# Europos Sąjungos C 9/2006

| | ISSN 1725-521X |
| --- | --- |
| Europos Sąjungos
  oficialusis leidinys | C 9 |
| | |
| Leidimas lietuvių kalba | Informacija ir prane_imai | 49 tomas2006m. sausio 14d. |

ISSN 1725-521X

Europos Sąjungos

oficialusis leidinys

C 9

Leidimas lietuvių kalba

Informacija ir prane_imai

49 tomas2006m. sausio 14d.

---

| Prane_imo Nr. | Turinys | Puslapis |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Informacija |
| | Komisija |
| 2006/C 009/1 | Euro kursas | 1 |
| 2006/C 009/2 | Leidimas teikti valstybės pagalbą remiantis EB sutarties 87 ir 88 straipsnių nuostatomis — Atvejai, kuriems Komisija neprieštarauja | 2 |
| 2006/C 009/3 | Leidimas teikti valstybės pagalbą remiantis EB sutarties 87 ir 88 straipsnių nuostatomis — Atvejai, kuriems Komisija neprieštarauja (
  1
  ) | 3 |
| 2006/C 009/4 | Valstybės pagalba — Jungtinė karalystė — Valstybės pagalba C 45/2005 (ex N 364/2005) — Veiksmų programos dėl atliekų ir išteklių: pagalbos priemonė spausdinimo perdirbimo įmonėms — Kvietimas pateikti pastabas pagal EB sutarties 88 straipsnio 2 dalį (
  1
  ) | 6 |
| 2006/C 009/5 | Neprieštaravimas praneštai koncentracijai (Byla Nr. COMP/M.4008 — Logista/Editorial Planeta/JV) (
  1
  ) | 12 |
| 2006/C 009/6 | Neprieštaravimas praneštai koncentracijai (Byla Nr. COMP/M.4058 — Logista/Planeta de Agostini/JV) (
  1
  ) | 12 |

Prane_imo Nr.

Turinys

Puslapis

I   Informacija

Komisija

2006/C 009/1

Euro kursas

1

2006/C 009/2

Leidimas teikti valstybės pagalbą remiantis EB sutarties 87 ir 88 straipsnių nuostatomis — Atvejai, kuriems Komisija neprieštarauja

2

2006/C 009/3

Leidimas teikti valstybės pagalbą remiantis EB sutarties 87 ir 88 straipsnių nuostatomis — Atvejai, kuriems Komisija neprieštarauja (
  1
  )

1

3

2006/C 009/4

Valstybės pagalba — Jungtinė karalystė — Valstybės pagalba C 45/2005 (ex N 364/2005) — Veiksmų programos dėl atliekų ir išteklių: pagalbos priemonė spausdinimo perdirbimo įmonėms — Kvietimas pateikti pastabas pagal EB sutarties 88 straipsnio 2 dalį (
  1
  )

1

6

2006/C 009/5

Neprieštaravimas praneštai koncentracijai (Byla Nr. COMP/M.4008 — Logista/Editorial Planeta/JV) (
  1
  )

1

12

2006/C 009/6

Neprieštaravimas praneštai koncentracijai (Byla Nr. COMP/M.4058 — Logista/Planeta de Agostini/JV) (
  1
  )

1

12

| | Klaidų ištaisymas |
| --- | --- |
| 2006/C 009/7 | Pranešimo 2006 m. šventės klaidų ištaisymas (OL C 336, 2005 12 31) | 13 |

Klaidų ištaisymas

2006/C 009/7

Pranešimo 2006 m. šventės klaidų ištaisymas (OL C 336, 2005 12 31)

(OL C 336, 2005 12 31)

13

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Tekstas svarbus EEE |

---

(1)   Tekstas svarbus EEE

1

| LT | |
| --- | --- |

LT

---

I Informacija

Komisija

| 14.1.2006 | LT | Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys | C 9/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

LT

Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys

C 9/1

---

Euro kursas (1)

2006 m. sausio 13 d.

