# Eiropas Savienības C 9/2006

| | ISSN 1725-5201 |
| --- | --- |
| Eiropas Savienības
  Oficiālais Vēstnesis | C 9 |
| | |
| Izdevums latviešu valodā | Informācija un paziņojumi | 49. sējums2006. gada 14. janvāris |

ISSN 1725-5201

Eiropas Savienības

Oficiālais Vēstnesis

C 9

Izdevums latviešu valodā

Informācija un paziņojumi

49. sējums2006. gada 14. janvāris

---

| Paziņojums Nr. | Saturs | Lappuse |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Informācija |
| | Komisija |
| 2006/C 009/1 | Eiro maiņas kurss | 1 |
| 2006/C 009/2 | Valsts atbalsts ir atļauts saskaņā ar EK Līguma 87. un 88. panta noteikumiem — Gadījumi, pret kuriem Komisijai nav iebildumu | 2 |
| 2006/C 009/3 | Valsts atbalsts ir atļauts saskaņā ar EK Līguma 87. un 88. panta noteikumiem — Gadījumi, pret kuriem Komisijai nav iebildumu (
  1
  ) | 3 |
| 2006/C 009/4 | Valsts Atbalsts — Apvienotā Karaliste — Valsts Atbalsts C 45/2005 (ex N 364/2005) — rīcības programmas par atkritumiem un resursiem: atbalsts drukājamā un rakstāmā papīra pārstrādes jaudas palielināšanai — Uzaicinājums iesniegt apsvērumus saskaņā ar Eiropas Kopienas Līguma 88. panta 2. punktu (
  1
  ) | 6 |
| 2006/C 009/5 | Iebildumu necelšana pret paziņoto koncentrāciju (Lieta Nr. COMP/M.4008 — Logista/Editorial Planeta/JV) (
  1
  ) | 12 |
| 2006/C 009/6 | Iebildumu necelšana pret paziņoto koncentrāciju (Lieta Nr. COMP/M.4058 — Logista/Planeta de Agostini/JV) (
  1
  ) | 12 |

Paziņojums Nr.

Saturs

Lappuse

I   Informācija

Komisija

2006/C 009/1

Eiro maiņas kurss

1

2006/C 009/2

Valsts atbalsts ir atļauts saskaņā ar EK Līguma 87. un 88. panta noteikumiem — Gadījumi, pret kuriem Komisijai nav iebildumu

2

2006/C 009/3

Valsts atbalsts ir atļauts saskaņā ar EK Līguma 87. un 88. panta noteikumiem — Gadījumi, pret kuriem Komisijai nav iebildumu (
  1
  )

1

3

2006/C 009/4

Valsts Atbalsts — Apvienotā Karaliste — Valsts Atbalsts C 45/2005 (ex N 364/2005) — rīcības programmas par atkritumiem un resursiem: atbalsts drukājamā un rakstāmā papīra pārstrādes jaudas palielināšanai — Uzaicinājums iesniegt apsvērumus saskaņā ar Eiropas Kopienas Līguma 88. panta 2. punktu (
  1
  )

1

6

2006/C 009/5

Iebildumu necelšana pret paziņoto koncentrāciju (Lieta Nr. COMP/M.4008 — Logista/Editorial Planeta/JV) (
  1
  )

1

12

2006/C 009/6

Iebildumu necelšana pret paziņoto koncentrāciju (Lieta Nr. COMP/M.4058 — Logista/Planeta de Agostini/JV) (
  1
  )

1

12

| | Labojumi |
| --- | --- |
| 2006/C 009/7 | Labojums paziņojumā Svētku dienas 2006(OV C 336, 31.12.2005.) | 13 |

Labojumi

2006/C 009/7

Labojums paziņojumā Svētku dienas 2006(OV C 336, 31.12.2005.)

(OV C 336, 31.12.2005.)

