# Official Journal C 154/2008

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 154 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5119 June 2008 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 154

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5119 June 2008

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES |
| | Commission |
| 2008/C 154/01 | Communication from the Commission on the results of the risk evaluation and the risk reduction strategies for the substances: zinc; zinc chloride; zinc distearate (
  1
  ) | 1 |
| 2008/C 154/02 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections | 11 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

2008/C 154/01

Communication from the Commission on the results of the risk evaluation and the risk reduction strategies for the substances: zinc; zinc chloride; zinc distearate (
  1
  )

1

1

2008/C 154/02

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections

11

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES |
| | Commission |
| 2008/C 154/03 | Euro exchange rates | 15 |
| | NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES |
| 2008/C 154/04 | Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products and amending Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 | 16 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

2008/C 154/03

Euro exchange rates

15

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

2008/C 154/04

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products and amending Regulation (EC) No 70/2001

16

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) |
| 2008/C 154/05 | Notice of open competition EPSO/AST/65/08 | 22 |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY |
| | Commission |
| 2008/C 154/06 | Withdrawal of notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5126 — Ineos/BASF Assets) (
  1
  ) | 23 |

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

2008/C 154/05

Notice of open competition EPSO/AST/65/08

22

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY

Commission

2008/C 154/06

Withdrawal of notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5126 — Ineos/BASF Assets) (
  1
  )

1

23

| | Corrigenda |
| --- | --- |
| 2008/C 154/07 | Corrigendum to the Agreement between the European Parliament and the Commission on procedures for implementing Council Decision 1999/468/EC laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission, as amended by Decision 2006/512/EC (OJ C 143, 10.6.2008) | 24 |

Corrigenda

2008/C 154/07

Corrigendum to the Agreement between the European Parliament and the Commission on procedures for implementing Council Decision 1999/468/EC laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission, as amended by Decision 2006/512/EC (OJ C 143, 10.6.2008)

(OJ C 143, 10.6.2008)

24

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN

---

II Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

| 19.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 154/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 154/1

---

Communication from the Commission on the results of the risk evaluation and the risk reduction strategies for the substances: zinc; zinc chloride; zinc distearate

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 154/01)

Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 of 23 March 1993 on the evaluation and control of the risks of existing substances (1) involves the data reporting, priority setting, risk evaluation and, where necessary, development of strategies for limiting the risks of existing substances.

In the framework of Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 the following substances have been identified as priority substances for evaluation in accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 2268/95 (2) concerning the second list of priority substances as foreseen under Regulation (EEC) No 793/93:

| — | zinc, |
| --- | --- |

—

zinc,

| — | zinc chloride, |
| --- | --- |

—

zinc chloride,

| — | zinc distearate. |
| --- | --- |

—

zinc distearate.

The rapporteur Member State designated pursuant to this Regulation has completed the risk evaluation activities with regard to man and the environment for those substances in accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 of 28 June 1994 laying down the principles for the assessment of risks to man and the environment of existing substances (3) and has suggested a strategy for limiting the risks in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 793/93.

The Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment (SCTEE) and the Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER) have been consulted and have issued an opinion with respect to the risk evaluations carried out by the rapporteur. These opinions can be found on the website of the Scientific Committees.

Article 11(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 stipulates that the results of the risk evaluation and the recommended strategy for limiting the risks shall be adopted at Community level and published by the Commission. This Communication, together with the corresponding Commission Recommendation 2008/464/EC (4), provides the results of risk evaluations (5) and strategies for limiting the risks for the above mentioned substances.

The results of the risk evaluation and strategies for limiting the risks provided for in this communication are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee set up pursuant to Article 15(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 793/93.

---

(1)  OJ L 84, 5.4.1993, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 231, 28.9.1995, p. 18.

(3)  OJ L 161, 29.6.1994, p. 3.

(4)  OJ L 160, 19.6.2008.

(5)  The comprehensive Risk Assessment Report, as well as a summary thereof, can be found on the Internet site of the European Chemicals Bureau:

http://ecb.jrc.it/existing-substances/

---

ANNEX

PART 1

| CAS No: 7440-66-6 | | Einecs No: 231-175-3 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Structural formula: | Zn |
| Einecs name: | Zinc |
| IUPAC name: | Zinc |
| Rapporteur: | The Netherlands |
| Classification (1): | F; R15-17 (zinc powder — zinc dust (pyrophoric))
  N; R50-53 (zinc powder — zinc dust (pyrophoric))
  N; R50-53 (zinc powder — zinc dust (stabilised)) |

CAS No: 7440-66-6

Einecs No: 231-175-3

Structural formula:

Zn

Einecs name:

Zinc

IUPAC name:

Zinc

Rapporteur:

The Netherlands

Classification (1):

F; R15-17 (zinc powder — zinc dust (pyrophoric))

N; R50-53 (zinc powder — zinc dust (pyrophoric))

N; R50-53 (zinc powder — zinc dust (stabilised))

The risk assessment is based on practices related to the life-cycle of the substance produced in or imported into the European Community as described in the risk assessment forwarded to the Commission by the Member State Rapporteur. The risk assessment has been conducted in accordance with the methodology for metals applicable at the time and in line with the Technical Guidance Document on Risk Assessment in support of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 on risk assessment for existing substances.

