title: ΓΡΑΠΤΗ ΕΡΩΤΗΣΗ αρ θ. 3245/98 του Graham WATSON προς την Επ τροπή. Αρωματοθεραπεία

eurovoc_concepts:
alternative medicine
approval
aromatic plant
market approval
marketing
medical plant
plant health legislation
vegetable oil

text: C 142/110 Επι´σηµη Εφηµερι´δα των Ευρωπαι¨κω´ ν Κοινοτη´των EL 21. 5. 1999 (1999/C 142/136) ΓΡΑΠΤΗ ΕΡΩΤΗΣΗ E-3245/98 υποβολη´ : Graham Watson (ELDR) προς την Επιτροπη´ (28 Οκτωβρι´ου 1998) Θε´µα: Αρωµατοθεραπει´α ∆εδοµε´νων των συνεχιζο´µενων συζητη´σεων περι´ φαρµα´κων φυτικη´ς προε´λευσης µε σκοπο´ την επιβολη´ αυστηρο´τερου κανονισµου´ στη βιοµηχανι´α αυτη´ ε´χει αναλογιστει´ η Επιτροπη´ το µε´γεθος των πιθανω´ ν συνεπειω´ ν για την αρωµατοθεραπει´α; Γνωρι´ζει η Επιτροπη´ ο´τι η βιοµηχανι´α αρωµατοθεραπει´ας µπορει´ να υποστει´ σοβαρε´ς επιπτω´ σεις απο´ µε´τρα ο´πως οι πωλη´σεις αιθερι´ων ελαι´ων αποκλειστικα´ απο´ φαρµακει´α και/η´ απο´ ιατρει´α; Μπορει´ επι´σης η Επιτροπη´ να επιβεβαιω´ σει ο´τι η βιοµηχανι´α αρωµατοθεραπει´ας εκπροσωπει´ται στις αρµο´διες επιτροπε´ς ω´ στε να µην αποκλεισθει´ απο´ τη συζη´τηση περι´ ενο´ς αυστηρο´τερου κανονισµου´; Απα´ ντηση του κ. Bangemann εξ ονο´µατος της Επιτροπη´ ς (25 Νοεµβρι´ου 1998) Η Επιτροπη´ δεν ε´χει υπο´ψη της κανε´να σχε´διο νοµοθετικου´ µε´τρου η´ προ´ταση που θι´γει τη βιοµηχανι´α αρωµατοθεραπευτικω´ ν µε´σων. Η αρµοδιο´τητα για τη ρυ´θµιση της πω´ λησης αιθερι´ων ελαι´ων στους καταναλωτε´ς εµπι´πτει στα κρα´τη µε´λη και, ως εκ του´του, η πω´ ληση των προι¨ο´ντων αυτω´ ν διε´πεται απο´ την εθνικη´ νοµοθεσι´α. Ορισµε´να προι¨ο´ντα χρησιµοποιου´µενα στην αρωµατοθεραπει´α ει´ναι δυνατο´ν να καλυ´πτονται απο´ τον ορισµο´ του «Φαρµα´κου» που περιλαµβα´νεται στο α´ρθρο 1 της οδηγι´ας 65/65/ΕΟΚ της 26ης Ιανουαρι´ου 1965 περι´ προσεγγι´σεως των νοµοθετικω´ ν, κανονιστικω´ ν και διοικητικω´ ν διατα´ξεων σχετικα´ µε τα φα´ρµακα (1). Εα´ν τα προι¨ο´ντα αυτα´ παρα´γονται βιοµηχανικω´ ς µπορου´ν να διατεθου´ν στην αγορα´ µο´νον αφου´ εκδοθει´ σχετικη´ α´δεια κυκλοφορι´ας συ´µφωνα µε την ισχυ´ουσα κοινοτικη´ φαρµακευτικη´ νοµοθεσι´α. Οι «διεξαγο´µενες συζητη´σεις µε θε´µα τη βοτανοθεραπει´α» στις οποι´ες αναφε´ρεται το Αξιο´τιµο Με´λος του Κοινοβουλι´ου αφορου´ν κυρι´ως το προ´βληµα του κατα´ πο´σο οι απαιτη´σεις σχετικα´ µε την απο´δειξη της ποιο´τητας, ασφα´λειας και αποτελεσµατικο´τητας ενο´ς φαρµα´κου πρε´πει να ισχυ´ουν και για τα βο´τανα ο´πως συµβαι´νει µε οιοδη´ποτε α´λλο φαρµακευτικο´ προι¨ο´ν. Σε περι´πτωση που η Επιτροπη´ αποφασι´σει − µελλοντικα´ − να καταρτι´σει συγκεκριµε´νη προ´ταση για το εν λο´γω θε´µα, θα συµβουλευτει´ σε ευρει´α βα´ση ο´λα τα ενδιαφερο´µενα µε´ρη. (1) ΕΕ L 22 της 9. 2. 1965. (1999/C 142/137) ΓΡΑΠΤΗ ΕΡΩΤΗΣΗ E-3246/98 υποβολη´ : John McCartin (PPE) προς την Επιτροπη´ (28 Οκτωβρι´ου 1998) Θε´µα: Νο´µος Αστικη´ς Ανα´πλασης 1998 Μπορει´ η Επιτροπη´ να υποδει´ξει ποιε´ς πο´λεις και κωµοπο´λεις περιλαµβα´νονται στο Νο´µο Αστικη´ς Ανα´πλασης που υπε´βαλε η κυβε´ρνηση της Ιρλανδι´ας στην Επιτροπη´ τον περασµε´νο Σεπτε´µβριο, καθω´ ς και αν ε´χουν επι´σης περιληφθει´ τοπικε´ς ζω´ νες αερολιµε´νων (και αν ναι ποιε´ς); Πο´τε αναµε´νεται η ε´κδοση απο´φασης επι´ του σχεδι´ου ω´ στε να καταστει´ δυνατη´ η ε´ναρξη ισχυ´ος του στην Ιρλανδι´α; Απα´ ντηση του κ. Van Miert εξ ονο´µατος της Επιτροπη´ ς (2 ∆εκεµβρι´ου 1998) 8πως προκυ´πτει απο´ µι´α προκαταρκτικη´ εξε´ταση του κοινοποιηθε´ντος φακε´λου, η ιρλανδικη´ κυβε´ρνηση δεν ε´χει ακο´µη οριστικοποιη´σει τη διαδικασι´α επιλογη´ς των περιοχω´ ν που καλυ´πτονται απο´ το σχε´διο. Οι περιοχε´ς αυτε´ς, στις οποι´ες θα εφαρµο´ζονται ε´να η´ περισσο´τερα απο´ τα κι´νητρα που προβλε´πονται στο σχε´διο, θα ει´ναι µικρε´ς ζω´ νες που βρι´σκονται σε δια´φορες κωµοπο´λεις και πο´λεις. Ο τελικο´ς κατα´λογος θα αποσταλει´ στην Επιτροπη´ ο´ταν ολοκληρωθει´ η διαδικασι´α επιλογη´ς. Επι´σης, ο´πως φαι´νεται απο´ τη µελε´τη του φακε´λου, το σχε´διο δεν περιλαµβα´νει τις τοπικε´ς ζω´ νες αερολιµε´νων


title: WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3244/98 by Konstantinos HATZIDAKIS to the Commission. Action to preserve the Monastery of St Andrew in occupied Cyprus

eurovoc_concepts:
Cyprus
Türkiye
architectural heritage
cultural heritage
heritage protection
religious institution

formats: html pdf print

text: 14. 5. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 135/181 (1999/C 135/227) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3229/98 by Edith Müller (V) to the Commission (26 October 1998) Subject: Competitions Can the Commission provide the following statistical information in respect of each of the staff recruitment competitions held over the last five years: number of applications, number of candidates admitted to the written tests, number of candidates admitted to the oral tests and number of successful candidates, with the figures in each case being broken down by sex and nationality? Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (25 November 1998) At the end of 1998 the Commission will present a three-year report on the recruitment requirements of the Community institutions on the basis of Article 2 of Annex XI to the Staff Regulations. The report will include the statistics requested by the Honourable Member. In the immediate future, the Commission is sending the Honourable Member and Parliament’s Secretariat a set of (not necessarily complete) statistics on the A and B open competitions organised and managed by the Commission in the period 1993-97. (1999/C 135/228) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3244/98 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission (28 October 1998) Subject: Action to preserve the Monastery of St Andrew in occupied Cyprus According to recent reports, the historic Monastery of St Andrew in the Turkish-occupied sector of Cyprus has fallen into a dire state of repair due to being completely abandoned and the failure to carry out necessary maintenance work. This information is also confirmed by reports in the Turkish Cypriot press (the newspaper Kibris), which describe the state of the monastery as very poor and point out that it is in immediate need of repair. What action can the Commission take to remedy the unacceptable state of the island’s cultural heritage? Answer given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (13 November 1998) The Commission is aware of the state of the Monastery of Saint Andrew in northern Cyprus. For the time being, however, the Turkish Cypriot authorities refuse to have any dealings with EU representatives, and the leader of the Turkish Cypriot Community broke off bi-communal contacts at the end of last year. This rules out any operation in northern Cyprus and the Commission is therefore unable to consider specific heritage conservation measures


title: SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG nr. 3255/98 van Eryl McNALLY aan de Commissie. Overdracht van overheidspensioenen tussen lidstaten

eurovoc_concepts:
free movement of persons
pension scheme
residence
social security
social-security benefit
transfer of pension rights

text: 21. 7. 1999 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen C 207/43 (1999/C 207/056) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG E-3255/98 van Eryl McNally (PSE) aan de Commissie (28 oktober 1998) Betreft: Overdracht van overheidspensioenen tussen lidstaten Kan de Commissie meedelen welke plannen op stapel staan voor mensen uit verschillende lidstaten die hun overheidspensioen overgemaakt willen zien worden naar een verblijfplaats in een andere lidstaat? Antwoord van de heer Flynn namens de Commissie (15 december 1998) Artikel 10 van Verordening (EEG) 1408/71 van de Raad van 14 juni 1971 betreffende de toepassing van de sociale zekerheidsregelingen op werknemers en zelfstandigen, alsmede op hun gezinsleden, die zich binnen de Gemeenschap verplaatsen (1) stelt dat de uitkeringen bij invaliditeit en ouderdom en de renten bij arbeids- ongevallen, verkregen op grond van een wettelijke regeling van één of meer lidstaten, op generlei wijze kunnen worden verminderd, gewijzigd, geschorst, ingetrokken of verbeurd verklaard op grond van het feit dat de rechthebbende op het grondgebied van een andere lidstaat woont dan die, op het grondgebied waarvan zich het orgaan bevindt dat deze uitkering verschuldigd is. Deze verordening is rechtstreeks toepasselijk in alle lidstaten van de Gemeenschap en van de Europese Economische Ruimte (EER). (1) Een bijgewerkte versie van deze verordening is gepubliceerd in PB L 28 van 30. 1. 1997. (1999/C 207/057) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG E-3260/98 van Yves Verwaerde (PPE) aan de Commissie (28 oktober 1998) Betreft: De vraag of cumulatiecommissies wel verenigbaar zijn met de communautaire wetgeving Wanneer in Frankrijk een landbouwer een bepaald areaal bewerkt en hij zijn bedrijf besluit uit te breiden, moet hij tevoren toestemming verkrijgen van een cumulatiecommissie wanneer het nieuwe oppervlak, al naargelang het departement, twee of drie keer zo groot is als het minimum toegestane landbouwbedrijf. Kan de Commissie meedelen of ook in andere lidstaten en, zo ja, in welke er van dit soort cumulatiecommissies bestaan? Zijn deze commissies wel verenigbaar met de communautaire wetgeving, met name met het beginsel van vrijheid van vestiging? Antwoord van de heer Fischler namens de Commissie (30 november 1998) Zoals door het geachte parlementslid wordt vermeld, wordt de uitbreiding van landbouwbedrijven in Frankrijk gecontroleerd door een cumulatiecommissie. Soortgelijke regelingen en procedures in andere lidstaten zijn de Commissie niet bekend. De Commissie wijst er echter op dat de communautaire regelgeving in het algemeen, en het gemeenschap- pelijk landbouwbeleid in het bijzonder, geen afbreuk doet aan de bevoegdheid van de lidstaten om regelingen en procedures in te stellen waarmee wordt beoogd de ontwikkeling, en vooral de uitbreiding, van de landbouwbedrijven te volgen in het kader van bijvoorbeeld het nationale beleid inzake ruimtelijke ordening, of meer in het bijzonder van maatregelen om de vestiging van jonge landbouwers te bevorderen. Volgens de gegevens waarover de Commissie momenteel beschikt, zijn deze regelingen en procedures niet met het beginsel van vrije vestiging in strijd


