Norwegian authorities qualified the aid granted under the proposed scheme as transport aid.
   Chapter 25.4(27) of the Authority’s State Aid Guidelines states that: ‘In the regions of low population density qualifying either for exemption under Article 61(3)(a) or under 61(3)(c) on the basis of the population density test referred to in Chapter 25.3, paragraph 17, aid intended partly to offset additional transport costs (14) may be authorised under special conditions. It is up to the EFTA State to prove that such additional costs exist and to determine their amount.’
   Chapter 25(3), paragraph 17, of the State Aid Guidelines defines low population density as below 12,5 inhabitants per square kilometre.
   With regard to the special conditions for regions qualifying for the Article 61(3)(c) derogation under the population density criterion, Chapter 25.4(27) of the Guidelines refers to Annex XI that sets out the conditions to be met for aid to qualify for exemption. The conditions to be met are:

               ‘—

               Aid may serve only to compensate for the additional cost of transport. The EFTA State concerned will have to show that compensation is needed on objective grounds. There must never be overcompensation. Account will have to be taken here of other schemes of assistance to transport.

               —

               Aid may be given only in respect of the extra cost of transport of goods inside the national borders of the country concerned. It must not be allowed to become export aid.

               —

               Aid must be objectively quantifiable in advance, on the basis of an aid-per-kilometre ratio or on the basis of an aid-per-kilometre and an aid-per-unit-weight ratio, and there must be an annual report drawn up which, among other things, shows the operation of the ratio or ratios.

               —

               The estimate of the additional cost must be based on the most economical form of transport and the shortest route between the place of production or processing and commercial outlets.

               —

               Aid may be given only to firms located in areas qualifying for regional aid on the basis of the new population density test. Such areas will be made up essentially of NUTS level III geographic regions with a population density of less than 12,5 inhabitants per square kilometre. However, a certain flexibility is allowed in the selection of areas, subject to the following limitations:

                           —

                           flexibility in the selection of areas must not mean an increase in the population covered by transport aid,

                           —

                           the NUTS III parts qualifying for flexibility must have a population density of less than 12,5 inhabitants per square kilometre,

                           —

                           they must be contiguous with NUTS III regions which satisfy the low population density test,

                           —

                           their population must remain low compared with the total coverage of the transport aid;

               —

               No aid may be given towards the transport or transmission of the products of businesses without an alternative location (products of the extractive industries, hydroelectric power stations, etc.);

               —

               Transport aid given to firms in industries which the EFTA Surveillance Authority considers sensitive (motor vehicles, synthetic fibres, shipbuilding and steel) must always be notified in advance and will be subject to the industry guidelines in force.’