13

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Dokuments attiecas uz EEZ |

---

(1)   Dokuments attiecas uz EEZ

1

| LV | |
| --- | --- |

LV

---

I Informācija

Komisija

| 14.1.2006 | LV | Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis | C 9/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

LV

Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis

C 9/1

---

Eiro maiņas kurss (1)

2006. gada 13. janvāris

(2006/C 9/01)

1 eiro=

| | Valūta | Maiņas kurss |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | ASV dolārs | 1,2039 |
| JPY | Japānas jēna | 138,13 |
| DKK | Dānijas krona | 7,4592 |
| GBP | Lielbritānijas mārciņa | 0,68140 |
| SEK | Zviedrijas krona | 9,3063 |
| CHF | Šveices franks | 1,5491 |
| ISK | Islandes krona | 74,01 |
| NOK | Norvēģijas krona | 8,0475 |
| BGN | Bulgārijas Ieva | 1,9558 |
| CYP | Kipras mārciņa | 0,5737 |
| CZK | Čehijas krona | 28,840 |
| EEK | Igaunijas krona | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Ungārijas forints | 250,51 |
| LTL | Lietuvas lits | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvijas lats | 0,6960 |
| MTL | Maltas lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | Polijas zlots | 3,8138 |
| RON | Rumānijas leja | 3,6308 |
| SIT | Slovēnijas tolērs | 239,49 |
| SKK | Slovākijas krona | 37,520 |
| TRY | Turcijas lira | 1,6160 |
| AUD | Austrālijas dolārs | 1,6040 |
| CAD | Kanādas dolārs | 1,3972 |
| HKD | Hongkongas dolārs | 9,3316 |
| NZD | Jaunzēlandes dolārs | 1,7344 |
| SGD | Singapūras dolārs | 1,9648 |
| KRW | Dienvidkorejas vons | 1 189,03 |
| ZAR | Dienvidāfrikas rands | 7,3170 |
| CNY | Ķīnas juaņa renminbi | 9,7144 |
| HRK | Horvātijas kuna | 7,3750 |
| IDR | Indonēzijas rūpija | 11 282,95 |
| MYR | Malaizijas ringits | 4,502 |
| PHP | Filipīnu peso | 63,072 |
| RUB | Krievijas rublis | 34,3200 |
| THB | Taizemes bats | 47,643 |

Valūta

Maiņas kurss

USD

ASV dolārs

1,2039

JPY

Japānas jēna

138,13

DKK

Dānijas krona

7,4592

GBP

Lielbritānijas mārciņa

0,68140

SEK

Zviedrijas krona

9,3063

CHF

Šveices franks

1,5491

ISK

Islandes krona

74,01

NOK

Norvēģijas krona

8,0475

BGN

Bulgārijas Ieva

1,9558

CYP

Kipras mārciņa

0,5737

CZK

Čehijas krona

28,840

EEK

Igaunijas krona

15,6466

HUF

Ungārijas forints

250,51

LTL

Lietuvas lits

3,4528

LVL

Latvijas lats

0,6960

MTL

Maltas lira

0,4293

PLN

Polijas zlots

3,8138

RON

Rumānijas leja

3,6308

SIT

Slovēnijas tolērs

239,49

SKK

Slovākijas krona

37,520

TRY

Turcijas lira

1,6160

AUD

Austrālijas dolārs

1,6040

CAD

Kanādas dolārs

1,3972

HKD

Hongkongas dolārs

9,3316

NZD

Jaunzēlandes dolārs

1,7344

SGD

Singapūras dolārs

1,9648

KRW

Dienvidkorejas vons

1 189,03

ZAR

Dienvidāfrikas rands

7,3170

CNY

Ķīnas juaņa renminbi

9,7144

HRK

Horvātijas kuna

7,3750

IDR

Indonēzijas rūpija

11 282,95

MYR

Malaizijas ringits

4,502

PHP

Filipīnu peso

63,072

RUB

Krievijas rublis

34,3200

THB

Taizemes bats

47,643

---

(1)

Datu avots: atsauces maiņas kursu publicējusi ECB.