(2006/C 9/01)

1 euro=

| | Valiuta | Valiutos kursas |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | JAV doleris | 1,2039 |
| JPY | Japonijos jena | 138,13 |
| DKK | Danijos krona | 7,4592 |
| GBP | Svaras sterlingas | 0,68140 |
| SEK | Švedijos krona | 9,3063 |
| CHF | Šveicarijos frankas | 1,5491 |
| ISK | Islandijos krona | 74,01 |
| NOK | Norvegijos krona | 8,0475 |
| BGN | Bulgarijos levas | 1,9558 |
| CYP | Kipro svaras | 0,5737 |
| CZK | Čekijos krona | 28,840 |
| EEK | Estijos kronos | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Vengrijos forintas | 250,51 |
| LTL | Lietuvos litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvijos latas | 0,6960 |
| MTL | Maltos lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | Lenkijos zlotas | 3,8138 |
| RON | Rumunijos lėja | 3,6308 |
| SIT | Slovėnijos tolaras | 239,49 |
| SKK | Slovakijos krona | 37,520 |
| TRY | Turkijos lira | 1,6160 |
| AUD | Australijos doleris | 1,6040 |
| CAD | Kanados doleris | 1,3972 |
| HKD | Honkongo doleris | 9,3316 |
| NZD | Naujosios Zelandijos doleris | 1,7344 |
| SGD | Singapūro doleris | 1,9648 |
| KRW | Pietų Korėjos vonas | 1 189,03 |
| ZAR | Pietų Afrikos randas | 7,3170 |
| CNY | Kinijos ženminbi juanis | 9,7144 |
| HRK | Kroatijos kuna | 7,3750 |
| IDR | Indijos rupija | 11 282,95 |
| MYR | Malaizijos ringitas | 4,502 |
| PHP | Filipinų pesas | 63,072 |
| RUB | Rusijos rublis | 34,3200 |
| THB | Tailando batas | 47,643 |

Valiuta

Valiutos kursas

USD

JAV doleris

1,2039

JPY

Japonijos jena

138,13

DKK

Danijos krona

7,4592

GBP

Svaras sterlingas

0,68140

SEK

Švedijos krona

9,3063

CHF

Šveicarijos frankas

1,5491

ISK

Islandijos krona

74,01

NOK

Norvegijos krona

8,0475

BGN

Bulgarijos levas

1,9558

CYP

Kipro svaras

0,5737

CZK

Čekijos krona

28,840

EEK

Estijos kronos

15,6466

HUF

Vengrijos forintas

250,51

LTL

Lietuvos litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvijos latas

0,6960

MTL

Maltos lira

0,4293

PLN

Lenkijos zlotas

3,8138

RON

Rumunijos lėja

3,6308

SIT

Slovėnijos tolaras

239,49

SKK

Slovakijos krona

37,520

TRY

Turkijos lira

1,6160

AUD

Australijos doleris

1,6040

CAD

Kanados doleris

1,3972

HKD

Honkongo doleris

9,3316

NZD

Naujosios Zelandijos doleris

1,7344

SGD

Singapūro doleris

1,9648

KRW

Pietų Korėjos vonas

1 189,03

ZAR

Pietų Afrikos randas

7,3170

CNY

Kinijos ženminbi juanis

9,7144

HRK

Kroatijos kuna

7,3750

IDR

Indijos rupija

11 282,95

MYR

Malaizijos ringitas

4,502

PHP

Filipinų pesas

63,072

RUB

Rusijos rublis

34,3200

THB

Tailando batas

47,643

---

(1)

Šaltinis: valiutų perskaičiavimo kursai paskelbti ECB.

---

| 14.1.2006 | LT | Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys | C 9/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

LT

Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys

C 9/2

---

Leidimas teikti valstybės pagalbą remiantis EB sutarties 87 ir 88 straipsnių nuostatomis

Atvejai, kuriems Komisija neprieštarauja

(2006/C 9/02)

Sprendimo priėmimo data:

Valstybė narė: Vokietija (Schleswig-Holstein)

Pagalbos Nr.: 9/2004

Pavadinimas: Pagalba skerdenoms sunaikinti

Tikslas: atlyginti gyvulių augintojams už ūkiuose kritusių gyvulių šalinimą

Teisinis pagrindas:

| — | 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.)

Biudžetas: 5,5 milijono EUR per metus

Pagalbos intensyvumas: 100 %

Trukmė: iki 2013 m.

