title: 2000/21/EC: Commission Decision of 28 July 1999 on state aid granted by the Federal Republic of Germany to Brockhausen Holze GmbH (notified under document number C(1999) 2914) (Text with EEA relevance) (Only the German text is authentic)

eurovoc_concepts:
Germany
State aid
aid for restructuring
aid to undertakings
control of State aid
regional aid

text: L 7/6 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 12. 1. 2000 II (Acts whose publication is not obligatory) COMMISSION COMMISSION DECISION of 28 July 1999 on state aid granted by the Federal Republic of Germany to Brockhausen Holze GmbH (notified under document number C(1999) 2914) (Only the German text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) (2000/21/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 88(2) thereof, Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 62(1)(a) thereof, Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provisions cited above (1) and having regard to their comments, Whereas: 1. PROCEDURE (1) By a complaint dated 2 September 1996 (registered as received on 6 September 1996), the Commission was informed that the Land of Saxony had granted state aid to Brockhausen Holze GmbH (BHC), Chemnitz. In response to Commission requests for information dated the 16 September 1996 and 22 November 1997, German authorities sent formal replies on 15 October 1996 and 7 February 1997. On the basis of the informa- tion contained in the last of those letters, the aid was (1) OJ C 144, 9. 5. 1998, p. 15. (2) (3) insolvency procedure for registered as non-notified aid on 8 April 1997. On 18 April 1997 BHC filed for insolvency (Gesamtvollstreckung: special firms in the new Länder). In letters dated 21 April, 12 June and 18 July 1997 the Commission asked the German authorities to notify the aid. In letters dated 26 June and l5 August 1997, the German authorities refused on the ground that notification no longer served any purpose because the firm had filed for insolvency. By letter dated 18 February 1998, the Commission informed Germany of its decision to initiate the proce- dure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty. In addition, it formally requested Germany (2) to provide it, within one month of receiving the request, with all necessary documentation and information for assessing the compatibility of the aid already granted with Article 87 of the EC Treaty. Germany replied by letter dated 4 May. The Commission decision to initiate the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Communi- ties (3). In its decision, the Commission invited all inter- ested parties to submit their comments on the aid. On 9 June 1998 the Commission received a set of comments which it forwarded to the German authorities on 25 January 1999. After the deadline had been extended several times, Germany was given the opportunity to comment by 31 March 1999. It did not comply with this deadline. After from the Commission, Germany finally submitted its comments on 11 May 1999. receiving a reminder (2) In accordance with the judgment of the European Court of Justice given on 13 April 1994 in Joined Cases C-324/90 and C-342/90 Federal Republic of Germany and Pleuger-Worthington V Commission [1994] ECR I-1173. (3) See footnote 1. 12. 1. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 7/7 2. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE AID 2. 1 Grounds for initiating the procedure (4) (5) The aid to BHC came to the Commission's attention through a complaint lodged by an Austrian engineering works which alleged that the Land of Saxony had granted the firm aid amounting to DEM 4,7 million. In the complainant's opinion, the aid enabled the firm to increase its exports by reducing prices. By letter dated 15 October 1996, Germany confirmed that the firm had received a dormant equity holding of DEM 2,5 million from the Saxony Consolidation Fund (Konsolidierungsfonds) (4) and an 80 % deficiency guar- antee (Ausfallbürgschaft) on a DEM 2,3 million loan provided under Saxony's Guarantee Directive (5). (6) These aid measures presented the following difficulties. (a) Aid scheme N 117/95 was approved on the basis of the undertaking given by Germany that there would be no combination of aid. However, the aid from the Consolidation Fund was granted in addition to the guarantee provided under scheme N 73/93, thereby infringing the prohibition on combining aid. The aid should therefore have been notified as ad hoc restruc- turing aid. restrict the amount of aid to an absolute minimum and to comply more fully with the guidelines on state aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in diffi- culty (6). (8) In order to secure a formal notification and to be able to assess the compatibility of the aid granted to the firm with the common market, the Commission decided to initiate the Article 88(2) procedure. 2. 2 The recipient firm (9) As at 31 December 1995 BHC had 243 employees and an annual turnover of DEM 32 million; no one firm falling outside the definition of a small or medium-sized enterprise (SME) owned 25 % or more of its capital. BHC was therefore an SME within the meaning of Commis- sion Recommendation 96/280/EC of 3 April 1996 concerning the definition of small and medium-sized enterprises (7). (10) BHC traded in the three areas of make-to-order casting (25 %), services (25 %) and replacement parts (50 %), producing mainly steel balls for the cement industry and linings for furnaces. (b) Scheme N 73/93 allows guarantees to be provided (11) to cover loans of DEM 5 million or more only. The firm is located in Chemnitz and thus in a structu- rally weak area of Saxony. (7) Germany was again asked to notify the aid formally and to provide all the necessary information for an assess- ment of its compatibility with the common market. The German authorities refused to do so in letters dated 26 June and 15 August 1997 on the grounds that: 2. 3 History of the firm (a) notification no longer served any purpose since the firm had filed for insolvency, and (12) (b) the aid measures were not to be seen as separate measures but as a single restructuring aid measure, with the result that there was no infringement of the prohibition on combining aid. Using both schemes had made it possible to reduce the overall intensity of the aid because a guarantee has a lesser aid inten- sity than a loan. In this way it had been possible to (4) Directive on grants from the Saxony Consolidation Fund for the restructuring of small and medium-sized industrial enterprises under the agreement between the Land of Saxony and the Treuhandanstalt (THA)/Bundesanstalt für vereinigungsbedingte Sonderaufgaben (BvS) of 5 December 1994; state aid scheme N 117/95; Commission approval given by letter dated 5 May 1995 (SG(95) D/5782). (5) Directive on guarantees for industry and the liberal professions and for agriculture and forestry of 1 September 1993; state aid scheme N 73/93; Commission approval given by letter dated 7 June 1993 (SG(93) D/9273). BHC succeeded Eisen- and Stahlgießerei Chemnitz GmbH (ESC GmbH), which was acquired at the begin- ning of 1992 from the Treuhandanstalt by PE GmbH. The privatisation was conducted according to an open, unconditional and transparent tendering procedure with the highest bidder acquiring the firm. In September 1992 the two firms created CPC GmbH, which was to operate an iron and steel foundry. In 1993 the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia produced a financing plan for CPC GmbH which had as a condition the establishment of a plant in North Rhine Westphalia. The CP Gießerei KG (CPG KG) was therefore set up in Beckum. Subse- quently, CPC GmbH and CPG KG were renamed BHC Brockhausen & Holze Gießerei GmbH & Co KG (BHC KG) and Brockhausen & Holze Gießerei GmbH (BHC GmbH). On 29 August 1995 BHC GmbH and BHC KG were merged to become BHC. (6) OJ C 368, 23. 12. 1994, p. 12. (7) OJ L 107, 30. 4. 1996, p. 4. L 7/8 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 12. 1. 2000 (13) During 1995 BHC faced enormous liquidity problems owing to delays in investment and to heavy start-up losses. These start-up losses were principally due to the firm's unproductive old equipment and to the end of cooperation with a west German partner. In a report by the management consultancy firm LOGOS-Consult, the firm's financing requirements in January 1996 were put at DEM 6 million. A restructuring plan was drawn up and various public bodies provided financial assistance. However, this did not resolve the firm's liquidity prob- lems. In February 1997 further assistance of the order of DEM 1,243 million was provided. Since this was not sufficient, BHC filed for insolvency (Gesamtvollstreckung) on 18 April 1997. (14) Insolvency proceedings began on 20 May 1997. The sequestrator/administrator concluded a takeover and lease agreement with Guß and Verschleißtechnik GmbH (GVT). On 23 June BHC's business activities were discontinued and taken over by GVT. The present decision concerns the old firm only. 2. 4 Financial assistance (15) According to the notification which Germany submitted on 4 May 1998 after the state aid procedure had been initiated, BHC benefited between 1994 and 1997 from various aid measures amounting to over DEM 42 million. The private investor's share in the restructuring some have would DEM 750 000 (8). However, the information supplied to the Commission is not explicit regarding this share. amounted appear to to (16) In 1993 the first comprehensive financing plan for BHC was drawn up. (a) On 27 May 1994 the Land of North Rhine-West- phalia, under its programme of guarantee assistance for projects in Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, Thuringia and Berlin/East, provided a 90 % deficiency guarantee on a DEM 20 million investment loan and a DEM 10 million operating loan (9). The aid thus came to DEM 27 million. (b) On 28 October 1994, under the joint Federal Government/Länder scheme for improving regional Saxony economic structures (10), Land of the (8) This would appear to have consisted of the following: 20 % of the i. e. DEM 500 000, and DEM 250 000 in DEM 2,3 million loan, the form of a shareholder loan. (9) N 155/88. (10) 22nd framework plan of the joint Federal Government/Länder scheme for improving regional economic structures. approved a grant of DEM 7,406 million, of which only DEM 6,94 million was paid out. (c) Under the 1993 Investment Allowance Act (Investi- tionszulagengesetz/InvZulG), the Chemnitz tax office provided the allowances amounting to DEM 91 268 and DEM 1 056 153 for the years 1994 and 1995. firm with investment (17) In January 1996 restructuring measures had to be taken in view of the difficulties faced by the firm. These were financed by: (a) an operating loan from the bank affiliated to the firm (initially limited to DEM 1,8 million) that was secured on 3 April 1996 by an 80 % guarantee under Saxony's guarantee scheme (N 73/93). The guarantee amounted to DEM 1,44 million; (b) a dormant equity holding of DEM 2,5 million from the Saxony Consolidation Fund (11) granted on 24 June 1996; (c) a repayment deferral of DEM 1,167 million granted by Chemnitz's Department of Public Works. (18) Lastly, in order to meet the firm's liquidity requirements, three further measures were taken in February 1997. (a) The guarantee provided by the Land of Saxony was increased to cover a further DEM 500 000, bringing the loan to DEM 2,3 million, with the guarantee covering DEM 1,8 million. (b) The BvS granted a loan of DEM 500 000, with interest at 3 percentage points over the discount rate. (c) The shareholders helped to bridge the liquidity gap with DEM 250 000. (19) All the aid measures were registered as claims in the insolvency proceedings. 