---

| 14.1.2006 | LV | Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis | C 9/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

LV

Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis

C 9/2

---

Valsts atbalsts ir atļauts saskaņā ar EK Līguma 87. un 88. panta noteikumiem

Gadījumi, pret kuriem Komisijai nav iebildumu

(2006/C 9/02)

Lēmuma pieņemšanas datums:

Dalībvalsts: Vācija (Šlēsviga-Holšteina)

Atbalsta Nr: N 9/2004

Nosaukums: Atbalsts kautķermeņu iznīcināšanai

Mērķis: izmaksāt kompensācijas lopkopjiem par mirušo lopu iznīcināšanu fermu līmenī

Tiesiskais pamats:

| — | 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.)

Budžets: 5,5 miljoni EUR gadā

Atbalsta intensitāte: 100 %

Izpildes laiks: līdz 2013. gadam

Lēmuma teksts autentiskā(s) valodā(s), no kura ir izņemta konfidenciālā informācija, ir pieejams šajā tīmekļa vietnē:

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

---

| 14.1.2006 | LV | Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis | C 9/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

LV

Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis

C 9/3

---

Valsts atbalsts ir atļauts saskaņā ar EK Līguma 87. un 88. panta noteikumiem

Gadījumi, pret kuriem Komisijai nav iebildumu

(2006/C 9/03)

(Dokuments attiecas uz EEZ)

Lēmuma pieņemšanas diena:

Dalībvalsts: Nīderlande

Atbalsta Nr.: N 127/2004

Nosaukums: Veicināšanas pasākumi attiecībā uz jūras zeltplekstēm

Mērķis: Finansēt veicināšanas pasākumus attiecībā uz jūras zeltplekstēm, izmantojot parafiskālos maksājumus

Juridiskais pamats:

| — | 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

Budžets: 200 000 EUR gadā

Ilgums: Neierobežots (shēma tiks paziņota Komisijai no jauna vēlākais desmit gadus pēc shēmas spēkā stāšanās dienas)

Atbalsta intensitāte vai summa: To summu robežās, kas noteiktas pamatnostādnēs valsts atbalsta izskatīšanai zivsaimniecībā un akvakultūrā (OV C 19, 20.01.2001, 7 lpp.)

Cita informācija: Gada pārskats.

Lēmuma teksts autentiskā(s) valodā(s), no kura ir izņemta konfidenciālā informācija, ir pieejams šajā tīmekļa vietnē:

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

Pieņemšanas datums:

Dalībvalsts: Spānija (Principado de Asturias)

Atbalsta numurs: N 173/2005

Nosaukums oriģinālvalodā:

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

Mērķis: Pētniecība un attīstība — Visas nozares

Juridiskais pamats: 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

Budžets:

| | 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

Atbalsta intensitāte vai apjoms: 35 % — 60 % — + 10 % — 75 % — 50 %

Ilgums:

Lēmuma autentiskais teksts, no kura izņemta visa konfidenciālā informācija, ir atrodams šādā tīmekļa vietnē:

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

Pieņemšanas datums:

Dalībvalsts: Dānija

Atbalsta numurs: N 229/2005

Nosaukums oriģinālvalodā:

Regionale Teknologicentre

Mērķis: Pētniecība un attīstība (Visas nozares)

Juridiskais pamats: Lov nr. 419 af 6.6.2002

Budžets:

| | 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

Atbalsta intensitāte vai apjoms: 60 %

Ilgums:

Lēmuma autentiskais teksts, no kura izņemta visa konfidenciālā informācija, ir atrodams šādā tīmekļa vietnē:

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

Lēmuma pieņemšanas datums:

Dalībvalsts: Slovākijas Republika

Atbalsta nr.:: N 298/2005

Nosaukums: individuāls atbalsts TYZAM Production s.r.o. audiovizuālo darbu radīšanai

Mērķis: atbalsts filmu veidošanai

Juridiskais pamats:

| 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

Budžets: 7 miljoni SKK

Atbalsta intensitāte vai summa: 20 %

Atbalsta ilgums: vienreizējs pasākums pēc apstiprināšanas (2005. gada 31. decembris)

