# Amtsblatt C 9/14.

| | ISSN 1725-2407 |
| --- | --- |
| Amtsblatt
  der Europäischen Union | C 9 |
| | |
| Ausgabe in deutscher Sprache | Mitteilungen und Bekanntmachungen | 49. Jahrgang14. Januar 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2407

Amtsblatt

der Europäischen Union

C 9

Ausgabe in deutscher Sprache

Mitteilungen und Bekanntmachungen

49. Jahrgang14. Januar 2006

---

| Informationsnummer | Inhalt | Seite |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Mitteilungen |
| | Kommission |
| 2006/C 009/1 | Euro-Wechselkurs | 1 |
| 2006/C 009/2 | Genehmigung staatlicher Beihilfen gemäß den Artikeln 87 und 88 des EG-Vertrags — Vorhaben, gegen die von der Kommission keine Einwände erhoben werden | 2 |
| 2006/C 009/3 | Genehmigung staatlicher Beihilfen gemäß den Artikeln 87 und 88 des EG-Vertrags — Vorhaben, gegen die von der Kommission keine Einwände erhoben werden (
  1
  ) | 3 |
| 2006/C 009/4 | Staatliche Beihilfe — Vereinigtes Königreich — Staatliche Beihilfe C 45/2005 (ex N 364/2005) — Aktionsprogramm Abfall und Ressourcen: Beihilfe zur Erhöhung der Recyclingkapazitäten für Druck- und Schreibpapier — Aufforderung zur Abgabe von Stellungnahmen gemäß Artikel 88 Absatz 2 EG-Vertrag (
  1
  ) | 6 |
| 2006/C 009/5 | Keine Einwände gegen einen angemeldeten Zusammenschluss (Sache COMP/M.4008 — Logista/Editorial Planeta/JV) (
  1
  ) | 12 |
| 2006/C 009/6 | Keine Einwände gegen einen angemeldeten Zusammenschluss (Sache COMP/M.4058 — Logista/Planeta de Agostini/JV) (
  1
  ) | 12 |

Informationsnummer

Inhalt

Seite

I   Mitteilungen

Kommission

2006/C 009/1

Euro-Wechselkurs

1

2006/C 009/2

Genehmigung staatlicher Beihilfen gemäß den Artikeln 87 und 88 des EG-Vertrags — Vorhaben, gegen die von der Kommission keine Einwände erhoben werden

2

2006/C 009/3

Genehmigung staatlicher Beihilfen gemäß den Artikeln 87 und 88 des EG-Vertrags — Vorhaben, gegen die von der Kommission keine Einwände erhoben werden (
  1
  )

1

3

2006/C 009/4

Staatliche Beihilfe — Vereinigtes Königreich — Staatliche Beihilfe C 45/2005 (ex N 364/2005) — Aktionsprogramm Abfall und Ressourcen: Beihilfe zur Erhöhung der Recyclingkapazitäten für Druck- und Schreibpapier — Aufforderung zur Abgabe von Stellungnahmen gemäß Artikel 88 Absatz 2 EG-Vertrag (
  1
  )

1

6

2006/C 009/5

Keine Einwände gegen einen angemeldeten Zusammenschluss (Sache COMP/M.4008 — Logista/Editorial Planeta/JV) (
  1
  )

1

12

2006/C 009/6

Keine Einwände gegen einen angemeldeten Zusammenschluss (Sache COMP/M.4058 — Logista/Planeta de Agostini/JV) (
  1
  )

1

12

| | Berichtigungen |
| --- | --- |
| 2006/C 009/7 | Berichtigung der Mitteilung betreffend Feiertage 2006 (ABl. C 336 vom 31.12.2005) | 13 |

Berichtigungen

2006/C 009/7

Berichtigung der Mitteilung betreffend Feiertage 2006 (ABl. C 336 vom 31.12.2005)

(ABl. C 336 vom 31.12.2005)

13

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text von Bedeutung für den EWR |

---

(1)   Text von Bedeutung für den EWR

1

| DE | |
| --- | --- |

DE

---

I Mitteilungen

Kommission

| 14.1.2006 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | C 9/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

C 9/1

---

Euro-Wechselkurs (1)

13. Januar 2006

(2006/C 9/01)

1 Euro=

| | Währung | Kurs |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US-Dollar | 1,2039 |
| JPY | Japanischer Yen | 138,13 |
| DKK | Dänische Krone | 7,4592 |
| GBP | Pfund Sterling | 0,68140 |
| SEK | Schwedische Krone | 9,3063 |
| CHF | Schweizer Franken | 1,5491 |
| ISK | Isländische Krone | 74,01 |
| NOK | Norwegische Krone | 8,0475 |
| BGN | Bulgarischer Lew | 1,9558 |
| CYP | Zypern-Pfund | 0,5737 |
| CZK | Tschechische Krone | 28,840 |
| EEK | Estnische Krone | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Ungarischer Forint | 250,51 |
| LTL | Litauischer Litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Lettischer Lat | 0,6960 |
| MTL | Maltesische Lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | Polnischer Zloty | 3,8138 |
| RON | Rumänischer Leu | 3,6308 |
| SIT | Slowenischer Tolar | 239,49 |
| SKK | Slowakische Krone | 37,520 |
| TRY | Türkische Lira | 1,6160 |
| AUD | Australischer Dollar | 1,6040 |
| CAD | Kanadischer Dollar | 1,3972 |
| HKD | Hongkong-Dollar | 9,3316 |
| NZD | Neuseeländischer Dollar | 1,7344 |
| SGD | Singapur-Dollar | 1,9648 |
| KRW | Südkoreanischer Won | 1 189,03 |
| ZAR | Südafrikanischer Rand | 7,3170 |
| CNY | Chinesischer Renminbi Yuan | 9,7144 |
| HRK | Kroatische Kuna | 7,3750 |
| IDR | Indonesische Rupiah | 11 282,95 |
| MYR | Malaysischer Ringgit | 4,502 |
| PHP | Philippinischer Peso | 63,072 |
| RUB | Russischer Rubel | 34,3200 |
| THB | Thailändischer Baht | 47,643 |

Währung

Kurs

USD

US-Dollar

1,2039

JPY

Japanischer Yen

138,13

DKK

Dänische Krone

7,4592

GBP

Pfund Sterling

0,68140

SEK

Schwedische Krone

9,3063

CHF

Schweizer Franken

1,5491

ISK

Isländische Krone

74,01

NOK

Norwegische Krone

8,0475

BGN

Bulgarischer Lew

1,9558

CYP

Zypern-Pfund

0,5737

CZK

Tschechische Krone

28,840

EEK

Estnische Krone

15,6466

HUF

Ungarischer Forint

250,51

LTL

Litauischer Litas

3,4528

LVL

Lettischer Lat

0,6960

MTL

Maltesische Lira

0,4293

PLN

Polnischer Zloty

3,8138

RON

Rumänischer Leu

3,6308

SIT

Slowenischer Tolar

239,49

SKK

Slowakische Krone

37,520

TRY

Türkische Lira

1,6160

AUD

Australischer Dollar

1,6040

CAD

Kanadischer Dollar

1,3972

HKD

Hongkong-Dollar

9,3316

NZD

Neuseeländischer Dollar

1,7344

SGD

Singapur-Dollar

1,9648

KRW

Südkoreanischer Won

1 189,03

ZAR

Südafrikanischer Rand

7,3170

CNY

Chinesischer Renminbi Yuan

9,7144

HRK

Kroatische Kuna

7,3750

IDR

Indonesische Rupiah

11 282,95

MYR

Malaysischer Ringgit

4,502

PHP

Philippinischer Peso

63,072

RUB

Russischer Rubel

34,3200

THB

Thailändischer Baht

47,643

---

(1)

Quelle: Von der Europäischen Zentralbank veröffentlichter Referenz-Wechselkurs.

---

| 14.1.2006 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | C 9/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

C 9/2

---

Genehmigung staatlicher Beihilfen gemäß den Artikeln 87 und 88 des EG-Vertrags

Vorhaben, gegen die von der Kommission keine Einwände erhoben werden

(2006/C 9/02)

Datum der Annahme des Beschlusses:

Mitgliedstaat: Deutschland (Schleswig-Holstein)

Beihilfe Nr.: N 9/2004

Titel: Beihilfen für die Vernichtung von Tierkörpern

Zielsetzung: Entschädigung von Tierhaltern für die Kosten der Vernichtung von im Betrieb verendeten Tieren.