         In Chapter 25.5(5) of the State Aid Guidelines it is stated in relation to the EFTA State’s regional aid maps that: ‘During the period of validity of the map, EFTA States may request adjustments to it, if it is shown that socioeconomic conditions have changed significantly. Such changes may relate to the rates of intensity and the eligible regions, provided that the possible inclusion of new regions is offset by the exclusion of regions having the same population. The validity of the adjusted map expires on the date already set for the original map’.
   The Authority has examined the two notifications dated 25 March 2003 and 22 October 2003, respectively, in light of Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement and the relevant parts of the State Aid Guidelines on national regional aid cited above.
   4.   The notification dated 25 March 2003
   The assessment of the notification dated 25 March 2003, which was the subject of the opening decision dated 16 July 2003, has led to the following observations:
   (a)   The aid is limited to regions of low population density qualifying for Article 61(3)(c) status, with the exception of four municipalities (Chapter 25.4(27) and 25.5(5) and fifth indent of Annex XI of the State Aid Guidelines)
   The Norwegian authorities have notified four municipalities outside the current regional aid map (Herøy, Ulstein, Hareid and Aukra).
   The Authority’s authorisation of the map of assisted areas for Norway in 1999 (327/99/COL) implied an endorsement of the granting of aid to enterprises in areas covered by the regional aid map under approved regional aid schemes. It follows that regional aid (for example direct transport aid) cannot be granted outside the approved map of assisted areas.
   Chapter 25.5(5) of the State Aid Guidelines obliges Member States to remove existing regions of the approved regional aid map, in order to include new regions. As the Norwegian authorities have not notified an adjustment of the map of assisted areas in accordance with Chapter 25.5(5) of the State Aid Guidelines, regional aid (direct transport aid) to the four municipalities outside the regional aid map (Herøy, Ulstein, Hareid and Aukra, all located in the county of Møre og Romsdal)) is incompatible with the State aid provisions of the EEA Agreement. Consequently, the Norwegian authorities cannot implement the notified aid scheme for these four municipalities.
   The total population coverage in the notification dated 25 March 2003 was 721 079 inhabitants, or 16,0 % of the total population in Norway. The total population of Herøy, Ulstein, Hareid and Aukra is 22 844 inhabitants. The population coverage without these four municipalities therefore becomes 698 235 inhabitants, or 15,5 % of the total population.
   The population coverage in Sør-Trøndelag and Møre og Romsdal (the counties that do not have a low population density) was 179 792 inhabitants in the notification dated 25 March 2003. Without the four municipalities Herøy, Ulstein, Hareid and Aukra the population coverage for these two counties becomes 156 948 (15) inhabitants, which is lower than the population within the regional aid map in counties with a low population density that is not proposed eligible for direct transport aid (Hedmark, Oppland, Telemark and Aust-Agder). The total population within the regional aid map in these four counties is 209 593 inhabitants.
   The areas in Sør-Trøndelag and Møre og Romsdal proposed eligible for direct transport aid have a population density lower than 12,5 inhabitants per square kilometre. They are contiguous with the counties that satisfy the low population density test (Nord-Trøndelag and northwards). The population coverage in Sør-Trøndelag and Møre og Romsdal (156 948 inhabitants) amounts to 22,5 % of the total population coverage of the proposed scheme (698 235 inhabitants).
   As to the rest of the notified areas, they are all Article 61(3)(c) EEA areas with a low population density. The conditions of Chapter 25.4(27) and the fifth indent of Annex XI are fulfilled.
   (b)   The Norwegian authorities have proven that additional transport costs exist and have determined their amount (Chapter 25.4(27) of the State Aid Guidelines)
   To document additional transport costs, the Norwegian authorities have submitted two surveys. The first one by letter from the Mission of Norway to the European Union dated 19 June 2003, the second one, which is an extension of the first one, by letter from the Mission of Norway to the European Union dated 18 September 2003. Both surveys are random sample surveys where a number of firms were selected according to established statistical methods. For the selected firms data on transport costs were assembled.
   In the opening decision (dated 16 July 2003), the Authority expressed doubts about the documentation submitted by the Norwegian authorities (the first survey). The Authority considered that the survey did not, to a sufficient degree, prove that additional transport costs exist in the geographical areas in southern Norway proposed eligible for direct transport aid (Sogn og Fjordane, Møre og Romsdal and Sør-Trøndelag).
   In the second survey, the number of enterprises was increased. The study now confirms that enterprises located in the proposed area for direct transport aid have additional transport costs. Enterprises in the counties of Troms, Nordland, Nord-Trøndelag, Sør-Trøndelag, Møre og Romsdal and Sogn and Fjordane have average transport costs, both in total and for distances above 350 kilometres, that are significantly higher than for enterprises in the reference area. Enterprises in Troms, Nordland and Nord-Trøndelag have transport costs that are 220 % higher than enterprises in the reference area for transport distances above 350 kilometres. Enterprises in Sør-Trøndelag, Møre og Romsdal and Sogn and Fjordane have transport costs that are 143 % above the reference area for transport distances above 350 kilometres.
   The Authority finds that the Norwegian authorities have proven that additional transport costs exist, and that the condition of Chapter 25.4(27) of the State Aid Guidelines therefore is fulfilled.
   (c)   The aid serves to compensate for the additional transport costs only (first indent of Annex XI of the State Aid Guidelines)
   The aid intensities presented in table 1 in point I.2.3 above ensure that enterprises can receive aid up to a maximum of 40 % of their transport costs (for transport distances above 701 kilometres). Only transportation of more than 350 kilometres will be eligible for transport aid. The Authority considers that this is consistent with the results of the surveys presented by the Norwegian authorities (see point I.3.3 above) and finds that the scheme does not provide aid in excess of what is needed to compensate these additional transport costs.
   In order to ensure that companies are not being overcompensated, any benefit from a reduced social security contribution rate will be deducted from the transport aid grant calculated according to table 1 in point I.2.3 above.
   The condition in the first indent of Annex XI of the State Aid Guidelines is thus fulfilled.
   (d)   Aid is given only in respect of transport of goods inside the national borders of the country concerned (second indent of Annex XI of the State Aid Guidelines)
   Under the scheme, aid may only be given in respect of the extra cost of transport of goods inside national boundaries and calculated on the basis of the direct and most economical option of transport mode between the place of production and processing and commercial outlet. When transporting goods to destinations in Finland and Sweden, the calculation of total transport distance also includes the distances within Sweden and Finland but aid is only given to the transport costs incurred within the national borders.
   The condition in the second indent of Annex XI of the State Aid Guidelines is therefore fulfilled.
   (e)   The aid is objectively quantifiable in advance on the basis of an aid-per-kilometre and an aid-per-unit-weight ratio; the estimate of additional costs is based on the most economical form of transport and the shortest route (third and fourth indent of Annex XI of the State Aid Guidelines)
   The proposed scheme satisfies these requirements in the following manner:

               —

               the aid is calculated as a percentage of the transport costs (see table 1 in point I.2.3),

               —

               the transport costs refer to reasonable costs specified in a consignment note or equivalent document, and which are dependent on the transport distance inside national boundaries, weight of goods and type of goods and on freight charges and other charges that may be attributed to the actual transport,

               —

               transport costs must be calculated on the basis of the most economical mode of transport and the shortest route between place of production and the destination.

         The conditions in the third and fourth indent of Annex XI of the State Aid Guidelines are thereby fulfilled.
   (f)   The sector-specific arrangements are complied with (sixth and seventh indent of Annex XI of the State Aid Guidelines)

               —

               The scheme does not apply to transport or transmission of the products of businesses without an alternative location: production and distribution of electricity, extraction of crude petroleum and natural gas, service activities incidental to oil and gas extraction excluding surveying, mining of metal ores and extraction of the industrial minerals nepheline syenite and olivine.

               —

               The scheme does not apply to enterprises covered by the Act referred to in point 1a and b of Annex XV to the EEA Agreement (on aid to the steel industry and aid to shipbuilding).