2. 5 Restructuring plan (20) The notification made on 4 May 1998 contained a brief description of the restructuring plan. By letter dated 11 May 1999, Germany sent the Commission the report by LOGOS-Consult, in which an assessment was made of the plan drawn up by BHC's management. (11) See footnote 4. 12. 1. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 7/9 (21) The 1996 restructuring plan was designed to increase BHC's productivity, to make it more competitive and to improve the relatively tight financial situation. (22) It essentially comprised six measures: (a) completing the reconstruction of essential plant with a view to improving the quality of production, cutting back on the use of material, energy and human resources, and ultimately producing at more competitive costs; (b) shutting down unprofitable old equipment; (c) reducing the workforce by 30; (d) intensifying marketing activities by, among other things, setting up a network of sales offices abroad, sales the management volumes would expand in 1996 and in subsequent years; assumption being that (e) moving into a higher-quality product area, i. e. from casting to cement. BHC was no longer to be a foundry in the traditional sense. (23) Under the financing plan, unnecessary land was to be disposed of so that equity capital could be used to help reduce the firm's indebtedness and thus open up possi- bilities for additional financing from credit institutions. (24) Losses were still forecast for the financial year 1996, but from 1997 onwards the firm was expected to move into the black. (25) LOGOS-Consult considered the management's plan to be optimistic and ambitious, but not unrealistic. Since it was not based on the worst-case scenario, some elements of risk remained. For example, the firm's share in the restructuring costs was to be financed from the sale of unnecessary land. However, at the time of the report by LOGOS-Consult, this sale had not yet taken place and was still uncertain. 2. 6 Products and markets (26) BHC's main activities were in the areas of casting, replacement parts and services. As regards casting (25 % of turnover), the firm principally produced parts for the automotive engineering industries, where competitive pressures were enormous. Replace- and mechanical ment parts (50 % of turnover) were produced mainly for the cement industry. According to the notification, however, there was no overcapacity here since the firm occupied a customer-oriented product niche. Lastly, services made up 25 % of turnover. (27) With an annual output of some EUR 20 billion, the Community is among the world's largest producers of castings. The industry manufactures parts mostly for the automative and mechanical engineering sectors and is made up of small and medium-sized enterprises. (28) Foundries supply industrial firms and are thus dependent to a large degree on cyclical business trends and on the demand patterns of customers. Owing to the economic downturn, the number of people employed in the foundry sector throughout the Community has fallen since 1989 by 50 000, or some 20 % of the workforce. (29) By comparison with other sectors, foreign trade is virtu- ally insignificant in the foundry products industry. (30) (31) (32) (33) The sector cannot really be considered to be a growth industry. Discounting the differences caused by fluctu- ations in the business cycle, production has remained almost constant over the last 10 years. The increase in value over this period merely reflects the trend towards higher-quality castings. The most recent economic downturn in 1990 to 1993 hit the foundry sector hard. However, there was an improvement in 1994 and the market did not suffer from overcapacity. Since drastic manpower cuts have been made in recent years and numerous manufacturing processes are being increasingly rationalised, there is now quiet optimism in the sector once again. Evidence that these rationalisation measures were what was needed is found in the spectacular production volumes achieved in 1995 with 20 % fewer employees than in 1989 (12). 3. COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES By letter dated 9 June 1998, the Commission received a the engineering works statement made on behalf of Liezen and Gießerei GmbH, which had lodged the complaint on 2 September 1996. It welcomed the Commission's decision to initiate proceedings against BHC and repeated the argument that there had been overcapacity in the foundry sector for several years. Public support for firms in this sector distorted competition and should be avoided since it enabled such firms to benefit from additional resources, making it possible for them to sell their products at below market price. (12) See Panorama of EU Industry 1997, pages 10-41. L 7/10 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 12. 1. 2000 (34) Furthermore, the fact that insolvency proceedings had been initiated in respect of BHC on 18 April 1996 could the aid not prevent an examination being made of granted previously, which distorted competition. already had (42) The grant of DEM 7,406 million was made under the joint Federal Government/Länder scheme for improving regional economic structures, which had been notified to and approved by the Commission. (35) According to the statement, the new firm founded by Mr Schulze-Brockhausen in the wake of the insolvency proceedings had applied to the Land of Saxony for further aid. If approved, public funding of the rescue arrangements (Auffanglösung), under which BHC's activi- ties were to continue under the same management, would result in circumvention of the relevant state aid rules and further undue distortion of competition. (43) The investment allowance of DEM 1,147 million was provided under schemes notified to and approved by the Commission. (36) The statement went on to say that, if the previous and the new aid turned out to be restructuring aid, the question would arise as to whether the conditions set out in the guidelines were met. If the new firm received aid, this would run counter to the principle according to which restructuring aid can be granted only once. (44) 4. COMMENTS FROM GERMANY (37) Germany responded to the Commission's request by letter dated 4 May 1998, which, in practice, constitutes notification of all the aid granted to BHC. (38) As regards the question of whether aid was granted to the new firm set up under the rescue arrangements, the German authorities informed the Commission in a letter dated 4 December 1998 that BHG Guß- and Ver- schleißtechnik GmbH and GVT Guß- and Ver- schleißtechnik GmbH Chemnitz had applied for regional aid totalling DEM 2,149 million under the joint Federal Government/Länder improving regional economic structures. scheme for (39) Germany confirmed this information in a letter dated 11 May 1999 and again explained why it considered the aid granted to BHC to be compatible with the guidelines. (45) 5. ASSESSMENT OF THE AID (40) (41) 5. 1 Aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty The possibility that the aid described distorted trade between Member States on the market referred to at the outset cannot be ruled out. For this reason, each aid measure must be assessed in the light of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty. The 90 % deficiency guarantee on an investment loan of DEM 20 million and an operating loan of DEM 10 million, i. e. a guarantee worth DEM 27 million in total, was provided under a notified scheme already approved by the Commission. The criteria laid down for imple- menting the scheme were adhered to. this The 80 % guarantee on an operating loan of DEM 2,3 million, i. e. a guarantee worth DEM 1,8 million, was provided under the guarantee scheme of the Land of Saxony (N 73/93). Generally speaking, scheme permits guarantees to be provided only for loans of DEM 5 million or more. In exceptional circumstances, however, the Sächsische Aufbaubank (Saxony Bank for Reconstruction) or the Bürgschaftsbank Sachsen GmbH (Saxony Guarantee Bank) can guarantee loans of under DEM 5 million if, for example, the loan is to be used to finance restructuring projects and the guarantee is thus designed to contribute to the success of the restructuring plan. This scheme was approved on condition that a restructuring plan for restoring the viability of the firm the was drawn up. Commission would have to examine whether it could restore the viability of the firm. If such a plan were drawn up, The dormant equity holding of DEM 2,5 million came from the Saxony Consolidation Fund (N 117/95). This scheme was approved, inter alia on condition that no firm should receive aid if it had already received restruc- turing aid for firms in difficulty. This prohibition on combining aid was not adhered to, since the aid was granted in addition to the 80 % guarantee on a loan of DEM 2,3 million from the Sächsische Aufbaubank. The German authorities argued that there was no combina- tion of aid in this case since the two measures were not to be seen as separate but as a single restructuring aid measure. They explained that using two aid schemes had enabled them to reduce the overall aid intensity since the intensity for guarantees is lower than for loans. This argument cannot be accepted. If the Commission were to accept it, prohibitions on combining aid would become meaningless and compliance arbitrary. Further- more, the aid intensity of a guarantee or loan provided by the State to a firm in difficulty is considered to be 100 % and the aid is therefore equivalent to a grant (13). (13) Commission communication to the Member States on the applica- tion of Articles 92 and 93 of the EC Treaty and of Article 5 of Commission Directive 80/723/EEC on the transparency of financial relations between Member States and public undertakings (OJ L 307, 13. 