Rechtsgrundlage:

| — | Richtlinien für die Gewährung von Beihilfen für die Tierkörperbeseitigung (VIII 35 — 7280.321) |
| --- | --- |

—

Richtlinien für die Gewährung von Beihilfen für die Tierkörperbeseitigung (VIII 35 — 7280.321)

| — | § 9, Abs 1 n. 7 „Ausführungsgesetz zum Tierkörperbeseitigungsgesetz“ (GVObl. Schl. H.S.) |
| --- | --- |

—

§ 9, Abs 1 n. 7 „Ausführungsgesetz zum Tierkörperbeseitigungsgesetz“ (GVObl. Schl. H.S.)

Haushaltsmittel: 5,5 Mio. EUR jährlich

Beihilfeintensität oder -höhe: 100 %

Laufzeit: Bis 2013

Die rechtsverbindliche(n) Sprachfassung(en) der Entscheidung, aus der (denen) alle vertraulichen Angaben gestrichen wurden, kann (können) unter folgender Internet-Adresse eingesehen werden:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/

---

| 14.1.2006 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | C 9/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

C 9/3

---

Genehmigung staatlicher Beihilfen gemäß den Artikeln 87 und 88 des EG-Vertrags

Vorhaben, gegen die von der Kommission keine Einwände erhoben werden

(2006/C 9/03)

(Text von Bedeutung für den EWR)

Datum des Beschlusses:

Mitgliedstaat: Niederlande

Nr. der Beihilfe: N 127/2004

Titel: Maßnahmen zur Förderung der Erzeugung und des Absatzes von Schollen

Zielsetzung: Förderung des Absatzes von Schollen mit Hilfe parafiskalischer Abgaben

Rechtsgrundlage:

| — | Instellingsverordening Productschap Vis |
| --- | --- |

—

Instellingsverordening Productschap Vis

| — | Wet op de bedrijfsorganisatie |
| --- | --- |

—

Wet op de bedrijfsorganisatie

| — | Verordening instelling van een fonds voor scholpromotie en verordening financiering scholpromotie 2004 |
| --- | --- |

—

Verordening instelling van een fonds voor scholpromotie en verordening financiering scholpromotie 2004

Haushaltsmittel: 200 000 EUR pro Jahr

Laufzeit: Unbefristet (diese Regelung wird der Kommission spätestens zehn Jahre nach ihrem Inkrafttreten erneut mitgeteilt)

Beihilfeintensität: Einhaltung der Sätze gemäß den Leitlinien für die Prüfung der einzelstaatlichen Beihilfen im Fischerei- und Aquakultursektor (ABl. C 19 vom 20.1.2001, S. 7)

Andere Angaben: Durchführungsbericht

Die rechtsverbindliche(n) Sprachfassung(en) der Entscheidung, aus der (denen) alle vertraulichen Angaben gestrichen wurden, kann (können) unter folgender Internet-Adresse eingesehen werden:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/

Datum der Annahme:

Mitgliedstaat: Spanien (Principado de Asturias)

Nummer der Beihilfe: N 173/2005

Titel in der Originalsprache: Proyecto de ayudas para la ejecución de proyectos de investigación del Plan I+D+I de Asturias. Prolongación y modificación de la ayuda N 716/2001

Ziel: Forschung und Entwicklung (Alle Sektoren)

Rechtsgrundlage: Propuesta de Resolución de la Consejería de Educación y Ciencia del Gobierno del Principado de Asturias, de marzo de 2005, por la que se convocan ayudas a las empresas para la ejecución de proyectos de investigación en el marco del Plan de I+D+I de Asturias

Haushaltsmittel:

| | 2005: 300 000 EUR |
| --- | --- |

2005: 300 000 EUR

| | 2006: 3 000 000 EUR |
| --- | --- |

2006: 3 000 000 EUR

| | 2007: 3 000 000 EUR |
| --- | --- |

2007: 3 000 000 EUR

Beihilfeintensität oder -höhe: 35 % — 60 % — +10 % — 75 % — 50 %

Laufzeit:

Die rechtsverbindliche(n) Sprachfassung(en) der Entscheidung, aus der (denen) alle vertraulichen Angaben gestrichen wurden, kann (können) unter folgender Internet-Adresse eingesehen werden:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/

Datum der Annahme:

Mitgliedstaat: Dänemark

Nummer der Beihilfe: N 229/2005

Titel in der Originalsprache: Regionale Teknologicentre

Ziel: Forschung und Entwicklung (Alle Sektoren)

Rechtsgrundlage: Lov nr. 419 af 6.6.2002

Haushaltsmittel:

| | 2005: 4 000 000 EUR |
| --- | --- |

2005: 4 000 000 EUR

| | 2006-2008: 23 000 000 EUR |
| --- | --- |

2006-2008: 23 000 000 EUR

| | 2009: 25 000 000 EUR |
| --- | --- |

2009: 25 000 000 EUR

Beihilfeintensität oder -höhe: 60 %

Laufzeit:

Die rechtsverbindliche(n) Sprachfassung(en) der Entscheidung, aus der (denen) alle vertraulichen Angaben gestrichen wurden, kann (können) unter folgender Internet-Adresse eingesehen werden:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/

Datum der Annahme des Beschlusses:

Mitgliedstaat: Slowakische Republik

Beihilfe Nr.: N 298/2005

Titel: Einzelbeihilfe für die audiovisuelle Produktion zugunsten der TYZAM s.r.o.

Zielsetzung: Förderung von Filmproduktionen

Rechtsgrundlage:

| a) | Zákon č. 523/2004 Z.z. o rozpočtových pravidlách verejnej správy a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov |
| --- | --- |

a)

Zákon č. 523/2004 Z.z. o rozpočtových pravidlách verejnej správy a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov

| b) | Zákon č. 231/1999 Z.z. o štátnej pomoci v znení zákona č. 203/2004 – § 4 ods. 1, písm. d) |
| --- | --- |

b)

Zákon č. 231/1999 Z.z. o štátnej pomoci v znení zákona č. 203/2004 – § 4 ods. 1, písm. d)

| c) | Výnos MK SR – 480/2004 – 1 o poskytovaní dotácií v pôsobnosti MK SR |
| --- | --- |

c)

Výnos MK SR – 480/2004 – 1 o poskytovaní dotácií v pôsobnosti MK SR

Haushaltsmittel: 7 Mio. SKK

Beihilfeintensität oder -höhe: 20 %

Laufzeit: Einzelbeihilfe nach der Genehmigung (31.12.2005)

Die rechtsverbindliche(n) Sprachfassung(en) der Entscheidung, aus der (denen) alle vertraulichen Angaben gestrichen wurden, kann (können) unter folgender Internet-Adresse eingesehen werden:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/

Datum der Annahme des Beschlusses:

Mitgliedstaat: Slowakische Republik

Beihilfe Nr.: N 299/2005

Titel: Einzelbeihilfe für die audiovisuelle Produktion zugunsten der TaO Productions s.r.o.

Zielsetzung: Förderung von Filmproduktionen

Rechtsgrundlage:

| a) | Zákon č. 523/2004 Z.z. o rozpočtových pravidlách verejnej správy a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov |
| --- | --- |

a)

Zákon č. 523/2004 Z.z. o rozpočtových pravidlách verejnej správy a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov

| b) | Zákon č. 231/1999 Z.z. o štátnej pomoci v znení zákona č. 203/2004 – § 4 ods. 1, písm. d) |
| --- | --- |

b)

Zákon č. 231/1999 Z.z. o štátnej pomoci v znení zákona č. 203/2004 – § 4 ods. 1, písm. d)

| c) | Výnos MK SR – 480/2004 – 1 o poskytovaní dotácií v pôsobnosti MK SR |
| --- | --- |

c)

Výnos MK SR – 480/2004 – 1 o poskytovaní dotácií v pôsobnosti MK SR

Haushaltsmittel: 8 Mio. SKK

Beihilfeintensität oder -höhe: 10 %

Laufzeit: Einzelbeihilfe nach der Genehmigung (31.12.2005)

Die rechtsverbindliche(n) Sprachfassung(en) der Entscheidung, aus der (denen) alle vertraulichen Angaben gestrichen wurden, kann (können) unter folgender Internet-Adresse eingesehen werden:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/

Datum der Annahme des Beschlusses:

Mitgliedstaat: Slowakische Republik

Beihilfe Nr.: N 300/2005

Titel: Einzelbeihilfe für die audiovisuelle Produktion zugunsten der ALEF Film & Media Group, s.r.o.