title: 1999/450/EG: Beschikking van de Commissie van 28 oktober 1998 inzake staatssteun die Spanje voornemens is te verlenen aan AG Tubos Europa SA (kennisgeving geschied onder nummer C(1998) 3438) (Slechts de tekst in de Spaanse taal is authentiek) (Voor de EER relevante tekst)

eurovoc_concepts:
Spain
State aid
aid to undertakings
investment aid
regional aid
steel

text: L 177/24 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen 13. 7. 1999 II (Besluiten waarvan de publicatie niet voorwaarde is voor de toepassing) COMMISSIE BESCHIKKING VAN DE COMMISSIE van 28 oktober 1998 inzake staatssteun die Spanje voornemens is te verlenen aan AG Tubos Europa SA (kennisgeving geschied onder nummer C(1998) 3438) (Slechts de tekst in de Spaanse taal is authentiek) (Voor de EER relevante tekst) (1999/450/EG) DE COMMISSIE VAN DE EUROPESE GEMEENSCHAPPEN, Gelet op het Verdrag tot oprichting van de Europese Gemeen- schap, inzonderheid op artikel 93, lid 2, eerste alinea, Gelet op de Overeenkomst betreffende de Europese Economi- sche Ruimte, inzonderheid op artikel 62, lid 1, onder a), Na de belanghebbenden overeenkomstig voornoemde bepa- lingen te hebben aangemaand hun opmerkingen te maken (1), en gezien die opmerkingen, Overwegende hetgeen volgt: I. PROCEDURE B¶ schr¶ven van 29 oktober 1997 heeft de permanente verte- genwoordiging van Spanje b¶ de Europese Unie het voornemen aangemeld om regionale investeringssteun te verlenen aan AG Tubos Europa SA, een nieuwe dochteronderneming van het Spaanse concern „Alfonso Gallardo” die zich in de regio Extre- madura zou vestigen. B¶ brief van 22 januari 1998 heeft de permanente vertegenwoordiging voor de Commissie aanvul- lende informatie verschaft. B¶ schr¶ven van 11 maart 1998 heeft de Commissie Spanje in kennis gesteld van haar besluit om de procedure van artikel 93, lid 2, van het EG-Verdrag in verband met voornoemde steun in te leiden. Het besluit van de Commissie tot inleiding van de procedure in het Publicatieblad van de Europese werd bekendgemaakt Gemeenschappen (2). Daarb¶ werden belanghebbenden uitgeno- digd hun opmerkingen in te dienen. De opmerkingen die van de „UK Steel Association” (Vereniging van de ¶zer- en staalsector van het Verenigd Koninkr¶k), de „Wirtschaftsvereinigung Stahlrohre” (de Duitse vereniging van producenten van stalen buizen) en het Duitse ministerie van Economische Zaken z¶n ontvangen, werden aan de Spaanse regering overgemaakt, waarmee haar de gelegenheid werd geboden hierop te antwoorden. De eerste opmerkingen van Spanje werden b¶ brief van 9 april 1998 ontvangen en het antwoord op de opmerkingen van belanghebbenden b¶ brieven van, respectievel¶k, 23 juli en 4 augustus 1998. II. GEDETAILLEERDE BESCHR(cid:246)VING VAN DE STEUN De steun bestaat in een regionale subsidie van 1,175 miljard ESP voor de financiering van een investering van 5,596 miljard ESP, zodat de steunintensiteit 21 % bedraagt. De nieuwe onder- neming zal stalen buizen produceren, vooral grote en kleine gelaste secties. Haar jaarl¶kse capaciteit zal een 225 000 ton bedragen, maar in een eerste fase zal deze tot 100 000 ton beperkt bl¶ven. De productie van de onderneming zal bestaan uit ronde en andersvormige zowel grote (diameter meer dan 406,4 mm) als kleine buizen. Naar verwachting zal de productie van grote buizen ongeveer 25 % van de totale productie uitmaken. De onderneming zal aan 60 personen werk bieden. Ingevolge punt 4, lid 1, onder a), van de communautaire kaderregeling voor bepaalde niet onder het EGKS-Verdrag vallende sectoren van de ¶zer- en staalindustrie (3), hierna „de EG-kaderregeling voor de ¶zer- en staalindustrie” genoemd, moeten de lidstaten de Commissie vooraf van alle steunvoorne- mens betreffende de deelsector grote gelaste buizen in kennis stellen, en kunnen z¶ die steun niet ten uitvoer leggen alvorens (1) PB C 156 van 21. 5. 1998, blz. 11. (2) Zie voetnoot 1. (3) PB C 320 van 13. 12. 1988, blz. 3. 13. 7. 1999 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen L 177/25 de Commissie haar goedkeuring heeft gegeven. Ofschoon de onderneming stalen buizen van verschillende grootte zal gaan produceren, geldt de aanmeldingsplicht slechts voor 25 % van die buizen. Desalniettemin dient de Commissie b¶ het onder- zoek van de steun ervan uit te gaan dat alle door de onderne- ming vervaardigde producten grote gelaste stalen buizen z¶n, aangezien het mogel¶k is om, zonder dat hiervoor ook maar enige technische aanpassing nodig is, t¶dens de productie de grootte van de buizen aan de vraag aan te passen. Zoals reeds b¶ de inleiding van de procedure erop werd gewezen, houdt de Commissie b¶ haar beoordeling van steun aan ondernemingen die onder de werkingssfeer van de EG- kaderregeling voor de ¶zer- en staalindustrie vallen, rekening met de marktsituatie in de deelsector waartoe de betrokken onderneming behoort, en met name of deze al dan niet een structurele overcapaciteit vertoont, alsmede met de mogel¶ke weerslag van de investeringen waarvoor steun wordt verleend, op de marktsituatie en op de mededinging. B¶ haar beoordeling houdt de Commissie eveneens rekening met de regionale dimensie van de investeringen waarvoor steun wordt verleend. Wanneer de steunontvangende onderneming in een steunge- bied is gelegen, moeten de potenti(cid:137)le voordelen van de gesubsi- dieerde investering voor de ontwikkeling van de regio tegen de eventuele negatieve gevolgen voor de mededinging worden afgewogen. Tenslotte dient de Commissie te garanderen dat geen steun naar producten uit de EGKS-¶zer- en staalsector wordt overgeheveld, omdat subsidies voor niet-EGKS-activi- teiten van dochterondernemingen van staalconcerns uiteindel¶k aan de EGKS-activiteiten ten goede kunnen komen. In de sector stalen buizen bestaat sinds het midden van de jaren tachtig een overcapaciteit. In 1997 bedroeg de benuttingsgraad van de capaciteit in de Gemeenschap voor de deelsector grote gelaste buizen in het algemeen, waarbinnen de onderneming werkzaam zal z¶n, slechts 49 %. Na een eerste onderzoek besloot de Commissie dat a priori niet kon worden uitgesloten dat de gesteunde investering negatieve gevolgen voor de mededinging zou hebben, die groter zouden kunnen z¶n dan de potenti(cid:137)le voordelen die de regio van de gesubsidieerde investering zou genieten. Het was evenmin volledig uit te sluiten dat de steun aan AG Tubos Europa SA naar producten uit de EGKS-¶zer- en staalsector zou worden overgeheveld. Om voornoemde redenen besloot de Commissie om met betrekking tot de bedoelde steun de procedure van lid 2, van het EG-Verdrag in te leiden. artikel 93, III. OPMERKINGEN VAN BELANGHEBBENDEN Alle belanghebbenden die opmerkingen hebben ingediend in de sector stalen hebben op de bestaande overcapaciteit buizen, en met name in de deelsector van de grote gelaste buizen, gewezen. Derhalve z¶n z¶ van mening dat de Commissie zich dient te verzetten tegen de voorgenomen steun die de situatie zou verslechteren en bovendien de toekomst van de bestaande zich eveneens in gebieden met afnemende econo- mische activiteit bevindende ondernemingen, in gevaar zou brengen. De UK Steel Association stelt voorts dat de betrokken investe- ring niet kan worden gerechtvaardigd met het argument als zou er op Europese schaal onvoldoende aanbod z¶n van het type holle buizen dat AG Tubos Europa SA voornemens is op de markt te brengen. Volgens haar kan eraan worden getw¶feld of de markt, gelet op de beperkte vraag naar dit type buizen, in staat is om nieuwe capaciteit, die in een eerste periode een 100 000 ton zal belopen, te absorberen. IV. OPMERKINGEN VAN SPANJE Spanje heeft opgemerkt dat er geen enkele mogel¶kheid bestaat voor overheveling van de steun naar de EGKS-activiteiten van het concern dat over AG Tubos Europa SA zeggenschap uitoe- fent. De nieuwe onderneming zal een juridisch volledig onaf- hankel¶ke dochter z¶n en zal haar grondstoffen niet van de concernondernemingen betrekken. Winst en verlies zullen niet worden overgeheveld naar de verschillende dochteronderne- mingen van het concern en Spanje zal erop toezien dat van de steun correct gebruik wordt gemaakt. Wat het punt van de overcapaciteit op de markt betreft, is Spanje van oordeel dat de onderneming een nieuw product zal vervaardigen dat geen concurrentie vormt voor de productie van grote gelaste buizen in de Gemeenschap, gezien de techni- sche kenmerken ervan en het gebruik waartoe het is bestemd. Het gaat hier om een relatief nieuw product, de holle struc- turen, dat meer en meer b¶ de constructie van niet-residenti(cid:137)le gebouwen wordt gebruikt. Spanje verwacht een st¶ging van de vraag naar dit product wegens de voordelen die het ten opzicht van traditionele bouwmaterialen biedt. B¶gevolg is er in de sector in Europa geen sprake van overcapaciteit, maar gaat het integendeel om een markt in expansie. Bovendien verschilt het productieproces van het proc(cid:130)d(cid:130) dat traditioneel voor de fabri- cage van stalen buizen wordt gebruikt, zodat AG Tubo Europa SA omvangr¶ke investeringen zal moeten doen om die stalen buizen te kunnen produceren. V. BEOORDELING VAN DE STEUN In de eerste plaats moet nauwkeurig het marktsegment worden vastgesteld waarin AG Tubos Europa SA voornemens is werk- zaam te z¶n. Op die w¶ze kan worden bepaald of de nieuwe onderneming door haar productie de bestaande overcapaciteit in de sector holle gelaste stalen buizen zal doen toenemen, zoals door de Commissie werd gevreesd na een voorlopig onderzoek op grond waarvan de procedure formeel werd inge- leid. Volgens de door Spanje verschafte inlichtingen, waaronder de technische specificaties van de nieuwe installaties, die zullen worden aangeschaft, zal AG Tubos Europa SA de holle-struc- tuursecties uitsluitend door middel van een koud vormgevings- proc(cid:130)d(cid:130) vervaardigen; de secties zullen een diameter hebben van 600 mm en meer. Grote hollestructuursecties, alhoewel deze plegen te worden ingedeeld onder de benaming „grote gelaste stalen buizen” voor diverse gebruiksdoeleinden, worden vervaardigd met een proc(cid:130)d(cid:130) dat verschilt van dat voor de klassieke stalen buizen, z¶ worden voor andere toepassingen gebruikt en z¶ z¶n onder- worpen aan andere Europese normen. Z¶ kunnen worden beschouwd een deelsector te vormen binnen de algemene sector „stalen buizen”. De productie-installaties ervan kunnen niet worden gebruikt om buizen te vervaardigen, tenz¶ zware b¶komende investeringen worden gedaan, en de markt van bestemming ervan is niet die van de woningbouw, waarop normale grote buizen die in het algemeen worden gebruikt voor gas- en vloeistoffentransport, niet worden afgezet. De holle-structuursecties en de grote gelaste stalen buizen kunnen dus noch vanuit het oogpunt van de productie, noch vanuit gebruikersoogpunt, substitueerbare producten worden beschouwd. als L 177/26 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen 13. 7. 1999 De producten van AG Tubos Europa SA zullen geen concur- rentie voor andere stalen buizen betekenen, maar wel voor bouwmaterialen zoals cement. Dit type product wordt immers in toenemende mate gebruikt in de sector van de bouw van niet-residenti(cid:137)le gebouwen. Z¶ worden steeds meer in de plaats van andere materialen toegepast en bovendien wordt verwacht dat de bouwsector in Europa de positieve tendens van de laatste jaren zal weten te handhaven. Derhalve kan worden geconcludeerd dat er in Europa een nieuwe markt bestaat voor de grote koudgevormde hollestructuursecties, welke een expansie kent. AG Tubos Europa SA zal de eerste producent z¶n van holle- structuursecties met een diameter groter dan 406,4 mm. B¶ge- volg bestaat er voor dit product geen overcapaciteit. In feite zal de onderneming de eerste producent z¶n voor koudgevormde, gelaste hollestructuursecties met een grotere diameter dan 200 mm en de eerste producent van (koud en warm afge- werkte) holle-structuursecties met een diameter van meer dan 406 mm. De bestaande Europese producenten van holle-struc- tuursecties fabriceren buizen met een diameter van slechts maximaal 400 mm en de door hen gebruikte productieme- thode is de warme vormgeving, terw¶l AG Tubos Europa SA koude vormgeving zal toepassen. Haar productie in het gamma van producten die worden omschreven als grote gelaste buizen, zal geen invloed hebben op de productiecapaciteit van de Gemeenschap. VI. CONCLUSIE B¶gevolg concludeert de Commissie dat, anders dan z¶ aanvan- kel¶k oordeelde en anders dan in de opmerkingen van belang- hebbenden, de productie van de nieuwe onderneming, die uit grote gelaste stalen buizen (met een diameter van meer dan 406,4 mm) bestaat, niet ertoe leidt dat de overcapaciteit in de betrokken sector wordt verergerd. Het door AG Tubos Europa SA vervaardigde product heeft een specifieke, in expansie verkerende markt en de onderneming zal in Europa de eerste fabrikant z¶n die dit type product vervaardigt. Wat de mogel¶kheid betreft dat de steun wordt overgeheveld naar de EGKS-activiteiten van het concern, dat over de onder- neming zeggenschap uitoefent, erkent de Commissie dat, gelet op de door Spanje verstrekte inlichtingen en garanties, z¶nde juridische onafhankel¶kheid van de onderneming, geen overhe- veling van winsten en verliezen, controle op de correcte gebruikmaking van de steun, dit gevaar onbestaande is of tot een minimum beperkt. Overigens z¶ erop gewezen dat de onderneming in een gebied wordt gevestigd dat onder de toepassing valt van artikel 92, lid 3, onder a), van het EG-Verdrag, waarvoor een maximum- steunintensiteit van 60 % geldt. De steun welke een intensiteit van 21 % heeft, bl¶ft dus ruim beneden dit plafond en de investering waaraan steun wordt verleend, zal b¶dragen tot de economische en sociale ontwikkeling van het gebied, doordat rechtstreeks 60 arbeidsplaatsen worden geschapen, en zal door de ontwikkeling van gelieerde activiteiten een gunstige weerslag hebben op de plaatsel¶ke economie. Gelet op het voorgaande komt de Commissie tot de gevolgtrek- king, dat de steun die Spanje voornemens is aan AG Tubos Europa SA toe te kennen, voldoet aan de voorwaarden die in de wetgeving voor de EG-¶zer- en staalindustrie z¶n vervat, en verenigbaar is met de gemeenschappel¶ke markt overeenkom- stig artikel 92, lid 3, onder a), van het Verdrag, HEEFT DE VOLGENDE BESCHIKKING GEGEVEN: Artikel 1 De door Spanje aangemelde steun ten belope van 1,175 miljard ESP, die het voornemens is aan AG Tubos Europa SA toe te kennen, is verenigbaar met de gemeenschappel¶ke markt over- eenkomstig artikel 92, lid 3, onder a), van het Verdrag. B¶gevolg wordt de toekenning van steun toegestaan voor een bedrag van 1,175 miljard ESP. Deze beschikking is gericht tot het Koninkr¶k Spanje. Artikel 2 Gedaan te Brussel, 28 oktober 1998. Voor de Commissie Karel VAN MIERT Lid van de Commissie