               —

               The scheme does not apply to agriculture, forestry and fisheries that will continue to be subject to the current system of geographically differentiated social security contributions.

         The conditions in the sixth and seventh indent of Annex XI of the State Aid Guidelines are thus fulfilled.
   5.   The amended notification dated 22 October 2003
   By letter from the Mission of Norway to the European Union dated 22 October 2003, the Norwegian authorities notified a geographical extension of the scheme notified on 25 March 2003 (see point I.3.1 above).
   To document additional transport costs, the Norwegian authorities have submitted a survey that documents additional transport costs for the 13 proposed eligible municipalities in Hedmark and Oppland counties. The conclusion of the survey is that the enterprises in these 13 municipalities have transport costs — both in total and for distances above 350 kilometres — that, on average, are significantly higher than the costs of enterprises in the reference area (120 % for transport distances above 350 kilometres).
   The Authority finds that the survey proves that additional transport costs exist for the notified 13 municipalities.
   The Authority notes that the extension of the geographical scope of the scheme brings the total population coverage for the scheme up to 735 506 inhabitants (16), or 16,3 % of the total population (without the municipalities Herøy, Ulstein, Hareid and Aukra).
   The Authority also notes that the population density in the proposed areas from Hedmark and Oppland is lower than 12,5 inhabitants per square kilometre.
   Furthermore, the population within the regional aid map in counties with a low population density that is not proposed eligible for direct transport aid becomes 172 322 inhabitants (17), which is higher than the population of the areas in Møre og Romsdal and Sør-Trøndelag (the counties that do not have a low population density) that is proposed eligible for direct transport aid (156 948 inhabitants).
   Concerning the notification of 22 October 2003, the Authority concludes that the population density in the 13 municipalities is lower than 12,5 inhabitants per square kilometre and that they are within the existing regional aid map. The inclusion of these 13 municipalities does not bring the population coverage in the non-low population density counties Møre og Romsdal and Sør-Trøndelag (156 948 inhabitants) above the population coverage in the low population density counties Hedmark, Oppland, Telemark and Aust-Agder that is not proposed eligible for direct transport aid (172 322 inhabitants). The Norwegian authorities have also proven that additional transport costs exist for the 13 additional municipalities. As to the remaining requirements that need to be fulfilled, the Authority refers to the assessment in point 4 above that are equally valid when the 13 municipalities are included in the scheme.
   6.   Conclusion
   The Authority concludes, with reference to the arguments above, that direct transport aid to the four municipalities Herøy, Ulstein, Hareid and Aukra is incompatible with the State aid provisions of the EEA Agreement and the aid shall not be put into effect for these four municipalities. Otherwise, the notified direct transport aid scheme is compatible with the EEA Agreement.
   The Norwegian authorities are reminded that they are obliged to inform the Authority of any plan to amend or extend the scheme. The Norwegian authorities are also requested to submit an annual report providing detailed information on the implementation of the scheme and on the aid-per-kilometre ratio or the aid-per-kilometre and aid-per-unit-weight ratio in particular,
   HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

               1.

               Direct transport aid to the four municipalities Herøy, Ulstein, Hareid and Aukra is incompatible with the State aid provisions of the EEA Agreement. The aid shall not be put into effect for these four municipalities.

               2.

               The direct transport aid scheme, as notified by the Norwegian authorities on 25 March 2003 and 22 October 2003, with the exception of direct transport aid to the four municipalities mentioned in point 1 above, is compatible with Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement.

               3.

               This decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Norway.

               4.

               This decision is authentic in the English language.

      Done at Brussels, 25 February 2004.

            For the EFTA Surveillance Authority

            The President

         Hannes HAFSTEIN

            College Member

         Einar M. BULL

      (1)  Hereinafter referred to as the EEA Agreement.

      (2)  Hereinafter referred to as the Surveillance and Court Agreement.

      (3)  Procedural and Substantive Rules in the Field of State Aid (State Aid Guidelines), adopted and issued by the EFTA Surveillance Authority on 19 January 1994. Published in OJ L 231, 3.9.1994, p. 1. The Guidelines were last amended on 18 February 2004 (not yet published).

      (4)  Decision No 141/03/COL of 16 July 2003 (OJ C 216, 11.9.2003, p. 3 and EEA Supplement No 45 11.9.2003, p. 1).

      (5)  Institute of Transport Economics (TØI). Arbeidsdokument av 4.6.2003. U-2899. TR1180/2003.

      (6)  See footnote 4.

      (7)  OJ L 145, 9.6.2005, p. 25.

      (8)  All the population figures used in this decision are on 1 January 2002. The total population of Norway on 1 January 2002 was 4 503 436 inhabitants.

      (9)  Interju av industribedrifter i aktuelle transportstøttesoner og i referansesoner. Arbeidsdokument av 4.6.2003.

      (10)  ‘Statistisk sentralbyrås bedrifts- og foretaksregister’.

      (11)  ‘Arbeidsdokument av 4.6.2003 (rev.1.9.2003-U-2899-TR1180/2003)’.

      (12)  Population within the low density population counties of Aust-Agder, Telemark, Hedmark and Oppland.

      (13)  ‘Arbeidsdokument av 22.9.2003-U-2929-TR1194/2003’.