Lēmuma teksts autentiskā(s) valodā(s), no kura ir izņemta konfidenciālā informācija, ir pieejams šajā tīmekļa vietnē:

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

Lēmuma pieņemšanas datums:

Dalībvalsts: Slovākijas Republika

Atbalsta nr.: N 299/2005

Nosaukums: individuāls atbalsts TaO Productions s.r.o audiovizuālo darbu radīšanai

Mērķis: atbalsts filmu veidošanai

Juridiskais pamats:

| 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

Budžets:: 8 miljoni SKK

Atbalsta intensitāte vai summa: 10 %

Atbalsta ilgums: vienreizējs pasākums pēc apstiprināšanas (2005. gada 31. decembris)

Lēmuma teksts autentiskā(s) valodā(s), no kura ir izņemta konfidenciālā informācija, ir pieejams šajā tīmekļa vietnē:

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

Lēmuma pieņemšanas datums:

Dalībvalsts: Slovākijas Republika

Atbalsta nr.: N 300/2005

Nosaukums: individuāls atbalsts ALEF Film& Media Group audiovizuālo darbu radīšanai

Mērķis: atbalsts filmu veidošanai

Juridiskais pamats (oriģinālvalodā):

| 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

Budžets: 11 miljoni SKK

Atbalsta intensitāte vai summa: 26,2 %

Atbalsta ilgums: vienreizējs pasākums pēc apstiprināšanas (2005. gada 31. decembris)

Lēmuma teksts autentiskā(s) valodā(s), no kura ir izņemta konfidenciālā informācija, ir pieejams šajā tīmekļa vietnē:

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

Lēmuma pieņemšanas datums:

Dalībvalsts: Francija

Atbalsta Nr.: N 337/2004 un N 378/2004

Nosaukums: Finansējums Centres Techniques Industriels un Centres Professionnels de Développement économique, izmantojot nodokļus un budžeta apropriācijas

Mērķis: Kopīgi pasākumi pētniecībā un attīstībā, standartizācija, apmācība, mehānisko produktu, patēriņa preču un celtniecības materiālu nozares uzņēmumu veicināšana un informācija

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

Ilgums: Sākot no dienas, kad Komisija devusi atļauju, līdz 2010. gada 31. decembrim.

Cita informācija: Saņēmējs: TI un CPDE patēriņa preču, mehānisko produktu un celtniecības materiālu nozarē

Lēmuma teksts autentiskā(s) valodā(s), no kura ir izņemta konfidenciālā informācija, ir pieejams šajā tīmekļa vietnē:

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

Lēmuma pieņemšanas datums:

Dalībvalsts: Dānija

Atbalsta Nr.: N 374/2002

Nosaukums: Atbalsti zvejas ostu aprīkojumam, kas piešķirti Kopienas struktūrpalīdzības ietvaros saskaņā ar ZVFI 2000.-2006. gadam

Mērķis: Līdzfinansēt struktūrpalīdzību Dānijas zvejas ostu aprīkojumam laikposmā no 2000. līdz 2006. gadam

Juridiskais pamats:

| — | 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

Budžets: 27 miljoni EUR

Ilgums: 2000.-2006. gads

Atbalsta intensitāte un lielums: Atbilstīgi Regulā (EK) Nr. 2792/1999 noteiktajām summām

Cita informācija: Gada pārskats

Lēmuma teksts autentiskā(s) valodā(s), no kura ir izņemta konfidenciālā informācija, ir pieejams šajā tīmekļa vietnē:

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

Pieņemšanas datums:

Atbalsta numurs: N 465/2005

Dalībvalsts: Nīderlandes Karaliste

Nosaukums oriģinālvalodā:

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

Juridiskais pamats: 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

Mērķis: Apmācība

Kopējais atbalsta apjoms: 53 miljoni EUR

Plānotie gada izdevumi:

| | 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

Atbalsta ilgums (periods): 2006. gada 1. janvāris — 2008. gada 31. decembris.