The risk assessment has, based on the available information, determined that in the European Community the substance is mainly used for galvanising and in brass. Other uses are in die casting alloys, rolled/wrought zinc, pigments and chemicals and for the production of other zinc compounds. Uses of zinc and certain zinc compounds as nanomaterials have not been assessed.

The Predicted No-Effect Concentrations (PNECs) for zinc metal included in the risk assessment have been derived solely for the purposes of this risk assessment. They must not be used for other purposes, such as setting environmental quality standards or sanitation levels, without further in-depth consideration as to whether they are fit for that purpose. In every case an appropriate bioavailability correction should be incorporated as an essential part of the process.

RISK ASSESSMENT

A.   Human health

The conclusions of the assessment of the risks to

WORKERS

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusions of the assessment of the risks to

CONSUMERS

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusions of the assessment of the risks to

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusions of the assessment of the risks to

HUMAN HEALTH (physicochemical properties)

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

B.   Environment

The conclusions of the assessment of the risks to

ATMOSPHERE

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusions of the assessment of the risks to the

AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM INCLUDING SEDIMENT

| 1.1. | is that there is a need for specific measures to limit the risks for the specific scenarios listed below. This conclusion is reached because of:






  — | concerns for effects on the local aquatic (including sediment) environment as a consequence of exposure arising from the production of zinc metal and from the use in continuous hot dip galvanising, electro galvanising, in brass, as die casting alloy, as rolled/wrought zinc and as zinc powder/dust. For a number of production sites of zinc metal and processing scenarios of zinc metal no immediate concern has been identified but a potential risk at local scale cannot be excluded due to possible existence of high regional background concentrations of zinc, |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.1.

is that there is a need for specific measures to limit the risks for the specific scenarios listed below. This conclusion is reached because of:

—

concerns for effects on the local aquatic (including sediment) environment as a consequence of exposure arising from the production of zinc metal and from the use in continuous hot dip galvanising, electro galvanising, in brass, as die casting alloy, as rolled/wrought zinc and as zinc powder/dust. For a number of production sites of zinc metal and processing scenarios of zinc metal no immediate concern has been identified but a potential risk at local scale cannot be excluded due to possible existence of high regional background concentrations of zinc,

| — | concerns for effects on the regional aquatic (including sediment) environment due to elevated regional zinc levels in some, but not all, regional surface waters and sediments. |
| --- | --- |

—

concerns for effects on the regional aquatic (including sediment) environment due to elevated regional zinc levels in some, but not all, regional surface waters and sediments.

In regions where these waters (including sediment) are found, it is strongly recommended that the available information on known and potential sources of zinc emissions, and region-specific natural background concentration are carefully taken into account before taking decisions about risk reduction measures.

The findings of the risk assessment report are that the current uses of zinc and zinc compounds do not per se lead to the elevated regional levels found in surface water and sediment.

The elevated zinc levels in those waters and sediments, where they are found, may be caused by a combination of zinc and zinc compounds. The elevated levels come from various emission sources, including local industrial point sources, historical contamination, mining activities, geology and diffuse sources. The contribution of each of these sources may vary between regions.

Local industrial point sources may include industrial processes that use and emit zinc and zinc compounds, as well as other processes that are unintentional sources and are not directly connected with the zinc producing or using industries. These were not examined in the risk assessment report, but may nevertheless have emissions of zinc to the aquatic environment.

| 1.2. | is that there is a need for further information and/or testing. This conclusion is reached because of:






  — | concerns for effects on the aquatic (including sediment) environment alongside motorways in the European Union. Due to a number of uncertainties additional information is needed to refine this part of the risk assessment. |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.2.

is that there is a need for further information and/or testing. This conclusion is reached because of:

—

concerns for effects on the aquatic (including sediment) environment alongside motorways in the European Union. Due to a number of uncertainties additional information is needed to refine this part of the risk assessment.

| 1.3. | is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied for all local and regional scenarios, including concerning secondary poisoning, except for those listed under point 1.1 and 1.2 above. This conclusion is reached because:






  — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.3.

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied for all local and regional scenarios, including concerning secondary poisoning, except for those listed under point 1.1 and 1.2 above. This conclusion is reached because:

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to the

TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEM

| 2.1. | is that there is a need for specific measures to limit the risks for the specific scenarios listed below. This conclusion is reached because of:






  — | concerns for the local terrestrial environment as a consequence of exposure arising from use in continuous hot dip galvanising and electro galvanising. |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.1.

is that there is a need for specific measures to limit the risks for the specific scenarios listed below. This conclusion is reached because of:

—

concerns for the local terrestrial environment as a consequence of exposure arising from use in continuous hot dip galvanising and electro galvanising.

| 2.2. | is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied, for all local and regional (line sources at terrestrial road borders and zinc accumulation in regional soils) scenarios, including concerning secondary poisoning, except for those listed under point 2.1 above. This conclusion is reached because:






  — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.2.