title: Komission asetus (EY) N:o 2321/98, annettu 28 päivänä lokakuuta 1998, tuonnin kiinteistä arvoista tiettyjen hedelmien ja vihannesten tulohinnan määrittämiseksi

eurovoc_concepts:
agri-monetary policy
citrus fruit
fruit vegetable
grape
import price
pip fruit

formats: pdf print

text: 29. 10. 98 FI Euroopan yhteis(cid:148)jen virallinen lehti L 290/5 I (S(cid:132)(cid:132)d(cid:148)kset, jotka on julkaistava) KOMISSION ASETUS (EY) N:o 2321/98, annettu 28 p(cid:132)iv(cid:132)n(cid:132) lokakuuta 1998, tuonnin kiinteist(cid:132) arvoista tiettyjen hedelmien ja vihannesten tulohinnan m(cid:132)(cid:132)rit- t(cid:132)miseksi EUROOPAN YHTEIS(cid:153)JEN KOMISSIO, joka ottaa huomioon Euroopan yhteis(cid:148)n perustamissopi- muksen, ottaa huomioon hedelmien ja vihannesten tuont¶(cid:132)rjes- telm(cid:132)n soveltamista koskevista yksityiskohtaisista s(cid:132)(cid:132)n- n(cid:148)ist(cid:132) 21 p(cid:132)iv(cid:132)n(cid:132) joulukuuta 1994 annetun komission asetuksen (EY) N:o 3223/94 (1), sellaisena kuin se on viimeksi muutettuna asetuksella (EY) N:o 1498/98 (2), ja erityisesti sen 4 artiklan 1 kohdan, ottaa huomioon yhteisess(cid:132) maatalouspolitiikassa sovellet- tavista laskentayksik(cid:148)st(cid:132) ja muuntokursseista 28 p(cid:132)iv(cid:132)n(cid:132) joulukuuta 1992 annetun neuvoston asetuksen (ETY) N:o 3813/92 (3), sellaisena kuin se on viimeksi muutettuna asetuksella (EY) N:o 150/95 (4), ja erityisesti sen 3 artiklan 3 kohdan, sek(cid:132) katsoo, ett(cid:132) asetuksessa (EY) N:o 3223/94 s(cid:132)(cid:132)det(cid:132)(cid:132)n Uruguayn kier- roksen monenv(cid:132)listen tulosten mukaisesti komission vahvistamista kolmansien maiden kauppaneuvottelujen tuonnin kiinteiden arvojen perusteista liitteiss(cid:132) m(cid:132)(cid:132)ritelt(cid:132)- vien tuotteiden ja ajanjaksojen osalta, ja edell(cid:132) mainittujen perusteiden mukaisesti tuonnin kiin- te(cid:132)t arvot on vahvistettava t(cid:132)m(cid:132)n asetuksen liitteess(cid:132) esite- tylle tasolle, ON ANTANUT T(cid:142)M(cid:142)N ASETUKSEN: 1 artikla Asetuksen (EY) N:o 3223/94 4 artiklassa tarkoitetut tuonnin kiinte(cid:132)t arvot vahvistetaan liitteess(cid:132) olevassa taulukossa merkityll(cid:132) tavalla. 2 artikla T(cid:132)m(cid:132) asetus tulee voimaan 29 p(cid:132)iv(cid:132)n(cid:132) lokakuuta 1998. T(cid:132)m(cid:132) asetus on kaikilta osiltaan velvoittava, j(cid:132)senvaltioissa. ja sit(cid:132) sovelletaan sellaisenaan kaikissa Tehty Brysseliss(cid:132) 28 p(cid:132)iv(cid:132)n(cid:132) lokakuuta 1998. Komission puolesta Franz FISCHLER Komission j(cid:132)sen (1) EYVL L 337, 24. 12. 1994, s. 66 (2) EYVL L 198, 15. 7. 1998, s. 4 (3) EYVL L 387, 31. 12. 1992, s. 1 (4) EYVL L 22, 31. 1. 1995, s. 1 L 290/6 FI Euroopan yhteis(cid:148)jen virallinen lehti 29. 10. 98 LIITE tuonnin kiinteist(cid:132) arvoista tiettyjen hedelmien ja vihannesten tulohinnan m(cid:132)(cid:132)ritt(cid:132)miseksi 28 p(cid:132)iv(cid:132)n(cid:132) lokakuuta 1998 annettuun komission asetukseen CN-koodi Kolmannen maan koodi (1) Tuonnin kiinte(cid:132) arvo (ecua/100 kg) 0702 00 00 0709 90 70 0805 30 10 0806 10 10 0808 10 20, 0808 10 50, 0808 10 90 0808 20 50 060 204 999 052 999 052 388 524 528 999 052 400 999 060 064 388 400 404 800 999 052 064 400 720 999 80,7 70,1 75,4 94,3 94,3 57,4 62,1 27,8 48,6 49,0 130,1 239,5 184,8 36,7 38,0 32,7 86,5 62,7 156,9 68,9 98,9 60,2 84,3 121,0 91,1 (1) Komission asetuksessa (EY) N:o 2317/97 (EYVL L 321, 22. 11. 1997, s. 19) vahvistettu maanimikkeist(cid:148). Koodi ”999” tarkoittaa ”muuta alkuper(cid:132)(cid:132)”


title: 1999/374/EC: Commission Decision of 28 October 1998 on aid granted by Germany to Neptun Industrie Rostock GmbH (notified under document number C(1998) 3435) (Text with EEA relevance) (Only the German text is authentic)

eurovoc_concepts:
Germany
State aid
application of EU law
control of State aid
industrial restructuring
shipbuilding