      (14)  Additional transport costs mean the extra costs occasioned by movements of goods within the borders of the country concerned. In no circumstances may such aid constitute export aid, nor must it constitute measures having an equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions on imports, within the meaning of Article 11 of the EEA Agreement.

      (15)  179 792 – 22 844 = 156 948.

      (16)  698 235 + 37 271 = 735 506.

      (17)  209 593 – 37 271 = 172 322.


Avis juridique important

|

31994D0748

94/748/EC: Council Decision of 10 November 1994 appointing a member and an alternate member of the Committee of the Regions

Official Journal L 298 , 19/11/1994 P. 0039 - 0039 Finnish special edition: Chapter 1 Volume 3 P. 0203  Swedish special edition: Chapter 1 Volume 3 P. 0203

COUNCIL DECISION of 10 November 1994 appointing a member and an alternate member of the Committee of the Regions (94/748/EC)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 198a thereof,  Having regard to the Council Decision of 26 January 1994 appointing members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period 26 January 1994 to 25 January 1998 (1),  Whereas a member's seat and an alternate member's seat have become vacant on the Committee of the Regions following the resignations of, respectively, Mr Joseph Fischer and Ms Ulrike Riedel, which were notified to the Council on 8 November 1994;  Having regard to the proposal from the German Government,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:   Sole Article  Mr Rupert von Plottnitz is hereby appointed a member of the Committee of the Regions in place of Mr Joseph Fischer for the remainder of the latter's term of office, which runs until 25 January 1998;  Ms Priska Hintz is hereby appointed an alternate member of the Committee of the Regions in place of Ms Ulrike Riedel for the remainder of the latter's term of office, which runs until 25 January 1998.  Done at Brussels, 10 November 1994.  For the Council The President U. SEILER-ALBRING  (1) OJ No L 31, 4. 2. 1994, p. 29.


title: 2008/521/EC: Decision of the European Parliament of 24 April 2007 on the discharge for the implementation of the budget of the European Medicines Agency for the financial year 2005

text:
               15.7.2008

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 187/128

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 24 April 2007
   on the discharge for the implementation of the budget of the European Medicines Agency for the financial year 2005
   (2008/521/EC)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
   having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Medicines Agency for the financial year 2005 (1),
   having regard to the Court of Auditors' report on the final annual accounts of the European Medicines Agency for the financial year 2005, together with the Agency's replies (2),
   having regard to the Council's Recommendation of 27 February 2007 (5711/2007 — C6-0080/2007),
   having regard to the EC Treaty, and in particular Article 276 thereof,
   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 (3), and in particular Article 185 thereof,
   having regard to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency (4), and in particular Article 68 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 (5), and in particular Article 94 thereof,
   having regard to Rule 71 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 the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A6-0099/2007),

               1.

               Grants the executive director of the European Medicines Agency discharge for the implementation of the Agency's budget for the financial year 2005;

               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 Medicines 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

         Hans-Gert PÖTTERING

            The Secretary-General

         Harald RØMER

      (1)  OJ C 266, 31.10.2006, p. 4.

      (2)  OJ C 312, 19.12.2006, p. 12.

      (3)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1995/2006 (OJ L 390, 30.12.2006, p. 1).

      (4)  OJ L 136, 30.4.2004, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 (OJ L 378, 27.12.2006, p. 1).

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

               15.7.2008

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 187/129

         RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 24 April 2007
   with observations forming an integral part of the Decision on the discharge for the implementation of the budget of the European Medicines Agency for the financial year 2005
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
   having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Medicines Agency for the financial year 2005 (1),
   having regard to the Court of Auditors' report on the final annual accounts of the European Medicines Agency for the financial year 2005, together with the Agency's replies (2),
   having regard to the Council's Recommendation of 27 February 2007 (5711/2007 — C6-0080/2007),
   having regard to the EC Treaty, and in particular Article 276 thereof,
   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 (3), and in particular Article 185 thereof,
   having regard to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency (4), and in particular Article 68 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 (5), and in particular Article 94 thereof,
   having regard to Rule 71 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 the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A6-0099/2007),

               A.

               whereas the Court of Auditors stated that it obtained reasonable assurance that the annual accounts for the financial year ended 31 December 2005 were reliable and that the underlying transactions, taken as a whole, were legal and regular;

               B.

               whereas on 27 April 2006 Parliament gave discharge to the director in respect of the implementation of the Agency's budget for the 2004 financial year (6) and in the Resolution accompanying the discharge decision Parliament, inter alia,

                           —

                           noted the Court of Auditor's finding that contracts concluded with banks had been in force for over five years, in contravention of the Agency's financial regulation implementing rules, which require a new invitation to tender at least every five years; noted the Agency's reply, explaining the reasons for the delay in launching a call for tendering, and setting out the benefits achieved through direct negotiation with the bank, and will bear this in mind when considering revisions to the Financial Regulation,

                           —

                           pointed out that the new pharmaceuticals legislation, which was adopted in 2004, had a considerable impact on the Agency's work and management structures;

         General points concerning the majority of EU Agencies requiring individual discharge

               1.

               Considers that the ever-growing number of Community Agencies and the activities of certain of them do not seem to form part of an overall policy framework, and that the remits of some Agencies do not always reflect the real needs of the Union or the expectations of its citizens, and notes that in general terms the Agencies do not always have a good image or a good press;

               2.