Zielsetzung: Förderung von Filmproduktionen

Rechtsgrundlage:

| a) | Zákon č. 523/2004 Z.z. o rozpočtových pravidlách verejnej správy a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov |
| --- | --- |

a)

Zákon č. 523/2004 Z.z. o rozpočtových pravidlách verejnej správy a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov

| b) | Zákon č. 231/1999 Z.z. o štátnej pomoci v znení zákona č. 203/2004 – § 4 ods. 1, písm. d) |
| --- | --- |

b)

Zákon č. 231/1999 Z.z. o štátnej pomoci v znení zákona č. 203/2004 – § 4 ods. 1, písm. d)

| c) | Výnos MK SR – 480/2004 – 1 o poskytovaní dotácií v pôsobnosti MK SR |
| --- | --- |

c)

Výnos MK SR – 480/2004 – 1 o poskytovaní dotácií v pôsobnosti MK SR

Haushaltsmittel: 11 Mio. SKK

Beihilfeintensität oder -höhe: 26,2 %

Laufzeit: Einzelbeihilfe nach der Genehmigung (31.12.2005)

Die rechtsverbindliche(n) Sprachfassung(en) der Entscheidung, aus der (denen) alle vertraulichen Angaben gestrichen wurden, kann (können) unter folgender Internet-Adresse eingesehen werden:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/

Datum der Annahme des Beschlusses:

Mitgliedstaat: Frankreich

Beihilfe Nr.: N 337/2004 und N 378/2004

Titel: Finanzierung von industriellen technischen Zentren (Centres Techniques Industriels) und beruflichen Zentren für wirtschaftliche Entwicklung (Centres Professionnels de Développement économique) durch zweckgebundene Steuern und Haushaltsmittel

Zielsetzung: Öffentliche Forschungs- und Entwicklungstätigkeit, Standardisierung, Ausbildung, Förderung und Information der Unternehmen in den Branchen Maschinenbau, Verbrauchsgüter und Baumaterial

Rechtsgrundlage: Loi 2001-692 du 1er août 2001 et loi de finance annuelle

Laufzeit: Ab dem Zeitpunkt der Genehmigung durch die Kommission bis zum 31.12.2010

Andere Angaben: Gefördert werden einschlägige Zentren in der Verbrauchsgüter-, Maschinenbau- und Baumaterialbranche

Die rechtsverbindliche(n) Sprachfassung(en) der Entscheidung, aus der (denen) alle vertraulichen Angaben gestrichen wurden, kann (können) unter folgender Internet-Adresse eingesehen werden:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/

Datum der Annahme des Beschlusses:

Mitgliedstaat: Dänemark

Beihilfe Nr.: N 374/2002

Titel: Beihilfen zur Ausrüstung von Fischereihäfen im Rahmen der aus dem FIAF kofinanzierten Strukturmaßnahmen in den Jahren 2000 — 2006

Zielsetzung: Kofinanzierung von Strukturinterventionen zugunsten der Ausrüstung von Fischereihäfen in Dänemark im Zeitraum 2000 — 2006

Rechtsgrundlage:

| — | Lov nr. 316 om strukturforanstaltninger, offentliggjort den 3. maj 2001 |
| --- | --- |

—

Lov nr. 316 om strukturforanstaltninger, offentliggjort den 3. maj 2001

| — | Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 2792/1999 af 17. december 1999 om de nærmere regler og betingelser for Fællesskabets strukturforanstaltninger for fiskeriet |
| --- | --- |

—

Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 2792/1999 af 17. december 1999 om de nærmere regler og betingelser for Fællesskabets strukturforanstaltninger for fiskeriet

Haushaltsmittel: 27 Mio. EUR

Laufzeit: 2000 — 2006

Beihilfeintensität oder -höhe: Einhaltung der Höchstbeträge gemäß der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 2792/1999

Andere Angaben: Jahresbericht

Die rechtsverbindliche(n) Sprachfassung(en) der Entscheidung, aus der (denen) alle vertraulichen Angaben gestrichen wurden, kann (können) unter folgender Internet-Adresse eingesehen werden:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/

Datum der Annahme des Beschlusses:

Beihilfe Nr.: N 465/2005

Mitgliedstaat: Niederlande

Titel: Ondersteunende maatregelen om de omschakeling te vergemakkelijken van een aanbod- naar een vraagfinanciering voor schoolbegeleidingsdiensten en rechtstreekse betaling van het geoormerkt gedeelte van de begroting voor schoolbegeleidingsdiensten aan deze diensten

Rechtsgrundlage: Hoofdstukken VI en VIA, onderdeel a) van de wet tot wijziging van onder meer de wet op het primair onderwijs, de wet op de expertisecentra, en de wet op het voortgezet onderwijs in verband met de vraagfinanciering voor schoolbegeleiding en de bekostiging van het onderwijs aan zieke leerlingen

Zielsetzung: Förderung der Ausbildung in Form direkter Zuschüsse

Beihilfeintensität oder -höhe: 53 Mio. EUR

Haushaltsmittel:

| | 2006: 15 000 000 EUR |
| --- | --- |

2006: 15 000 000 EUR

| | 2007: 35 000 000 EUR |
| --- | --- |

2007: 35 000 000 EUR

| | 2008: 3 000 000 EUR |
| --- | --- |

2008: 3 000 000 EUR

Laufzeit: 1.1.2006 — 31.12.2008

Andere Angaben:

| | Art der Beihilfe: Beihilferegelung |
| --- | --- |

Art der Beihilfe: Beihilferegelung

| | Form der Beihilfe: Zuschuss |
| --- | --- |

Form der Beihilfe: Zuschuss

Die rechtsverbindliche(n) Sprachfassung(en) der Entscheidung, aus der (denen) alle vertraulichen Angaben gestrichen wurden, kann (können) unter folgender Internet-Adresse eingesehen werden:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/

Datum der Annahme des Beschlusses:

Mitgliedstaat: Spanien

Beihilfe Nr.: N 499/2004

Titel: Beihilferegelung zur Förderung des Bergbaus, des Umweltschutzes und der Sicherheit in Bergwerken, in denen nicht zur Energieerzeugung verwendete Erze abgebaut werden

Zielsetzung: Änderung der von der Kommission am 19. Juni 2002 genehmigten Regelung (Form und Intensität der Beihilfen) mit dem Ziel, die Exploration attraktiver zu machen

Beihilfeintensität oder -höhe: Explorationsbeihilfen: direkte Zuschüsse bis zu 20 % der beihilfefähigen Kosten (30 % für KMU) und/oder zinsloser rückzahlbarer Vorschuss von bis zu 60 % der beihilfefähigen Kosten (70 % für KMU)

Laufzeit: Bis zum 31.12.2006

Die rechtsverbindliche(n) Sprachfassung(en) der Entscheidung, aus der (denen) alle vertraulichen Angaben gestrichen wurden, kann (können) unter folgender Internet-Adresse eingesehen werden:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/

Datum der Annahme des Beschlusses:

Mitgliedstaat: Deutschland

Beihilfe Nr.: NN 44/2004

Titel: Rettungsbeihilfe für das SVZ Schwarze Pumpe

Zielsetzung: Rettung eines Unternehmens in Schwierigkeiten

Rechtsgrundlage: §2(3) Förderbankgesetz

Höhe der Beihilfe: 21,028 Mio. EUR

Laufzeit: Bis 31.5.2005

Die rechtsverbindliche(n) Sprachfassung(en) der Entscheidung, aus der (denen) alle vertraulichen Angaben gestrichen wurden, kann (können) unter folgender Internet-Adresse eingesehen werden:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/

---

| 14.1.2006 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | C 9/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

C 9/6

---

STAATLICHE BEIHILFE — VEREINIGTES KÖNIGREICH

Staatliche Beihilfe C 45/2005 (ex N 364/2005) — Aktionsprogramm Abfall und Ressourcen: Beihilfe zur Erhöhung der Recyclingkapazitäten für Druck- und Schreibpapier

Aufforderung zur Abgabe von Stellungnahmen gemäß Artikel 88 Absatz 2 EG-Vertrag

(2006/C 9/04)

(Text von Bedeutung für den EWR)

Mit Schreiben vom 7. Dezember 2005, das nachstehend in der verbindlichen Sprachfassung abgedruckt ist, hat die Kommission dem Vereinigten Königreich ihre Entscheidung mitgeteilt, wegen der erwähnten Maßnahme das Verfahren nach Artikel 88 Absatz 2 EG-Vertrag zu eröffnen.

Die Beteiligten sind aufgefordert, ihre Stellungnahme innerhalb eines Monats nach dem Datum dieser Veröffentlichung an folgende Anschrift zu richten:

| Europäische Kommission |
| --- |
| Generaldirektion Wettbewerb |
| Kanzlei Staatliche Beihilfen |
| SPA 3, 6/05 |
| B-1049 Brüssel |
| Fax Nr.: (32-2) 296 12 42 |

Europäische Kommission

Generaldirektion Wettbewerb

Kanzlei Staatliche Beihilfen

SPA 3, 6/05

B-1049 Brüssel

Fax Nr.: (32-2) 296 12 42

Alle Stellungnahmen werden den britischen Behörden übermittelt. Jeder, der eine Stellungnahme abgibt, kann unter Angabe von Gründen schriftlich beantragen, dass seine Identität nicht bekannt gegeben wird.