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied, for all local and regional (line sources at terrestrial road borders and zinc accumulation in regional soils) scenarios, including concerning secondary poisoning, except for those listed under point 2.1 above. This conclusion is reached because:

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

MICRO-ORGANISMS IN THE SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT

| 3.1. | is that there is a need for limiting the risks for some, but not all, local scenarios. This conclusion is reached because of:






  — | concerns for micro-organisms in the sewage treatment plant as a consequence of exposure arising from some of the production sites of zinc metal and from some of the processing sites of continuous hot dip galvanising, electro galvanising, as brass and as die casting alloy. |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.1.

is that there is a need for limiting the risks for some, but not all, local scenarios. This conclusion is reached because of:

—

concerns for micro-organisms in the sewage treatment plant as a consequence of exposure arising from some of the production sites of zinc metal and from some of the processing sites of continuous hot dip galvanising, electro galvanising, as brass and as die casting alloy.

| 3.2. | is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied for all local scenarios, except for those listed under point 3.1 above. This conclusion is reached because:






  — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.2.

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied for all local scenarios, except for those listed under point 3.1 above. This conclusion is reached because:

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

STRATEGY FOR LIMITING RISKS

For the ENVIRONMENT

It is recommended:

| — | to consider under Directive 2008/1/EC (2) and Directive 2000/60/EC (3) if additional risk management is needed for other sources of zinc emissions than those from the produced and imported chemical (for instance natural sources, mining activities, historical pollution and the use of other zinc compounds), which the risk reduction strategy has identified as contributing significantly to the emissions of zinc to the aquatic compartment, |
| --- | --- |

—

to consider under Directive 2008/1/EC (2) and Directive 2000/60/EC (3) if additional risk management is needed for other sources of zinc emissions than those from the produced and imported chemical (for instance natural sources, mining activities, historical pollution and the use of other zinc compounds), which the risk reduction strategy has identified as contributing significantly to the emissions of zinc to the aquatic compartment,

| — | to facilitate permitting and monitoring under Directive 2008/1/EC, zinc should be included in the ongoing work to develop guidance on ‘Best Available Techniques’ (BAT). |
| --- | --- |

—

to facilitate permitting and monitoring under Directive 2008/1/EC, zinc should be included in the ongoing work to develop guidance on ‘Best Available Techniques’ (BAT).

PART 2

| CAS No: 7646-85-7 | | Einecs No: 231-592-0 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Structural formula: | ZnCl2 |
| Einecs name: | Zinc chloride |
| IUPAC name: | Zinc chloride |
| Rapporteur: | The Netherlands |
| Classification (4): | Xn; R22
  C; R34
  N; R50-53 |

CAS No: 7646-85-7

Einecs No: 231-592-0

Structural formula:

ZnCl2

Einecs name:

Zinc chloride

IUPAC name:

Zinc chloride

Rapporteur:

The Netherlands

Classification (4):

Xn; R22

C; R34

N; R50-53

The risk assessment is based on practices related to the life-cycle of the substance produced in or imported into the European Community as described in the risk assessment forwarded to the Commission by the Member State Rapporteur. The risk assessment has been conducted in accordance with the methodology for metals applicable at the time and in line with the Technical Guidance Document on Risk Assessment in support of Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 on risk assessment for existing substances.

The risk assessment has, based on the available information, determined that in the European Community the substance is mainly used in the chemical industry, galvanising industry, battery industry and agrochemical industry (fungicides). Other uses are in the printing and dye industry. Uses as nanomaterials have not been assessed.

RISK ASSESSMENT

A.   Human health

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

WORKERS

is that there is a need for specific measures to limit the risks. This conclusion is reached because of:

| — | concerns for acute respiratory tract irritation as a consequence of inhalation exposure arising during the production of zinc chloride. |
| --- | --- |

—

concerns for acute respiratory tract irritation as a consequence of inhalation exposure arising during the production of zinc chloride.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

CONSUMERS

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

HUMAN HEALTH (physicochemical properties)

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

B.   Environment

Conclusions are given on local scenarios only. The conclusions regarding the regional risks to the environment as described in the risk assessment for zinc metal (Einecs No 231-175-3) apply as well.

The conclusions of the assessment of the risks to

ATMOSPHERE

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusions of the assessment of the risks to the

AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM INCLUDING SEDIMENT

| 1.1. | is that there is a need for specific measures to limit the risks. This conclusion is reached because of:






  — | concerns for effects on the local aquatic environment as a consequence of exposure arising from production at one site and exposure arising from the use by the dyes and inks industry (formulation and processing). For one production site no immediate concern has been identified but a potential risk at local scale cannot be excluded due to possible existence of high regional background concentrations of zinc, |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.1.

is that there is a need for specific measures to limit the risks. This conclusion is reached because of:

—

concerns for effects on the local aquatic environment as a consequence of exposure arising from production at one site and exposure arising from the use by the dyes and inks industry (formulation and processing). For one production site no immediate concern has been identified but a potential risk at local scale cannot be excluded due to possible existence of high regional background concentrations of zinc,

| — | concerns for effects on sediment dwelling organisms as a consequence of local exposure arising from production at three sites and local exposure arising from the use in the chemical industry (processing), battery industry (processing) and dyes and inks industry (formulation and processing). For a number of production sites and processing scenarios no immediate concern has been identified but a potential risk at local scale cannot be excluded due to possible existence of high regional background concentrations of zinc. |
| --- | --- |

—

concerns for effects on sediment dwelling organisms as a consequence of local exposure arising from production at three sites and local exposure arising from the use in the chemical industry (processing), battery industry (processing) and dyes and inks industry (formulation and processing). For a number of production sites and processing scenarios no immediate concern has been identified but a potential risk at local scale cannot be excluded due to possible existence of high regional background concentrations of zinc.

| 1.2. | is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied for all local scenarios, including concerning secondary poisoning, except for those listed under point 1.1 above. This conclusion is reached because:






  — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.2.