               Invites the Commission therefore to define an overall policy framework for the setting up of new Community Agencies and to present a cost-benefit study before the setting up of any new Agency, while being careful to avoid any overlap of activities between Agencies or with the remits of other European organisations;

               3.

               Calls on the Court of Auditors to give its opinion on the cost-benefit study before Parliament takes its decision;

               4.

               Invites the Commission to present every five years a study on the added value of every existing Agency; invites all relevant institutions in the case of a negative evaluation of the added value of an Agency to take the necessary steps by reformulating the mandate of that Agency or by closing it;

               5.

               Considers it regrettable, given the growing number of regulatory Agencies, that the negotiations on the draft interinstitutional agreement on the operating framework for the European regulatory Agencies have not yet been concluded, and calls on the relevant departments of the Commission, in consultation with the Court of Auditors, to do their utmost to ensure that the agreement is brought to a rapid conclusion;

               6.

               Notes that the Commission's budgetary responsibility calls for closer linking of the Agencies to the Commission; calls on the Commission and the Council to take all necessary steps to give the Commission a blocking minority in the supervisory bodies of the regulatory Agencies by 31 December 2007 and to provide for such a minority from the outset when new Agencies are set up;

               7.

               Invites the Court of Auditors to create an additional chapter in its Annual Report, devoted to all Agencies to be discharged under the Commission's accounts in order to have a much clearer picture of the use of EU funds by Agencies;

               8.

               Recalls the principle according to which all Community Agencies, whether subsidised or not, are subject to discharge by the Parliament, even where a discharge authority exists by virtue of their constitutive texts;

               9.

               Calls on the Court of Auditors to perform performance audits for all Agencies and to report back to the relevant committees of Parliament, including the Committee on Budgetary Control;

               10.

               Notes that the number of Agencies is constantly increasing and that, in accordance with the Commission's political responsibility for the operation of the Agencies, which goes far beyond mere logistical support, there is an even higher need for the Directorates-General of the Commission charged with the setting up and monitoring of Agencies to develop a common approach to the Agencies; considers that a structure similar to the one created by the Agencies for coordination among the DGs concerned would be a pragmatic way forward towards a common approach by the Commission on all matters relating to the Agencies;

               11.

               Invites the Commission to improve administrative and technical support to the Agencies, taking into account the growing complexity of the Community's administrative rules and technical problems;

               12.

               Notes the lack of a disciplinary body in any of the Community Agencies, and calls on the Commission to take the necessary steps to ensure that such a mechanism is rapidly put in place;

               13.

               Welcomes the considerable improvements in the coordination among the Agencies, which allows them to tackle recurring problems and makes cooperation with the Commission and Parliament more efficient;

               14.

               Takes the view that the establishment by a number of Agencies of a shared support service aimed at making their computerised financial management systems consistent with those of the Commission is a measure that should be taken further and extended;

               15.

               Calls upon the Agencies to improve their cooperation and benchmarking with actors in the field; urges the Commission and to adopt any measures it considers necessary to help the Agencies enhance their image and raise the profile of their activities;

               16.

               Calls upon the Commission to come up with a proposal to harmonise the format of the annual reporting by the Agencies and to develop performance indicators which would allow a comparison of their efficiency;

               17.

               Invites the Agencies to present at the beginning of every year performance indicators against which they could be measured;

               18.

               Invites all Agencies to increasingly use SMART objectives which should lead to more realistic planning and implementation of goals;

               19.

               Agrees with the Court of Auditors that the Commission also bears responsibility for the (financial) management of the Agencies; therefore, urges the Commission to monitor and where necessary direct and help the management of the different Agencies, especially in relation to the proper application of tender procedures, transparency of recruitment procedures, sound financial management (underspending and overbudgeting) and most importantly the proper application of the rules concerning the internal control framework;

               20.

               Considers that the Agencies' work programmes should express their contributions in operational and measurable terms and that due consideration should be given to the Commission's Internal Control Standards;

         Specific points

               21.

               Notes that the implementation of the budget, the utilisation rates for commitment appropriations (94 %) and payment appropriations (82 %) were on the whole high, and that for administrative expenditure (Title II) the utilisation rate for commitment appropriations was less than 90 %, with more than 40 % of the commitments made being carried over to the following financial year;

               22.

               Notes that the budget of the Agency has grown considerably between 2003 and 2005 due to the enlargement of the European Union and new tasks; is very pleased with the increased appropriations for, and the full implementation of, the Orphan Drugs budget line;

               23.

               Invites the Agency to make sure that only staff members with delegation rights have access to the corresponding computer system;

               24.

               Invites the Agency to integrate into its accounts the funds (7) collected from other Agencies and bodies to finance a common support service to develop their financial management information systems;

               25.

               Demands that contract award procedures should be transparent and follow the guiding rules including in the IT area;

               26.

               Invites the Agency to inform Parliament about the new call for tender concerning bank contracts according to standard rules as soon as possible;

               27.

               Points out that the new pharmaceuticals legislation, which was adopted in 2004, has had a considerable impact on the Agency's work, management structures and staff; congratulates the Agency on successfully adapting to the new regulatory framework, which entered into force in November 2005;

               28.

               Is pleased at the launch of the ‘SME office’, providing financial and administrative assistance to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2049/2005 (8);

               29.