ZUSAMMENFASSUNG

Im Juli 2005 meldete das Vereinigte Königreich bei der Kommission eine Investitionsbeihilfe zur Erhöhung der Kapazitäten zur Herstellung von Druck- und Schreibpapier aus Recycling-Zellstoff an.

1.   Beschreibung der Maßnahme

Papierabfälle aus Büros werden im Vereinigten Königreich nicht gesammelt und verwertet. Um diesen Mangel zu beheben und die Sammlung von Papierabfällen aus Büros zu fördern, beabsichtigt die für den Aktionsplan Abfall und Ressourcen (WRAP) zuständige staatliche Stelle, Papierfabriken im Wege eines Ausschreibungsverfahrens Zuschüsse für die Aufstockung ihrer Recyclingkapazitäten für Druck- und Schreibpapier zu gewähren. Im Gegenzug müssen sich die Papierhersteller verpflichten, eine größere Menge von Altpapier wiederzuverwerten, wobei ein Mindestprozentsatz oder eine Mindesttonnage von Druck- und Schreibpapierabfällen aus Büros stammen muss. Um die gesammelten Druck- und Schreibpapierabfälle bestmöglich zu verwerten, sollen die zusätzlichen Kapazitäten zur Herstellung von neuem Druck- und Schreibpapier verwendet werden.

Die Ausschreibung wird auch technologische und innovative Aspekte gebührend berücksichtigen, um die Entwicklung nachhaltiger Prozesse der Abfallverwertung zu fördern, die über den aktuellen Stand der Technik hinausgehen. Für das Programm sind Haushaltsmittel zwischen 6 und 20 Mio. GBP veranschlagt. Da das Ausschreibungsverfahren über die Höhe der Beihilfen entscheiden wird, sind die Beihilfeintensitäten noch nicht bekannt. Bei den voraussichtlichen Begünstigten handelt es sich um weniger als zehn Papierhersteller. Die britischen Behörden werden die Beihilfe voraussichtlich noch vor April 2006 gewähren.

2.   Würdigung der Maßnahme

Die Kommission bezweifelt, dass die Maßnahme unter Ziffer 29 des Gemeinschaftsrahmens für staatliche Umweltschutzbeihilfen (1) fällt, da die Investitionen in neue Kapazitäten zur Herstellung von Papier aus Altpapier die eigene Umweltverschmutzung nicht verringern werden. Die begünstigten Unternehmen werden vielmehr Altpapier verwenden, das von irgendeinem Papierhersteller stammt.

Sie bezweifelt ferner, dass abgesehen vom Gemeinschaftsrahmen für Umweltschutzbeihilfen andere Befreiungen gemäß Artikel 87 Absätze 2 und 3 EG-Vertrag greifen können. Die begünstigten Unternehmen wurden noch nicht ausgewählt, so dass sich unmöglich sagen lässt, ob die Investitionen in ausgewiesenen Fördergebieten erfolgen werden und somit die Leitlinien für nationale Regionalbeihilfen (2) ganz oder teilweise anwendbar sind.

Sollte der Gemeinschaftsrahmen für Umweltschutzbeihilfen nicht anwendbar sein, muss die Kommission unmittelbar auf der Grundlage von Artikel 87 Absatz 3 Buchstabe c entscheiden. Die Kommission hat dies bei einer Recyclingmaßnahme (3) und zwei anderen Fällen in der Papierindustrie (4) bereits getan. Die von der Kommission angewandten Kriterien beruhten auf der Anreizwirkung der Beihilfe und darauf, ob die zugunsten der Umwelt erforderlichen Investitionen über den Stand der Technik auf EU-Ebene hinausgingen.

In anderen Fällen, in denen die Kommission Investitionsbeihilfen zur Schaffung von Kapazitäten zur Verwertung von Altpapier geprüft hat, beruhten die Kriterien der Kommission auf der Anreizwirkung der Beihilfe und darauf, ob die zugunsten der Umwelt erforderlichen Investitionen über den Stand der Technik auf EU-Ebene hinausgingen. Die Kommission bezweifelt, dass die Begründung der britischen Behörden, dass derzeit bei der Herstellung von Druckpapier in der EU sehr wenig Altpapier verwertet wird, ausreicht, um festzustellen, dass die Herstellung von Druckpapier unter Verwendung von Recycling-Zellstoff über den Stand der Technik in der EU hinaus geht.

Ebenso wenig ist von der Anreizwirkung der Maßnahme für die Sammlung von Druck- und Schreibpapierabfällen überzeugt.

Außerdem bezweifelt sie, dass die Herstellung von Druck- und Schreibpapier aus Druck- und Schreibpapierabfällen im Vergleich zu dem üblicheren Verfahren der Verwendung von Druck- und Schreibpapierabfällen zur Herstellung anderer Papiersorten umweltfreundlicher ist.

Fraglich ist auch, ob sich die beihilfefähigen Kosten auf die zur Erreichung der Umweltschutzziele erforderlichen Investitionsmehrkosten beschränken, da die britischen Behörden nicht beabsichtigen, die Investitionskosten für vergleichbare Kapazitäten, die nicht den gleichen Nutzen für die Umwelt bringen, von den beihilfefähigen Investitionskosten abzuziehen. Es ist somit ungewiss, ob bei der Gewährung einer Beihilfe für Investitionen in neue Kapazitäten zur Herstellung von Druck- und Schreibpapier aus Druck- und Schreibpapierabfällen die Kosten einer konventionellen Papierherstellungsanlage abgezogen werden.

Schließlich hat die Kommission Zweifel, ob die von den britischen Behörden geplante Maßnahme die den Wettbewerb am wenigsten beeinträchtigende Lösung des fraglichen Problems darstellt. Andere Instrumente, z.B. solche, die sich auf die Sammlung konzentrieren, dürften die Märkte für Altpapier und Endprodukte weniger beeinträchtigen.

3.   Schlussfolgerung

Auf der Grundlage der vorstehenden Erwägungen hat die Kommission beschlossen, das Verfahren nach Artikel 88 Absatz 2 EG-Vertrag zu eröffnen. Die Betroffenen sind aufgefordert, insbesondere zu folgenden Fragen Stellung zu nehmen: 1) Was ist als Stand der Technik bei der Verwendung von Altpapier (Druck- und Schreibpapier) zur Herstellung von neuem Druck- und Schreibpapier anzusehen, 2) ist die Beihilfe notwendig, damit mehr Druck- und Schreibpapier gesammelt wird, 3) in welchem Umfang ist eine Verfälschung des Wettbewerbs auf dem Markt für neues Papier und Altpapier zu erwarten, und 4) welche Vorteile für die Umwelt sind durch die angemeldete Maßnahme im Vergleich zu den Vorteilen zu erwarten, die durch andere Instrumente erreicht werden können.

DAS SCHREIBEN

„The Commission wishes to inform the United Kingdom that, having examined the information supplied by your authorities on the aid referred to above, it has decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty.

1.   PROCEDURE

| (1) | Following informal discussions, by letter of 22 July 2005, registered in the Commission on 26 July 2005 under number A/6948, the United Kingdom notified to the Commission a scheme for increasing the manufacturing capacity of printing and writings paper from recycled fibre under the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP). The notification was registered under number N 364/05. The Commission asked further information by letter dated 9 September 2005, registered under number D/56952. The United Kingdom replied by letter dated 28 October 2005, and registered on 7 November 2002 under number A/38954. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Following informal discussions, by letter of 22 July 2005, registered in the Commission on 26 July 2005 under number A/6948, the United Kingdom notified to the Commission a scheme for increasing the manufacturing capacity of printing and writings paper from recycled fibre under the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP). The notification was registered under number N 364/05. The Commission asked further information by letter dated 9 September 2005, registered under number D/56952. The United Kingdom replied by letter dated 28 October 2005, and registered on 7 November 2002 under number A/38954.