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied for all local scenarios, including concerning secondary poisoning, except for those listed under point 1.1 above. This conclusion is reached because:

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to the

TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEM

| 2.1. | is that there is a need for specific measures to limit the risks. This conclusion is reached because of:






  — | concerns for the local terrestrial environment as a consequence of exposure arising from the use in the chemical industry (processing) and dyes and inks industry (formulation and processing). |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.1.

is that there is a need for specific measures to limit the risks. This conclusion is reached because of:

—

concerns for the local terrestrial environment as a consequence of exposure arising from the use in the chemical industry (processing) and dyes and inks industry (formulation and processing).

| 2.2. | is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied, for all local scenarios, including concerning secondary poisoning, except for those listed under point 2.1 above. This conclusion is reached because:






  — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.2.

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied, for all local scenarios, including concerning secondary poisoning, except for those listed under point 2.1 above. This conclusion is reached because:

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

MICRO-ORGANISMS IN THE SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT

| 3.1. | is that there is a need for limiting the risks. This conclusion is reached because of:






  — | concerns for micro-organisms in the sewage treatment plant as a consequence of exposure arising from production at three sites and exposure arising from the use in the chemical industry (processing) and dyes and inks industry (formulation and processing). |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.1.

is that there is a need for limiting the risks. This conclusion is reached because of:

—

concerns for micro-organisms in the sewage treatment plant as a consequence of exposure arising from production at three sites and exposure arising from the use in the chemical industry (processing) and dyes and inks industry (formulation and processing).

| 3.2. | is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied for all local scenarios, except for those listed under point 3.1 above. This conclusion is reached because:






  — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.2.

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied for all local scenarios, except for those listed under point 3.1 above. This conclusion is reached because:

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

STRATEGY FOR LIMITING RISKS

For WORKERS

The legislation for workers' protection currently into force at Community level is generally considered to give an adequate framework to limit the risks of zinc chloride to the extent needed and shall apply.

For ENVIRONMENT

It is recommended:

| — | to consider under Directive 2008/1/EC (2) and Directive 2000/60/EC (3) if additional risk management is needed for other sources of zinc emissions than those from the produced and imported chemical (for instance natural sources, mining activities, historical pollution and the use of other zinc compounds), which the risk reduction strategy has identified as contributing significantly to the emissions of zinc to the aquatic compartment, |
| --- | --- |

—

to consider under Directive 2008/1/EC (2) and Directive 2000/60/EC (3) if additional risk management is needed for other sources of zinc emissions than those from the produced and imported chemical (for instance natural sources, mining activities, historical pollution and the use of other zinc compounds), which the risk reduction strategy has identified as contributing significantly to the emissions of zinc to the aquatic compartment,

| — | to facilitate permitting and monitoring under Directive 2008/1/EC, zinc chloride should be included in the ongoing work to develop guidance on ‘Best Available Techniques’ (BAT). |
| --- | --- |

—

to facilitate permitting and monitoring under Directive 2008/1/EC, zinc chloride should be included in the ongoing work to develop guidance on ‘Best Available Techniques’ (BAT).

PART 3

| CAS No: 557-05-1 and 91051-01-3 (5) | | Einecs No: 209-151-9 and 293-049-4 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Structural formula: | |
| Einecs name: | Zinc distearate |
| IUPAC name: | Zinc dioctadecanoate |
| Rapporteur: | The Netherlands |
| Classification: | No classification |

CAS No: 557-05-1 and 91051-01-3 (5)

Einecs No: 209-151-9 and 293-049-4

Structural formula:

Image

Einecs name:

Zinc distearate

IUPAC name:

Zinc dioctadecanoate

Rapporteur:

The Netherlands

Classification:

No classification

The risk assessment is based on practices related to the life-cycle of the substance produced in or imported into the European Community as described in the risk assessment forwarded to the Commission by the Member State Rapporteur. The risk assessment has been conducted in accordance with the methodology for metals applicable at the time and in line with the Technical Guidance Document on Risk Assessment in support of Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 on risk assessment for existing substances.

The risk assessment has, based on the available information, determined that in the European Community the substance is mainly used in the polymers industry as a stabiliser component, lubricant, mould release agent and dusting agent for rubber.

Other uses are in the paints, lacquers and varnishing industry as a sanding and flatting agent, in the building industry as a waterproofing agent in concrete, in the paper, pulp, board and textile industry as a waterproofing agent, in the cosmetics and pharmaceutical industry, chemical and metal industries and other applications. Uses as nanomaterials have not been assessed.