               Welcomes the efforts of the Agency to provide more scientific advice at early stages of the development of new medicines as well as the introduction of measures to accelerate the assessment of medicines that are of critical importance to public health; notes the work done by the Agency to facilitate a quick assessment of vaccines in the event of an influenza pandemic;

               30.

               Requests that, before 1 January 2010 and every five years thereafter, the Agency commission an independent external evaluation of its achievements on the basis of its founding Regulation and the work programmes decided by the Management Board; requests further that the evaluation assess the working practices and the impact of the Agency and take into account the views of the stakeholders, at both Community and national level; requests that the Management Board of the Agency examine the conclusions of the evaluation and draft such recommendations to the Commission and Parliament as may be necessary regarding changes in the Agency, its working practices and programmes, that the evaluation and the recommendations to the Commission and Parliament shall be made public, for example on their websites, and that the Funds needed to carry out the external evaluation shall be allocated through the budget of the corresponding DG.

      (1)  OJ C 266, 31.10.2006, p. 4.

      (2)  OJ C 312, 19.12.2006, p. 12.

      (3)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1995/2006 (OJ L 390, 30.12.2006, p. 1).

      (4)  OJ L 136, 30.4.2004, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 (OJ L 378, 27.12.2006, p. 1).

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

      (6)  OJ L 340, 6.12.2006, p. 107.

      (7)  Approximately EUR 400 000.

      (8)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 2049/2005 of 15 December 2005 laying down, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council, rules regarding the payment of fees to, and the receipt of administrative assistance from, the European Medicines Agency by micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. (OJ L 329, 16.12.2005, p. 4).


title: Council Decision 2011/170/CFSP of 21 March 2011 amending Council Decision 2010/330/CFSP on the European Union Integrated Rule of Law Mission for Iraq, EUJUST LEX – IRAQ

text:
               22.3.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 76/61

         COUNCIL DECISION 2011/170/CFSP
   of 21 March 2011
   amending Council Decision 2010/330/CFSP on the European Union Integrated Rule of Law Mission for Iraq, EUJUST LEX – IRAQ
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 28 and Article 43(2) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 7 March 2005, the Council adopted Joint Action 2005/190/CFSP on the European Union Integrated Rule of Law Mission in Iraq, EUJUST LEX (1). That Joint Action, as subsequently amended and extended, expired on 30 June 2009.

               (2)

               On 11 June 2009, the Council adopted Joint Action 2009/475/CFSP (2) which continued EUJUST LEX for another 12 months until 30 June 2010 and which provided that during this period EUJUST LEX was to start a pilot phase of activities in Iraq.

               (3)

               On 14 June 2010, the Council adopted Decision 2010/330/CFSP (3) which continued EUJUST LEX for a further 24 months until 30 June 2012 and which provided that during this period EUJUST LEX – IRAQ should progressively shift its activities and relevant structures to Iraq, focusing on specialised training, while maintaining out-of-country activities as appropriate.

               (4)

               Council Decision 2010/330/CFSP provided for a financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EUJUST LEX-IRAQ for the period from 1 July 2010 to 30 June 2011. This financial reference amount should be increased to cover the Mission’s operational needs and Council Decision 2010/330/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly.

               (5)

               The mandate of the Mission is being carried out in a security context that is liable to deteriorate and to undermine the objectives of the external action of the Union as defined in Article 21 of the Treaty.

               (6)

               The command and control structure of the Mission should be without prejudice to the contractual responsibility of the Head of Mission towards the Commission for implementing the budget of the Mission,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Article 11(1) of Council Decision 2010/330/CFSP is hereby replaced by the following:

      ‘1.   The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to the Mission between 1 July 2010 and 30 June 2011 shall be EUR 22 300 000.’.

   Article 2
   This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 21 March 2011.

            For the Council

            The President

         C. ASHTON

      (1)  OJ L 62, 9.3.2005, p. 37.

      (2)  OJ L 156, 19.6.2009, p. 57.

      (3)  OJ L 149, 15.6.2010, p. 12.


title: 86/642/ECSC: Decision of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of the European Coal and Steel Community, meeting within the Council of 22 December 1986 establishing ceilings and Community supervision for imports of certain goods falling under the ECSC Treaty originating in Yugoslavia (1987)