11. 1993, p. 3). 12. 1. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 7/11 Since the conditions of the scheme were not met, the measure should have been notified individually under Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty. Germany did not fulfil this obligation, with the result that the aid was granted unlawfully and must be seen as ad hoc restructuring aid. The repayment deferral of DEM 1,167 million granted by the Chemnitz Department of Public Works also constitutes state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty and should have been notified under Article 88(3). it is therefore In purely formal terms, unlawful. It secures additional liquidity and is therefore equivalent to a loan. The DEM 500 000 loan from the BvS was granted to a firm in difficulty and is to be considered to constitute aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty. Since it was not notified, it is also unlawful from a formal point of view. This amount should be increased by the interest on the loan of DEM 5 800. (46) (47) 5. 2 Exemption under Article 87(3) of the EC Treaty (48) The Commission must examine whether the aid is eligible for exemption under Article 87(3) of the EC Treaty. be compatible with the common market if the criteria set out in the guidelines are met. (50) The 80 % guarantee from the Land of Saxony to cover an operating loan of DEM 2,3 million, the dormant equity holding from the Consolidation Fund, the repay- ment deferral of DEM 1,167 million granted by the Chemnitz Department of Public Works and the BvS loan of DEM 500 000 can be considered to be restructuring aid. The assistance measures provided in 1997 in view of the renewed liquidity problems can be considered to be additional measures necessary for the restructuring. (51) For the aid to be approved by the Commission, the restructuring plan would have to meet all the following criteria: (a) the restructuring must restore the long-term viability of the firm; (b) undue distortions of competition must be avoided; (c) the amount and intensity of the aid must be limited to the strict minimum needed for the restructuring, and the restructuring costs must not exceed the anticipated benefits; (d) the restructuring plan must be implemented in full, set by the Commission the conditions and all observed; (e) the implementation of the restructuring plan must be monitored on the basis of detailed annual reports. (49) In BHC's case, the Commission based itself on the special rule laid down in Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty with regard to ‘aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas, where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common inter- est’. The primary objective of the aid in question is not the promotion of regional development, but the restruc- turing of a firm in difficulty. Such aid can be judged to (52) The sine qua non of any restructuring plan is that it must restore the long-term viability of the firm within a reasonable timescale and must be based on realistic assumptions as to the firm's future operating conditions. (53) The restructuring plan assumed the following financial development of the firm: 1995 outturn 1996 forecast 1997 forecast 1998 forecast (DEM) Sales revenues 18 394 000 30 779 000 34 550 000 37 600 000 Expenditure on raw materials, auxiliary materials and oper- ating supplies 10 384 000 9 833 000 10 450 000 11 400 000 Manpower costs 6 689 000 7 900 000 8 327 000 8 327 000 Depreciation 361 000 2 405 000 2 800 000 2 800 000 Annual profit (loss) — – 1 546 000 247 000 2 163 000 L 7/12 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 12. 1. 2000 (54) In the Commission's view, the restructuring plan is not based on realistic assumptions. Specifically, it assumes an increase in sales from 1996 and a corresponding significant increase in turnover; it also predicts the finan- cial recovery of the firm following the sale of unneces- sary land. This increase in turnover depends basically on the firm's productive capacity in the cement market segment, into which it wishes to move. The plan thus predicts an increase in turnover of more than 60 % between 1995 and 1996. In the Commission's view, the increases in turnover were overestimated in the plan. It is unlikely that BHC could have redirected its activities towards a new market so quickly. This requires the acquisition of specialist expertise and the technical adap- tation of machinery. Furthermore, the financial recovery of BHC, which was in an extremely tight financial situa- tion, depends on the sale of unnecessary land for a price of at least DEM 5 million. However, in the new Länder there is an oversupply of industrial land. The minimum price set by BHC's management has to be seen as uncer- tain. In the report by LOGOS-Consult it was classed as risky since in the short term only between DEM 3 million and DEM 4 million could be raised. Under the circumstances, the Commission considers that the viabi- lity of the firm could not be restored within a reasonable timescale. restructuring plan was not based on realistic assump- tions and could not restore the firm's viability. Since the first condition laid down in the guidelines is not met, the aid cannot be considered to be compatible with the common market. (58) The effect of the aid on competition on the market for foundry products must also be examined. According to the information in the Commission's possession, there is no overcapacity in this industry. Since BHC is an SME located in an area covered by Article 87(2)(a) of the EC Treaty and since there is no overcapacity in the sector, the Commission takes the view that competitors were not adversely affected by the restructuring. (59) Since one of the conditions set out in the guidelines has not been met, the restructuring aid to BHC cannot be approved and so it is not necessary to assess the firm's own share in the restructuring costs. (55) The subsequent development of the firm bears out this assessment. At the end of 1996 BHC again faced enor- mous liquidity problems, with turnover remaining below expected levels. It recorded losses of more than DEM 7 million that year (14). 6. CONCLUSION (56) There are several reasons for this: (a) the land could not be sold; (b) a number of claims could not be recovered; (60) Germany did not meet the conditions for the application of the Saxony Guarantee Directive (N 73/93) because the restructuring plan could not restore the viability of the firm. The aid must therefore be viewed as ad hoc restructuring aid. The criteria laid down in the guidelines are not met. The 80 % guarantee covering DEM 1,8 million of the operating loan of DEM 2,3 million is therefore not compatible with the common market. (c) the firm faced major technical problems which prevented it from achieving its planned turnover. (61) (57) Despite renewed financial assistance in February 1997, BHC's viability was not restored; between January and April the firm recorded losses of more than DEM 5 million (15). On 18 April 1997 it filed for insolvency. All of this confirms the Commission's assessment that the (14) The BHC balance sheet and profit and loss account for 1996 are not available. (15) This figure comes from the list of assets and liabilities drawn up by the sequestrator on 18 April 1997. The accounts for 1997 are incomplete. The conditions for the application of scheme N 117/95 (compliance with the prohibition on combining aid) were not met. The DEM 2,5 million dormant equity holding from the Consolidation Fund was therefore classed by the Commission as ad hoc restructuring aid. Since the criteria set out in the guidelines were not met, it is therefore not compatible with the common market. (62) The repayment deferral of DEM 1,167 million allowed by the Chemnitz Public Works Department constitutes restructuring aid. Since, here too, the criteria set out in the guidelines were not met, this measure is also incompatible with the common market. 12. 1. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 7/13 (63) (64) The BvS loan of DEM 500 000 is not compatible with the criteria for the granting of restructuring aid and cannot be approved either on the basis of the exemp- tions provided for in the guidelines. The Commission finds that Germany granted the above aid in breach of Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty. The guarantee of DEM 1,8 million from the Land of Saxony, the dormant equity holding of DEM 2,5 million from the Consolidation Fund, the repayment deferral of DEM 1,167 million and the DEM 500 000 loan from the BvS, together with interest of DEM 5 800, are to be recovered by Germany in accordance with its relevant legislation and procedures, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 The state aid which Germany has granted to Brockhausen Holze GmbH, Chemnitz, amounting to DEM 5,9728 million, is incompatible with the common market. The aid consists of the following: (d) a repayment deferral of DEM 1,167 million. Article 2 1. Germany shall take all necessary measures to recover from the recipient the aid referred to in Article 1 and unlaw- fully made available to the recipient. 2. Recovery shall be effected in accordance with the provi- sions and procedures of German law. The aid to be recovered shall include interest from the date on which the unlawful aid was made available to the recipient until its recovery. Interest shall be calculated on the basis of the refer- ence rate used for calculating the grant equivalent of regional aid. the date of Article 3 Germany shall inform the Commission, within two months of notification of this Decision, of the measures taken to comply with it. This Decision is addressed to the Federal Republic of Germany. Article 4 (a) a DEM 1,8 million guarantee from the Land of Saxony, Done at Brussels, 28 July 1999. (b) a dormant equity holding of DEM 2,5 million from the Saxony Consolidation Fund, (c) a loan of DEM 500 000, together with interest of DEM 5 800, and For the Commission Karel VAN MIERT Member of the Commission