Sprendimo autentišką tekstą be konfidencialių duomenų galima rasti adresu:

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

---

| 14.1.2006 | LT | Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys | C 9/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

LT

Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys

C 9/3

---

Leidimas teikti valstybės pagalbą remiantis EB sutarties 87 ir 88 straipsnių nuostatomis

Atvejai, kuriems Komisija neprieštarauja

(2006/C 9/03)

(Tekstas svarbus EEE)

Sprendimo priėmimo data:

Valstybė narė: Nyderlandai

Pagalbos Nr.: N 127/2004

Pavadinimas: Plekšnių reklamos priemonės

Tikslas: Finansuoti plekšnių reklamos priemones iš parafiskalinių mokesčių

Teisinis pagrindas:

| — | 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

Biudžetas: 200 000 EUR per metus

Trukmė: Neribota (apie schemą bus naujai pranešta Komisijai ne vėliau kaip po dešimties metų skaičiuojant nuo jos įsigaliojimo)

Pagalbos forma ir intensyvumas: Neviršijant valstybės pagalbos žuvininkystės ir akvakultūros sektoriui tyrimo gairėse nustatytų sumų ribų (OL C 19, 2001 1 20, p. 7)

Kita informacija: Metinė ataskaita

Sprendimo autentišką tekstą be konfidencialių duomenų galima rasti adresu:

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

Priėmimo data:

Valstybė narė: Ispanija (Principado de Asturias)

Pagalbos Nr.: N 173/2005

Pagalbos pavadinimas: 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

Tikslas: Moksliniai tyrimai ir technologijų plėtra (Visi sektoriai)

Teisinis pagrindas: 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

Biudžetas:

| | 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

Pagalbos intensyvumas arba suma: 35 % — 60 % — + 10 % — 75 % — 50 %

Trukmė:

Sprendimo autentišką tekstą be konfidencialių duomenų galima rasti adresu:

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

Priėmimo data:

Valstybė narė: Danija

Pagalbos Nr.: N 229/2005

Pagalbos pavadinimas: Regionale Teknologicentre

Tikslas: Moksliniai tyrimai ir technologijų plėtra (Visi sektoriai)

Teisinis pagrindas: Lov nr. 419 af 6.6.2002

Biudžetas:

| | 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

Pagalbos intensyvumas arba suma: 60 %

Trukmė:

Sprendimo autentišką tekstą be konfidencialių duomenų galima rasti adresu:

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

Sprendimo priėmimo data:

Valstybė narė: Slovakija

Pagalbos Nr.: N 298/2005

Pavadinimas: Individuali pagalba TYZAM s.r.o. garso ir vaizdo medžiagos gamybai

Tikslas: parama filmų gamybai

Teisinis pagrindas:

| 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

Biudžetas: 7 mln. SKK

Pagalbos intensyvumas arba suma: 20 %

Trukmė: vienkartinė priemonė gavus patvirtinimą (2005 12 31)

Sprendimo autentišką tekstą be konfidencialių duomenų galima rasti adresu:

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

Sprendimo priėmimo data:

Valstybė narė: Slovakija

Pagalbos Nr.: N 299/2005

Pavadinimas: Individuali pagalba TaO Productions s.r.o. garso ir vaizdo medžiagos gamybai

Tikslas: parama filmų gamybai

Teisinis pagrindas:

| 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

Biudžetas: 8 mln. SKK

Pagalbos intensyvumas arba suma: 10 %

Trukmė: vienkartinė priemonė gavus patvirtinimą (2005 12 31)

Sprendimo autentišką tekstą be konfidencialių duomenų galima rasti adresu:

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

Sprendimo priėmimo data:

Valstybė narė: Slovakija

Pagalbos Nr.: N 300/2005

Pavadinimas: Individuali pagalba ALEF Film & Media Group s.r.o. garso ir vaizdo medžiagos gamybai

Tikslas: parama filmų gamybai

Teisinis pagrindas:

| 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

Biudžetas: 11 mln. SKK

Pagalbos intensyvumas arba suma: 26,2 %

Trukmė: vienkartinė priemonė gavus patvirtinimą (2005 12 31)