Cita informācija:

| | Pasākuma veids: Shēma |
| --- | --- |

Pasākuma veids: Shēma

| | Atbalsta veids: Tiešā subsīdija |
| --- | --- |

Atbalsta veids: Tiešā subsīdija

Lēmuma teksts autentiskā(s) valodā(s), no kura ir izņemta konfidenciālā informācija, ir pieejams šajā tīmekļa vietnē:

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

Lēmuma pieņemšanas datums:

Dalībvalsts: Spānija

Atbalsta Nr.: N 499/2004

Nosaukums: Atbalsta shēma ieguves rūpniecības izpētes darbiem, apkārtējās vides aizsardzībai un raktuvju drošībai attiecībā uz enerģiju neradošo rūdu ieguvi

Mērķis: Enerģiju neradošo rūdu ieguves nozare. Grozījumi Komisijas 2002. gada 19. jūnijā apstiprinātajā shēmā. Grozījumi attiecībā uz atbalsta formām un intensitāti ieguves rūpniecībā, lai padarītu šo nozari pievilcīgāku

Atbalsta intensitāte vai summa: Atbalsts izpētes darbiem: tiešs piešķīrums, kas nosedz līdz 20 % no attaisnotajām izmaksām (30 % maziem un vidējiem uzņēmumiem) un/vai bezprocentu avanss, kas nosedz līdz 60 % no attaisnotajām izmaksām (70 % mazo un vidējo uzņēmumu gadījumos)

Ilgums:

Lēmuma teksts autentiskā(s) valodā(s), no kura ir izņemta konfidenciālā informācija, ir pieejams šajā tīmekļa vietnē:

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

Lēmuma pieņemšanas diena:

Dalībvalsts: Vācija

Atbalsta Nr.: NN 44/2004

Nosaukums: Glābšanas atbalsts SVZ Schwarze Pumpe

Mērķis: Glābšanas atbalsts

Juridiskais pamats: §2(3) Förderbankgesetz

Apjoms: 21,028 miljoni EUR

Ilgums:

Lēmuma teksts autentiskā(s) valodā(s), no kura ir izņemta konfidenciālā informācija, ir pieejams šajā tīmekļa vietnē:

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

---

| 14.1.2006 | LV | Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis | C 9/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

LV

Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis

C 9/6

---

VALSTS ATBALSTS — APVIENOTĀ KARALISTE

Valsts Atbalsts C 45/2005 (ex N 364/2005) — rīcības programmas par atkritumiem un resursiem: atbalsts drukājamā un rakstāmā papīra pārstrādes jaudas palielināšanai

Uzaicinājums iesniegt apsvērumus saskaņā ar Eiropas Kopienas Līguma 88. panta 2. punktu

(2006/C 9/04)

(Dokuments attiecas uz EEZ)

Ar 2005. gada 7. decembrī datētu vēstuli, kura tās autentiskajā valodā ir pievienota šī kopsavilkuma pielikumā, Komisija paziņoja Apvienotajai Karalistei par savu lēmumu uzsākt EK Līguma 88. panta 2. punktā paredzēto procedūru attiecībā uz minēto atbalstu.

Mēneša laikā pēc šā kopsavilkuma un tam pievienotās vēstules publicēšanas dienas ieinteresētās personas var nosūtīt savus apsvērumus uz šādu adresi:

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| State Aid Greffe |
| SPA 3, 6/05 |
| B-1049 Brussels |
| Fakss: (32-2) 296 12 42 |

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

State Aid Greffe

SPA 3, 6/05

B-1049 Brussels

Fakss: (32-2) 296 12 42

Šos apsvērumus paziņos Apvienotajai Karalistei. Ieinteresētā puse, kas iesniedz apsvērumus, var rakstveidā pieprasīt, lai tās identitāte netiktu atklāta, norādot šādas prasības iemeslus.