title: 99/565/CE: Decisione della Commissione, del 28 luglio 1999, concernente la concessione di un aiuto alla produzione di olive da tavola in Grecia [notificata con il numero C(1999) 2465] (Il testo in lingua greca è il solo facente fede)

eurovoc_concepts:
Greece
State aid
olive
production aid
terms for aid

formats: html pdf print

text: 13. 8. 1999 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee L 213/29 DECISIONE DELLA COMMISSIONE del 28 luglio 1999 concernente la concessione di un aiuto alla produzione di olive da tavola in Grecia [notificata con il numero C(1999) 2465] (Il testo in lingua greca è il solo facente fede) (1999/565/CE) LA COMMISSIONE DELLE COMUNITÀ EUROPEE, visto il trattato che istituisce la Comunità europea, visto il regolamento n. 136/66/CEE del Consiglio, del 22 settembre 1966, relativo all'attuazione di un'organizzazione comune dei mercati nel settore dei grassi (1), modificato da ultimo dal regolamento (CE) n. 1638/98 (2), in particolare l'arti- colo 5, paragrafo 4, (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) considerando che l'articolo 5, paragrafo 4, del regola- mento n. 136/66/CEE stabilisce che gli Stati membri possono destinare al sostegno delle olive da tavola una parte dei rispettivi quantitativi nazionali garantiti e dell'aiuto alla loro produzione di olio d'oliva, in casi che devono essere autorizzati dalla Commissione secondo la procedura di cui all'articolo 38; considerando che la Grecia ha presentato una domanda per la campagna 1999/2000 e 2000/2001 e che occorre stabilire la modalità di concessione dell'aiuto; considerando che occorre prevedere che l'aiuto sia concesso ai produttori di olive da tavola trasformate in Grecia e precisare le provenienti da oliveti situati condizioni a cui può essere concesso l'aiuto; considerando che il periodo di trasformazione deve essere definito come il periodo compreso tra il 1o settembre e il 31 agosto; che debbono essere considerate trasformate le olive oggetto di un primo trattamento in salamoia della durata minima di quindici giorni e defini- tivamente ritirate da detta salamoia o, in mancanza di tale trattamento, di un trattamento adeguato, che le renda idonee al consumo umano; considerando che occorre determinare il peso delle olive da tavola trasformate aventi diritto all'aiuto nonché l'equivalenza tra le olive da tavola trasformate e l'olio d'oliva ai fini del calcolo dell'aiuto unitario alle olive da tavola e della gestione dei quantitativi nazionali garantiti; trasformazione delle considerando che le imprese di olive da tavola devono essere autorizzate a condizioni da determinare; considerando che occorre prevedere disposizioni per il controllo dell'aiuto alle olive da tavola; che dette disposi- zioni devono prevedere tra l'altro la dichiarazione di coltivazione del produttore per le olive da tavola, un'at- (1) GU 172 del 30. 9. 1966, pag. 3025/66. (2) GU L 210 del 28. 7. 1998, pag. 32. testazione dei trasformatori sui quantitativi di olive consegnate dai produttori e uscite dalla catena di trasfor- in materia di controllo mazione nonché gli obblighi degli organismi pagatori; che occorre prevedere sanzioni per i produttori delle olive da tavola in caso di dichiara- zione discordante con gli elementi constatati nel corso del controllo; (8) (9) considerando che occorre determinare gli elementi per il calcolo dell'aiuto da concedere ai produttori delle olive da tavola trasformate; che può essere concesso un anti- cipo dell'aiuto a determinate condizioni; considerando che comunicare alla la Grecia deve Commissione le misure nazionali prese per applicare la presente decisione nonché gli elementi necessari per calcolare l'anticipo dell'aiuto e l'aiuto definitivo; (10) considerando che le misure previste dalla presente deci- sione sono conformi al parere del comitato di gestione per i grassi, HA ADOTTATO LA PRESENTE DECISIONE: Articolo 1 Per la campagna di commercializzazione dell'olio d'oliva 1999/ 2000 e 2000/2001, la Grecia è autorizzato a concedere un aiuto alla produzione di olive da tavola alle condizioni previste dalla presente decisione. Articolo 2 1. L'aiuto alla produzione di olive da tavola è concesso ai in Grecia, produttori di olive provenienti da oliveti situati entrate in un'impresa di trasformazione autorizzata, per essere trasformate in olive da tavola. Per ciascuna campagna di commercializzazione dell'olio 2. di oliva, l'aiuto è concesso per le olive da tavola trasformate dal 1o settembre della campagna precedente al 31 agosto della campagna di cui trattasi. Ai sensi della presente decisione per olive da tavola 3. trasformate si intendono olive oggetto, per almeno quindici giorni, di un primo trattamento in salamoia, e definitivamente ritirate da detta salamoia o, in mancanza di tale trattamento, di un trattamento adeguato, che le renda idonee al consumo umano. L 213/30 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee 13. 8. 1999 Articolo 3 1. Ai fini del calcolo dell'aiuto unitario per le olive da tavola e della gestione dei quantitativi nazionali garantiti di olio d'oliva, 100 kg di olive da tavola trasformate sono considerate equivalenti a 13 kg di olio d'oliva, avente diritto all'aiuto alla produzione di cui all'articolo 5 del regolamento n. 136/66/CE. 2. Il peso delle olive da tavola trasformate da prendere in considerazione è il peso netto sgocciolato delle olive intere, trasformate, ove del caso frantumate, ma non snocciolate. L'autorizzazione è rifiutata o ritirata immediatamente 4. qualora l'impresa: — non soddisfi o non soddisfi più le condizioni stabilite per l'autorizzazione, oppure — sia oggetto di un procedimento giudiziario da parte delle autorità competenti a causa di irregolarità in relazione al regime previsto dal regolamento n. 136/66/CEE, oppure — sia stata oggetto di sanzioni per un'infrazione a detto rego- lamento negli ultimi ventiquattro mesi. Articolo 4 Articolo 5 È attribuito un numero di riconoscimento alle imprese 1. che: — presentano una domanda di riconoscimento entro il 30 settembre che precede la campagna di commercializzazione dell'olio di oliva di cui trattasi, accompagnata dalle informa- zioni di cui al paragrafo 2 e dagli impegni di cui al para- grafo 3; — commercializzano olive da tavola trasformate aventi even- tualmente subito altre lavorazioni; — dispongono di impianti che consentano la trasformazione di almeno 20 tonnellate di olive all'anno nelle isole e 50 tonnellate di olive all'anno nelle altre zone. immagazzinamento, che ne indichi La domanda di autorizzazione comprende tra l'altro: 2. — una descrizione degli impianti tecnici di trasformazione e di le capacità rispettive; — una descrizione delle forme di preparazione delle olive da tavola commercializzate, che indichi per ciascuna forma il coefficiente di trasformazione; Ai fini della concessione dell'aiuto alla produzione di olive da tavola il produttore presenta, entro il 1o dicembre della campagna in corso, una dichiarazione complementare alla dichiarazione di coltivazione prevista per l'aiuto alla produ- zione di olio d'oliva, o, se del caso, una nuova dichiarazione, che fornisca, per quanto riguarda le olive da tavola, tutte le informazioni contemplate da detta dichiarazione di coltiva- zione per l'olio d'oliva. Qualora le informazioni in questione siano state già fornite da una dichiarazione di coltivazione per l'olio d'oliva, nella dichia- razione complementare vengono solo indicati gli estremi della dichiarazione di coltivazione e delle parcelle di cui trattasi. Le dichiarazioni relative alle olive da tavola sono integrate nella base di dati alfanumerica prevista per il regime di aiuto alla produzione di olio d'oliva. Articolo 6 — lo stato dettagliato delle scorte di olive da tavola nelle diverse fasi di preparazione e per forma di preparazione, alla data del 1o settembre precedente la prima campagna dell'olio d'oliva di cui trattasi. 