Sprendimo autentišką tekstą be konfidencialių duomenų galima rasti adresu:

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

Sprendimo priėmimo data:

Valstybė narė: Prancūzija

Pagalbos Nr.: N 337/2004 ir N 378/2004

Pavadinimas: Mokesčių ir biudžeto asignavimų pagalba finansuoti pramonės technikos centrus ir ekonominio vystymosi profesinius centrus

Tikslas: Bendri įmonių, veikiančių mechanikos gaminių, vartojimo prekių ir statybinių medžiagų sektoriuose, mokslinių tyrimų ir technologijų plėtros, standartizavimo, mokymo, skatinimo ir informavimo veiksmai

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

Trukmė: Nuo Komisijos leidimo išdavimo datos iki 2010 m. gruodžio 31 d.

Kita informacija: Pagalbos gavėjas: Pramonės technikos centrai ir ekonominio vystymosi profesiniai centrai mechanikos gaminių, vartojimo prekių ir statybinių medžiagų sektoriuose

Sprendimo autentišką tekstą be konfidencialių duomenų galima rasti adresu:

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

Sprendimo priėmimo data:

Valstybė narė: Danija

Pagalbos Nr.: N 374/2002

Pavadinimas: Pagalba, skirta žvejybos uostų įrangai, skiriama pagal Bendrijos struktūrinės pagalbos, priskiriamos ŽOFI, sistemą 2000 — 2006 metams

Tikslas: Bendras struktūrinių priemonių, susijusių su Danijos žvejybos uostų įranga, finansavimas 2000 — 2006 metais

Teisinis pagrindas:

| — | 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

Biudžetas: 27 mln. EUR

Trukmė: 2000 — 2006 metai

Pagalbos forma ir intensyvumas: Neviršijant Reglamente (EB) Nr. 2792/1999 nustatytų sumų ribų

Kita informacija: Metinė ataskaita

Sprendimo autentišką tekstą be konfidencialių duomenų galima rasti adresu:

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

Priėmimo data:

Pagalbos Nr.: N 465/2005

Valstybė narė: Nyderlandų Karalystė

Pavadinimas: 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

Teisinis pagrindas: 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

Tikslas: Mokymas

Bendra pagalbos suma: 53 mln. EUR

Planuojamos metinės išlaidos:

| | 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

Trukmė: 2006 01 01 — 2008 12 31

Kita informacija:

| | Priemonės tipas: Schema |
| --- | --- |

Priemonės tipas: Schema

| | Pagalbos forma: Tiesioginė dotacija |
| --- | --- |

Pagalbos forma: Tiesioginė dotacija

Sprendimo autentišką tekstą be konfidencialių duomenų galima rasti adresu:

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

Sprendimo priėmimo data:

Valstybė narė: Ispanija

Pagalbos Nr.: N 499/2004

Pavadinimas: Pagalbos schema išžvalgymui, aplinkos apsaugai ir kasybos saugumui, išgaunant neenergetines rūdas

Tikslas: Neenergetinių rūdų sektorius. Pagalbos schemos pakeitimai, kuriems Komisija pritarė 2002 m. birželio 19 d. Pagalbos formų ir intensyvumo pakeitimai rūdų išžvalgymo sektoriuje, kuriais kasybos veiklą siekiama padaryti patrauklesne

Pagalbos intensyvumas arba suma: Pagalba išžvalgymui: negrąžinama išmoka, dengianti iki 20 % reikalavimus atitinkančių išlaidų (30 % mažoms ir vidutinėms įmonėms) ir (arba) be procentų grąžintinas avansas, dengiantis iki 60 % reikalavimus atitinkančių išlaidų (70 % mažoms ir vidutinėms įmonėms)

Trukmė:

Sprendimo autentišką tekstą be konfidencialių duomenų galima rasti adresu:

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

Sprendimo priėmimo data:

Valstybė narė: Vokietija

Pagalbos Nr.: NN 44/2004

Pavadinimas: Sanavimo pagalba „SVZ Schwarze Pumpe“

Tikslas: Sanavimo pagalba

Teisinis pagrindas: §2(3) Förderbankgesetz

Suma: 21,028 mln. EUR

Trukmė: Iki 2005 05 31

Sprendimo autentišką tekstą be konfidencialių duomenų galima rasti adresu:

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

---

| 14.1.2006 | LT | Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys | C 9/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

LT

Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys

C 9/6

---

VALSTYBĖS PAGALBA — JUNGTINĖ KARALYSTĖ

Valstybės pagalba C 45/2005 (ex N 364/2005) — Veiksmų programos dėl atliekų ir išteklių: pagalbos priemonė spausdinimo perdirbimo įmonėms

Kvietimas pateikti pastabas pagal EB sutarties 88 straipsnio 2 dalį

(2006/C 9/04)

(Tekstas svarbus EEE)

Prie šios santraukos pridėtu 2005m. grudžio 12 d. autentiška kalba parengtu laišku Komisija pranešė Jungtinei Karalystei apie savo sprendimą pradėti EB Sutarties 88 straipsnio 2 dalyje numatytą procedūrą dėl pirmiau minėtos priemonės.

Suinteresuotosios šalys gali pateikti pastabas per mėnesį nuo šios santraukos ir prie jos pridėto laiško paskelbimo dienos šiuo adresu:

| Commission européenne |
| --- |
| Direction générale de la Concurrence |
| Greffe des aides d'État |
| SPA 3, 6/05 |
| B-1049 Bruxelles |
| Faksas (32 2) 296 1242 |

Commission européenne

Direction générale de la Concurrence

Greffe des aides d'État

SPA 3, 6/05

B-1049 Bruxelles

Faksas (32 2) 296 1242

Šios pastabos bus perduotos Jungtinei Karalystei. Pastabas pateikianti suinteresuotoji šalis gali pateikti pagrįstą raštišką prašymą neatskleisti jos tapatybės.

SANTRAUKA

2005 m. liepos mėn. JK pranešė Komisijai apie investicinę pagalbos schemą spausdinimo popieriaus gamybos iš makulatūros pluošto gamybinių pajėgumų didinimui.

1.   Priemonės aprašymas

Jungtinėje Karalystėje makulatūra iš biurų nėra renkama ir perdirbama. Siekiant pagerinti šią situaciją už veiksmų programą dėl atliekų ir išteklių (WRAP) atsakinga valstybės institucija planuoja suteikti dotacijas popieriaus fabrikams. Šiomis dotacijomis bus skatinamas makulatūros rinkimas biuruose, skiriant bendrą finansavimą perdirbamo spausdinimo popieriaus apimties didinimui popieriaus fabrikuose. Savo ruožtu popieriaus gamintojai turi įsipareigoti naudoti didesnį makulatūros kiekį iš surinkto atliekų srauto, naudojant nustatytą mažiausią kiekį biuruose surinktos spausdinimo popieriaus makulatūros. Siekiant geriau panaudoti surinktą spausdinimo popieriaus makulatūrą, naujo spausdinimo popieriaus gamybai bus naudojami padidinti popieriaus gamybos pajėgumai.

Konkurse bus atsižvelgta į naujų, įprastais technikos laimėjimais neapsiribojančių technologijų panaudojimą, demonstravimą ir inovacijas, siekiant skatinti atliekų perdirbimo tvarių procesų plėtrą. Numatomas pagalbos schemos biudžetas yra 6–20 mln. GBP. Kadangi pagalbos lygiai bus apibrėžiami konkurso metu, pagalbos intensyvumas dar nėra žinomas. Pagalbą tikisi gauti mažiau kaip dešimt popieriaus gamintojų. JK valdžios institucijos planuoja suteikti pagalbą iki 2006 m. balandžio mėn.

2.   Priemonės įvertinimas

Gairių dėl pagalbos aplinkos apsaugai (1) atžvilgiu Komisija abejoja, ar pagalbos schemai taikomas 29 gairių punktas, nes investicijos į naujus popieriaus gamybos įrenginius nesumažins pačių įmonių sukeltos aplinkos taršos. Naudos gavėjai greičiau naudos bet kurio popieriaus gamintojo makulatūrą.