2.   DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE

| (2) | WRAP is an entity established to promote sustainable waste management, and more specifically to promote efficient markets for recycled materials and products. Its central objective is to enable recycled markets to function more effectively by stimulating demand for recycled materials and products, thereby improving the economics of collection. Although WRAP functions as an adjunct to the Government and implements government policies, it has the form of a private company. WRAP's shareholders comprise several representatives of the industries with some interests in waste management, among them the Confederation of Paper Industries and the Chartered Institute of Waste Management, charities like Wastewatch, and representatives of the devolved and British governments. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

WRAP is an entity established to promote sustainable waste management, and more specifically to promote efficient markets for recycled materials and products. Its central objective is to enable recycled markets to function more effectively by stimulating demand for recycled materials and products, thereby improving the economics of collection. Although WRAP functions as an adjunct to the Government and implements government policies, it has the form of a private company. WRAP's shareholders comprise several representatives of the industries with some interests in waste management, among them the Confederation of Paper Industries and the Chartered Institute of Waste Management, charities like Wastewatch, and representatives of the devolved and British governments.

| (3) | In the present case, WRAP has chosen to give support for the creation of printing and writing reprocessing capacity. The definition of printing and writing paper used by the UK authorities includes the following types of papers: paper for printed publications, copier/printer paper and magazine papers. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In the present case, WRAP has chosen to give support for the creation of printing and writing reprocessing capacity. The definition of printing and writing paper used by the UK authorities includes the following types of papers: paper for printed publications, copier/printer paper and magazine papers.

| (4) | By increasing reprocessing capacity of printing and writing paper (hereinafter “P&W paper”), WRAP wants to address the problems of paper collection and recycling in offices and business. According to the United Kingdom most of the paper produced by businesses and offices is not collected and sorted for recycling. The reasons for this lie in a dual system of waste collection, where city councils are responsible for collecting domestic waste but have no responsibility for collecting waste from businesses and offices, and the low costs of landfill. Businesses and offices pay private waste managers for the collection of their waste. The low costs of landfill, the difficulties experienced in sourcing waste paper in the last decade, and attendant price fluctuations has led to a market failure consisting of a shortage of reprocessing capacity and a preference by waste managers to dump waste paper from offices and businesses in the landfill and to a shortage of reprocessing capacity. In order to correct this market failure, WRAP intends to offer grants to paper manufacturers to increase paper reprocessing capacity which utilises waste paper from offices and businesses as its raw material input. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

By increasing reprocessing capacity of printing and writing paper (hereinafter “P&W paper”), WRAP wants to address the problems of paper collection and recycling in offices and business. According to the United Kingdom most of the paper produced by businesses and offices is not collected and sorted for recycling. The reasons for this lie in a dual system of waste collection, where city councils are responsible for collecting domestic waste but have no responsibility for collecting waste from businesses and offices, and the low costs of landfill. Businesses and offices pay private waste managers for the collection of their waste. The low costs of landfill, the difficulties experienced in sourcing waste paper in the last decade, and attendant price fluctuations has led to a market failure consisting of a shortage of reprocessing capacity and a preference by waste managers to dump waste paper from offices and businesses in the landfill and to a shortage of reprocessing capacity. In order to correct this market failure, WRAP intends to offer grants to paper manufacturers to increase paper reprocessing capacity which utilises waste paper from offices and businesses as its raw material input.

| (5) | WRAP is planning to issue a competitive tender process, inspired by EC public procurement procedures, and grant the aid to paper mills before April 2006. The specific aim expressed in the tender procedure will be to provide a subsidy towards the creation of new P&W paper reprocessing capacity and promote the development of recycled paper technology within this paper grade. Successful bidders will be those whose collections are predominantly from offices and business and are of P&W waste paper. According to the UK authorities, it is highly probable that a bid that included a high proportion of (low quality) household waste, rather than P&W waste paper from offices and/or businesses, will not succeed. According to the order of priority given by WRAP in the tender invitation document to raw material sources, the most important source is offices or business. In return to the grant, the successful paper manufacturers will commit to an increased agreed tonnage of P&W waste paper newly recovered from the waste stream as the raw material for the new facilities, with a minimum percentage or tonnage being recovered printing and writing paper from offices. Tenderers will need to specify the level of support required to bring forward their proposals, and to demonstrate technological developments and environmental benefits. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

WRAP is planning to issue a competitive tender process, inspired by EC public procurement procedures, and grant the aid to paper mills before April 2006. The specific aim expressed in the tender procedure will be to provide a subsidy towards the creation of new P&W paper reprocessing capacity and promote the development of recycled paper technology within this paper grade. Successful bidders will be those whose collections are predominantly from offices and business and are of P&W waste paper. According to the UK authorities, it is highly probable that a bid that included a high proportion of (low quality) household waste, rather than P&W waste paper from offices and/or businesses, will not succeed. According to the order of priority given by WRAP in the tender invitation document to raw material sources, the most important source is offices or business. In return to the grant, the successful paper manufacturers will commit to an increased agreed tonnage of P&W waste paper newly recovered from the waste stream as the raw material for the new facilities, with a minimum percentage or tonnage being recovered printing and writing paper from offices. Tenderers will need to specify the level of support required to bring forward their proposals, and to demonstrate technological developments and environmental benefits.

| (6) | Among the criteria for the selection of the successful tenderers is the inclusion in the facility of elements of new technology or processes, whose trialling or demonstration will assist the development of sustainable processes in waste recycling. In addition, the demonstration by the tenderer that the process used goes beyond current “state of the art”. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

Among the criteria for the selection of the successful tenderers is the inclusion in the facility of elements of new technology or processes, whose trialling or demonstration will assist the development of sustainable processes in waste recycling. In addition, the demonstration by the tenderer that the process used goes beyond current “state of the art”.

| (7) | According to the United Kingdom, the competitive tender will ensure that the minimum necessary is paid to secure the environmental benefits. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

According to the United Kingdom, the competitive tender will ensure that the minimum necessary is paid to secure the environmental benefits.

| (8) | The United Kingdom argues that the investment project would bring about a major environmental benefit consisting in the creation of an increasing demand for a major proportion of office and businesses waste stream. This will bring benefits for the environment, while this will also allow less waste to be disposed in the landfills. |
| --- | --- |

(8)

The United Kingdom argues that the investment project would bring about a major environmental benefit consisting in the creation of an increasing demand for a major proportion of office and businesses waste stream. This will bring benefits for the environment, while this will also allow less waste to be disposed in the landfills.

| (9) | The budget for this measure is between GBP 6 million and GBP 20 millions. The budget will cover a period from the date of clearance to 31 December 2008. The number of beneficiaries is expected to be between two and ten paper mill companies, depending on the quality of the proposals. The aid is financed through the general budget of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). |
| --- | --- |

(9)

The budget for this measure is between GBP 6 million and GBP 20 millions. The budget will cover a period from the date of clearance to 31 December 2008. The number of beneficiaries is expected to be between two and ten paper mill companies, depending on the quality of the proposals. The aid is financed through the general budget of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).

3.   PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF THE MEASURE

| (10) | According to Article 6 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (5), the decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure shall summarise the relevant issues of fact and law, shall include a preliminary assessment of the Commission as to the aid character of the proposed measure, and shall set out the doubts as to its compatibility with the common market. |
| --- | --- |

(10)

According to Article 6 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (5), the decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure shall summarise the relevant issues of fact and law, shall include a preliminary assessment of the Commission as to the aid character of the proposed measure, and shall set out the doubts as to its compatibility with the common market.

3.1.   Existence of aid under Article 87(1) EC Treaty

| (11) | Under Article 87(1) EC Treaty, “any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, insofar as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the common market.” |
| --- | --- |

(11)

Under Article 87(1) EC Treaty, “any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, insofar as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the common market.”

| (12) | In this case, the measure will be funded by resources granted by the State under the WRAP programme. The aid will be granted to individual beneficiaries. The competitive selection procedures may ensure that the amount of the subsidy is limited to the minimum, but does not take away the aid character of the measure. The measure distorts or threatens to distort competition, as it may cover a significant part of investment costs, which would allow the beneficiary to charge a lower price for the P&W paper it produces. The measure will affect the market for new paper, but also the market for waste paper, which is valuable commodity in demand by the paper industry. The measure is likely to affect trade between Member States, since both new paper and waste paper are traded internationally. In fact, a big amount of the UK paper consumption is imported mainly from other Member States and the United Kingdom was the biggest European exporter of waste paper in 2004 (6). |
| --- | --- |

(12)

In this case, the measure will be funded by resources granted by the State under the WRAP programme. The aid will be granted to individual beneficiaries. The competitive selection procedures may ensure that the amount of the subsidy is limited to the minimum, but does not take away the aid character of the measure. The measure distorts or threatens to distort competition, as it may cover a significant part of investment costs, which would allow the beneficiary to charge a lower price for the P&W paper it produces. The measure will affect the market for new paper, but also the market for waste paper, which is valuable commodity in demand by the paper industry. The measure is likely to affect trade between Member States, since both new paper and waste paper are traded internationally. In fact, a big amount of the UK paper consumption is imported mainly from other Member States and the United Kingdom was the biggest European exporter of waste paper in 2004 (6).

| (13) | Therefore, the scheme qualifies as State aid under Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty. |
| --- | --- |

(13)

Therefore, the scheme qualifies as State aid under Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty.

| (14) | By notifying to the Commission the current scheme, the United Kingdom has fulfilled with the obligation of Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty. |
| --- | --- |

(14)

By notifying to the Commission the current scheme, the United Kingdom has fulfilled with the obligation of Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty.