1. L'impresa autorizzata rilascia al produttore di cui all'arti- colo 2, paragrafo 1, dopo la consegna dell'ultima partita ed entro il 30 giugno, un attestato di consegna in cui è indicato il peso netto delle olive entrate nell'impresa. Ai fini dell'autorizzazione l'impresa si 3. — prendere in consegna, trattare e immagazzinare separata- mente da una parte le olive da tavola destinate a beneficiare dell'aiuto e dall'altra quelle provenienti da paesi terzi e quelle che non beneficeranno dell'aiuto; impegna a: — tenere una contabilità di magazzino per l'attività relativa alle olive da tavola, legata alla contabilità finanziaria, che indichi per ciascun giorno: a) i quantitativi di olive entrati, partita per partita, preci- sando il produttore di ciascuna partita, b) i quantitativi di olive messe in trasformazione e i quanti- tativi di olive da tavola trasformate ai sensi dell'articolo 2, paragrafo 3, c) i quantitativi di olive da tavola la cui elaborazione è terminata, d) i quantitativi di olive da tavola usciti dall'impresa per forma di preparazione, precisando i destinatari. — fornire al produttore di cui all'articolo 2, paragrafo 1, e all'organismo competente i documenti e le informazioni di cui all'articolo 6 alle condizioni indicate; ivi — sottoporsi a tutti i controlli previsti nell'ambito del regime contemplato dalla presente decisione. Tale attestato è corredato di tutti i documenti relativi al peso delle partite di olive consegnate. L'impresa riconosciuta comunica all'organismo compe- 2. tente e all'agenzia di controllo: a) prima del 10 di ogni mese: — i quantitativi di olive entrate, messe in trasformazione e trasformate ai sensi dell'articolo 2, paragrafo 3, nel corso del mese precedente; — i quantitativi di olive elaborate e uscite, distinte per forma di preparazione, nel corso del mese precedente; — la somma dei quantitativi di cui ai primi due trattini e lo stato delle scorte, alla fine del mese precedente; b) anteriormente al 1o luglio, l'elenco nominativo dei produt- tori di cui all'articolo 2, paragrafo 1, a titolo del periodo di trasformazione di cui all'articolo 2, paragrafo 2, e i quantita- tivi per i quali è stato loro rilasciato l'attestato di cui al paragrafo 1; c) anteriormente al 1o giugno della campagna successiva, il totale dei quantitativi consegnati a titolo del periodo di trasformazione di cui all'articolo 2, paragrafo 2, e il totale dei quantitativi trasformati corrispondenti. 13. 8. 1999 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee L 213/31 Articolo 7 1. Il produttore di olive da tavola presenta presso l'orga- nismo competente, direttamente o indirettamente, anterior- mente al 1o luglio della campagna in corso, una domanda di aiuto che contenga fra l'altro le seguenti indicazioni: — il proprio nome e indirizzo; — l'ubicazione delle aziende e delle parcelle in cui sono state raccolte le olive, con riferimento alla dichiarazione di colti- vazione corrispondente; — l'impresa autorizzata a cui sono state consegnate le olive. La domanda è accompagnata dall'attestato di consegna di cui all'articolo 6, paragrafo 1. Tuttavia, per le olive consegnate tra il 1o luglio e il 31 agosto, l'attestato di consegna è presentato entro il 1o settembre. Ove del caso la domanda può essere accompagnata da una domanda di anticipo dell'aiuto. Qualunque ritardo nella presentazione di una domanda di 2. aiuto dà luogo ad una riduzione dell'1 % per giorno lavorativo di ritardo sull'importo dell'aiuto a cui il produttore avrebbe avuto diritto in caso di presentazione in tempo utile. Se il ritardo è superiore a 25 giorni lavorativi la domanda è irricevi- bile. Articolo 8 Prima del pagamento definitivo dell'aiuto l'organismo 1. competente effettua i controlli necessari per verificare: — i quantitativi di olive da tavola per i quali sono stati rila- sciati attestati di consegna; — i quantitativi di olive da tavola trasformate e la loro riparti- zione per produttore. Il controllo comprende: — diverse ispezioni materiali delle merci immagazzinate nonché una verifica della contabilità delle imprese autoriz- zate; — un esame più approfondito delle domande di aiuto relative ad oleicoltori che richiedono l'aiuto sia per le olive da tavola che per l'olio d'oliva. La Grecia prende tutte le misure necessarie per garantire 2. che: — sia rispettato il diritto all'aiuto alla produzione di olive da tavola; — siano escluse dal diritto all'aiuto alla produzione di olio d'oliva le olive entrate in un'impresa autorizzata ai sensi della presente decisione; — non siano presentate più domande di aiuto per le stesse olive. 3. Fatte salve le sanzioni previste dalla Grecia, non è concesso alcun aiuto al produttore di cui all'articolo 2, para- grafo 1, la cui dichiarazione ai sensi dell'articolo 5 o la cui domanda di aiuto ai sensi dell'articolo 7 risulti in contraddi- zione con gli elementi constatati nel corso di un controllo. Tuttavia, le misure di cui all'articolo 15 del regolamento (CE) n. 2366/98 della Commissione (1) applicano mutatis mutandis. si Articolo 9 1. Ciascun produttore di cui all'articolo 2, paragrafo 1, può ricevere un anticipo dell'aiuto richiesto. Tale anticipo è pari all'importo unitario di cui all'articolo 17 bis, paragrafo 1, del regolamento (CEE) n. 2261/84 del Consiglio (2), moltiplicato per il quantitativo d'olio d'oliva equivalente, in virtù dell'arti- colo 3, paragrafo 1, al quantitativo di olive da tavola trasfor- mate. Per l'anticipo al produttore, il quantitativo di olive da tavola trasformate è determinato applicando al quantitativo indicato nell'attestato di consegna, confermato dalle altre informazioni ricevute dall'organismo competente, un coefficiente di trasfor- mazione provvisorio. Detto coefficiente è fissato dall'organismo competente sulla base dei dati disponibili per l'impresa autoriz- zata di cui trattasi. Tuttavia il quantitativo di olive da tavola preso in considerazione non può essere superiore al 90 % del quantitativo di olive da tavola consegnate. L'anticipo dell'aiuto è versato al produttore che ne ha 2. fatto richiesta conformemente al disposto dell'articolo 7, para- grafo 1, a decorrere dal 16 ottobre della campagna in corso. Articolo 10 1. Fatte salve le riduzioni previste all'articolo 20 quinquies l'aiuto è pari all'importo del regolamento (CEE) n. 136/66, unitario di cui all'articolo 17 bis, paragrafo 2, del regolamento (CEE) n. 2261/84, moltiplicato per il quantitativo d'olio d'oliva equivalente, in virtù dell'articolo 3, paragrafo 1, al quantitativo di olive da tavola trasformate. Per l'aiuto al produttore di cui all'articolo 2, paragrafo 1, il quantitativo di olive da tavola trasformate è determinato appli- cando al quantitativo indicato nell'attestato di consegna, confermato dalle altre informazioni ricevute dall'organismo competente, un coefficiente di trasformazione relativo all'im- presa in questione. Detto coefficiente è pari al rapporto tra il totale delle olive da tavola trasformate e il totale delle olive da tavola per le quali sono stati rilasciati attestati di consegna, a titolo della campagna di commercializzazione dell'olio d'oliva di cui trattasi. Qualora il quantitativo di olive trasformate corrispondente all'aiuto indicato nell'attestato di consegna non possa essere stabilito, i quantitativi di olive da tavola trasformate per i produttori in questione sono calcolati applicando il coefficiente medio per le altre imprese. Tuttavia, fatti salvi i diritti che gli oleicoltori in questione potrebbero far valere nei riguardi dell'impresa, detto quantitativo di olive trasformate non può essere superiore al 75 % del quantitativo indicato nell'attestato di consegna. (1) GU L 293 del 31. 10. 1998, pag. 50. (2) GU L 208 del 3. 8. 1984, pag. 3. L 213/32 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee 13. 8. 1999 Il tasso applicabile per la conversione in dracme dell'im- 2. porto dell'aiuto è il tasso di conversione agricolo in vigore il primo giorno del mese della prima consegna di olive da parte del produttore di cui trattasi. — anteriormente al 16 giugno, i quantitativi di olio d'oliva equivalenti alla produzione effettiva delle olive da tavola trasformate, nonché i coefficienti di trasformazione defini- tivi. L'aiuto, o se del caso il saldo dell'aiuto, è versato integral- 3. mente al produttore dopo che sono stati effettuati i controlli di cui all'articolo 8, entro novanta giorni a decorrere dalla fissa- zione del suo importo unitario da parte della Commissione. Articolo 12 La presente decisione è applicabile a decorrere dal 1o settembre 1999. Articolo 11 Articolo 13 La Repubblica ellenica è destinataria della presente decisione. La Grecia comunica alla Commissione: — senza indugio, le misure nazionali prese in applicazione della presente decisione; — anteriormente al 1o agosto di ciascuna campagna, i quanti- tativi di olio d'oliva equivalenti alla produzione stimata delle olive da tavola trasformate nonché i coefficienti di trasformazione provvisori applicabili per tale calcolo; Fatto a Bruxelles, il 28 luglio 1999. Per la Commissione Franz FISCHLER Membro della Commissione