text:
31 . 12 . 86                               Official Journal of the European Communities                                No L 380 / 59
                                                                    II
                                             (Acts whose publications is not obligatory)
                                                         COUNCIL
                   DECISION OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE
                   MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN COAL AND STEEL COMMUNITY ,
                                               MEETING WITHIN THE COUNCIL ,
                                                        of 22 December 1986
                   establishing ceilings and Community supervision for imports of certain goods falling under
                                         the ECSC Treaty originating in Yugoslavia ( 1987 )
                                                           ( 86 / 642 / ECSC )
THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF                                Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic
THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN COAL AND
                                                                         Community and the Socialist Federal Republic of
STEEL COMMUNITY , MEETING WITHIN THE COUNCIL .                           Yugoslavia ( 2 ).
In agreement with the Commission ,                                       Goods shall be set off against the ceilings only if the
                                                                         movement certificate has been submitted before the date on
                                                                         which customs duties are reimposed .
HAVE DECIDED AS FOLLOWS :
                                                                         The reaching of a ceiling shall be determined at
                                                                         Community level on the basis of imports set off against it in
                                                                         the manner defined in the preceding subparagraphs .
                            Article 1
1 . From 1 January to 31 December 1987 imports of                        The Member States shall periodically inform the
certain products originating in Yugoslavia and indicated in              Commission of imports effected in accordance with the
Article 3 of the Agreement between the Member States of                  above rules ; such information shall be supplied under the
the European Coal and Steel Community , of the one part ,                conditions laid down in paragraph 4 .
and the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia , of the
other part ( x ), shall be subject to annual ceilings and to             3 . As soon as the ceilings are reached at Community level ,
Community supervision in the Community as constituted
on 31 December 1985 .
                                                                         Member States may at any time , at the request of any one
                                                                         of them or of the Commission , and in respect of the whole
                                                                         of the Community , reintroduce the levying of the customs
The description of the goods referred to in the preceding                duties applicable to third countries .
subparagraph , their tariff headings and statistical numbers
and the levels of the indicative ceilings are given in the
Annex hereto .                                                           Within the framework of the foregoing provisions , the
                                                                         Commission shall coordinate the procedures for
                                                                         reintroducing the customs duties applicable to third
2 . Amounts shall be set off against the ceilings as and                 countries , in particular by notifying the date common to
when the goods are entered with customs authorities for                  the whole of the Community and directly applicable in each
free circulation and accompanied by a movement certificate               Member State . This notification shall be published in the
conforming to the rules contained in Protocol 3 to the                   Official Journal of the European Communities .
H OJ No L 41 , 14 . 2 . 1983 , p. 113 .                                  ( 2 ) OJ No L 41 , 14 . 2 . 1983 , p. 2 .
 ---pagebreak--- No L 380 / 60                          Official Journal of the European Communities                        31 . 12 . 86
4 . Member States shall forward to the Commission , not                                     Article 3
later than the 15th day of each month , statements of the
amounts set off during the preceding month . They shall , if      Member States shall take all measures necessary to
the Commission so requests , make up such statements for          implement this Decision .
periods of 10 days and forward them within five clear days
of expiry of the preceding 10-day period .
                                                                  Done at Brussels , 22 December 1986 .
                         Article 2
                                                                                The President
Member States and the Commission shall cooperate closely
to ensure that this Decision is complied with .                                                           G. SHAW
 ---pagebreak--- 31 . 12 . 86                          Official Journal of the European Communities                                       No L 380 / 61
                                                            ANNEX
              CCT                                                                                Level of
     Order
             heading                               Description                                  NIMEXE-code                  ceiling
      No
               No                                                                                ( tonnes )
       1        2                                       3                                              4                        5
   06.0010   73.01   Pig iron , cast iron and spiegeleisen , in pigs , blocks , lumps and
                     similar forms :
                     A. Spiegeleisen                                                        73.01-10
                     B. Haematite pig iron and cast iron                                    73.01-21 , 23 , 25 , 27   •   23 125
                     C. Phosphoric pig iron and cast iron                                   73.01-31 , 35
                     D. Other pig iron and cast iron :
                         II . Other                                                         73.01-49
   06.0020   73.08   Iron or steel coils for re-rolling                                     73.08-all Nos                 33 572
   06.0030   73.10   Bars and rods (including wire rod ), of iron or steel , hot-rolled ,
                     forged , extruded , cold-formed or cold-finished ( including
                     precision-made); hollow mining drill steel :
                     A. Not further worked than hot-rolled or extruded                      73.10-11 , 12 , 14 , 15 ,
                                                                                17 , 18             ►   22 121
                     D. Clad or surface-worked ( for example , polished , coated ):
                         I.     Not further worked than clad :
                                a ) Hot-rolled or extruded                                  73.10-42
   06.0040   73.11   Angles, shapes and sections , of iron or steel , hot-rolled , forged ,
                     extruded , cold-formed or cold-finished ; sheet piling of iron or
                     steel , whether or not drilled , punched or made from assembled
                     elements :
                     A. Angles , shapes and sections :
                             I. Not further worked than hot-rolled or extruded              73.11-11 , 12 , 14 , 16 ,  ►  3 157
                                                                                19
                         IV . Clad or surface-worked ( for example , polished ,
                                coated ):
                                a ) Not further worked than clad :
                                    1 . Hot-rolled or extruded                              73.11-41
                     B. Sheet piling                                                        73.11-50
   06.0050   73.12   Hoop and strip , of iron or steel , hot-rolled or cold-rolled :
                     A. Not further worked than hot-rolled                                  73.12-11 , 19
                     B. Not further worked than cold-rolled :
                             I. In coils for the manufacture of tinplate                    73.12-21
                     C. Clad , coated or otherwise surface-treated :
                                                                                ►      6 524
                         III . Tinned :
                                a ) Tinplate                                                73.12-51