Kitų nei aplinkos apsaugos pagalbos gairės taisyklių atžvilgiu Komisija taip pat abejoja, ar kitos EB sutarties 87 straipsnio 2 ir 3 dalyse nustatytos išimtys gali būti taikomos. Tačiau naudos gavėjai dar nėra išrinkti, todėl neįmanoma įvertinti, ar bus investuojama srityse, atitinkančiose regioninės pagalbos teikimo reikalavimus ir ar bus taikomos visos nacionalinės regioninės pagalbos teikimo gairės (2), ar jų dalis.

Jei gairės dėl pagalbos aplinkos apsaugai nebus taikomos, Komisija turės atlikti įvertinimą tiesiogiai remdamasi 87 straipsnio 3 dalies c punktu. Praeityje Komisija jau yra taikiusi šį metodą perdirbimo schemai (3) ir dviem kitais atvejais popieriaus pramonėje (4). Komisijos taikomi kriterijai buvo pagrįsti skatinančiu pagalbos poveikiu ir tuo, ar aplinkos gerinimui reikalingos investicijos neapsiriboja įprastais technikos laimėjimais ES lygiu.

Kitais atvejais, kai Komisija atliko investicinės pagalbos popieriaus perdirbimo pajėgumams įvertinimą, Komisijos taikomi kriterijai buvo pagrįsti skatinančiu pagalbos poveikiu ir tuo, ar investicijos aplinkos gerinimui neapsiriboja įprastais technikos laimėjimais ES lygiu. Komisija abejoja, ar JK valdžios institucijų pateikto pateisinimo, kad šiuo metu ES gaminant spausdinimo popierių perdirbama labai nedaug makulatūros, pakanka nuspręsti, kad spausdinimo popieriaus gamyba, naudojant makulatūros pluoštą neapsiriboja įprastais technikos laimėjimais ES lygiu.

Komisijai kyla abejonių dėl pagalbos priemonės skatinamojo poveikio spausdinimo popieriaus makulatūros rinkimui.

Komisija taip pat abejoja, ar spausdinimo popieriaus gamyba iš tokio popieriaus makulatūros duos daugiau naudos aplinkai palyginti su labiau paplitusiu metodu naudojant spausdinimo popieriaus makulatūrą kitų popieriaus rūšių gamybai.

Be to, Komisija abejoja, ar reikalavimus atitinkančios išlaidos bus tik papildomos investicinės išlaidos, reikalingos siekiant aplinkosaugos tikslų, nes JK neplanuoja iš reikalavimus atitinkančių investicinių išlaidų atimti investicijų į palyginamuosius pajėgumus, kuriais nebūtų pasiekta tokia pat nauda aplinkai. Taigi neaišku, ar suteikus pagalbą investicijoms į naujus spausdinimo popieriaus gamybos, naudojant tokio popieriaus makulatūrą, pajėgumus, įprastinio spausdinimo popieriaus gamybos fabriko statybos išlaidos bus atimamos.

Galiausiai Komisija abejoja, ar sprendžiant šią problemą JK siūloma priemonė mažiausiai iškraipo rinką. Kitos priemonės, t. y. tos, kurios orientuotos į makulatūros rinkimą, gali mažiau iškraipyti makulatūros ir galutinių produktų rinkas.

3.   Išvada

Atsižvelgiant į ankstesnius svarstymus, Komisija nusprendė pradėti procedūrą pagal EB sutarties 88 straipsnio 2 dalį. Suinteresuotosios šalys kviečiamos pateikti savo pastabas, ypač dėl 1) to, ką laikyti įprastais technikos laimėjimais, naujo spausdinimo popieriaus gamybai naudojant tokio popieriaus makulatūrą, 2) pagalbos būtinumo, atsižvelgiant į planuojamą surenkamos spausdinimo popieriaus makulatūros kiekio padidėjimą, 3) tikėtino konkurencijos iškraipymo laipsnio tiek naujo popieriaus, tiek makulatūros rinkose ir 4) naudos aplinkai, kurią galima pasiekti priemone, apie kurią pranešta, palyginti su nauda, kurią galima pasiekti kitomis priemonėmis.

RAŠTO TEKSTAS

„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)  OL C 37, 2001 2 3, p. 3.

1

(2)  OL C 74, 1998 3 10, p. 3.

2

(3)  OL L 102, 2004 4 7, p. 59. JK neseniai pranešė apie šios dabar vertinamos schemos išplėtimą ir pratęsimą.