title: Kommissionens forordning (EF) nr. 1658/1999 af 28. juli 1999 om fastsættelse af det maksimale restitutionsbeløb ved udførsel af hvidt sukker i forbindelse med den 49. dellicitation under den løbende licitation omhandlet i forordning (EF) nr. 1574/98

eurovoc_concepts:
award of contract
export refund
white sugar

text: L 197/12 DA De Europæiske Fællesskabers Tidende 29. 7. 1999 KOMMISSIONENS FORORDNING (EF) Nr. 1658/1999 af 28. juli 1999 om fastsættelse af det maksimale restitutionsbeløb ved udførsel af hvidt sukker i forbindelse med den 49. dellicitation under den løbende licitation omhandlet i forordning (EF) nr. 1574/98 KOMMISSIONEN FOR DE EUROPÆISKE FÆLLESSKABER HAR — til under henvisning Europæiske Fællesskab, traktaten om oprettelse af Det under henvisning til R(cid:134)dets forordning (EØF) nr. 1785/81 af juni 1981 om den fælles markedsordning for sukker (1), 30. senest ændret ved Kommissionens forordning (EF) nr. 1148/ 98 (2), særlig artikel 17, stk. 5, andet afsnit, litra b), og ud fra følgende betragtninger: (1) (2) I henhold til Kommissionens forordning (EF) nr. 1574/ 98 af 22. juli 1998 om en løbende licitation med henblik p(cid:134) fastsættelse af en eksportafgift og/eller sukker (3), ændret ved eksportrestitution for hvidt forordning (EF) nr. 1489/1999 (4), foranstaltes dellicitati- oner med henblik p(cid:134) eksport af dette sukker; i henhold til bestemmelserne i artikel 9, stk. 1, i forord- ning (EF) nr. 1574/98, fastsættes der i p(cid:134)kommende tilfælde for den p(cid:134)gældende dellicitation et maksimalt restitutionsbeløb især under hensyntagen til situationen og den forventede udvikling p(cid:134) markedet for sukker i Fællesskabet og p(cid:134) verdensmarkedet; (3) (4) efter gennemgang af tilbuddene bør de bestemmelser, der er nævnt i artikel 1, fastsættes for den 49. dellicita- tion; de i denne forordning fastsatte foranstaltninger er i over- ensstemmelse med udtalelse fra Forvaltningskomit(cid:130)en for Sukker — UDSTEDT FØLGENDE FORORDNING: Artikel 1 For den 49. dellicitation for hvidt sukker, ifølge forordning (EF) fastsættes maksimumseksportrestitutionen til nr. 1574/98, 50,100 EUR/100 kg. Denne forordning træder i kraft den 29. juli 1999. Artikel 2 Denne medlemsstat. forordning er bindende i alle enkeltheder og gælder umiddelbart i hver Udfærdiget i Bruxelles, den 28. juli 1999. P(cid:134) Kommissionens vegne Franz FISCHLER Medlem af Kommissionen (1) EFT L 177 af 1. 7. 1981, s. 4. (2) EFT L 159 af 3. 6. 1998, s. 38. (3) EFT L 206 af 23. 7. 1998, s. 7. (4) EFT L 172 af 8. 7. 1999, s. 27


title: 1999/564/CE: Décision de la Commission, du 28 juillet 1999, concernant l'octroi d'une aide à la production d'olives de table au Portugal [notifiée sous le numéro C(1999) 2462] (Le texte en langue portugaise est le seul faisant foi.)