3.2.   Compatibility of the aid under the environmental aid guidelines

| (15) | The UK authorities claim that the scheme brings environmental benefits. Therefore, the Commission assessed whether the scheme would be justified under the Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection (hereinafter the environmental aid guidelines) (7). |
| --- | --- |

(15)

The UK authorities claim that the scheme brings environmental benefits. Therefore, the Commission assessed whether the scheme would be justified under the Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection (hereinafter the environmental aid guidelines) (7).

| (16) | The Commission does not deny that the reuse of waste paper is more environmentally friendly than putting it into landfill. However, it has doubts that point 29 of the environmental aid guidelines justify the scheme in as far as it increases the recycling rate of P&W paper. Pursuant to this point, the Commission may authorise (1) investment aid enabling firms to improve on the community standards applicable and (2) investment aid where firms undertake investment in the absence of mandatory Community standards or where they have to undertake investments in order to comply with national standards that are more stringent than the applicable Community standards. |
| --- | --- |

(16)

The Commission does not deny that the reuse of waste paper is more environmentally friendly than putting it into landfill. However, it has doubts that point 29 of the environmental aid guidelines justify the scheme in as far as it increases the recycling rate of P&W paper. Pursuant to this point, the Commission may authorise (1) investment aid enabling firms to improve on the community standards applicable and (2) investment aid where firms undertake investment in the absence of mandatory Community standards or where they have to undertake investments in order to comply with national standards that are more stringent than the applicable Community standards.

| (17) | First of all, the Commission recalls that according to the general principles of law, an exception should be interpreted in a restrictive manner. The guidelines define the conditions under which the Commission may consider that aid is compatible with the common market in accordance with Article 87(3)(c)of the Treaty, and therefore form an exception to the general prohibition laid down in Article 87(1) of the Treaty. It should also be recalled that the environmental aid guidelines are based on the general principle of “the polluter pays”, and that every interpretation of the guidelines should strictly comply with this underlying principle. |
| --- | --- |

(17)

First of all, the Commission recalls that according to the general principles of law, an exception should be interpreted in a restrictive manner. The guidelines define the conditions under which the Commission may consider that aid is compatible with the common market in accordance with Article 87(3)(c)of the Treaty, and therefore form an exception to the general prohibition laid down in Article 87(1) of the Treaty. It should also be recalled that the environmental aid guidelines are based on the general principle of “the polluter pays”, and that every interpretation of the guidelines should strictly comply with this underlying principle.

| (18) | The scheme may increase the capacity to produce P&W paper, which would lead to increase quantities of waste paper, which would only be partially recycled. In any case, only part of the waste paper used to manufacture P&W paper will be paper sold by each beneficiary itself. Consequently, the Commission has doubts that the investment will reduce the beneficiaries' own pollution. It is more likely that the environmental benefits may derive from indirect effects on supply and demand for waste paper that affect all users and provide of waste paper concerned, not only the beneficiary. |
| --- | --- |

(18)

The scheme may increase the capacity to produce P&W paper, which would lead to increase quantities of waste paper, which would only be partially recycled. In any case, only part of the waste paper used to manufacture P&W paper will be paper sold by each beneficiary itself. Consequently, the Commission has doubts that the investment will reduce the beneficiaries' own pollution. It is more likely that the environmental benefits may derive from indirect effects on supply and demand for waste paper that affect all users and provide of waste paper concerned, not only the beneficiary.

| (19) | The United Kingdom agrees that there are no Community standards applicable to the beneficiaries. Therefore, first situation referred to in point 29 of the environmental aid guidelines, which allows aid to be granted in order to enable firms to improve on Community standards does not apply in this case. |
| --- | --- |

(19)

The United Kingdom agrees that there are no Community standards applicable to the beneficiaries. Therefore, first situation referred to in point 29 of the environmental aid guidelines, which allows aid to be granted in order to enable firms to improve on Community standards does not apply in this case.

| (20) | In relation to the second situation described in the environmental guidelines, concerning aid to firms to undertake investments in absence of Community standards, the Commission also has doubts that it would apply in this case. The Commission considers that point 29 of the environmental aid guidelines concerns cases where an undertaking invests to improve its own environmental record, and to reduce its own pollution. In such cases, aid can be allowed as an incentive to improve the environmental performance of the company. |
| --- | --- |

(20)

In relation to the second situation described in the environmental guidelines, concerning aid to firms to undertake investments in absence of Community standards, the Commission also has doubts that it would apply in this case. The Commission considers that point 29 of the environmental aid guidelines concerns cases where an undertaking invests to improve its own environmental record, and to reduce its own pollution. In such cases, aid can be allowed as an incentive to improve the environmental performance of the company.

| (21) | This interpretation is confirmed by point 18(b) of the environmental aid guidelines, which states that aid “may act as an incentive to firms to improve on standards or to undertake further investment designed to reduce pollution from their plants”. |
| --- | --- |

(21)

This interpretation is confirmed by point 18(b) of the environmental aid guidelines, which states that aid “may act as an incentive to firms to improve on standards or to undertake further investment designed to reduce pollution from their plants”.

| (22) | Other interpretation of the guidelines might result in Member States subsidising large investments, with high intensities, in all those sectors where used products can be used as materials for production or where such use is the general practice in that sector. Such aid could be granted in non-assisted areas or, in any event, without having to comply with regional aid rules and might have serious consequences on the relevant markets. Moreover, following such interpretation, the rules could be circumvented by granting aid not to the polluters, that under Community law would not be obliged to take care of the other company's pollution, but to the companies taking care of the pollution. |
| --- | --- |

(22)

Other interpretation of the guidelines might result in Member States subsidising large investments, with high intensities, in all those sectors where used products can be used as materials for production or where such use is the general practice in that sector. Such aid could be granted in non-assisted areas or, in any event, without having to comply with regional aid rules and might have serious consequences on the relevant markets. Moreover, following such interpretation, the rules could be circumvented by granting aid not to the polluters, that under Community law would not be obliged to take care of the other company's pollution, but to the companies taking care of the pollution.

| (23) | It is not excluded that part(s) of the selected investment projects will be eligible for environmental aid for other reasons, but as the projects have not been selected yet and as the United Kingdom has not guaranteed that aid would be given only in situations foreseen by the environmental guidelines, the Commission doubts whether the aid can be justified under the environmental aid guidelines. |
| --- | --- |

(23)

It is not excluded that part(s) of the selected investment projects will be eligible for environmental aid for other reasons, but as the projects have not been selected yet and as the United Kingdom has not guaranteed that aid would be given only in situations foreseen by the environmental guidelines, the Commission doubts whether the aid can be justified under the environmental aid guidelines.

3.3.   Compatibility of aid under the regional guidelines and other provisions of the Treaty

| (24) | The beneficiaries have not been chosen yet, and therefore it is impossible to assess if the investments will take place in areas eligible for regional aid and that the Guidelines on national regional aid (8) would apply wholly or in part. In fact, it should be noted that similar projects have already been approved by the Commission based on the rules for regional aid, but not as environmental aid (9). |
| --- | --- |

(24)

The beneficiaries have not been chosen yet, and therefore it is impossible to assess if the investments will take place in areas eligible for regional aid and that the Guidelines on national regional aid (8) would apply wholly or in part. In fact, it should be noted that similar projects have already been approved by the Commission based on the rules for regional aid, but not as environmental aid (9).

| (25) | The Commission furthermore doubts that other rules based on Article 87(3)(c) are applicable or that other exemptions set out in Article 87(2) and (3) of the EC-Treaty are applicable. |
| --- | --- |

(25)

The Commission furthermore doubts that other rules based on Article 87(3)(c) are applicable or that other exemptions set out in Article 87(2) and (3) of the EC-Treaty are applicable.