                           V. Other ( for example , copper-plated, artificially oxidized ,
                                lacquered, nickel-plated , varnished , clad , parkerized ,
                                printed ):
                                a ) Not further worked than clad :
                                    1 . Hot-rolled                                          73.12-71
 ---pagebreak--- No L 380 / 62                           Official Journal of the European Communities                                              31 . 12 . 86
               CCT                                                                                Level of
   Order
     No
              heading                                    Description                                 NIMEXE-code                  ceiling
                No                                                                                ( tonnes )
      1          2                                            3                                             4
                                                                                E"
                                                                                5
  06.0060     73.1$   Sheets and plates , of iron or steel , hot-rolled or cold-rolled :
                      A. 'Electrical' sheets and plates                                         73.13-11 , 16
                      B. Other sheets and plates :
                             I. Not further worked than hot-rolled                              73.13-17 , 19 , 21 , 23 ,
                                                                                26 , 32 , 34 , 36
                           II . Not further worked than cold-rolled , of a thickness
                                of:
                                b ) More than 1 mm but less than 3 mm                           73.13-43 , 45
                                c ) 1 mm or less                                                73.13-47 , 49
                          III . Not further worked than burnished , polished or                                                 40 461
                                glazed                                                          73.13-50
                          IV . Clad , coated or otherwise surface-treated :
                                b ) Tinned                                                      73.13-64 . 65
                                c) Zinc-coated or lead-coated                                   73.13-67 , 68 , 72 , 74
                                d) Other ( for example , copper-plated , artificially           73.13-76 , 78 , 79 , 82 ,
                                      oxidized , lacquered , nickel-plated , varnished , clad ,        84 , 86 , 87 , 88 ,
                                     parkerized , printed )                                            89
                           V. Otherwise shaped or worked :
                                a ) Cut into shapes other than rectangular shapes , but
                                     not further worked :
                                     2 . Other                                                  73.13-92
                                                                                i
  06.0070     73.15   Alloy steel and high carbon steel in the forms mentioned in
                      heading Nos 73.06 to 73.14 :
                      A. High carbon steel :
                              I. Ingots , blooms , billets , slabs and sheets bars :
                                  b ) Other                                                     73.61-20 , 50
                           III . Coils for re-rolling                                           73.62-10
                           IV . Universal plates                                                73.62-30
                            V. Bars and rods ( including wire rod ) and hollow mining
                                  drill steel ; angles , shapes and sections :
                                  b ) Not further worked than hot-rolled or extruded            73.63-21 , 29
                                  d ) Clad or surface-worked ( for example, polished ,
                                       coated ):
                                       1 . Not further worked than clad :
                                           aa ) Hot-rolled or extruded                          73.63-72
                           VI . Hoop and strip:
                                  a ) Not further worked than hot-rolled                        73.64-20
                                 c) Clad , coated or otherwise surface-treated :
                                       1 . Not further worked than clad :
                                           aa ) Hot-rolled                                      73.64-72
                          VII . Sheets and plates :
                                 a ) Not further worked than hot-rolled                         73.65-21 , 23 , 25
                                 b ) Not further worked than cold-rolled , of a
                                       thickness of:
                                       2 . Less than 3 mm                                       73.65-55
                                 c ) Polished ,        clad ,      coated    or    otherwise    73.65-70
                                       surface-treated
                                 d ) Otherwise shaped or worked :
                                       1 . Cut into shapes other than rectangular shapes ,      73.65-81                      ► 22 041
                                           but not further worked
 ---pagebreak--- 31 . 12 . 86                         Official Journal of the European Communities                                 No L 380 / 63
                CCT                                                                                Level of
     Order
      No
               heading                                Description                           NIMEXE code               ceiling
                 No                                                                                ( tonnes )
       1          2                                       3                                        4                     5
   06.0070     73.15   B. Alloy steel :
    (cont'd ) (cont'd)
                            I. Ingots , blooms, billets , slabs and sheet bars :
                                b ) Other :
                                     1 . Ingots :
                                         bb ) Other                                     73.71-23 , 24 , 29
                                     2 . Blooms , billets , slabs and sheet bars        73.71-51 , 52 , 54 , 55 ,
                                                                                56 , 59
                          III . Coils for re-rolling                                    73.72-11 , 13 , 19
                          IV . Universal plates                                         73.72-33 , 39
                           V. Bars and rods ( including wire rod ) and hollow mining
                                drill steel ; angles , shapes and sections :
                                b ) Not further worked than hot-rolled or extruded      73.73-23 , 24 , 25 , 26 ,
                                                                                29 , 33 , 34 , 35 ,
                                                                                36 , 39
                                d ) Clad or surface-worked ( for example , polished ,
                                     coated ):
                                     1 . Not further worked than clad :
                                         aa ) Hot-rolled or extruded                    73.73-72
                          VI . Hoop and strip :
                                a ) Not further worked than hot-rolled                  73.74-21 , 23 , 29
                                c) Clad , coated or otherwise surface-treated :
                                     1 . Not further worked than clad :
                                         aa ) Hot-rolled                                73.74-72
                          VII . Sheets and plates :
                                a ) 'Electrical' sheets and plates                      73.75-11 , 19
                                b ) Other sheets and plates :
                                     1 . Not further worked than hot-rolled             73.75-23 , 24 , 29 , 33 ,
                                                                                34 , 39 , 43 , 44 ,
                                                                                49
                                     2 . Not further worked than cold-rolled , of a
                                         thickness of:
                                         bb) Less than 3 mm                             73.75-63 , 64 , 69
                                     3 . Polished , clad , coated or otherwise surface 73.75-73 , 79
                                         treated
                                     4 . Otherwise shaped or worked :
                                         aa ) Cut into shapes other than rectangular    73.75-83 , 84 , 89