KOPSAVILKUMS

Apvienotā Karaliste 2005. gada jūlijā paziņoja Komisijai par investīciju atbalsta shēmu drukājamā un rakstāmā papīra ražošanas jaudas palielināšanai, izmantojot otrreizējā pārstrādē iegūtas šķiedras.

1.   Pasākuma apraksts

Anglijā papīra atkritumi no birojiem netiek savākti un pārstrādāti. Lai novērstu šo trūkumu, par atkritumu un resursu rīcības plānu (WRAP) atbildīgā valsts iestāde paredz piedāvāt dotācijas papīrfabrikām. Līdzfinansējot papīrfabriku drukājamā un rakstāmā papīra (Printing & Writing paper) pārstrādes jaudas palielinājumu, dotācijas stimulēs pieprasījumu pēc papīra atkritumu savākšanas no birojiem. Papīrrūpniecības uzņēmumiem, kas saņems atbalstu, jāpiekrīt izlietot lielāku apjomu jauno papīra atkritumu, kas pārstrādāti no atkritumu plūsmas un satur minimālo pārstrādātā biroja papīra (drukājamā un rakstāmā) procentu vai tonnāžu. Lai vislietderīgāk izlietotu saņemtos papīra atkritumus, palielinātā papīra ražošanas jauda tiks izmantota jauna drukājamā un rakstāmā papīra ražošanai.

Izskatot piedāvājumus, tiks ņemts vērā jauno tehnoloģiju vienību iekļaušana, demonstrācija un inovācija, kas veicinās noturīgus atkritumu pārstrādes procesus, tas ir, tādus, kas pārsniedz jaunākos sasniegumus. Plānotais atbalsta shēmas budžets varētu būt no 6 līdz 20 miljoniem GBP. Tā kā atbalsta līmeņus noteiks konkursa procedūra, tad atbalsta intensitāte vēl nav zināma. Atbalstu saņems ne vairāk kā 10 papīra ražotāji. Apvienotās Karalistes iestādes plāno piešķirt atbalstu pirms 2006. gada aprīļa.

2.   Pasākuma novērtējums

Attiecībā uz pamatnostādnēm par atbalstu videi (1) Komisija apšauba atbalsta shēmas atbilstību pamatnostādņu 29. punktam, jo ieguldījumi jauna papīra ražošanas jaudā, izmantojot pārstrādājamo papīru, nesamazinās pašu kompāniju radīto piesārņojumu. Saņēmēji drīzāk lietos izmantoto papīru, kas iegūts no jebkāda papīra ražotāja.

Attiecībā uz citiem noteikumiem Komisija apšauba, ka ir piemērojami citi EK Līguma 87. panta 2. un 3. punktā norādītie atbrīvojumi. Tomēr saņēmēji vēl nav izvēlēti, un tāpēc nav iespējams novērtēt to, vai ieguldījumi notiks apgabalos, kas ir tiesīgi saņemt reģionālo atbalstu, un vai pamatnostādnes par valsts reģionālo atbalstu (2) tiks piemērotas pilnībā vai daļēji.

Tieši pamatojoties uz 87. panta 3. punkta c) apakšpunktu, Komisijai jānovērtē, vai nav jāpiemēro pamatnostādnes par atbalstu videi. Komisija to ir iepriekš darījusi, īpaši attiecībā uz otrreizējās pārstrādes shēmu (3) un divām citām lietām papīrrūpniecībā (4). Komisijas piemēroto kritēriju pamatā bija atbalsta stimulējoša ietekme, kā arī tas, vai ieguldījumi, kas nepieciešami, lai panāktu labvēlīgu ietekmi uz vidi, veicinās tādu tehnoloģiju izstrādi, kas pārsniegtu pašreizējo attīstības līmeni ES.