text: 9. 6. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 144/21 COMMISSION COMMISSION DECISION of 28 October 1998 on aid granted by Germany to Neptun Industrie Rostock GmbH (notified under document number C(1998) 3435) (Only the German text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) (1999/374/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 93(2) thereof, Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 62(1)(a) thereof, Having given the interested parties notice, in accordance with the abovementioned Articles, to submit their observations, Whereas: I By letter No 1015 dated 11 February 1997, the Commission informed Germany that it had decided to initiate proceedings pursuant to Article 93(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of aid granted for the rescue of Neptun Industrie Rostock GmbH (hereinafter ‘NIR'). The Commission’s decision to initiate proceedings was published in the Official Journal of the European Communities (1); the other Member States and interested parties were asked to submit their comments. Germany replied to the notice of 11 February 1997 by letters dated 10 March and 29 April 1997. In reply to further questions by the Commission, it sent further information by letters dated 28 May, 16 June, 1 July, 4 July, 22 July, 10 September, 29 September, 5 December and 8 December 1997, and 29 January, 15 May, 19 June, 17 September and 19 October 1998. The Commission’s letters asking Germany for further information on the restructuring were dated 2 May, 19 June, 5 August and 23 December 1997, and 30 March, 2 September and 30 September 1998. One Member State submitted comments to the Commission. (1) OJ C 119, 17. 4. 1997, p. 4. L 144/22 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 6. 1999 II By letter dated 13 June 1996, Germany sent notification of a loan of DEM 15 million granted by the Bundesanstalt für vereinigungsbedingte Sonderaufgaben (Federal Institute for Special Tasks associated with Unification; hereinafter the ‘BvS') to NIR as rescue aid. In a letter dated 12 September 1996, Germany confirmed that the amount of the loan had already been paid to NIR on 4 April 1996. It was initially to be repaid by the end of that year (1). The loan had not been notified to the Commission prior to its grant and/or payment. Furthermore, the Commission found that the Land of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania had decided to provide a 100 % guarantee in respect of a DEM 63 million loan on 15 May 1996. By decision of 2 September 1996, the Land extended the guarantee until the end of 1996 (2). The guarantee was not notified to the Commission prior to its grant. In its decision to initiate proceedings pursuant to Article 93(2) of the EC Treaty, the Commission took the view that, in line with the ‘market economy investor principle', the two financial measures had to be regarded as State aid. The Commission also considered the aid to be illegal, since Germany had failed to fulfil its obligations pursuant to Article 93(3) of the EC Treaty by granting the aid before notification. The Commission considered that the belatedly notified loan constituted rescue aid and assumed that the non-notified guarantee constituted rescue aid as well. It expressed doubts as to the compatibility of the aid with the criteria laid down in the Community guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty (‘the guidelines') (3), especially as Germany had failed to provide any restructuring plan by the time the Commission decided to initiate the proceedings. The initiation of proceedings therefore comprised a formal injunction requiring Germany to provide full information on the financial situation of NIR, the total amount of aid granted and the restructuring programme. III Following the initiation of proceedings, the government of one Member State sent comments to the Commission. It called for rapid clarification of the actual amount of aid paid and shared the Commission’s doubts as to the compatibility of the aid. IV (1) In the former GDR, there were two big shipyards in the Rostock area, VEB Schiffswerft Neptun in Rostock and VEB Warnow Werft in Rostock-Warnemünde. These two yards were merged in 1991 to form a new company, Neptun-Warnow Werft GmbH. At the same time, the Neptun yard in Rostock stopped building new ships and continued only with ship repair. The Warnemünde yard was privatised in late 1992/early 1993 in the form of an ‘asset deal' and sold to Kvaerner AS. The residual parts, with a workforce of some 1 500, not having been sold to Kvaerner AS, were combined under a new holding company, NIR. NIR was set up on 1 March 1993 and privatised later that year. Neptun Betriebsgesellschaft took 20 % of the shares as part of a management buy-out (MBO), while the Bremer Vulkan company Hanse Holding purchased the other 80 %. (1) For final terms, see point IV. 6. (2) This guarantee was later extended several times, see point IV. 6. (3) OJ C 368, 23. 12. 1994, p. 12. 9. 6. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 144/23 The closure of the Neptun yard’s capacity for building and converting merchant ships was part of the capacity reductions in the East German shipbuilding industry. These capacity reductions were a condition in the special rules for the restructuring of the shipbuilding industry in East Germany, which were adopted in 1992 (Council Directive 92/68/EEC of 20 July 1992 amending Directive 90/648/EEC on aid to shipbuilding (1)). NIR therefore had to diversify into areas outside shipbuilding. According to the first provisional business plan of December 1992, NIR was to become an industrial conglomerate with a loosely annexed repair yard. (2) Germany notified the aid to be granted for this first privatisation and restructuring by letters dated 27 and 29 July 1993. According to the notification and the privatisation contract, the new owners were to make investments of DEM 357,1 million by the end of 1996. They had to guarantee a minimum workforce of 1 200, including no more than 200 in the repair yard. The ship repair capacity was limited to 300 000 hours/year. It was further clearly stipulated that no aid must spill over to the repair yard (as required by the relevant provision in Council Directive 90/648/EEC of 21 December 1990 on aid to shipbuilding (2)). The restructuring aid consisted of a lump-sum payment of DEM 159 million from the Treuhandanstalt and investment aid from the Land of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania of up to DEM 92,8 million under regional aid schemes. The Commission approved the restructuring aid by letter No 18963 of 23 November 1993. (3) From the end of 1993 until early 1996, NIR belonged to Bremer Vulkan Verbund AG as part of the intermediate holding company ‘Vulkan Industrie Holding GmbH' (hereinafter ‘VIH'), which held 80 % of NIR’s equity. During that period, a number of enterprises in this group, mostly located in the Bremen region, were transferred to NIR. Towards the end of 1995, Bremer Vulkan ran into severe financial difficulties, had to apply for debt composition proceedings on 21 February 1996 and went bankrupt on 1 May 1996. (4) In preparation for an intended sale of Bremer Vulkan’s holding in NIR (which was held by its intermediate holding company, VIH) to an investment company, VIH, Neptun Vermö- gensverwaltungsgesellschaft, the BvS, NIR and Neptun Betriebsgesellschaft agreed by means of a contract dated 25 March 1996 that the 80 % holding of Bremer Vulkan should be placed with a company held by the administrator (3). In this arrangement, the BvS released Bremer Vulkan from its investment obligations under the privatisation agreement of 1993, which in practice were no longer enforceable anyway because of the imminent full bankruptcy of Bremer Vulkan Verbund AG and VIH. The contract of 25 March 1996 stipulated that the holding was to be sold as soon as possible, and by the end of 1997 at the latest. However, the plans for rapid sale of the holding came to nothing as the results of a ‘due diligence' examination were not satisfactory to the investment company. Subsequently, the investment bank ‘C. S. First Boston AG' was entrusted by the BvS with the task of looking for potential investors. In addition, NIR supervisory board members also tried to find a suitable investor for the company. However, although C. S. First Boston contacted a large number of potential buyers of NIR by the summer of 1997 and although NIR’s interest in finding a new owner was made public in the specialised press, these activities had no tangible results. It was only in the autumn of 1997 that the owners of Meyer shipyard in Papenburg (hereinafter ‘Meyer') made an offer to buy NIR. The only alternative to Meyer’s offer was a continuation of the restructuring under the existing MBO. However, the plan worked out by Neptun Betriebsge- sellschaft turned out to be financially hardly viable and would have needed very high State guarantees over an extended period. Consequently, the MBO plan was given up. Meyer, as the only bidder, then acquired all the shares of NIR. (1) OJ L 219, 4. 8. 1992, p. 54 and the preceding ‘Proposal for a Council Directive providing for changes to the seventh Council Directive on aid to shipbuilding of 21 December 1990' (OJ C 155, 20. 6. 1992, p. 20. ). (2) OJ L 380, 31. 12. 1990, p. 27. (3) The financing institution in question was the venture capital wing of Vereins- und Westbank, a private German bank. The BvS acted in this agreement as a private investor would have done in a similar situa- tion, as it gave up certain rights under the previous privatisation agreement with Bremer Vulkan in return for a share in the proceeds from the sale of the holding of Vulkan Industrie Holding in NIR. L 144/24 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 6. 1999 (5) Germany further explained in its letter of 22 July 1997 that the separation of NIR from Bremer Vulkan in early 1996 was necessary in order not to jeopardise the restructuring and to avoid the imminent bankruptcy of NIR. A bankruptcy would have risked losing the entire investment in the hatch covers production facility and the boat service yard, both in the Rostock region. NIR had at the time large payment obligations stemming from this invest- ment, which was nearing completion. NIR had participated in the cash concentration system of the Bremer Vulkan group until end of 1995, though it did not benefit from the misuse of aid meant for MTW and Volkswerft (1). It left this system in the end with balanced accounts, but due to its previous linkage with Bremer Vulkan it was not able to get any loans from banks without a State guarantee. (6) In its reply of 10 March 1997 regarding the initiation of proceedings and the injunction to provide the relevant information, Germany informed the Commission of the various aid measures. The aid given consists of: 1. a loan from the BvS of DEM 15 million for operating expenditure, disbursed on 10 April 1996, originally to be repaid on 31 December 1997, later prolonged until 31 December 1998; 2. a loan from the BvS of DEM 5,4 million for ongoing investments, disbursed in March 1997, with due dates as under 1; 3. a loan from the BvS of DEM 14,1 million for ongoing investments, social plan expendi- ture and operating purposes, disbursed in three trenches between February and June 1997, with due dates as under 1; 4. a 100 % State guarantee under the Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania guarantee scheme to secure loans of up to DEM 63 million (DEM 40 million for investments, DEM 11 million overdraft facility, DEM 12 million procurement financing), granted on 15 May 1996, prolonged several times up to the envisaged approval of the restructuring aid plan by the Commission; 5. a 100 % counter-guarantee up to DEM 8 million provided by the BvS for order financing, granted on 11 March 1997, provisionally prolonged as under 4. All these loans and guarantees were provided against securities from NIR. The BvS set up a detailed monitoring system to ensure correct use of the funds. Of the loans totalling DEM 34,5 million, an amount of DEM 25,6 million was spent on the completion of investments in two factories in Rostock (Neptun Stahlobjektbau and A&R Neptun Boatservice), DEM 3,5 million on staff costs and DEM 5,4 million on other operating expenditure. Germany considers the measures introduced up to 31 March 1997 to be rescue aid, and their prolonga- tions after that date to be restructuring aid. The proceedings cover only the loan mentioned under point 1 and the guarantee mentioned under point 4 up to 31 December 1997. The Commission registered their prolongations and the additional measures as new aid under State aid case NN 102/97. (7) By letter dated 10 March 1997, Germany sent the Commission a provisional restructuring programme drawn up by the enterprise. It was evident from the documents and the subse- quent discussion that an initial restructuring report had already been established by external advisors in September 1996 and a second in December 1996. These had not been sent to the Commission as there was a disagreement between the advisors, the management of NIR, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania and the BvS on how to proceed. The reports of the auditors on the business years 1993 to 1995 and the analyses of the advisors showed that the situation of NIR was much worse than had been expected up to the autumn of 1996. Reported losses (1) See the Commission Decision of 23 July 1998 on State aid C 7/96 (not yet published). NIR terminated its participation in the cash concentration system by a separate agreement between Bremer Vulkan, NIR and the relevant commercial bank. In the agreement, NIR claims on Vulkan Industrie Holding were set off against Neptun Techno Products liabilities to Vulkan Industrie Holding, so that both companies left the cash concentration system with balanced accounts. 9. 6. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 144/25 shot up from DEM 5,2 million (1994) to DEM 122,9 million (1995), and even then the auditors indicated that the pending risks would need further corrections. In its letter of 2 May 1997 to Germany, the Commission therefore expressed serious doubts about the viability of the restructuring plan notified in the spring of 1997. (8) By letters dated 1 July and 22 July 1997, Germany informed the Commission of revisions to the restructuring plan and a modification of the financing programme. The programme was again modified in the autumn of 1997 after the sale of all the shares in NIR for a total price of DEM [. ] (1) by the administrator of Bremer Vulkan and Neptun Betriebsgesellschaft to Meyer. The main elements of this revised restructuring programme are: (a) the concentration of NIR’s activities on the maritime core business with five companies:  MACOR-Neptun Rostock (primarily production of hatch covers for container vessels; expected long-term workforce in 1999: 255)  Neptun Reparaturwerft (ship repair; expected workforce: 59)  A&R Neptun Boatservice (construction of yachts, repair of small naval and coastguard vessels; expected workforce: 29)  Möhring Klimatechnik (air conditioning equipment, mainly for ships, expected work- force: 83)  Personalservice Rostock (a personnel leasing company for craftsmen in the maritime trades; expected workforce: 55); (b) the sale of the holdings in or closure of companies no longer belonging to the core business:  Neptun Isolierglas  Neptun-Scanhus Fertigungsgesellschaft  Neptun Systemtechnik  NIR Hotelbetriebsgesellschaft  Oberflächentechnik Rostock; (c) the sale of all properties and assets no longer needed for business operations (Neptun owns large areas close to the city centre of Rostock); (d) a reduction in the number of directly employed staff to around 800 initially and from 1999 onwards to about 530 (the workforce at the beginning of 1996 was 1 200). (9) According to the business plan sent with Germany’s letter dated 8 December 1997 and the provisional annual report for 1997, the maritime core business of NIR will continue to make losses until the end of 1999. The first modest profits are expected as from the year 2000. A major part of the losses are expected in the repair yard, which has not received and will not receive any aid. These losses are to be covered by the sale of property belonging to the yard and by Meyer. The total expected annual results of the other operative companies are: DEM [. ] (*) in 1997 (provisional outturn), DEM [. ] (*) in 1998 (including staff reduction costs of DEM 3,5 million), DEM [. ] (*) in 1999, DEM [. ] (*) in 2000 and DEM [. ] (*) in 2001. A major part of the losses will occur in Neptun MACOR. This enterprise was formed through a merger of MACOR in Bremerhaven and Neptun Stahlobjektbau in Rostock. The restruc- turing plan makes it clear that major improvements in the organisation and in sales (1) Parts of this text have been edited to ensure that confidential information is not disclosed; those parts are enclosed in square brackets and marked with an asterisk. L 144/26 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 6. 1999 management will be necessary to achieve positive results from the year 2000 onwards. Minor and rapidly decreasing losses are expected in Neptun Boatservice up to the year 2000. Möhring has been profitable until now and is expected to remain profitable. De facto, this company is hardly affected by the restructuring. Personalservice made losses of DEM 0,8 million in 1997, but expects small profits from 1998 onwards. (10) As regards the financing of the other restructuring measures, the following was agreed between Meyer, the BvS and the Land: (a) Meyer will provide a subordinated loan of DEM 20 million to strengthen the capital base of NIR. This loan will be used primarily to finance necessary investments in the repair yard, which must not benefit from State aid. (b) Neptun Development GmbH, a newly founded subsidiary of NIR, will repay the bank loans taken up by NIR in 1996/97 from the proceeds of property sales by the end of 2002. The present State guarantee provided by Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania to secure these loans (DEM 63 million in total) in favour of the lending bank will be replaced by a guarantee amounting to some DEM 28 million after approval of the aid programme by the Commission. (c) After approval from the Commission, the BvS will waive repayment of the loans of a total amount of DEM 34,5 million given to NIR in 1996/97 (1). (d) At Meyer’s request, the BvS will prolong the refund guarantee for a credit line of up to DEM 8 million until 31 December 1998 against securities on the property of NIR and payment of fees of 0,5 % p. a. (e) Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania will provide aid of up to DEM 1,7 million under the regional aid programme ‘Gemeinschaftsaufgabe zur Förderung der regionalen Wirt- schaftsstruktur' for residual investments of DEM 9,8 million for the production of hatch covers by MACOR Neptun. This aid is a residual amount of the regional aid committed in 1994, which was suspended after the collapse of Bremer Vulkan. Germany gave an assurance that NIR and its enterprises undergoing restructuring would not receive any additional aid during the restructuring period, which runs until the end of 2001. Germany will provide the Commission with annual reports on the progress of the restruc- turing and the disinvestment measures. These reports will be certified by the company’s auditors. For Neptun Reparaturwerft, separate accounts will be maintained, and annual reports will be submitted to the Commission in order to make sure that no aid spills over to the repair yard. Germany and the company confirmed that Neptun Reparaturwerft will continue to comply with its capacity limitation of 300 000 hours per year. By letter dated 10 September 1997, Germany agreed to provide six-monthly production control reports to the Commission. These will also deal with the status of investments in the yard. Neptun Reparaturwerft will not resume conversion activities for merchant ships before 2001, when the 10-year closure period of the former Neptun Werft comes to an end (2). Germany and the company confirmed further that the facilities of A&R Neptun Boatservice will not be used for the building, conversion or repair of vessels falling under the scope of Community legislation on aid to shipbuilding. The auditor will check compliance with this commitment. (1) See point 6 items 1 to 3. (2) See Article 7 of Directive 90/684/EEC, which stipulates a 10-year closure period. 9. 6. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 144/27 (11) In view of the developments in the enterprise, this Decision deals with the rescue aid on which the Article 93(2) proceedings were initiated (1) as well as with all other aid granted or planned for the rescue and restructuring of NIR. V (1) The loans and the guarantee given by the BvS in 1996/97, like the State guarantee of DEM 63 million provided by Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania in 1996 (2), are State aid. In its letter of 10 March 1997, Germany stated that these measures were indispensable as banks had refused to give loans to NIR, even after the separation from Bremer Vulkan, without a full refund guarantee from the State. It is therefore uncontested that all the financial measures of the BvS and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, including those notified in 1997, are State aid within the meaning of Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty. Germany proved with certified detailed reports from the auditors that Neptun Reparaturwerft has not so far received any aid. An assurance has also been given that Neptun Reparaturwerft will not benefit from the rescue and restructuring aid in future either. The expected losses of Neptun Reparaturwerft will be covered by sales of company assets and by Meyer. In the case of A&R Neptun Boatservice, it is clearly set out that this small yard will limit its activities to yachts and small naval boats  in other words, to vessels not falling under the scope of the specific Community legislation governing the building of merchant ships. The rescue and restructuring aid for NIR is therefore not to be regarded as aid to shipbuilding. The aid is to be assessed pursuant to Article 92 of the Treaty in the light of the criteria set out in the Community Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty (3). (2) The loans and the guarantee from the BvS and the guarantee on an amount of DEM 63 million from Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania have to be regarded as non-notified aid as all the aid was granted before the Commission could state its position on it. Germany failed to fulfil its notification obligations pursuant to Article 93(3) of the EC Treaty. The Commission cannot fully accept the argument put forward by Germany that the guarantee from Mecklen- burg-Western Pomerania was granted under an aid scheme approved by the Commission in November 1991. It should be borne in mind that the Commission requested Germany by letter No 15716 of 9 November 1994 to take appropriate measures within the meaning of Article 93(1) of the EC Treaty for the operation of the guarantee scheme. One important measure was the individual notification of guarantees granted for large enterprises in diffi- culty as required by the guidelines. As Germany did not implement this measure, the Commission found in Decision 96/475/EC (4) that the guarantee scheme of Mecklenburg- Western Pomerania was incompatible with the common market. Since 1 July 1996, the individual notification of guarantees for large enterprises has been obligatory. The decision of the guarantee board to grant the first guarantee until 31 August 1996 dates from 15 May 1996. While the Commission therefore concedes that the first granting of the guarantee by Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania did not require an individual notification, Germany was bound to notify its extension from 1 September 1996 onwards. This was not done. (3) The guidelines distinguish between rescue and restructuring aid. In the present case this distinction is difficult to apply. NIR was already undergoing restructuring at the time of its separation from Bremer Vulkan. While it was clear from the beginning that the previous restructuring plan needed some modification, the full scope of the problems became visible only towards the end of 1996, when the auditors had finalised their work on the annual report for 1995 and the external advisors from UBB had presented their analysis. Matters (1) See Section II. (2) See the detailed description in point IV. 6. (3) OJ C 368, 23. 12. 1994, p. 12. (4) OJ L 194, 6. 8. 1996, p. 25. L 144/28 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 6. 1999 were further complicated by the fact that the NIR holding company consisted of some 15 rather small enterprises, at different locations and working in very different fields. In many cases these enterprises had strong commercial links with other parts of the former Bremer Vulkan group, whose future was uncertain as well. The continuing viability of these firms had ‘Neptun 2000' of to be examined in each individual case. The first restructuring plan, December 1996 prepared by NIR itself, was based on over-optimistic assumptions. It was accepted neither by the NIR’s bankers nor by the BvS. To arrive at a feasible solution, the restructuring plan had to be modified several times. This process was painful and difficult, as each step involved further closures and further reductions of staff. At the same time, the restructuring of the residual parts had to be continued. It therefore took 15 months to arrive at a new restructuring plan agreed between the relevant parties in Germany (1). When the shares of the company were sold to Meyer, the new owners made further modifications up to November 1997 (2). This is far more than the period of six months laid down in the guidelines. The Commission acknowledges the particular difficulties involved in the rescue and restructuring of NIR and can therefore as an exception accept the delays which occurred in this case. The Commission regrets, however, that Germany failed until March 1997 to fulfil its obligations of providing information on the progress achieved in drawing up a restructuring plan. (4) Due to the fact that no viable restructuring plan was available until 28 May 1997, the aid given up to that date, as described under point IV. 6, is to be regarded as rescue aid. According to the guidelines, rescue aid must meet the following conditions: (i) It must consist of liquidity help in the form of loan guarantees or loans bearing normal commercial interest rates. The rescue aid was given in this form. The loans from the BvS carried an interest rate of 3 % above the discount rate, which can be regarded as a market rate in view of the collateral provided by NIR. The loan secured by the State guarantee carries a market interest rate as well. The Commission estimated the aid intensity of the guarantees at 15 % per annum, due to the fact that the securities provided by NIR would not have allowed a full recovery in the event of a default (the corresponding aid amount over an approximate period of two years is therefore DEM 21,3 million (3)). (ii) It must be restricted to the amount needed to keep a firm in business. Germany provided evidence that the funds were limited to the minimum and only disbursed when the payment obligations became due. This also applies to the large payments for investments, which had to be made under existing contracts. The investments were about 80 % complete at the beginning of 1996. Any termination of the contracts with the suppliers would have caused excessive costs and most likely the bankruptcy of NIR. In addition, it would have left major production facilities incomplete and therefore without any economic use. (1) Fortschreitung der Unternehmenskonzeption ‘Neptun 2000': this restructuring plan handed over to the Commission at a meeting on 30 June 1997 in Brussels contains the essential elements of the final restruc- turing plan. It is the first restructuring plan which can be considered feasible within the meaning of the guidelines. (2) The final business plan dates from 12 November 1997 and was sent to the Commission by Germany by letter dated 8 December 1997. (3) The guarantees in question are shortfall guarantees. The guarantor has to meet the shortfall after liquida- tion of all collateral securities. The collateral securities provided are mortgages on all real properties belon- ging to NIR. In its analysis, the Commission estimated the default risk on the basis of the value of the collateral securities, based on assessment of the value of the property. It came to the conclusion that the collateral securities, which had a book value of some DEM 144 million at the end of 1995, would not have been sufficient to repay all loans (some DEM 115 million) from the proceeds of a forced sale of the property. A shortfall in the range of 30 % could have been expected in the two-year guarantee period. This 30 % shortfall on the amount of the guarantees corresponds to an amount of DEM 21,3 million. 9. 6. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 144/29 (iii) It must be paid only for the time needed to devise the necessary and feasible recovery plan (1). As set out above, the Commission can accept in this particular case the reasons given for the delays in drawing up a feasible restructuring plan. The Commission can also agree to the prolongation of this aid until it has taken a decision on the restruc- turing programme and the restructuring aid linked to it. (iv) It must be warranted on the grounds of serious social difficulties and have no unduly disruptive effects on the industrial situation in other Member States. Most parts of NIR are located in the region of Rostock, with a small proportion in Bremerhaven. Both regions are classified as assisted areas and suffer from very high unemployment. In addition, both areas were particularly affected by the collapse of Bremer Vulkan, as this group was one of their main industrial employers. The rescue aid is therefore justified on social grounds. The analysis of the impact of the aid on the industry in other Member States can concentrate on the maritime core business of NIR. As mentioned above, the Neptun Reparaturwerft repair yard is not covered by the restructuring aid programme and has not received any aid, nor will it do so. Mohring is a profitable enterprise which never needed any aid. All rescue aid for operative and investment purposes was used for MACOR Neptun and the A&R Neptun Boatservice with the exception of a minor part used in the holding company to meet its social costs for the termination of a number of activities. Boatservice is a small enterprise with less than 50 staff operating on the regional German market for smaller yachts. Its limited activities in the repair of small vessels belonging to the German navy are outside of the scope of Article 92 of the Treaty, owing to the provisions of Article 223 thereof. MACOR Neptun’s main activity is the design, engineering and construction of cargo access equipment for freight vessels, particularly of hatch covers for container ships. The engineering and design activities are carried out in MACOR. Three engineering companies, MacGregor (Finland), Kvaerner (Norway) and MACOR control the world market for the design and engineering of hatch covers, with the Finnish company MacGregor in a dominant position. The closure of MACOR would have strengthened this dominant position. The production of hatch covers is concentrated in countries with low labour costs outside the Community, mostly in Asia (especially China) and Eastern Europe (Croatia, Romania, Poland) for price reasons. The main competitor within the Community is Arend & Cie (France). The entrance barriers to this market are extremely low, as in principle any enterprise active in heavy steel construction would be able to manufacture hatch covers according to the design of the engineering firms. This makes this market difficult for Community suppliers. Their main advantage is their proximity to European shipyards and the higher quality of their products. However, given the structure of the shipbuilding market, none of these suppliers, including MACOR Neptun, will be able to influence the relatively low price level. The relevant market for hatch covers is the world market, and the present difficult situation on this market is caused by developments in East Asia, where by far the most cargo vessels are built and equipped. It can therefore be assumed that the rescue aid has had and is having no unreasonable effect on the industrial situation in other Member States. (1) As mentioned in the guidelines, the Commission will consider favourably an extension of the rescue aid until its investigation is completed. L 144/30 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 6. 1999 Though the rescue aid granted is non-notified aid and therefore illegal, the Commission can declare the aid compatible with the common market, taking into consideration the excep- tional circumstances as described above. The loans and the guarantees were provided to ensure the short-term survival of NIR. Subject to the above qualifications, they fulfil the criteria laid down in the guidelines. (5) As is explained in the description under point IV. 10, the support given by the State for the completion of the restructuring by the new owners consists predominantly in a waiver of the loans from the BvS totalling DEM 34,5 million and a prolongation of the State guarantees on a reduced amount until the bank loans have been repaid. The aid element of the guarantee given by Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania is limited by the fact that the bank loan in question is primarily secured by mortgages on property and other assets valued at DEM 66,5 million. The detailed valuation was submitted to the Commission and can be accepted. The risk relating to this guarantee is therefore limited to a shortfall or delay in the proceeds from the sales of property in the event of a severe crisis on the local property market in the next few years. The fees of about 1 % per annum are, however, somewhat below the expected market price in view of the right of prior claim to 50 % of the proceeds granted to the lending bank. The Commission estimated therefore that the aid equivalent is in the DEM 2 million range. The terms of the refund guarantee by the BvS in respect of a credit line of DEM 8 million can be regarded as market terms in view of the collateral securities required. This assessment by the Commission is supported by the fact that Meyer has not yet requested issue of the guarantee bond in view of the costs. Apart from the regional aid of DEM 1,7 million, no aid will be paid in cash. As in this case the investment by MACOR Neptun was clearly specified in the notification, any spillover of aid from NIR to its repair yard or to Meyer Werft in Papenburg can be virtually excluded. Notwithstanding that, the Commission will monitor the correct use of the aid and the repayment of the bank loans in the framework of the agreed monitoring system by means of audited reports. (6) The guidelines lay down the following criteria for restructuring aid: (a) the aid must be linked to a viable restructuring/recovery programme submitted in all relevant detail to the Commission and capable of restoring the long-term viability of the firm within a reasonable time-scale; (b) the aid must be in proportion to the restructuring costs and benefits; (c) undue distortions of competition through the aid must be avoided; (d) the firm must fully implement the restructuring plan and observe any conditions imposed; (e) the implementation of the plan and compliance with the conditions will be monitored by requiring the submission of detailed annual reports to the Commission. (7) Germany sent the Commission a detailed restructuring programme (1). It comprises a complete rearrangement of NIR’s activities, with a concentration on the core business in the maritime sector and the termination of all other activities. The workforce will be reduced further in this process from 1 200 to about 530 from 1999 onwards (these figures include the repair yard). According to the business plan of Meyer, NIR as a group will be profitable as from the year 2000. The provisional results for 1997 are basically in line with this plan. The to future demand and prices, planning is based on cautious assumptions as (1) See point IV. 8. 9. 6. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 144/31 which seems realistic given developments in the shipbuilding industries in Western Europe. It is further assumed that productivity will strongly increase in the new facilities at MACOR Neptun and A&R Neptun Boatservice in the first three years after full commissioning in 1997. Together with the reduction in the workforce and lowering of overheads on the part of the holding company, this will reduce production costs and eliminate the high start-up losses in these two companies. As Möhring is already profitable and Personalservice expects a balanced result, the assumption of relatively modest but stable profitability from 2000 onwards seems realistic. The Commission can therefore accept the viability of the restruc- turing plan. (8) As was shown above, the restructuring aid will basically consist of the waiver of the loans from the BvS totalling DEM 34,5 million, the prolongation of the State guarantees on an amount which will gradually decrease until 2002, when the sale of property no longer needed by NIR will be completed, and DEM 1,7 million in regional investment aid. As the main financial contribution, Meyer will provide a capital-replacing loan of DEM 20 million to re-establish the capital base of NIR. Germany considers this package as necessary and justified, in view of the losses made during the rescue period, the losses still expected during the remaining restructuring period and the modest profits expected thereafter. Although the total aid provided for the restructuring of NIR is very high in relation to the workforce retained, the Commission can accept this argument in this specific case. The original restructuring plan of the Bremer Vulkan period must be considered to have failed. Virtually the total equity of NIR was used up due to this failure. Some of the investments recently completed need to be partly written-off because of their low returns. The waiver of the rescue loans of DEM 34,5 million covers a part of the losses run up in the past few years. It is essential in order to restore the financial equilibrium of NIR. The DEM 1,7 million regional investment aid for the completion of some minor investments of a total cost of DEM 9,8 million has an intensity of 18 %. This is far lower than the maximum of 35 % permitted in the region and can therefore be accepted. Germany gave an assurance that no other aid will be paid to the enterprises presently under the NIR holding company during their restructuring period, which will end in 2001. No aid will be received by Neptun Reparaturwerft. The planned aid measures are in line with the restructuring programme submitted and are necessary from a commercial point of view. In view of the comprehensive restructuring of NIR, the substantial closure costs involved and the time needed for the completion of the restructuring, the Commission can consider the total amount of DEM 38,2 million in restructuring aid acceptable. (9) As the restructuring aid consists mainly in a prolongation of a State guarantee for an existing loan, which is to be repaid by Meyer, and in a waiver of debts by the BvS, the impact on competition will be very limited for the same reasons as discussed in relation to the rescue aid. Therefore, no undue distortions of competition in the common market are expected. Implementation of parts of the restructuring programme began provisionally in 1997. On 12 February 1998 Meyer took over the management of NIR. Since then, the restructuring plan has been undergoing full implementation. Germany will provide annual reports on the progress of the restructuring. In addition, Germany will send the Commission the abovemen- tioned reports on the activities of Neptun Reparaturwerft and A&R Neptun Boatservice. (10) In conclusion, the restructuring aid for NIR can be regarded as in line with the criteria set out in the guidelines. The aid can therefore be regarded as compatible with the common market pursuant to Article 92(3)(a) and (c) of the EC Treaty and Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA L 144/32 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 6. 1999 Agreement, subject to compliance by Germany with the conditions set out in this Decision. Germany and Meyer on behalf of NIR have given an undertaking to implement the restructuring programme as notified and to comply with the conditions. Past experience, however, both after the takeover by BVV and after the latter’s bankruptcy, has shown considerable difficulties in the drawing-up and implementation of a sustainable restructuring plan. The Commission would therefore point out that the full implementation of the restructuring plan is a condition for the aid. The Commission will take steps to require the recovery of the aid if the restructuring plan is not fully implemented (unless any modifications which may have become necessary have been accepted by the Commission) or the conditions concerning the use of the aid are not complied with, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 The loans of a total amount of DEM 34,5 million granted to Neptun Industrie Rostock GmbH (NIR) by the Bundesanstalt fur vereinigungsbedingte Sonderaufgaben (BvS), which are to be waived as from the date of adoption of this Decision, are compatible with the common market, subject to compliance with the conditions set out in Article 5. Article 2 The guarantee in respect of an amount of DEM 63 million, which was granted on 15 May 1996 by the Land of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania for NIR and which is to be replaced by a subsequent guarantee of up to DEM 28,1 million as from the date of adoption of this Decision until 31 December 2002 at the latest, comprises an aid equivalent of DEM 20,9 million and is compatible with the common market, subject to compliance with the conditions set out in Article 5. Article 3 The counter-guarantee in respect of an amount of DEM 8 million granted on 11 March 1997 until the date of this Decision by the BvS for NIR comprises an aid equivalent of DEM 2,4 million and is compatible with the common market. The possible renewal of this counter-guarantee until 31 December 1998 does not contain aid in view of the fees paid by NIR and the securities to be provided by NIR to the BvS. Article 4 The regional investment aid of an amount of DEM 1,7 million to be granted for the completion of investments in the NIR company MACOR Neptun is compatible with the common market, subject to compliance with the conditions set out in Article 5. Article 5 1. The State aid referred to in Articles 1 to 4 may be used exclusively for the rescue and restructuring of NIR, in line with the restructuring plan notified to the Commission. The aid must not be used for, and its benefits must not spill over to, the shipyards Neptun Reparaturwerft in Rostock or Meyer Werft in Papenburg. Until the end of 2001, no other aid shall be paid to the companies of the NIR group undergoing restructuring. 9. 6. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 144/33 2. Germany shall ensure that: (a) Neptun Reparaturwerft does not exceed the capacity limit of 300 000 hours for the repair of merchant ships (b) no conversion work is carried out on ships falling under the scope of the Community legislation on shipbuilding (c) the facilities of A&R Neptun Boatservice are not used for the building, conversion or repair of ships falling under the scope of the Community legislation on shipbuilding. Germany shall report on the progress of the restructuring by means of annual reports during 3. the period from 1998 to 2001. The reports will also provide sufficiently detailed information on compliance with the conditions set out in this Article. In addition, Germany shall submit six-monthly production control reports providing information on the activities of Neptun Repar- aturwerft. This Decision is addressed to the Federal Republic of Germany. Article 6 Done at Brussels, 28 October 1998. For the Commission Karel VAN MIERT Member of the Commission