eurovoc_concepts:
Portugal
State aid
olive
production aid
terms for aid

text: 13. 8. 1999 FR Journal officiel des Communautés européennes L 213/25 DÉCISION DE LA COMMISSION du 28 juillet 1999 concernant l'octroi d'une aide à la production d'olives de table au Portugal [notifiée sous le numéro C(1999) 2462] (Le texte en langue portugaise est le seul faisant foi. ) (1999/564/CE) LA COMMISSION DES COMMUNAUTÉS EUROPÉENNES, vu le traité instituant la Communauté européenne, vu le règlement no 136/66/CEE du Conseil du 22 septembre 1966 (1) portant établissement d'une organisation commune des marchés dans le secteur des matières grasses, modifié en dernier lieu par le règlement (CE) no 1638/98 (2), et notamment son article 5, paragraphe 4, (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) considérant que l'article 5, paragraphe 4, du règlement no 136/66/CEE prévoit la faculté pour les États membres d'attribuer une partie de leurs quantités nationales garan- ties et de l'aide à leur production d'huile d'olive au soutien des olives de table dans des conditions à approuver par la Commission selon la procédure prévue à l'article 38; considérant que le Portugal a présenté une demande pour les campagnes 1999/2000 et 2000/2001; considérant qu'il y a lieu de prévoir que l'aide est octroyée aux producteurs d'olives de table transformées provenant d'une oliveraie au Portugal et de préciser les conditions dans lesquelles l'aide peut être octroyée; considérant qu'il y a lieu de définir du 1er septembre au 31 août la période de transformation; qu'il convient de considérer comme étant transformées les olives ayant subi un premier traitement à la saumure d'une durée d'au moins quinze jours et étant sorties définitivement de ladite saumure ou, à défaut, un traitement adéquat les rendant aptes à la consommation humaine; considérant qu'il y a lieu de déterminer le poids des olives de table transformées ayant droit à l'aide ainsi que l'équivalence entre les olives de table transformées et l'huile d'olive afin de calculer l'aide unitaire aux olives de table et de gérer les quantités nationales garanties; considérant que les entreprises de transformation des olives de table doivent être agréées selon des conditions à déterminer; considérant qu'il faut prévoir des dispositions pour le contrôle de l'aide aux olives de table; que ces disposi- la déclaration de tions doivent prévoir, notamment, culture du producteur pour les olives de table, des communications des transformateurs sur les quantités (1) JO 172 du 30. 9. 1966, p. 3025/66. (2) JO L 210 du 28. 7. 1998, p. 32. d'olives livrées par les producteurs et sorties de la chaîne de transformation ainsi que les obligations en matière de contrôle des organismes payeurs; qu'il y a lieu de prévoir des pénalités pour les producteurs des olives de table en cas de déclaration discordante avec les éléments cons- tatés au cours d'un contrôle; (8) (9) considérant qu'il y a lieu de déterminer les éléments pour le calcul de l'aide à octroyer aux producteurs des olives de table transformées; qu'une avance sur l'aide peut être octroyée sous certaines conditions; considérant que le Portugal doit communiquer à la Commission les mesures nationales prises pour appli- quer la présente décision ainsi que les élément servant pour le calcul de l'avance sur l'aide et de l'aide définitive; (10) considérant que les mesures prévues par la présente décision sont conformes à l'avis du comité de gestion des matières grasses, A ARRÊTÉ LA PRÉSENTE DÉCISION: Article premier Pour les campagnes de commercialisation de l'huile d'olive 1999/2000 et 2000/2001, le Portugal est autorisé à octroyer une aide à la production d'olives de table dans les conditions prévues par la présente décision. Article 2 L'aide à la production d'olives de table est octroyée au 1. producteur d'olives provenant d'une oliveraie au Portugal, entrées pour y être transformées en olives de table dans une entreprise agréée à cet effet. Pour chaque campagne de commercialisation de l'huile 2. d'olive, l'aide est octroyée pour des olives de table transformées du 1er septembre de la campagne prédédente au 31 août de la campagne concernée. 3. Au sens de la présente décision, on entend par «olives de table transformées» des olives ayant subi, pendant au moins quinze jours, un premier traitement à la saumure et étant sorties définitivement de ladite saumure ou, à défaut, un traite- ment adéquat les rendant aptes à la consommation humaine. L 213/26 FR Journal officiel des Communautés européennes 13. 8. 1999 Article 3 1. Pour le calcul de l'aide unitaire aux olives de table et la gestion des quantités nationales garanties en huile d'olive, 100 kilogrammes d'olives de table transformées sont considérées comme équivalentes à 11,5 kilogrammes d'huile d'olive ayant droit à l'aide à la production prévue par l'article 5 du règlement no 136/66/CEE. Le poids des olives de table transformées à prendre en 2. considération est le poids net égoutté des olives entières, après transformation, le cas échéant cassées, mais non dénoyautées. L'agrément est refusé ou retiré sans délai à l'entreprise 4. qui: — ne satisfait pas ou ne satisfait plus aux conditions d'agré- ment ou — fait l'objet, par les autorités compétentes, de poursuites pour irrégularités à l'égard du régime prévu par le règle- ment no 136/66/CEE ou — a été sanctionnée pour une infraction audit règlement au cours des vingt-quatre derniers mois. Article 4 Article 5 1. Un numéro d'agrément est octroyé aux entreprises qui: — déposent une demande d'agrément au plus tard le 30 septembre précédant la campagne d'huile d'olive concernée, accompagnée des informations visées au paragraphe 2 et des engagements visés au paragraphe 3, — commercialisent des olives de table transformées, ayant le cas échéant subi d'autres préparations, — disposent d'installations permettant la transformation d'au moins 30 tonnes d'olives par an. 2. La demande d'agrément comporte au moins: — une description des installations techniques de transforma- tion et de stockage, indiquant leurs capacités, — une description des formes de préparations d'olives de table qui sont commercialisées, indiquant pour chacune d'elles le poids moyen des olives de table transformées par kilo- gramme de produit préparé, — l'état détaillé des stocks d'olives de table aux diverses étapes de préparation et par forme de préparation, à la date du 1er septembre précédant la campagne d'huile d'olive concernée. 3. Aux fins d'agrément, l'entreprise s'engage à: — réceptionner, traiter et stocker séparément, d'une part, les olives de table destinées à recevoir l'aide et, d'autre part, celles provenant des pays tiers et celles qui ne bénéficieront pas de l'aide, — tenir une comptabilité matières pour l'activité relative aux olives de table, reliée à la comptabilité financière, mention- nant pour chaque jour: a) les quantités d'olives entrées, producteur de chaque lot; lot par lot, indiquant le b) les quantités d'olives mises en transformation et les quantités d'olives de table transformées au sens de l'ar- ticle 2, paragraphe 3; c) les quantités d'olives de table dont la préparation est achevée; d) les quantités d'olives de table sorties de l'entreprise, par forme de préparation, en indiquant les destinataires, — fournir au producteur visé à l'article 2, paragraphe 1, et à l'organisme compétent les documents et informations visés à l'article 6 dans les conditions y indiquées, — se soumettre à tout contrôle prévu dans le cadre du régime visé par la présente décision. Aux fins de l'octroi de l'aide à la production d'olives de table, le tard le 1er décembre de la producteur dépose, au plus campagne en cours, une déclaration complémentaire à la décla- ration de culture prévue pour l'aide à la production d'huile d'olive ou, le cas échéant, une déclaration nouvelle, fournissant, en ce qui concerne les olives de table, toutes les informations prévues par ladite déclaration de culture pour l'huile d'olive. Lorsque les informations concernées ont déjà été fournies et n'ont pas subi de changement, la déclaration complémentaire se limite à indiquer les références de la déclaration de culture qui est concernée et des parcelles en cause. Les déclarations relatives aux olives de table sont intégrées dans la base de données alphanumérique prévue pour le régime d'aide à la production d'huile d'olive. Article 6 1. L'entreprise agréée délivre au producteur visé à l'article 2, paragraphe 1, après la livraison de son dernier lot et au plus tard le 30 juin, une attestation de livraison mentionnant le poids net des olives entrées dans l'entreprise. Cette attestation est appuyée de tous les documents relatifs au poids des lots d'olives livrées. L'entreprise agréée communique à l'organisme compétent 2. et à l'agence de contrôle: a) avant le 10 de chaque mois: — les quantités d'olives entrées, mises en transformation et transformées au sens de l'article 2, paragraphe 3, au cours du mois précédent, — les quantités d'olives préparées et sorties, par forme de préparation, au cours du mois précédent, — les cumuls des quantités visées aux deux premiers tirets et l'état des stocks à la fin du mois précédent; b) avant le 1er juillet, l'état nominatif des producteurs visés à l'article 2, paragraphe 1, au titre de la période de la transfor- mation prévue à l'article 2, paragraphe 2, et les quantités pour lesquelles il leur a été délivré l'attestation visée au paragraphe 1; c) avant le 1er le total des juin de la campagne suivante, quantités livrées au titre de la période de transformation prévue à l'article 2, paragraphe 2, et le total des quantités transformées correspondantes. 13. 8. 1999 FR Journal officiel des Communautés européennes L 213/27 Article 7 1. Le producteur d'olives de table dépose auprès de l'orga- nisme compétent, directement ou indirectement, avant le 1er juillet de la campagne en cours, une demande d'aide indiquant au moins: — son nom et son adresse, — l'emplacement des exploitations et des parcelles où les olives ont été récoltées, avec référence à la déclaration de culture concernée, — l'entreprise agréée où les olives ont été livrées. La demande est accompagnée de l'attestation de livraison visée à l'article 6, paragraphe 1. Le cas échéant, la demande est accompagnée d'une demande d'avance sur l'aide. 2. Tout dépôt tardif d'une demande d'aide donne lieu à une réduction de 1 % par jour ouvrable de retard du montant de l'aide auquel le producteur aurait eu droit en cas de dépôt en temps utile. En cas de retard de plus de vingt-cinq jours la demande est irrecevable. Article 8 Avant le paiement définitif de l'aide, l'organisme compé- 1. tent effectue les contrôles nécessaires pour vérifier: — les quantités d'olives de table pour lesquelles des attesta- tions de livraison ont été délivrées, — les quantités d'olives de table transformées et leur réparti- tion par producteur. Le contrôle comporte: — plusieurs inspections physiques des marchandises stockées ainsi qu'une vérification de la comptabilité des entreprises agréées, — une accentuation des vérifications des demandes d'aide en ce qui concerne les oléiculteurs qui sollicitent l'aide à la fois pour les olives de table et pour l'huile d'olive. Le Portugal prend toutes les mesures nécessaires afin 2. d'assurer le contrôle: — du respect du droit à l'aide à la production d'olives de table, — de l'exclusion du droit à l'aide à la production d'huile d'olive pour les olives entrées dans une entreprise agréée au titre de la présente décision, — de l'absence de plusieurs demandes d'aides au titre des mêmes olives. 3. Sans préjudice des sanctions prévues par le Portugal, aucune aide n'est octroyée au producteur visé à l'article 2, paragraphe 1, dont la déclaration visée à l'article 5 ou la demande d'aide visée à l'article 7 s'avère en contradiction avec les éléments constatés au cours d'un contrôle. Toutefois, les dispositions de l'article 15 du règlement (CE) no 2366/98 de la Commission (1) s'appliquent mutatis mutandis. Article 9 Chaque producteur visé à l'article 2, paragraphe 1, peut 1. recevoir une avance sur l'aide demandée. L'avance sur l'aide est égale au montant unitaire visé à l'article 17 bis, paragraphe 1, du règlement (CEE) no 2261/84 du Conseil (2), multiplié par la quantité d'olives équivalant, en vertu de l'article 3, paragraphe 1, à la quantité d'olives de table transformées. Pour l'avance au producteur, la quantité d'olives de table trans- formées est déterminée en affectant la quantité figurant dans l'attestation de livraison, confirmée par les autres informations reçues par l'organisme compétent, d'un coefficient de transfor- mation provisoire. Ledit coefficient est établi par l'organisme compétent en fonction des données disponibles pour l'entre- prise agréée en cause. Toutefois, la quantité d'olives de table qui est prise en considération ne peut pas dépasser 90 % de la quantité d'olives de table livrées. 2. L'avance sur l'aide est payée au producteur qui en fait la demande conformément à l'article 7, paragraphe 1, à partir du 16 octobre de la campagne en cours. Article 10 Sans préjudice des réductions prévues par l'article 20 1. l'aide est égale au quinquies du règlement no 136/66/CEE, montant unitaire visé à l'article 17 bis, paragraphe 2, du règle- ment (CEE) no 2261/84, multiplié par la quantité d'huile d'olive équivalant, en vertu de l'article 3, paragraphe 1, à la quantité d'olives de table transformées. Pour l'aide à octroyer au producteur visé à l'article 2, para- graphe 1, la quantité d'olives de table transformées est déter- minée en affectant la quantité figurant dans l'attestation de livraison, confirmée par les autres informations reçues par l'or- ganisme compétent, d'un coefficient de transformation relatif à l'entreprise en cause. Ledit coefficient est égal au rapport entre le total des olives de table transformées et le total des olives de table pour lesquelles l'attestation de livraison a été délivrée, au titre de la campagne de commercialisation de l'huile d'olive concernée. Dans le cas où la quantité d'olives transformées correspondant à l'aide figurant dans l'attestation de livraison ne peut pas être établie, les quantités d'olives de table transformées pour les producteurs en cause sont calculées avec le coefficient moyen pour les autres entreprises. Toutefois, sans préjudice des droits que les oléiculteurs en question pourraient faire valoir à l'en- contre de l'entreprise, ladite quantité d'olives transformées ne peut pas excéder 75 % de la quantité figurant dans l'attestation de livraison. (1) JO L 293 du 31. 10. 1998, p. 50. (2) JO L 208 du 3. 8. 1984, p. 3. L 213/28 FR Journal officiel des Communautés européennes 13. 8. 1999 L'aide, ou le cas échéant le solde de l'aide, est payée 2. intégralement au producteur après les contrôles visés à l'article 8, dans les quatre-vingt-dix jours suivant la fixation par la Commission de son montant unitaire. des olives de table transformées ainsi que les coefficients de transformation retenus. Cette décision est applicable à partir du 1er septembre 1999. Article 12 Article 11 Article 13 Le Portugal communique à la Commission: — sans délai, les mesures nationales prises en application de la La République portugaise est destinataire de la présente déci- sion. présente décision, — avant le 1er août de chaque campagne, les quantités d'huile d'olive équivalant à la production estimée des olives de table transformées ainsi que les coefficients de transforma- tion provisoires pour cette estimation, — avant le 16 juin de chacune des campagnes suivantes, les quantités d'huile d'olive équivalant à la production effective Fait à Bruxelles, le 28 juillet 1999. Par la Commission Franz FISCHLER Membre de la Commission