Citos gadījumos, kad Komisija bija novērtējusi ieguldījumu atbalstu papīra pārstrādes spējas radīšanai, Komisijas piemēroto kritēriju pamatā bija atbalsta stimulējoša ietekme, kā arī tas, vai ieguldījumi, kas nepieciešami, lai panāktu labvēlīgu ietekmi uz vidi, veicinās tādu tehnoloģiju izstrādi, kas pārsniegtu pašreizējo attīstības līmeni ES. Komisija apšauba Apvienotās Karalistes iestāžu minēto pamatojumu, ka pašreiz ļoti mazais pārstrādes satura izmantojums drukājamā un rakstāmā papīra ražošanā Eiropas Savienībā ir pietiekams, lai noteiktu, ka drukājamā un rakstāmā papīra ražošana, izmantojot otrreizējās pārstrādes šķiedras, pārsniedz pašreizējo attīstības līmeni ES.

Komisija apšauba atbalsta shēmas stimulējošo ietekmi attiecībā uz izmantotā drukājamā un rakstāmā papīra savākšanu.

Komisija arī apšauba, vai drukājamā un rakstāmā papīra ražošana no izmantotā drukājamā un rakstāmā papīra palielinās labvēlīgo ietekmi uz vidi attiecībā uz vienkāršāku pieeju izmantotā biroja papīra izlietošanai citu papīra veidu ražošanā.

Komisija turklāt šaubās, vai attaisnotās izmaksas tiks pielīdzinātas ieguldījumu papildu izmaksām, kas vajadzīgas vides mērķu sasniegšanai, jo Apvienotā Karaliste neparedz ieguldījumu izmaksas par salīdzināmo jaudu atskaitīt no ieguldījumu attaisnotajām izmaksām, kam ir cita ietekme uz vidi. Tāpēc nav skaidrs, vai tad, kad tiks sniegts atbalsts ieguldījumiem jauna drukājamā un rakstāmā papīra kapacitātē, izlietojot izmantoto drukājamo un rakstāmo papīru, tiks atskaitītas standarta iekārtu biroja papīra izmaksas.

Visbeidzot, Komisija šaubās, vai Apvienotās Karalistes piedāvātais pasākums ir vismazāk kropļojošais aktuālās problēmas risināšanai. Citi instrumenti, piemēram, tie, kas ir vērsti uz papīra savākšanu, var mazāk izkropļot papīra atkritumu un galaproduktu tirgu.

3.   Secinājums

Ņemot vērā iepriekšminētos apsvērumus, Komisija ir nolēmusi uzsākt EK Līguma 88. panta 2. punktā noteikto procedūru. Ieinteresētās puses ir aicinātas iesniegt savus apsvērumus, jo īpaši attiecībā uz: 1) tehnoloģiju līmeni — ko par tādu būtu jāuzskata situācijā, kad drukājamā un rakstāmā papīra atkritumi tiek izmantoti jauna drukājamā un rakstāmā papīra ražošanai, 2) atbalsta nepieciešamību, ņemot vērā plānoto izmantotā drukājamā un rakstāmā papīra savākšanas apjoma palielināšanos, 3) sagaidāmo konkurences izkropļojuma pakāpi gan jauna papīra, gan izmantotā papīra tirgū un 4) labvēlīgo ietekmi uz vidi, ko var sagaidīt no minētā pasākuma, salīdzinot ar ietekmi, kas iegūstama ar citiem instrumentiem.

VĒSTULES TEKSTS

“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)  OV C 37, 3.2.2001., 3. lpp.

1

(2)  OV C 74, 10.3.1998., 9. lpp.

2

(3)  OV L 102, 7.4.2004., 59. lpp. Apvienotā Karaliste nesen paziņoja par šīs shēmas paplašināšanu un pagarināšanu, kas pašreiz tiek novērtēta.

3

(4)  OV L 314, 28.11.2003., 26. lpp. un OV L 53, 26.2.2005., attiecīgi 66. lpp. Komentāri par šajās lietās izmantotajiem kritērijiem arī ir sniegti ikgadējā konkurences ziņojumā 2004. gadā.