3.4.   Compatibility of aid directly on the basis of Article 87(3)(c)

| (26) | Should the Environmental aid guidelines not be applicable, the case has to be assessed directly on the basis of Article 87(3)(c). In fact, the Commission has done so in the past, notably for a recycling scheme administered by WRAP (10) and two other cases in the paper industry (11). |
| --- | --- |

(26)

Should the Environmental aid guidelines not be applicable, the case has to be assessed directly on the basis of Article 87(3)(c). In fact, the Commission has done so in the past, notably for a recycling scheme administered by WRAP (10) and two other cases in the paper industry (11).

| (27) | In past cases dealing with investment to increase recycling capacity in the paper industry (12), the criteria applied by the Commission was based on the incentive effect of the aid and whether the necessary investments to obtain the environmental benefits were going beyond the “state of the art” at EU level. Since the use of recycled fibre to manufacture paper is common practice in the EU, the Commission has not accepted that the mere fact that the aid aims to increase the amount of recycled paper fibre in the manufacturing of paper is enough to qualify it as environmental aid. |
| --- | --- |

(27)

In past cases dealing with investment to increase recycling capacity in the paper industry (12), the criteria applied by the Commission was based on the incentive effect of the aid and whether the necessary investments to obtain the environmental benefits were going beyond the “state of the art” at EU level. Since the use of recycled fibre to manufacture paper is common practice in the EU, the Commission has not accepted that the mere fact that the aid aims to increase the amount of recycled paper fibre in the manufacturing of paper is enough to qualify it as environmental aid.

Investments going beyond the state of the art?

| (28) | The UK authorities argue that the fact that very small amounts of P&W paper are made from recycled fibre in the EU, qualifies the investments as going beyond the current “state of the art”. The Commission is aware of technological barriers to increased rates of recycled fibres used in particular in P&W paper, like the de-inking of digital print, the removal of ashes with washers and the increased amount of bleaching, flotation, dispersion and sludge disposal. It would, however, normally expect a certain level of innovation from a market operator that wants to compete and be in the vanguard of the product market, in particular in the paper market, where many operators are large multinational producers. In past cases, the Commission concluded that “any paper producer that wishes to remain technologically and environmentally competitive in the long run has to make such investments in innovation from time to time” (13). The relatively small amounts of P&W paper manufactured from waste paper would seem to indicate that it is possible to implement such processes and that the technology exists. According to information available to the Commission the production of P&W papers using recycled fibre has increased by 6,8 % in 2004 (14). The production of P&W paper using recycled fibre is currently the fastest growing type of recycled paper in Europe. |
| --- | --- |

(28)

The UK authorities argue that the fact that very small amounts of P&W paper are made from recycled fibre in the EU, qualifies the investments as going beyond the current “state of the art”. The Commission is aware of technological barriers to increased rates of recycled fibres used in particular in P&W paper, like the de-inking of digital print, the removal of ashes with washers and the increased amount of bleaching, flotation, dispersion and sludge disposal. It would, however, normally expect a certain level of innovation from a market operator that wants to compete and be in the vanguard of the product market, in particular in the paper market, where many operators are large multinational producers. In past cases, the Commission concluded that “any paper producer that wishes to remain technologically and environmentally competitive in the long run has to make such investments in innovation from time to time” (13). The relatively small amounts of P&W paper manufactured from waste paper would seem to indicate that it is possible to implement such processes and that the technology exists. According to information available to the Commission the production of P&W papers using recycled fibre has increased by 6,8 % in 2004 (14). The production of P&W paper using recycled fibre is currently the fastest growing type of recycled paper in Europe.

| (29) | Therefore, the Commission has doubts that the justification used by the UK authorities that the current very low utilisation of recycled content in the production of P&W papers in the EU is enough to state that manufacturing P&W paper using recycle fibre goes beyond the current “state of the art” in the EU. |
| --- | --- |

(29)

Therefore, the Commission has doubts that the justification used by the UK authorities that the current very low utilisation of recycled content in the production of P&W papers in the EU is enough to state that manufacturing P&W paper using recycle fibre goes beyond the current “state of the art” in the EU.

Increasing collection rates?

| (30) | According to information available to the Commission, it seems that the current situation of the market of P&W waste paper is changing fast and that paper companies are becoming very interested on P&W waste paper due to its high quality (15). In fact, in Sweden it is expected that the recycling rate of office papers office will pass from 57 % in 2003 to 75 % in 2006. Given the situation on the waste paper market, it is reasonable to expect increased interest in waste P&W paper from paper producers. |
| --- | --- |

(30)

According to information available to the Commission, it seems that the current situation of the market of P&W waste paper is changing fast and that paper companies are becoming very interested on P&W waste paper due to its high quality (15). In fact, in Sweden it is expected that the recycling rate of office papers office will pass from 57 % in 2003 to 75 % in 2006. Given the situation on the waste paper market, it is reasonable to expect increased interest in waste P&W paper from paper producers.

| (31) | Therefore, the Commission has doubts that an increase in paper manufacturing capacity in the United Kingdom is needed to increase the collection demand. In the last years, there has been a big demand for waste paper in countries of East Asia. It would seem that such an increase has converted the United Kingdom to a net exporter of P&W waste paper. |
| --- | --- |

(31)

Therefore, the Commission has doubts that an increase in paper manufacturing capacity in the United Kingdom is needed to increase the collection demand. In the last years, there has been a big demand for waste paper in countries of East Asia. It would seem that such an increase has converted the United Kingdom to a net exporter of P&W waste paper.

| (32) | Therefore, the Commission has doubts about the necessity of aid for increasing the collection of P&W waste paper. |
| --- | --- |

(32)

Therefore, the Commission has doubts about the necessity of aid for increasing the collection of P&W waste paper.

Proper targeting to maximise environmental benefits?

| (33) | The Commission doubts whether the measure is properly targeted, ensuring the highest environmental benefits. The United Kingdom argues that the biggest environmental gains are obtained if high quality waste paper is used for high quality new paper, i.e. P&W paper. The Commission, however, wonders whether a more common approach like using P&W waste paper to manufacture other types of paper might have the same impact in the collection of paper from offices and, taking the broadest possible perspective, bring the same environmental benefits. |
| --- | --- |

(33)

The Commission doubts whether the measure is properly targeted, ensuring the highest environmental benefits. The United Kingdom argues that the biggest environmental gains are obtained if high quality waste paper is used for high quality new paper, i.e. P&W paper. The Commission, however, wonders whether a more common approach like using P&W waste paper to manufacture other types of paper might have the same impact in the collection of paper from offices and, taking the broadest possible perspective, bring the same environmental benefits.

Proper calculation of eligible investment cost?

| (34) | If it were appropriate to base the assessment directly on Article 87(3)(c), the Commission would draw a parallel to points 36 and 37 of the environmental aid guidelines to calculate the eligible cost. In accordance with these points, eligible cost must be confined to the extra investment costs necessary to meet the environmental objectives. |
| --- | --- |

(34)

If it were appropriate to base the assessment directly on Article 87(3)(c), the Commission would draw a parallel to points 36 and 37 of the environmental aid guidelines to calculate the eligible cost. In accordance with these points, eligible cost must be confined to the extra investment costs necessary to meet the environmental objectives.

| (35) | The method used by the UK authorities to calculate the eligible costs will be based on the premise that where the market would not give rise to the investment in question, then the relevant eligible costs are all the costs of the investment. Only those costs necessary to make the required investment, and to achieve the environmental objective, will be considered to be eligible and any net benefits during the first five years of production will be deducted. The cost of a reference investment which creates the same capacity but which does not provide the same environmental benefits, would not be subtracted. |
| --- | --- |

(35)

The method used by the UK authorities to calculate the eligible costs will be based on the premise that where the market would not give rise to the investment in question, then the relevant eligible costs are all the costs of the investment. Only those costs necessary to make the required investment, and to achieve the environmental objective, will be considered to be eligible and any net benefits during the first five years of production will be deducted. The cost of a reference investment which creates the same capacity but which does not provide the same environmental benefits, would not be subtracted.

| (36) | The Commission has doubts whether this interpretation is acceptable. Substantial parts of the selected investment projects might be essential as well for investment projects in similar production capacity that is not based on using waste P&W paper. In case of investment in new capacity, the whole investment cost would be necessary to obtain the environmental benefit, but it is not clear why the investment of a conventional plant should not be subtracted. Without taking account of such a reference investment, the cost calculation would be disproportioned. |
| --- | --- |

(36)

The Commission has doubts whether this interpretation is acceptable. Substantial parts of the selected investment projects might be essential as well for investment projects in similar production capacity that is not based on using waste P&W paper. In case of investment in new capacity, the whole investment cost would be necessary to obtain the environmental benefit, but it is not clear why the investment of a conventional plant should not be subtracted. Without taking account of such a reference investment, the cost calculation would be disproportioned.