title: 99/565/EC: Commission Decision of 28 July 1999 on the granting of aid for the production of table olives in Greece (notified under document number C(1999) 2465) (Only the Greek version is authentic)

text: 13. 8. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 213/29 COMMISSION DECISION of 28 July 1999 on the granting of aid for the production of table olives in Greece (notified under document number C(1999) 2465) (Only the Greek version is authentic) (1999/565/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation No 136/66/EEC of 22 September 1966 on the establishment of a common organ- isation of the market in oils and fats (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1638/98 (2), and in particular Article 5(4) thereof, (1) Whereas Article 5(4) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC grants the Member States the possibility of allocating part of their national guaranteed quantities and of their olive-oil production aid to support for table olives under to be approved by the Commission in conditions accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 38 of that Regulation; (2) Whereas Greece has presented a request in respect of the 1999/2000 and 2000/01 marketing years; whereas detailed rules should be laid down on the granting of the aid; (3) Whereas provision should be made for the aid to be granted to growers of processed table olives from olive groves in Greece and the conditions governing the granting of the aid should be specified; (4) Whereas the processing period should be defined as running from 1 September to 31 August; whereas olives which have undergone initial treatment in brine lasting at least 15 days, and have been removed from the brine definitively or, failing that, have undergone treatment making them fit for human consumption should be deemed to be processed olives; (5) Whereas the weight of processed table olives on which aid is payable, and the equivalence between processed table olives and olive oil should be determined for the purposes of calculating the unit aid on table olives and of administering the national guaranteed quantities; (6) Whereas undertakings processing table olives must be approved in accordance with conditions to be deter- mined; (7) Whereas provisions should be laid down for checks on aid for table olives; whereas those provisions must in particular cover crop declarations by table-olive growers, (1) OJ 172, 30. 9. 1966, p. 3025/66. (2) OJ L 210, 28. 7. 1998, p. 32. notifications by processors of the quantities of olives delivered by growers and leaving the processing chain, regarding and the obligations on paying agencies controls; whereas provision should be made for penal- ties on table-olive growers where their declarations conflict with the results of checks conducted; (8) Whereas the information needed for calculating the aid to be granted to growers of processed table olives should be determined; whereas an advance on the aid may be granted under certain conditions; (9) Whereas Greece must notify the Commission of the national measures adopted for the purposes of applying this Decision and of the information used for calculating the advance on the aid and the definitive aid; (10) Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are the Management in accordance with the opinion of Committee for Oils and Fats, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 For the 1999/2000 and 2000/01 olive-oil marketing years, Greece is hereby authorised to grant aid for the production of table olives in accordance with this Decision. Article 2 Aid for the production of table olives shall be granted to 1. growers of olives which come from olive groves in Greece and are sent to approved processing undertakings for processing into table olives. For each olive-oil marketing year, aid shall be granted for 2. table olives processed between 1 September of the preceding marketing year and 31 August of the marketing year concerned. 3. Within the meaning of this Decision ‘processed table olives’ means olives that have undergone for at least 15 days initial treatment in brine, and have been removed from the brine definitively or, failing that, have undergone treatment making them fit for human consumption. L 213/30 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 13. 8. 1999 Article 3 — submit to all checks provided for under this Decision. 1. For the purposes of calculating the unit aid on table olives and of administering the national guaranteed quantities of olive oil, 100 kilograms of processed table olives shall be deemed to be equivalent to 13 kilograms of olive oil eligible for production aid as provided for in Article 5 of Regulation No 136/66/EEC. The weight of processed table olives to be taken into 2. consideration shall be the drained net weight of whole olives after processing, possibly bruised but not stoned. Approval shall be refused or immediately withdrawn 4. where undertakings: — fail to comply or no longer comply with the conditions for approval, or — are prosecuted by the competent authorities for irregulari- in the arrangements provided for in respect of ties Regulation No 136/66/EEC, or — have been penalised for an infringement to that Regulation within the past 24 months. Article 4 Article 5 Approval numbers shall be allocated to undertakings 1. which: — submit an application for approval by 30 September preceding the olive-oil marketing year in question, accom- panied by the information referred to in paragraph 2 and the commitments referred to in paragraph 3, — market processed table olives, with or without additional preparation, — have plants capable of processing at least 20 tonnes of olives per year in the islands and 50 tonnes of olives per year in the other zones. Applications for approval shall 2. — a description of the processing plant and storage facilities, include at least: with details of their capacity, — a description of table-olive preparations marketed, indicating the processing coefficient for each of them; the forms of For the purposes of granting the aid for the production of table in addition to the crop declaration laid down for olives, olive-oil production aid, by 1 December of the current marketing year growers shall lodge a supplementary declara- tion or, as appropriate, a new declaration containing the same information as the crop declaration for olive oil but referring to table olives. Where the information concerned has already been furnished by a crop declaration for olive oil and has not been subject to modification, simply indicate the references to the crop declaration and the parcels concerned. supplementary declaration shall the The declarations concerning table olives shall be included in the alphanumeric database provided for in connection with the aid scheme for olive oil production. Article 6 — details of stocks of table olives at various stages of prepara- tion, by form of preparation, as at 1 September preceding the olive-oil marketing year in question. For the purposes of approval, processors shall undertake 3. to: — keep table olives on which aid is payable separate from table olives originating in third countries and those on which aid is not payable when taking delivery of, processing and storing them, 1. On delivery of the final consignment of olives and no later than 30 June, approved undertakings shall issue growers as referred to in Article 2(1) with a certificate of delivery showing the net weight of olives entering the undertaking. The certificate must be supported by all the documentation relating to the weight of the olives delivered. Approved undertakings shall notify the competent body 2. and the control agency: — keep stock accounts covering table olives, linked to the (a) by the 10th day of each month, of: financial accounts and indicating, for each day: (a) the quantities of olives entering the establishment, showing each consignment separately and identifying the grower of each, (b) the quantities of olives sent for processing and the quantities of table olives processed within the meaning of Article 2(3), (c) the quantities of table olives for which the process of preparation has been completed, (d) the quantities of table olives leaving the undertaking, broken down by form of preparation and indicating the consignees, — the quantities of olives received, sent for processing and in the processed within the meaning of Article 2(3) course of the previous month, — the quantities of olives prepared and sent out, broken in the course of the down by form of preparation, previous month, — the aggregate quantities referred to in the first two the indents and the stock situation at previous month; the end of (b) before 1 July, of the names of growers as referred to in Article 2(1) for the processing period referred to in Article 2(2) and of the quantities covered by certificates issued to them in accordance with paragraph 1; — provide the grower as referred to in Article 2(1) and the competent body with the documents and the information referred to in Article 6 in accordance with the conditions laid down therein, (c) before 1 June of the following marketing year, of the total quantities delivered for the processing period referred to in Article 2(2) and of the total corresponding quantities processed. 13. 8. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 213/31 Article 7 1. Before 1 July of the current marketing year, table-olive growers shall lodge aid applications, directly or indirectly, with the competent body, containing at least the following details: — the name and address of the grower, — the location of the holdings and the parcels where olives were harvested, with a reference to the relevant crop declaration, — the approved undertaking to which the olives were deliv- ered. Such applications shall be accompanied by certificates of delivery as referred to in Article 6(1). However, for olives delivered between 1 July and 31 August certificates of delivery must be lodged no later than 1 September. Where applicable, applications may be accompanied by an application for an advance on the aid. Applications lodged after 2. incur a penalty consisting in a reduction of 1 % of the amount to which the grower would have been entitled had the application been lodged by the due date, for each working day of delay. Applications lodged more than 25 days late shall be refused. the deadline shall applications in accordance with Article 7 prove to conflict with the results of checks conducted. However, Article 15 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2366/98 (1) shall apply mutatis mutandis. Article 9 Growers as referred to in Article 2(1) may receive an 1. advance on the aid requested. The advance shall be equal to the unit amount referred to in Article 17(a)(1) of Council Regula- tion (EEC) No 2261/84 (2), multiplied by the quantity of olive oil equivalent, in accordance with Article 3(1) of this Decision, to the relevant quantity of table olives processed. For the purposes of granting advances to growers, the quantity of table olives processed shall be determined by applying a provisional processing coefficient to the quantity appearing in the certificate of delivery, as confirmed by the further informa- tion notified to the competent body. That coefficient shall be established by the competent body depending on the data available on the approved undertaking concerned. However, the quantity of table olives taken into consideration may not exceed 90 % of the quantity of table olives delivered. 2. Advances on the aid shall be paid from 16 October of the current marketing year to growers applying therefor in accord- ance with Article 7(1). Article 8 Article 10 Before the definitive payment of the aid, the competent 1. body shall carry out the controls required to check: — the quantities of delivery issued, table olives covered by certificates of — the quantities of table olives processed, broken down by 1. Without prejudice to the reductions provided for in Article 20(d) of Regulation No 136/66/EEC, the aid shall be equal to the unit amount referred to in Article 17(a)(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2261/84, multiplied by the quantity of olive oil equivalent, in accordance with Article 3(1) of this Decision, to the relevant quantity of table olives processed. grower. Controls shall involve: — several physical inspections of goods in stock and a check of the accounts of approved undertakings, — stricter checks of aid applications from olive growers applying for aid on both table olives and olive oil. Greece shall see that all the necessary controls are in 2. place to ensure that: — entitlement to table-olive production aid is respected, — olives this entering an undertaking approved under Decision are excluded from eligibility for olive-oil produc- tion aid, — no more than one aid application is lodged for the same olives. 3. Without prejudice to the penalties laid down by Greece, no aid shall be granted to growers as referred to in Article 2(1) whose declarations as provided for in Article 5 or whose aid For the purposes of granting the aid to growers as referred to in Article 2(1), the quantity of table olives processed shall be determined by applying a processing coefficient for the under- taking concerned to the quantity appearing in the certificate of delivery, as confirmed by the further information notified to the competent body. That coefficient shall be equal to the ratio between the total quantity of table olives processed on the one hand, and the total quantity of table olives covered by certi- ficates of delivery issued on the other hand, in respect of the olive-oil marketing year concerned. table olives processed for Where the quantity of processed olives corresponding to the aid as set out in the certificate of delivery cannot be established, the quantities of the growers concerned shall be calculated on the basis of the average coeffi- cient for the other undertakings. However, without prejudice to any claims which the olive growers concerned might make against the undertaking, that quantity of processed olives may not exceed 75 % of the quantity shown in the certificate of delivery. (1) OJ L 293, 31. 10. 1998, p. 50. (2) OJ L 208, 3. 8. 1984, p. 3. L 213/32 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 13. 8. 1999 The rate applicable for conversion of the amount of the 2. aid into drachma shall be the agricultural conversion rate valid on the first day of the month in which the grower concerned makes his first delivery of olives. — before 16 June of each subsequent marketing year, of the quantities of olive oil equivalent to the actual output of table olives processed and of the processing coefficients adopted. Once the controls referred to in Article 8 have been 3. carried out, the aid or, where applicable, the balance of the aid shall be paid to the grower in full within 90 days of fixing by the Commission of the unit amount thereof. This Decision shall apply from 1 September 1999. Article 12 Article 11 This Decision is addressed to the Hellenic Republic. Article 13 Greece shall notify the Commission: — without delay, of the national measures taken pursuant to this Decision, — before 1 August of each marketing year, of the quantities of olive oil equivalent to the estimated output of table olives processed and of the provisional processing coefficients for that estimate, Done at Brussels, 28 July 1999. For the Commission Franz FISCHLER Member of the Commission


title: Verordening (EG) nr. 1648/1999 van de Commissie van 27 juli 1999 houdende afwijking van Verordening (EEG) nr. 1589/87 inzake de aankoop, via inschrijving, van boter door de interventiebureaus

eurovoc_concepts:
award of contract
butter
intervention agency
milk
milk product

text: L 195/14 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen 28. 7. 1999 VERORDENING (EG) Nr. 1648/1999 VAN DE COMMISSIE van 27 juli 1999 houdende afw¶king van Verordening (EEG) nr. 1589/87 inzake de aankoop, via inschr¶ving, van boter door de interventiebureaus DE COMMISSIE VAN DE EUROPESE GEMEENSCHAPPEN, Gelet op het Verdrag tot oprichting van de Europese Gemeen- schap, Gelet op Verordening (EEG) nr. 804/68 van de Raad van 27 juni 1968 houdende een gemeenschappel¶ke ordening der laatstel¶k markten in de sector melk en zuivelproducten (1), gew¶zigd b¶ Verordening (EG) nr. 1587/96 (2), inzonderheid op artikel 7 bis, lid 1, eerste alinea, en lid 3, (1) (2) Overwegende dat b¶ Verordening (EEG) nr. 1589/87 van de Commissie (3), laatstel¶k gew¶zigd b¶ Verordening (EG) nr. 124/1999 (4), bepalingen z¶n vastgesteld inzake de aankoop, via inschr¶ving, van boter door de interven- tiebureaus; dat in artikel 3, lid 1, van de genoemde verordening is bepaald dat de inschr¶ver slechts aan de inschr¶ving kan deelnemen voor boter die is geprodu- ceerd in de loop van de periode van 21 dagen vooraf- gaande aan de uiterste term¶n voor het indienen van de offertes; Overwegende dat, aangezien er in augustus slechts (cid:130)(cid:130)n inschr¶ving wordt gehouden aan het einde van de maand en er b¶gevolg tussen de laatste inschr¶ving van juli en de enige inschr¶ving van augustus 28 dagen liggen, de genoemde periode van 21 dagen te kort is om alle tussen de twee inschr¶vingen geproduceerde boter voor interventie te kunnen aanbieden; dat de periode waarin de boter moet z¶n geproduceerd om voor inter- ventie in aanmerking te komen, derhalve t¶del¶k tot 28 dagen moet worden verlengd; (3) Overwegende dat de in deze verordening vervatte maat- regelen in overeenstemming z¶n met het advies van het Comit(cid:130) van beheer voor melk en zuivelproducten, HEEFT DE VOLGENDE VERORDENING VASTGESTELD: Artikel 1 In afw¶king van artikel 3, lid 1, van Verordening (EEG) nr. 1589/87 en voor de inschr¶ving waarvan de term¶n voor het indienen van de offertes op de vierde dinsdag van augustus 1999 verstr¶kt, wordt de in het genoemde lid bedoelde periode vastgesteld op 28 dagen. Artikel 2 Deze verordening treedt in werking op de derde dag volgende op die van haar bekendmaking in het Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen. Deze verordening is verbindend in al haar onderdelen en is rechtstreeks toepassel¶k in elke lidstaat. Gedaan te Brussel, 27 juli 1999. Voor de Commissie Franz FISCHLER Lid van de Commissie (1) PB L 148 van 28. 6. 1968, blz. 13. (2) PB L 206 van 16. 8. 1996, blz. 21. (3) PB L 146 van 6. 6. 1987, blz. 27. (4) PB L 16 van 21. 1. 1999, blz. 19