title: Komission asetus (EY) N:o 2327/98, annettu 28 päivänä lokakuuta 1998, oliiviöljyn enimmäisvientitukien vahvistamisesta asetuksella (EY) N:o 1978/97 avatun pysyvän tarjouskilpailun osana toteutettua 22. osittaista tarjouskilpailua varten

eurovoc_concepts:
award of contract
export refund
olive oil

text: 29. 10. 98 FI Euroopan yhteis(cid:148)jen virallinen lehti L 290/21 KOMISSION ASETUS (EY) N:o 2327/98, annettu 28 p(cid:132)iv(cid:132)n(cid:132) lokakuuta 1998, oliivi(cid:148)ljyn enimm(cid:132)isvientitukien vahvistamisesta asetuksella (EY) N:o 1978/97 avatun pysyv(cid:132)n tarjouskilpailun osana toteutettua 22. osittaista tarjouskilpailua varten EUROOPAN YHTEIS(cid:153)JEN KOMISSIO, joka ottaa huomioon Euroopan yhteis(cid:148)n perustamissopi- muksen, ottaa huomioon rasva-alan yhteisest(cid:132) markkinaj(cid:132)rjestelyst(cid:132) 22 p(cid:132)iv(cid:132)n(cid:132) syyskuuta 1966 annetun neuvoston asetuksen N:o 136/66/ETY (1), sellaisena kuin se on viimeksi muutettuna asetuksella (EY) N:o 1638/98 (2), ja erityisesti sen 3 artiklan, sek(cid:132) katsoo, ett(cid:132) komission asetuksessa (EY) N:o 1978/97 (3) avataan olii- vi(cid:148)ljyn vientitukien m(cid:132)(cid:132)ritt(cid:132)mist(cid:132) koskeva pysyv(cid:132) tarjous- kilpailu, vientitukien enimm(cid:132)ism(cid:132)(cid:132)r(cid:132)t vahvistetaan asetuksen (EY) N:o 1978/97 6 artiklan mukaisesti ottaen huomioon tilanne ja kehitysn(cid:132)kym(cid:132)t yhteis(cid:148)n ja maailman oliivi(cid:148)ljy- markkinoilla ja saatujen tarjousten perusteella; tarjouskil- jonka pailu ratkaistaan sen tarjouksen tek¶(cid:132)n hyv(cid:132)ksi, tarjous sit(cid:132) on enimm(cid:132)isvientituen suuruinen tai pienempi, edell(cid:132) mainittujen s(cid:132)(cid:132)nn(cid:148)sten soveltamisesta seuraa, ett(cid:132) enimm(cid:132)isvientituet olisi vahvistettava liitteess(cid:132) mainitun suuruisiksi, ja rasvojen hallintokomitea ei ole antanut lausuntoa puheen- johtajansa asettamassa m(cid:132)(cid:132)r(cid:132)ajassa, ON ANTANUT T(cid:142)M(cid:142)N ASETUKSEN: 1 artikla Oliivi(cid:148)ljyn enimm(cid:132)isvientituet asetuksella (EY) N:o 1978/ 97 avatun pysyv(cid:132)n tarjouskilpailun osana toteutettua 22. osittaista tarjouskilpailua varten vahvistetaan liitteess(cid:132) 23 p(cid:132)iv(cid:132)(cid:132)n lokakuuta 1998 menness(cid:132) j(cid:132)tettyjen tarjousten perusteella. 2 artikla T(cid:132)m(cid:132) asetus tulee voimaan 29 p(cid:132)iv(cid:132)n(cid:132) lokakuuta 1998. T(cid:132)m(cid:132) asetus on kaikilta osiltaan velvoittava, j(cid:132)senvaltioissa. ja sit(cid:132) sovelletaan sellaisenaan kaikissa Tehty Brysseliss(cid:132) 28 p(cid:132)iv(cid:132)n(cid:132) lokakuuta 1998. Komission puolesta Franz FISCHLER Komission j(cid:132)sen (1) EYVL 172, 30. 9. 1966, s. 3025/66 (2) EYVL L 210, 28. 7. 1998, s. 32 (3) EYVL L 278, 11. 10. 1997, s. 7 L 290/22 FI Euroopan yhteis(cid:148)jen virallinen lehti 29. 10. 98 LIITE oliivi(cid:148)ljyn enimm(cid:132)isvientitukien vahvistamisesta asetuksella (EY) N:o 1978/97 avatun pysyv(cid:132)n tarjouskilpailun osana toteutettua 22. osittaista tarjouskilpailua varten 28 p(cid:132)iv(cid:132)n(cid:132) lokakuuta 1998 annettuun komission asetukseen Tuotekoodi Tuen m(cid:132)(cid:132)r(cid:132) (ecua/100 kg) 1509 10 90 9100 1509 10 90 9900 1509 90 00 9100 1509 90 00 9900 1510 00 90 9100 1510 00 90 9900 — — — — — — Huom. Tuotekoodit ja alaviitteet m(cid:132)(cid:132)ritell(cid:132)(cid:132)n komission asetuksessa (ETY) N:o 3846/87, sellaisena kuin se on muutettuna