RISK ASSESSMENT

A.   Human health

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

WORKERS

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

CONSUMERS

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

HUMAN HEALTH (physico-chemical properties)

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

B.   Environment

Conclusions are given on local scenarios only. The conclusions regarding the regional risks to the environment as described in the risk assessment for zinc metal (Einecs No 231-175-3) apply as well.

The conclusions of the assessment of the risks to

ATMOSPHERE

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusions of the assessment of the risks to the

AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM INCLUDING SEDIMENT

| 1.1. | is that there is a need for specific measures to limit the risks. This conclusion is reached because of:






  — | concerns for effects on the local aquatic environment as a consequence of exposure arising from the use in the textile industry (formulation), paper, pulp and board industry (formulation), metal extraction, refining and processing industry (processing) and formulation and processing by other industries. For a number of production sites and processing scenarios no immediate concern has been identified but a potential risk at local scale cannot be excluded due to possible existence of high regional background concentrations of zinc, |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.1.

is that there is a need for specific measures to limit the risks. This conclusion is reached because of:

—

concerns for effects on the local aquatic environment as a consequence of exposure arising from the use in the textile industry (formulation), paper, pulp and board industry (formulation), metal extraction, refining and processing industry (processing) and formulation and processing by other industries. For a number of production sites and processing scenarios no immediate concern has been identified but a potential risk at local scale cannot be excluded due to possible existence of high regional background concentrations of zinc,

| — | concerns for effects on sediment dwelling organisms as a consequence of local exposure arising from the production at two sites and local exposure arising from the use in the coating industry (formulation and industrial use), in the textile industry (formulation and processing), paper, pulp and board industry (formulation and processing), metal extraction, refining and processing industry (processing) and formulation and processing by other industries and personal and domestic use (formulation). For a number of production sites and processing scenarios no immediate concern has been identified but a potential risk at local scale cannot be excluded due to possible existence of high regional background concentrations of zinc. |
| --- | --- |

—

concerns for effects on sediment dwelling organisms as a consequence of local exposure arising from the production at two sites and local exposure arising from the use in the coating industry (formulation and industrial use), in the textile industry (formulation and processing), paper, pulp and board industry (formulation and processing), metal extraction, refining and processing industry (processing) and formulation and processing by other industries and personal and domestic use (formulation). For a number of production sites and processing scenarios no immediate concern has been identified but a potential risk at local scale cannot be excluded due to possible existence of high regional background concentrations of zinc.

| 1.2. | is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied for all local scenarios, including concerning secondary poisoning, except for those listed under point 1.1 above. This conclusion is reached because:






  — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.2.

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied for all local scenarios, including concerning secondary poisoning, except for those listed under point 1.1 above. This conclusion is reached because:

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to the

TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEM

| 2.1. | is that there is a need for specific measures to limit the risks. This conclusion is reached because of:






  — | concerns for the local terrestrial environment as a consequence of exposure arising from processing in the chemical industry and ‘other’ industries. |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.1.

is that there is a need for specific measures to limit the risks. This conclusion is reached because of:

—

concerns for the local terrestrial environment as a consequence of exposure arising from processing in the chemical industry and ‘other’ industries.

| 2.2. | is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied, for all local scenarios, including concerning secondary poisoning, except for those listed under point 2.1 above. This conclusion is reached because:






  — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.2.

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied, for all local scenarios, including concerning secondary poisoning, except for those listed under point 2.1 above. This conclusion is reached because:

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

MICRO-ORGANISMS IN THE SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT

| 3.1. | is that there is a need for limiting the risks. This conclusion is reached because of:






  — | concerns for micro-organisms in the sewage treatment plant as a consequence of exposure arising from the use in the chemical industry (processing), textile industry (formulation), paper, pulp and board industry (formulation), metal extraction, refining and processing industry (processing) and formulation and processing by other industries. |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.1.

is that there is a need for limiting the risks. This conclusion is reached because of:

—

concerns for micro-organisms in the sewage treatment plant as a consequence of exposure arising from the use in the chemical industry (processing), textile industry (formulation), paper, pulp and board industry (formulation), metal extraction, refining and processing industry (processing) and formulation and processing by other industries.

| 3.2. | is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied for all local scenarios, except for those listed under point 3.1 above. This conclusion is reached because:






  — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.2.

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied for all local scenarios, except for those listed under point 3.1 above. This conclusion is reached because:

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

STRATEGY FOR LIMITING RISKS

For ENVIRONMENT

It is recommended:

| — | to consider under Directive 2008/1/EC (2) and Directive 2000/60/EC (3) if additional risk management is needed for other sources of zinc emissions than those from the produced and imported chemical (for instance natural sources, mining activities, historical pollution and the use of other zinc compounds), which the risk reduction strategy has identified as contributing significantly to the emissions of zinc to the aquatic compartment, |
| --- | --- |

—

to consider under Directive 2008/1/EC (2) and Directive 2000/60/EC (3) if additional risk management is needed for other sources of zinc emissions than those from the produced and imported chemical (for instance natural sources, mining activities, historical pollution and the use of other zinc compounds), which the risk reduction strategy has identified as contributing significantly to the emissions of zinc to the aquatic compartment,

| — | to facilitate permitting and monitoring under Directive 2008/1/EC, zinc distearate should be included in the ongoing work to develop guidance on ‘Best Available Techniques’ (BAT). |
| --- | --- |

—

to facilitate permitting and monitoring under Directive 2008/1/EC, zinc distearate should be included in the ongoing work to develop guidance on ‘Best Available Techniques’ (BAT).