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 | LV | Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis | C 9/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

LV

Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis

C 9/12

---

Iebildumu necelšana pret paziņoto koncentrāciju

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

(2006/C 9/05)

(Dokuments attiecas uz EEZ)

2005. gada 16. decembrī Komisija nolēma necelt iebildumus pret augstāk paziņoto koncentrāciju un paziņo, ka tā ir saderīga ar kopējo tirgu. Šis lēmums ir balstīts uz Padomes Regulas (EK) Nr. 139/2004 6. panta 1. punkta b) apakšpunktu. Lēmuma pilns teksts ir pieejams vienīgi spāņu valodā un tiks publicēts pēc tam, kad tiks noskaidrots, vai tas ietver jelkādus komercnoslēpumus. Tas būs pieejams:

| — | Eiropas konkurences tīmekļa vietnē (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). Šī tīmekļa vietne nodrošina dažādas iespējas, lai palīdzētu ievietot individuālos apvienošanās lēmumus, norādot arī uzņēmuma nosaukumu, lietas numuru, datumu un sektorālo indeksu. |
| --- | --- |

—

Eiropas konkurences tīmekļa vietnē (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). Šī tīmekļa vietne nodrošina dažādas iespējas, lai palīdzētu ievietot individuālos apvienošanās lēmumus, norādot arī uzņēmuma nosaukumu, lietas numuru, datumu un sektorālo indeksu.

| — | elektroniskā veidā EUR-Lex tīmekļa vietnē ar dokumenta numuru 32005M4008. EUR-Lex ir tiešsaite piekļūšanai Eiropas Kopienas likumdošanas datorizētai dokumentācijas sistēmai. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

elektroniskā veidā EUR-Lex tīmekļa vietnē ar dokumenta numuru 32005M4008. EUR-Lex ir tiešsaite piekļūšanai Eiropas Kopienas likumdošanas datorizētai dokumentācijas sistēmai. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---

| 14.1.2006 | LV | Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis | C 9/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

LV

Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis

C 9/12

---

Iebildumu necelšana pret paziņoto koncentrāciju

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

(2006/C 9/06)

(Dokuments attiecas uz EEZ)

2005. gada 16. decembrī Komisija nolēma necelt iebildumus pret augstāk paziņoto koncentrāciju un paziņo, ka tā ir saderīga ar kopējo tirgu. Šis lēmums ir balstīts uz Padomes Regulas (EK) Nr. 139/2004 6.panta 1.punkta b) apakšpunktu. Lēmuma pilns teksts ir pieejams vienīgi spāņu valodā un tiks publicēts pēc tam, kad tiks noskaidrots, vai tas ietver jelkādus komercnoslēpumus. Tas būs pieejams:

| — | Eiropas konkurences tīmekļa vietnē (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). Šī tīmekļa vietne nodrošina dažādas iespējas, lai palīdzētu ievietot individuālos apvienošanās lēmumus, norādot arī uzņēmuma nosaukumu, lietas numuru, datumu un sektorālo indeksu. |
| --- | --- |

—

Eiropas konkurences tīmekļa vietnē (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). Šī tīmekļa vietne nodrošina dažādas iespējas, lai palīdzētu ievietot individuālos apvienošanās lēmumus, norādot arī uzņēmuma nosaukumu, lietas numuru, datumu un sektorālo indeksu.

| — | elektroniskā veidā EUR-Lex tīmekļa vietnē ar dokumenta numuru 32005M4058. EUR-Lex ir tiešsaite piekļūšanai Eiropas Kopienas likumdošanas datorizētai dokumentācijas sistēmai. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

elektroniskā veidā EUR-Lex tīmekļa vietnē ar dokumenta numuru 32005M4058. EUR-Lex ir tiešsaite piekļūšanai Eiropas Kopienas likumdošanas datorizētai dokumentācijas sistēmai. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---

Labojumi

| 14.1.2006 | LV | Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis | C 9/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2006

LV

Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis

C 9/13

---

Labojums paziņojumā “Svētku dienas 2006”

(
  “Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis” C 336, 2005. gada 31. decembris
  )

(2006/C 9/07)

2. lappusē pretī vārdam “FRANCE” svītrot “15.4,”.

---