title: INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA n. 3244/98 dell'on. Konstantinos HATZIDAKIS alla Commissione. Misure necessarie per la conservazione del Monastero di Aghios Andreas nei territori occupati di Cipro

text: 14. 5. 1999 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee C 135/181 (1999/C 135/227) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA E-3229/98 di Edith Müller (V) alla Commissione (26 ottobre 1998) Oggetto: Concorsi per l’assunzione di personale Può la Commissione comunicare, in merito ai concorsi realizzati negli ultimi cinque anni per la selezione del personale da assumere, dati statistici con le seguenti informazioni: numero, disaggregato per sesso e per cittadinanza, delle candidature, dei candidati ammessi alle prove scritte, dei candidati ammessi alle prove orali e dei candidati idonei? Risposta data dal sig. Liikanen a nome della Commissione (25 novembre 1998) Sulla base dell’articolo 2 dell’allegato XI dello Statuto, la Commissione presenterà alla fine del 1998 la relazione triennale sulle necessità delle istituzioni comunitarie in materia di assunzione. La relazione comprenderà in particolare delle statistiche in grado di rispondere alla domanda di informazione dell’onorevole parlamentare. Per il momento, la Commissione trasmette all’onorevole parlamentare nonché al Segretariato generale del Parlamento alcuni elementi statistici non esaurienti sui concorsi generali A e B organizzati e gestiti dalla Commissione nel periodo dal 1993 al 1997. (1999/C 135/228) INTERROGAZIONE SCRITTA E-3244/98 di Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) alla Commissione (28 ottobre 1998) Oggetto: Misure necessarie per la conservazione del Monastero di Aghios Andreas nei territori occupati di Cipro Secondo informazioni recentemente rese pubbliche, lo storico Monastero di Aghios Andreas che si trova nei territori occupati dell’isola di Cipro, è ridotto in condizioni disastrose a causa del totale abbandono e della mancanza dei necessari lavori di manutenzione. Tali informazioni sono confermate da articoli apparsi sulla stampa turco-cipriota (il quotidiano «Kibris»), che ha descritto la grave situazione del Monastero e ha constatato la necessità di urgenti lavori di restauro. Quali azioni potrebbe la Commissione intraprendere per ovviare all’inaccettabile degrado del patrimonio culturale dell’isola? Risposta data dal signor van den Broek in nome della Commissione (13 novembre 1998) La Commissione è a conoscenza dello stato in cui versa il monastero di Aghios Andreas, situato nella parte settentrionale di Cipro. Il rifiuto delle autorità turco-cipriote di avere qualsiasi contatto con i rappre- sentanti dell¢Unione europea e la sospensione degli incontri tra le due comunità dalla fine di dicembre 1997, decisa dal dirigente della comunità turco-cipriota, rendono impossibile per il momento qualsiasi azione nel nord del paese e soprattutto non consentono alla Commissione d¢ipotizzare un intervento concreto per la preservazione del patrimonio culturale


title: WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3245/98 by Graham WATSON to the Commission. Aromatherapy

text: C 142/110 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21. 5. 1999 (1999/C 142/136) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3245/98 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission (28 October 1998) Subject: Aromatherapy With regard to the ongoing discussions being held on herbal medicines with a view to establishing stricter regulation of this industry, what consideration has the Commission given to the possible impact on the aromatherapy industry? Is the Commission aware that the aromatherapy industry could suffer adversely from measures such as the restriction of sales of essential oils solely to pharmacies and/or practitioners? Will the Commission also ensure that the aromatherapy industry is represented on the relevant committees so that it is not sidelined in the debate on stricter regulation? Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (25 November 1998) The Commission is not aware of any draft legislative measure or proposal which might directly affect the aromatherapy industry. The regulation of the distribution of essential oils to the consumer falls within the competence of Member States and it is therefore national law that regulates the sale of these products. Some products used in aromatherapy may fall under the definition of ‘medicinal product’ as laid down in Article 1 of Directive 65/65/EEC of 26 January 1965 on the approximation of provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action relating to proprietary medicinal products (1). If these products are industrially produced, they may only be placed on the market if a marketing authorisation has been granted in accordance with Community pharmaceutical legislation. The ‘ongoing discussion on herbal medicine’, to which the Honourable Member refers, essentially deals with the problem of whether the requirements to prove quality, safety and efficacy of a medicinal product should apply to herbal medicines in the same manner as to any other medicinal product. Were the Commission − in the future − to decide to proceed with a specific proposal to address the above issue, it would ensure broad consultation with all interested parties. (1) OJ L 22, 9. 2. 1965. (1999/C 142/137) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3246/98 by John McCartin (PPE) to the Commission (28 October 1998) Subject: 1998 Urban Renewal Act, Ireland Can the Commission indicate which cities and towns are included in the 1998 Urban Renewal Act submitted to the Commission in late September by the Irish Government and indicate whether any regional airport zones (and, if so, which ones) have also been included? When does it expect a decision to be taken on the scheme so that it can come into effect in Ireland? Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (2 December 1998) A preliminary study of the notified file indicates that the Irish government has not yet finalised the selection process of the areas concerned by the scheme. These areas, to which one or more of the incentives provided in the scheme may apply, will be small zones located in various cities and towns. The final list will be sent to the Commission when the selection process is completed. It is also deduced from the study of the file that no regional airport zones are covered by the scheme


title: WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3247/98 by Ernesto CACCAVALE Monopolistic system of regulating chemists' shops in Italy

eurovoc_concepts:
Italy
access to a profession
consumer protection
geographical distribution
monopoly
pharmaceutical industry
pharmaceutical legislation
pharmacist
pharmacology
right of establishment

text: C 320/32 Euroopan yhteisöjen virallinen lehti FI 6. 11. 1999 (1999/C 320/043) KIRJALLINEN KYSYMYS E-3247/98 esittäjä(t): Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) komissiolle (28. lokakuuta 1998) Aihe: Apteekkitoiminnan monopolistinen sääntely Italiassa Italiassa apteekkipalveluista voimassa oleviin sääntöihin ja määräyksiin sisältyy koko joukko perusteettomia etuoikeuksia ja rajoituksia: ! Laki myöntää apteekkareille yksinoikeuden valmistaa ja myydä käsikauppalääkkeitä. ! Apteekkien määrää eri alueilla on rajoitettu käyttäen perusteina väestötietoja, maantieteellisiä seikkoja ja etäisyyksiä. Kunnissa, joissa on asukkaita enintään 12 500, saa olla yksi apteekki jokaista 5 000 asukasta kohden ja sitä suuremmilla paikkakunnilla yksi apteekki jokaista 4 000 asukasta kohden. Lisäksi jokainen uusi toimipiste täytyy perustaa vähintään 200 metrin päähän muista. ! Apteekkialalle pääsee vain julkisesta kilpailusta, jossa otetaan huomioon opintotodistukset ja kokeen tulokset, tai perimällä käsittämättömänä etuoikeutena luvan apteekkitoiminnan harjoittamiseen, siis sukulaisuussuhteen perusteella. ! Ammatinharjoittamista säännellään niin, että kukin kunta määrää aukioloajat ja päivystysvuorot läänin määräysten mukaisesti. Terveysmainontaa puolestaan säätelee laki, joka sallii mainonnan ainoastaan ilmoituksina puhelinluettelossa ja silloinkin vain kunnan luvalla sekä ammattikunnan esityksestä. Apteekkareille on suotu etuisuuksia suhteettoman paljon, jolloin sääntely ei mitenkään palvele tarkoitustaan eli kansanterveydestä huolehtimista. Erityisesti apteekkikiintiöiden tavoitteena näyttää olevan nimenomaan ammatinharjoittajien tulotason takaaminen eikä apteekkien järkevä ja riittävä alueellinen jakautuminen. Lopputuloksena tästä kaikesta on perusteeton monopoliasema. Voiko komissio siis ! ilmoittaa, missä vaiheessa ovat asiaa koskevat tutkimukset; ! sanoa, onko riittävästi perusteita pitää Italiassa vallitsevaa sääntelyä monopolistisena ja Euroopan kilpailulainsäädännön vastaisena; ! kertoa, mihin toimiin se aikoo ryhtyä, jotta kuluttajien etu turvattaisiin ja pääsy apteekkarin ammattiin helpottuisi? Komission jäsenen Mario Montin komission puolesta antama vastaus (15. tammikuuta 1999) Komissio kehottaa arvoisaa parlamentin jäsentä tutustumaan vastauksiin, jotka se on antanut Marie-Paule Kestelijn-Sierensin esittämään kirjalliseen kysymykseen E-3477/97 (1) ja Amedeo Amadeon kirjalliseen kysymykseen E-3011/98 (2), joka koski erityisesti voimassa olevaa Italian lainsäädäntöä yleisölle avoimien apteekkien hoitamista koskevien edellytysten osalta. Komissio katsoo, että esitetyn kaltaiset kansalliset toimenpiteet (apteekkareille myönnetty käsikauppalääkkei- den yksinmyyntioikeus, apteekkien perustamista säätelevät väestötiedot ja maantieteelliset seikat, apteekin perustamiseksi vaadittava julkinen kilpailu, viranomaisten määräämät aukioloajat ja päivystysvuorot sekä mainontaa rajoittavat säännöt) eivät riko EY:n perustamissopimuksen 52 artiklan mukaista sijoittautumisva- jos niitä pauden periaatetta, sovelletaan ketään syrjimättä ja jos ne eivät ole suhteettomia tavoiteltuun päämäärään nähden. Komissio katsoo myös, että edellä mainittujen toimenpiteiden suhteettomuutta tavoiteltuun päämäärään nähden ei ole osoitettu. tässä yhteydessä nimenomaisesti yhteisön sisäistä sijoittautumisvapautta, Komissio ilmoittaa arvoisalle parlamentin jäsenelle, ettei komissio ole aloittanut asiaa koskevia tutkimuksia. (1) (2) EYVL C 223, 17. 7. 1998. EYVL C 142, 21. 5. 1999, s. 70


title: Reglamento (CE) nº 2328/98 de la Comisión de 28 de octubre de 1998 que modifica el Reglamento (CE) nº 1253/98 el que se establece el plan de previsiones de abastecimiento a las Azores y Madeira de productos del sector de los cereales acogidos al régimen específico establecido en los artículos 2 a 10 del Reglamento (CEE) nº 1600/92 del Consejo