---

(1)  The classification of the substance is established by Commission Directive 2004/73/EC of 29 April 2004 adapting to technical progress for the 29th time Council Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances (OJ L 152, 30.4.2004, p. 1, amended by OJ L 216, 16.6.2004, p. 3).

(2)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2008, p. 8.

(3)  OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1.

(4)  The classification of the substance is established by Commission Directive 2004/73/EC of 29 April 2004 adapting to technical progress for the 29th time Council Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances (OJ L 152, 30.4.2004, p. 1, amended by OJ L 216, 16.6.2004, p. 3).

(5)  Commercially produced stearic acid is always a mixture of what chemically was called stearic acid (C18) and palmitic acid (C16). In practice, the description ‘Fatty acids, C16-18, zinc salts’ registered under CAS No 91051-01-3 is a more exact fit with commercial zinc stearate, but it is only listed on Einecs and Chemical Abstracts have never indexed a single article to this number. Based on these considerations, the CAS No 91051-01-3 was added.

---

| 19.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 154/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 154/11

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(2008/C 154/02)

| Date of adoption of the decision | 19.3.2008 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of the aid | N 311/07 |
| Member State | France |
| Region | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Régime d'aides en faveur de la publicité des animaux, produits animaux et produits d'origine animale |
| Legal basis | Arrêté |
| Type of measure | Aid scheme |
| Objective | Granting of aid for advertising |
| Form of aid | Direct grant |
| Budget | EUR 48 000 000 |
| Intensity | 50 % for campaigns on the internal market
  80 % for campaigns in third countries
  100 % for campaigns of a generic nature |
| Duration | 6 years |
| Economic sectors | Agriculture |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Office national interprofessionnel de l'élevage et de ses productions |
| 80, avenue des Terroirs de France |
| F-75607 Paris Cedex 12 |

Date of adoption of the decision

19.3.2008

Reference number of the aid

N 311/07

Member State

France

Region

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Régime d'aides en faveur de la publicité des animaux, produits animaux et produits d'origine animale

Legal basis

Arrêté

Type of measure

Aid scheme

Objective

Granting of aid for advertising

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

EUR 48 000 000

Intensity

50 % for campaigns on the internal market

80 % for campaigns in third countries

100 % for campaigns of a generic nature

Duration

6 years

Economic sectors

Agriculture

Name and address of the granting authority

Office national interprofessionnel de l'élevage et de ses productions

80, avenue des Terroirs de France

F-75607 Paris Cedex 12

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

| Date of adoption of the decision | 19.5.2008 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of the aid | N 404/07 |
| Member State | Estonia |
| Region | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Laenud hoiu-laenuühistute tegevuse arendamiseks |
| Legal basis | Maaelu ja põllumajandusturu korraldamise seadus, RT I 2004, 32, 227;






  — | Hoiu-laenuühistu seadus, RT I 1999, 24, 357; |

Date of adoption of the decision

19.5.2008

Reference number of the aid

N 404/07

Member State

Estonia

Region

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Laenud hoiu-laenuühistute tegevuse arendamiseks

Legal basis

Maaelu ja põllumajandusturu korraldamise seadus, RT I 2004, 32, 227;

—

Hoiu-laenuühistu seadus, RT I 1999, 24, 357;

| — | Laenu taotlemise ja menetlemise kord. Kinnitatud Maaelu Edendamise sihtasutuse nõukogu 13. aprilli 2005 otsusega; |
| --- | --- |

—

Laenu taotlemise ja menetlemise kord. Kinnitatud Maaelu Edendamise sihtasutuse nõukogu 13. aprilli 2005 otsusega;

| — | Laen hoiu-laenuühistute tegevuse arendamiseks. Laenu taotlemise kord. Kinnitatud Maaelu Edendamise sihtasutuse nõukogu 15. juuni 2005 otsusega |
| --- | --- |

—

Laen hoiu-laenuühistute tegevuse arendamiseks. Laenu taotlemise kord. Kinnitatud Maaelu Edendamise sihtasutuse nõukogu 15. juuni 2005 otsusega

Type of measure

Non-aid

Objective

Sectoral development

Form of aid

—

Budget

The size of the loan portfolio is EEK 30 000 000 annually (~ EUR 1 917 000)

Intensity

—

Duration

Until 15.9.2013

Economic sectors

Agricultural sector

Name and address of the granting authority

| Maaelu Edendamise Sihtasutus |
| --- |
| R. Tobiase 4 |
| EE-10147 Tallinn |

Maaelu Edendamise Sihtasutus

R. Tobiase 4

EE-10147 Tallinn

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

| Date of adoption of the decision | 30.4.2008 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of the aid | N 650/07 |
| Member State | France |
| Region | Département de la Sarthe |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Aide à la modernisation des élevages sarthois de poules pondeuses labellisés «Label Rouge» et «biologique» |
| Legal basis | Council Directive 1999/74/EC of 19 July 1999 laying down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens
  Articles L 1511-1 et seq. of the Code général des collectivités territoriales (CGCT) |
| Type of measure | Aid scheme |
| Objective | Aid for investments in agricultural holdings |
| Form of aid | Direct grant |
| Budget | EUR 600 000 |
| Intensity | 20 % |
| Duration | 2008-2009 |
| Economic sectors | Agriculture |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Conseil général de la Sarthe |
| DGA du développement territorial |
| Service agriculture et environnement |
| 40, rue de Joinville |
| F-72072 Le Mans Cedex 9 |