Choice for the least distortive instrument?

| (37) | The United Kingdom has chosen to grant aid directly to the paper producers instead of to collection schemes, because it reduces it administrative costs and the amount of support. The Commission, however, doubts whether the measure proposed by the United Kingdom is the least distortive instrument to address the problem at stake. Other instruments, e.g. instruments that focus on the collection, are likely to less distort the markets of waste paper and of end products. |
| --- | --- |

(37)

The United Kingdom has chosen to grant aid directly to the paper producers instead of to collection schemes, because it reduces it administrative costs and the amount of support. The Commission, however, doubts whether the measure proposed by the United Kingdom is the least distortive instrument to address the problem at stake. Other instruments, e.g. instruments that focus on the collection, are likely to less distort the markets of waste paper and of end products.

4.   CONCLUSION

| (38) | In the light of the foregoing considerations, the Commission, acting under the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty, requests the United Kingdom to submit its comments and to provide all such information as may help to assess the aid, within one month of the date of receipt of this letter. It requests your authorities to forward a copy of this letter to the potential recipient of the aid immediately. |
| --- | --- |

(38)

In the light of the foregoing considerations, the Commission, acting under the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty, requests the United Kingdom to submit its comments and to provide all such information as may help to assess the aid, within one month of the date of receipt of this letter. It requests your authorities to forward a copy of this letter to the potential recipient of the aid immediately.

| (39) | The Commission wishes to remind the United Kingdom that Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty has suspensory effect, and would draw your attention to Article 14 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, which provides that all unlawful aid may be recovered from the recipient. |
| --- | --- |

(39)

The Commission wishes to remind the United Kingdom that Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty has suspensory effect, and would draw your attention to Article 14 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, which provides that all unlawful aid may be recovered from the recipient.

| (40) | The Commission warns the United Kingdom that it will inform interested parties by publishing this letter and a meaningful summary of it in the Official Journal of the European Union. It will also inform interested parties in the EFTA countries which are signatories to the EEA Agreement, by publication of a notice in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union and will inform the EFTA Surveillance Authority by sending a copy of this letter. All such interested parties will be invited to submit their comments within one month of the date of such publication.“ |
| --- | --- |

(40)

The Commission warns the United Kingdom that it will inform interested parties by publishing this letter and a meaningful summary of it in the Official Journal of the European Union. It will also inform interested parties in the EFTA countries which are signatories to the EEA Agreement, by publication of a notice in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union and will inform the EFTA Surveillance Authority by sending a copy of this letter. All such interested parties will be invited to submit their comments within one month of the date of such publication.“

---

(1)  ABl. C 37 vom 3.2.2001, S. 3.

1

(2)  ABl. C 74 vom 10.3.1998, S. 9.

2

(3)  ABl. L 102 vom 7.4.2004, S. 59. Das Vereinigte Königreich hat vor Kurzem eine Ausweitung und Verlängerung dieser Maßnahme angemeldet, die derzeit geprüft wird.

3

(4)  ABl. L 314 vom 28.11.2003, S. 26 bzw. ABl. L 53 vom 26.2.2005, S. 66. Auf die in diesen Fällen angewandten Kriterien wird auch im Jahresbericht über die Wettbewerbspolitik 2004 eingegangen.

4

(5)  OJ L 83, 27.3.1999, p. 1.

5

(6)  CEPI, Special Recycling 2004 Statistics. Page 5, available at http://www.cepi.org/files/Sp %20Rec %202005-135002A.pdf

6

(7)  OJ C 37, 3.2.2001, p. 3.

7

(8)  OJ C 74, 10.3.1998, p. 9.

8

(9)  E.g. Hamburger AG (C 72/01), Commission decision 9 April 2002, OJ L 296, 20.10.2002, p. 50.

9

Kartogroup (N184/2000), Commission decision 18 July 2001 available at

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids/industrie/n184-00.pdf

(10)  OJ L 102, 7.4.2004, p. 59. The waste products that are concerned under this scheme are wood, glass, plastics, aggregates and compost. The Commission noted that the objective of this measure is to encourage the development of waste recycling, which is a clear objective of the Community environmental policy. The Commission also noted that the aid does not subsidise ‚state of the art‘ techniques in the industries concerned, which are economically profitable and do not need State aid. Therefore, the Commission considered that this scheme was compatible with Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty.

10

(11)  OJ L 314, 28.11.2003, p. 26 and OJ L 53, 26.2.2005, p. 66 respectively. The criteria used in these cases are also commented upon in the Annual Competition report of 2004.

11

(12)  OJ L 314, 28.11.2003, p. 26 and OJ L 53, 26.2.2005, p.66 respectively. The criteria used in these cases are also commented upon in the Annual Competition report of 2004.

12

(13)  OJ L 53, 26.2.2005, p. 76.

13

(14)  CEPI, Special Recycling 2004 Statistics, p. 1.

14

(15)  This is, e.g., signalled in a study on recycling waste ‚Support in the drafting of an ExIA on the Thematic Strategy on the Prevention and Recycling of Waste‘ by EPEC, Page 82, available at http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/waste/pdf/epec_report_05.pdf, published by DG ENV.

15

---

| 14.1.2006 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | C 9/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

C 9/12

---

Keine Einwände gegen einen angemeldeten Zusammenschluss

(Sache COMP/M.4008 — Logista/Editorial Planeta/JV)

(2006/C 9/05)

(Text von Bedeutung für den EWR)

Am 16. Dezember 2005 hat die Kommission entschieden, keine Einwände gegen den obengenannten angemeldeten Zusammenschluss zu erheben und ihn insofern für mit dem Gemeinsamen Markt vereinbar zu erklären. Diese Entscheidung stützt sich auf Artikel 6 Absatz 1 Buchstabe b der Ratsverordnung (EG) Nr. 139/2004. Der vollständige Text der Entscheidung ist nur auf spanisch erhältlich und wird nach Herausnahme eventuell darin enthaltener Geschäftsgeheimnisse veröffentlicht. Er ist erhältlich:

| — | auf der Europa-Wettbewerb-Website (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). Diese Website ermöglicht, einzelne Entscheidungen der Fusionskontrolle aufzufinden, einschließlich Suchmöglichkeiten nach Unternehmen, Fallnummer, Datum und Sektor, |
| --- | --- |

—

auf der Europa-Wettbewerb-Website (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). Diese Website ermöglicht, einzelne Entscheidungen der Fusionskontrolle aufzufinden, einschließlich Suchmöglichkeiten nach Unternehmen, Fallnummer, Datum und Sektor,

| — | in elektronischem Format auf der EUR-Lex Website unter der Dokumentennummer 32005M4008. EUR-Lex ist der Online-Zugang für das Gemeinschaftsrecht. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in elektronischem Format auf der EUR-Lex Website unter der Dokumentennummer 32005M4008. EUR-Lex ist der Online-Zugang für das Gemeinschaftsrecht. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---

| 14.1.2006 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | C 9/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

C 9/12

---

Keine Einwände gegen einen angemeldeten Zusammenschluss

(Sache COMP/M.4058 — Logista/Planeta de Agostini/JV)

(2006/C 9/06)

(Text von Bedeutung für den EWR)

Am 16. Dezember 2005 hat die Kommission entschieden, keine Einwände gegen den obengenannten angemeldeten Zusammenschluss zu erheben und ihn insofern für mit dem Gemeinsamen Markt vereinbar zu erklären. Diese Entscheidung stützt sich auf Artikel 6 Absatz 1 Buchstabe b der Ratsverordnung (EG) Nr. 139/2004. Der vollständige Text der Entscheidung ist nur auf spanisch erhältlich und wird nach Herausnahme eventuell darin enthaltener Geschäftsgeheimnisse veröffentlicht. Er ist erhältlich:

| — | auf der Europa-Wettbewerb-Website (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). Diese Website ermöglicht, einzelne Entscheidungen der Fusionskontrolle aufzufinden, einschließlich Suchmöglichkeiten nach Unternehmen, Fallnummer, Datum und Sektor, |
| --- | --- |

—

auf der Europa-Wettbewerb-Website (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). Diese Website ermöglicht, einzelne Entscheidungen der Fusionskontrolle aufzufinden, einschließlich Suchmöglichkeiten nach Unternehmen, Fallnummer, Datum und Sektor,

| — | in elektronischem Format auf der EUR-Lex Website unter der Dokumentennummer 32005M4058. EUR-Lex ist der Online-Zugang für das Gemeinschaftsrecht. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in elektronischem Format auf der EUR-Lex Website unter der Dokumentennummer 32005M4058. EUR-Lex ist der Online-Zugang für das Gemeinschaftsrecht. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---

Berichtigungen

| 14.1.2006 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | C 9/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

C 9/13

---

Berichtigung der Mitteilung betreffend Feiertage 2006

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union C 336 vom 31. Dezember 2005
  )

(2006/C 9/07)

Auf Seite 2 wird hinter dem Wort „FRANCE“ das Datum „15.4.“ gestrichen.

---