3

(4)  OL L314, 200311 28, p.26 ir OL L 53, 2005 2 26, p. 66. Šiais atvejais taikyti kriterijai taip pat aiškinami 2004 metų konkurencijos ataskaitoje.

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 | LT | Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys | C 9/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

LT

Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys

C 9/12

---

Neprieštaravimas praneštai koncentracijai

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

(2006/C 9/05)

(Tekstas svarbus EEE)

2005 m. gruodžio 16 d. Komisija nusprendė neprieštarauti dėl pavadinime praneštos koncentracijos ir paskelbti ją suderinama su bendrąja rinka. Šis sprendimas priimamas remiantis Tarybos reglamento (EB) Nr. 139/2004 6 straipsnio 1 dalies b punktu. Visas šio sprendimo tekstas yra ispanų. Sprendimas bus viešai paskelbtas tada, kai iš jo bus pašalinta profesine paslaptimi laikoma informacija. Sprendimą bus galima rasti:

| — | Europa interneto svetainės konkurencijos skiltyje (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). Ši svetainė suteikia galimybę rasti atskirus sprendimus dėl koncentracijos, įskaitant tokių sprendimų indeksus pagal įmonės pavadinimą, bylos numerį, priėmimo datą ir sektorių. |
| --- | --- |

—

Europa interneto svetainės konkurencijos skiltyje (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). Ši svetainė suteikia galimybę rasti atskirus sprendimus dėl koncentracijos, įskaitant tokių sprendimų indeksus pagal įmonės pavadinimą, bylos numerį, priėmimo datą ir sektorių.

| — | elektroniniu formatu EUR-Lex interneto svetainėje 32005M4008 dokumento numeriu. EUR-Lex svetainėje galima rasti įvairius Europos teisės dokumentus. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

elektroniniu formatu EUR-Lex interneto svetainėje 32005M4008 dokumento numeriu. EUR-Lex svetainėje galima rasti įvairius Europos teisės dokumentus. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---

| 14.1.2006 | LT | Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys | C 9/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

LT

Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys

C 9/12

---

Neprieštaravimas praneštai koncentracijai

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

(2006/C 9/06)

(Tekstas svarbus EEE)

2005 m. gruodžio 16 d. Komisija nusprendė neprieštarauti dėl pavadinime praneštos koncentracijos ir paskelbti ją suderinama su bendrąja rinka. Šis sprendimas priimamas remiantis Tarybos reglamento (EB) Nr. 139/2004 6 straipsnio 1 dalies b punktu. Visas šio sprendimo tekstas yra ispanų. Sprendimas bus viešai paskelbtas tada, kai iš jo bus pašalinta profesine paslaptimi laikoma informacija. Sprendimą bus galima rasti:

| — | Europa interneto svetainės konkurencijos skiltyje (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). Ši svetainė suteikia galimybę rasti atskirus sprendimus dėl koncentracijos, įskaitant tokių sprendimų indeksus pagal įmonės pavadinimą, bylos numerį, priėmimo datą ir sektorių. |
| --- | --- |

—

Europa interneto svetainės konkurencijos skiltyje (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). Ši svetainė suteikia galimybę rasti atskirus sprendimus dėl koncentracijos, įskaitant tokių sprendimų indeksus pagal įmonės pavadinimą, bylos numerį, priėmimo datą ir sektorių.

| — | elektroniniu formatu EUR-Lex interneto svetainėje 32005M4058 dokumento numeriu. EUR-Lex svetainėje galima rasti įvairius Europos teisės dokumentus. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

elektroniniu formatu EUR-Lex interneto svetainėje 32005M4058 dokumento numeriu. EUR-Lex svetainėje galima rasti įvairius Europos teisės dokumentus. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---

Klaidų ištaisymas

| 14.1.2006 | LT | Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys | C 9/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

LT

Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys

C 9/13

---

Pranešimo „2006 m. šventės“ klaidų ištaisymas

(
  Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys C 336, 2005 m. gruodžio 31 d.
  )

(2006/C 9/07)

2 puslapyje po įrašo „FRANCE“ išbraukti „15.4,“.

---