Date of adoption of the decision

30.4.2008

Reference number of the aid

N 650/07

Member State

France

Region

Département de la Sarthe

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Aide à la modernisation des élevages sarthois de poules pondeuses labellisés «Label Rouge» et «biologique»

Legal basis

Council Directive 1999/74/EC of 19 July 1999 laying down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens

Articles L 1511-1 et seq. of the Code général des collectivités territoriales (CGCT)

Type of measure

Aid scheme

Objective

Aid for investments in agricultural holdings

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

EUR 600 000

Intensity

20 %

Duration

2008-2009

Economic sectors

Agriculture

Name and address of the granting authority

Conseil général de la Sarthe

DGA du développement territorial

Service agriculture et environnement

40, rue de Joinville

F-72072 Le Mans Cedex 9

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

| Date of adoption of the decision | 30.4.2008 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of the aid | N 755/07 |
| Member State | Lithuania |
| Region | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Pagalba palūkanoms už kreditus (išskyrus žemei pirkti) kompensuoti |
| Legal basis | — | Lietuvos Respublikos žemės ūkio ir kaimo plėtros įstatymas (Žin., 2002, Nr. 72-3009); |

Date of adoption of the decision

30.4.2008

Reference number of the aid

N 755/07

Member State

Lithuania

Region

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Pagalba palūkanoms už kreditus (išskyrus žemei pirkti) kompensuoti

Legal basis

—

Lietuvos Respublikos žemės ūkio ir kaimo plėtros įstatymas (Žin., 2002, Nr. 72-3009);

| — | Lietuvos Respublikos Vyriausybės 1997 m. rugpjūčio 22 d. nutarimas Nr. 912 „Dėl Žemės ūkio paskolų garantijų fondo“ (Žin., 1997, Nr. 79-2009; 2003, Nr. 57-2542; 2005, Nr. 78-2825; Nr. 105-3874); |
| --- | --- |

—

Lietuvos Respublikos Vyriausybės 1997 m. rugpjūčio 22 d. nutarimas Nr. 912 „Dėl Žemės ūkio paskolų garantijų fondo“ (Žin., 1997, Nr. 79-2009; 2003, Nr. 57-2542; 2005, Nr. 78-2825; Nr. 105-3874);

| — | Dalies palūkanų už investicinius kreditus, paimtus nuo 2007 m. gegužės 1 d. ir suteiktus su UAB Žemės ūkio paskolų garantijų fondo garantija, kompensavimo taisyklių projektas; |
| --- | --- |

—

Dalies palūkanų už investicinius kreditus, paimtus nuo 2007 m. gegužės 1 d. ir suteiktus su UAB Žemės ūkio paskolų garantijų fondo garantija, kompensavimo taisyklių projektas;

| — | Dalies palūkanų už investicinius kreditus, paimtus nuo 2007 m. gegužės 1 d. ir suteiktus be UAB Žemės ūkio paskolų garantijų fondo garantijos, kompensavimo taisyklių projektas |
| --- | --- |

—

Dalies palūkanų už investicinius kreditus, paimtus nuo 2007 m. gegužės 1 d. ir suteiktus be UAB Žemės ūkio paskolų garantijų fondo garantijos, kompensavimo taisyklių projektas

Type of measure

Investment aid into agricultural primary production

Objective

Sectoral development

Form of aid

Interest rate subsidy

Budget

Total: LTL 54 000 000

Intensity

Up to 40 %

Duration

Until 31.12.2013

Economic sectors

Agricultural sector

Name and address of the granting authority

| Lietuvos Respublikos žemės ūkio ministerija |
| --- |
| Gedimino pr. 19 |
| LT-01103 Vilnius |

Lietuvos Respublikos žemės ūkio ministerija

Gedimino pr. 19

LT-01103 Vilnius

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

| Date of adoption of the decision | 19.3.2008 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of the aid | N 64/08 |
| Member State | France |
| Region | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Aide à la réinsertion professionnelle |
| Legal basis | Articles D 352-15 à D 352-30 du code rural |
| Type of measure | Aid scheme |
| Objective | Aid to help farmers withdraw from agricultural activities |
| Form of aid | Direct grant |
| Budget | EUR 30 million |
| Intensity | Variable |
| Duration | 6 years |
| Economic sectors | Agriculture |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Ministère de l'agriculture et de la pêche |
| 78, rue de Varenne |
| F-75349 Paris 07 SP |

Date of adoption of the decision

19.3.2008

Reference number of the aid

N 64/08

Member State

France

Region

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Aide à la réinsertion professionnelle