eurovoc_concepts:
Azores
Madeira
aid system
cereals
supply balance sheet

text: 29. 10. 98 ES Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas L 290/23 REGLAMENTO (CE) No 2328/98 DE LA COMISI(cid:222)N de 28 de octubre de 1998 que modifica el Reglamento (CE) no 1253/98 el que se establece el plan de previsiones de abastecimiento a las Azores y Madeira de productos del sector de los cereales acogidos al r(cid:130)gimen espec(cid:146)fico establecido en los art(cid:146)culos 2 a 10 del Reglamento (CEE) no 1600/92 del Consejo LA COMISI(cid:222)N DE LAS COMUNIDADES EUROPEAS, Visto el Tratado constitutivo de la Comunidad Europea, Visto el Reglamento (CEE) no 1600/92 del Consejo, de 15 de junio de 1992, sobre medidas espec(cid:146)ficas en favor de las Azores y Madeira relativas a determinados productos agrarios (1), cuya (cid:156)ltima modificaci(cid:155)n la constituye el Reglamento (CE) no 562/98 de la Comisi(cid:155)n (2), y, en parti- cular, su art(cid:146)culo 10, Considerando que las cantidades de productos que se benefician del r(cid:130)gimen espec(cid:146)fico de abastecimiento se fijan en los planes de previsiones establecidos peri(cid:155)dica- mente y revisables en funci(cid:155)n de las necesidades b(cid:145)sicas de los mercados, habida cuenta de los productos locales y de las corrientes de intercambios tradicionales; Considerando que, de conformidad con el art(cid:146)culo 2 del Reglamento (CEE) no 1600/92, dichas medidas cubren las necesidades de los archipi(cid:130)lagos para el consumo humano y el sector de la transformaci(cid:155)n; que estas necesidades se eval(cid:156)an anualmente mediante un plan de previsiones que puede revisarse durante el per(cid:146)odo en funci(cid:155)n de la evolu- ci(cid:155)n de las necesidades de las islas; que se puede esta- blecer un plan de previsiones aparte con objeto de evaluar las necesidades de las industrias de transformaci(cid:155)n o de acondicionamiento de al mercado local o que tradicionalmente se env(cid:146)an al resto de la Comunidad; los productos destinados Considerando que, en aplicaci(cid:155)n de lo dispuesto en el art(cid:146)culo 2 del Reglamento (CEE) no 1600/92 el Regla- mento (CE) no 1253/98 de la Comisi(cid:155)n (3) ha establecido el plan de previsiones de abastecimiento de productos del sector de los cereales a las Azores y Madeira para la campa(cid:157)a 1998/99; que para satisfacer las necesidades de esta regi(cid:155)n, es preciso modificar el citado plan de previ- siones de abastecimiento; que, por consiguiente, es conve- niente modificar el Reglamento (CE) no 1253/98; Considerando que las medidas previstas en el presente Reglamento se ajustan al dictamen del Comit(cid:130) de gesti(cid:155)n de los cereales, HA ADOPTADO EL PRESENTE REGLAMENTO: Art(cid:146)culo 1 El anexo del Reglamento (CE) no 1253/98 se sustituir(cid:145) por el anexo del presente Reglamento. Art(cid:146)culo 2 El presente Reglamento entrar(cid:145) en vigor el d(cid:146)a de su publicaci(cid:155)n en el Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas. Ser(cid:145) aplicable a partir del 1 de julio de 1998. El presente Reglamento ser(cid:145) obligatorio en todos sus elementos y directamente aplicable en cada Estado miembro. Hecho en Bruselas, el 28 de octubre de 1998. Por la Comisi(cid:155)n Franz FISCHLER Miembro de la Comisi(cid:155)n (1) DO L 173 de 27. 6. 1992, p. 1. (2) DO L 76 de 13. 3. 1998, p. 6. (3) DO L 173 de 18. 6. 1998, p. 10. L 290/24 ES Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas 29. 10. 98 ANEXO «ANEXO Plan de abastecimiento de las Azores y de Madeira en productos del sector de los cereales para la campa(cid:157)a 1998/99 Regi(cid:155)n Trigo blando panificable Trigo blando forrajero Trigo duro Cebada Ma(cid:146)z Malta Total Azores Madeira 34 000 25 000 Total 59 000 — — — 500 5 000 5 500 35 000 2 500 75 500 35 000 1 000 2 200 146 000 69 700 37 500 110 500 3 200 215 700»


title: Reglamento (CE) n° 2326/98 de la Comisión de 28 de octubre de 1998 por el que se fijan los derechos de importación en el sector del arroz

eurovoc_concepts:
CCT duties
import
rice

text: L 290/18 ES Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas 29. 10. 98 REGLAMENTO (CE) No 2326/98 DE LA COMISI(cid:222)N de 28 de octubre de 1998 por el que se fijan los derechos de importaci(cid:155)n en el sector del arroz LA COMISI(cid:222)N DE LAS COMUNIDADES EUROPEAS, Visto el Tratado constitutivo de la Comunidad Europea, Visto el Reglamento (CE) no 3072/95 del Consejo, de 22 de diciembre de 1995, por el que se establece la organiza- ci(cid:155)n com(cid:156)n de mercados en el sector del arroz (1), cuya (cid:156)ltima modificaci(cid:155)n la constituye el Reglamento (CE) no 2072/98 (2), Visto el Reglamento (CE) no 1503/96 de la Comisi(cid:155)n, de 29 de julio de 1996, por el que se establecen las disposi- ciones de aplicaci(cid:155)n del Reglamento (CE) no 3072/95 del Consejo en lo referente a los derechos de importaci(cid:155)n en el sector del arroz (3), cuya (cid:156)ltima modificaci(cid:155)n la consti- tuye el Reglamento (CE) no 1403/97 (4), y, en particular, el apartado 1 de su art(cid:146)culo 4, Considerando que el art(cid:146)culo 11 del Reglamento (CE) no 3072/95 establece la percepci(cid:155)n de los derechos del arancel aduanero com(cid:156)n con motivo de la importaci(cid:155)n de los productos mencionados en el art(cid:146)culo 1 del citado Reglamento; que, no obstante, el derecho de importaci(cid:155)n para los productos indicados en el apartado 2 de dicho art(cid:146)culo es igual al precio de intervenci(cid:155)n v(cid:145)lido para estos productos en el momento de su importaci(cid:155)n, incre- mentado en un porcentaje seg(cid:156)n se trate de arroz descas- carillado o blanqueado, y reducido en el precio de impor- taci(cid:155)n, siempre que el derecho no sobrepase los tipos de los derechos del arancel aduanero com(cid:156)n; Considerando que, en virtud de lo establecido en el apar- tado 3 del art(cid:146)culo 12 del Reglamento (CE) no 3072/95, los precios de importaci(cid:155)n cif se calculan tomando como base los precios representativos para el producto de que se trate en el mercado mundial o en el mercado comunitario de importaci(cid:155)n del producto; Considerando que el Reglamento (CE) no 1503/96 esta- blece las disposiciones de aplicaci(cid:155)n del Reglamento (CE) no 3072/95 en lo que respecta a los derechos de importa- ci(cid:155)n en el sector del arroz; Considerando que los derechos de importaci(cid:155)n son apli- cables hasta la entrada en vigor de otros nuevos; que si no se dispone de tambi(cid:130)n permanecen vigentes ninguna cotizaci(cid:155)n en las fuentes de referencia a que se refiere el art(cid:146)culo 5 del Reglamento (CE) no 1503/96 durante las dos semanas anteriores a la siguiente fijaci(cid:155)n peri(cid:155)dica; Considerando que, para permitir el funcionamiento normal del r(cid:130)gimen de derechos por importaci(cid:155)n, es necesario utilizar para el c(cid:145)lculo de estos (cid:156)ltimos los tipos de mercado registrados durante un per(cid:146)odo de referencia; Considerando que la aplicaci(cid:155)n del Reglamento (CE) no 1503/96 conduce a fijar los derechos de importaci(cid:155)n conforme a los anexos del presente Reglamento, HA ADOPTADO EL PRESENTE REGLAMENTO: Art(cid:146)culo 1 En el anexo I del presente Reglamento se establecen, sobre la base de los datos recogidos en el anexo II, los derechos de importaci(cid:155)n del sector del arroz mencionados en los apartados 1 y 2 del art(cid:146)culo 11 del Reglamento (CE) no 3072/95. Art(cid:146)culo 2 El presente Reglamento entrar(cid:145) en vigor el 29 de octubre de 1998. El presente Reglamento ser(cid:145) obligatorio en todos sus elementos y directamente aplicable en cada Estado miembro. Hecho en Bruselas, el 28 de octubre de 1998. Por la Comisi(cid:155)n Franz FISCHLER Miembro de la Comisi(cid:155)n (1) DO L 329 de 30. 12. 1995, p. 18. (2) DO L 265 de 30. 9. 1998, p. 4. (3) DO L 189 de 30. 7. 1996, p. 71. (4) DO L 194 de 23. 7. 1997, p. 2. 29. 10. 98 ES Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas L 290/19 ANEXO I Derechos de importaci(cid:155)n aplicables al arroz y al arroz partido C(cid:155)digo NC 1006 10 21 1006 10 23 1006 10 25 1006 10 27 1006 10 92 1006 10 94 1006 10 96 1006 10 98 1006 20 11 1006 20 13 1006 20 15 1006 20 17 1006 20 92 1006 20 94 1006 20 96 1006 20 98 1006 30 21 1006 30 23 1006 30 25 1006 30 27 1006 30 42 1006 30 44 1006 30 46 1006 30 48 1006 30 61 1006 30 63 1006 30 65 1006 30 67 1006 30 92 1006 30 94 1006 30 96 1006 30 98 1006 40 00 Terceros pa(cid:146)ses (excepto ACP y Bangladesh) (3) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) 271,25 271,25 271,25 262,17 271,25 271,25 271,25 262,17 478,36 478,36 478,36 (7) 478,36 478,36 478,36 (7) 478,36 478,36 478,36 (7) 478,36 478,36 478,36 (7) (7) ACP (1) (2) (3) 83,41 83,41 83,41 83,41 83,41 83,41 83,41 83,41 90,60 90,60 90,60 87,42 90,60 90,60 90,60 87,42 155,03 155,03 155,03 160,51 155,03 155,03 155,03 160,51 155,03 155,03 155,03 160,51 155,03 155,03 155,03 160,51 49,58 Derecho de importaci(cid:155)n (5) Bangladesh (4) Basmati India y Pakist(cid:145)n (6) Egipto (8) (en ecus/t) 121,01 121,01 121,01 121,01 121,01 121,01 121,01 121,01 131,29 131,29 131,29 126,75 131,29 131,29 131,29 126,75 224,27 224,27 224,27 232,09 224,27 224,27 224,27 232,09 224,27 224,27 224,27 232,09 224,27 224,27 224,27 232,09 72,38 12,17 12,17 188,03 188,03 188,03 188,03 188,03 188,03 188,03 188,03 203,44 203,44 203,44 196,63 203,44 203,44 203,44 196,63 358,77 358,77 358,77 370,50 358,77 358,77 358,77 370,50 358,77 358,77 358,77 370,50 358,77 358,77 358,77 370,50 114,00 (1) El derecho por las importaciones de arroz originario de los Estados de (cid:214)frica, del Caribe y del Pac(cid:146)fico se aplicar(cid:145) con arreglo al r(cid:130)gimen establecido en los Reglamentos (CE) no 1706/98 del Consejo (DO L 215 de 1. 8. 1998, p. 12) y, (CE) no 2603/97 de la Comisi(cid:155)n (DO L 351 de 23. 12. 1997, p. 22), modificado. (2) Con arreglo a lo dispuesto en el Reglamento (CE) no 1706/98, los derechos de importaci(cid:155)n no se aplicar(cid:145)n a los productos originarios de los Estados de (cid:214)frica, del Caribe y del Pac(cid:146)fico e importados directamente en el departamento de ultramar de la Reuni(cid:155)n. (3) El derecho por la importaci(cid:155)n de arroz en el departamento de ultramar de la Reuni(cid:155)n se establece en el apartado 3 del art(cid:146)culo 11 del Reglamento (CE) no 3072/95. (4) El derecho por las importaciones de arroz, excepto las de arroz partido (c(cid:155)digo NC 1006 40 00), originarias de Bangladesh se aplicar(cid:145) con arreglo al r(cid:130)gimen establecido en los Reglamentos (CEE) no 3491/90 del Consejo (DO L 337 de 4. 12. 1990, p. 1) y (CEE) no 862/91 de la Comisi(cid:155)n (DO L 88 de 9. 4. 1991, p. 7), modificado. (5) La importaci(cid:155)n de productos originarios de los PTU quedar(cid:145) exenta de derechos de importaci(cid:155)n, de conformidad con dispuesto en el apartado 1 del art(cid:146)culo 101 de la Decisi(cid:155)n 91/482/CEE del Consejo (DO L 263 de 19. 9. 1991, p. 1) modificada. (6) El arroz sin c(cid:145)scara de la variedad Basmati originario de la India y de Pakist(cid:145)n ser(cid:145) objeto de una reducci(cid:155)n de 250 ecus/t [art(cid:146)culo 4 bis del Reglamento (CE) no 1503/96, modificado]. (7) Derecho de aduana fijado en el arancel aduanero com(cid:156)n. (8) El derecho por las importaciones de arroz originario y procedente de Egipto se aplicar(cid:145) con arreglo al r(cid:130)gimen establecido en los Reglamentos (CE) no 2184/96 del Consejo (DO L 292 de 15. 11. 1996, p. 1) y (CE) no 196/97 de la Comisi(cid:155)n (DO L 31 de 1. 2. 1997, p. 53). L 290/20 ES Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas 29. 10. 98 ANEXO II C(cid:145)lculo de los derechos de importaci(cid:155)n del sector del arroz Paddy Arroz partido Descascarillado Blanco Descascarillado Blanco Tipo (cid:237)ndica Tipo Jap(cid:155)nica 1. Derecho de importaci(cid:155)n (ecus/t) (1) 262,17 (1) 271,25 478,36 2. Elementos de c(cid:145)lculo: a) Precio cif Arag (ecus/t) b) Precio fob (ecus/t) c) Fletes mar(cid:146)timos (ecus/t) d) Fuente — — — — 306,45 304,96 322,64 365,09 — — — — 297,17 339,62 25,47 25,47 USDA USDA Operadores Operadores (1) — — — — (1) Derecho de aduana fijado en el arancel aduanero com(cid:156)n