Legal basis

Articles D 352-15 à D 352-30 du code rural

Type of measure

Aid scheme

Objective

Aid to help farmers withdraw from agricultural activities

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

EUR 30 million

Intensity

Variable

Duration

6 years

Economic sectors

Agriculture

Name and address of the granting authority

Ministère de l'agriculture et de la pêche

78, rue de Varenne

F-75349 Paris 07 SP

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

---

IV Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

| 19.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 154/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 154/15

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

18 June 2008

(2008/C 154/03)

1 euro=

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,5493 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 167,62 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4593 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,79330 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,3838 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,6160 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 126,28 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,0405 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,000 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 243,44 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7044 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,3779 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,6643 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 30,360 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,9041 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6461 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5797 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 12,0932 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 2,0529 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,1215 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 596,24 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 12,5086 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,6624 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,2460 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 385,25 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 5,0468 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 68,580 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 36,6550 |
| THB | Thai baht | 51,568 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,5015 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 15,9462 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,5493

JPY

Japanese yen

167,62

DKK

Danish krone

7,4593

GBP

Pound sterling

0,79330

SEK

Swedish krona

9,3838

CHF

Swiss franc

1,6160

ISK

Iceland króna

126,28

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,0405

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,000

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

243,44

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7044

PLN

Polish zloty

3,3779

RON

Romanian leu

3,6643

SKK

Slovak koruna

30,360

TRY

Turkish lira

1,9041

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6461

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5797

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

12,0932

NZD

New Zealand dollar

2,0529

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,1215

KRW

South Korean won

1 596,24

ZAR

South African rand

12,5086

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,6624

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,2460

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 385,25

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

5,0468

PHP

Philippine peso

68,580

RUB

Russian rouble

36,6550

THB

Thai baht

51,568

BRL

Brazilian real

2,5015

MXN

Mexican peso

15,9462

---

(1)

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

| 19.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 154/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 154/16

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products and amending Regulation (EC) No 70/2001

(2008/C 154/04)

Aid No: XA 58/08

Member State: Republic of Slovenia

Region: Območje občine Bloke

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving individual aid: Podpore programom razvoja podeželja v občini Bloke 2007–2013

Legal basis: Pravilnik o sofinanciranju programov za ohranjanje in razvoj kmetijstva in podeželja v občini Bloke

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company:

| | 2007: EUR 4 172 |
| --- | --- |

2007: EUR 4 172

| | 2008: EUR 10 000 |
| --- | --- |

2008: EUR 10 000

| | 2009: EUR 10 000 |
| --- | --- |

2009: EUR 10 000

| | 2010: EUR 10 600 |
| --- | --- |

2010: EUR 10 600

| | 2011: EUR 11 000 |
| --- | --- |

2011: EUR 11 000

| | 2012: EUR 11 500 |
| --- | --- |

2012: EUR 11 500

| | 2013: EUR 12 000 |
| --- | --- |

2013: EUR 12 000

Maximum aid intensity:

1.   Investment in agricultural holdings:

| — | up to 50 % of eligible costs in less-favoured areas, |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 50 % of eligible costs in less-favoured areas,

| — | up to 40 % of eligible costs in other areas. |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 40 % of eligible costs in other areas.

The purpose of the aid is investment to restore farm features, to purchase equipment to be used for agricultural production, to invest in permanent crops and to improve farmland.

2.   Conservation of traditional landscapes and buildings:

| — | for investment in non-productive features, up to 100 % of eligible costs, |
| --- | --- |

—

for investment in non-productive features, up to 100 % of eligible costs,

| — | for investment in productive assets on farms, up to 60 % of actual costs, and up to 75 % in less-favoured areas, provided that the investment does not entail any increase in the production capacity of the farm, |
| --- | --- |

—

for investment in productive assets on farms, up to 60 % of actual costs, and up to 75 % in less-favoured areas, provided that the investment does not entail any increase in the production capacity of the farm,

| — | additional aid may be granted at a rate of up to 100 % to cover the extra costs incurred by using traditional materials necessary to preserve the heritage features of buildings. |
| --- | --- |

—

additional aid may be granted at a rate of up to 100 % to cover the extra costs incurred by using traditional materials necessary to preserve the heritage features of buildings.

3.   Aid towards the payment of insurance premiums:

| — | the amount of municipal support is the difference between the amount of co-financing of insurance premiums from the national budget and up to 50 % of eligible costs of insurance premiums for insuring crops and fruit and for insuring livestock against disease. |
| --- | --- |

—

the amount of municipal support is the difference between the amount of co-financing of insurance premiums from the national budget and up to 50 % of eligible costs of insurance premiums for insuring crops and fruit and for insuring livestock against disease.

4.   Aid for land reparcelling:

| — | up to 100 % of eligible legal and administrative costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 100 % of eligible legal and administrative costs.

5.   Aid to encourage the production of quality agricultural products:

| — | up to 100 % of actual costs incurred; this is to be provided in the form of subsidised services and must not involve direct payments of money to producers. |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 100 % of actual costs incurred; this is to be provided in the form of subsidised services and must not involve direct payments of money to producers.

6.   Provision of technical support:

| — | up to 100 % of costs concerning education and training of farmers, consultancy services and the organisation of forums, competitions, exhibitions, fairs, publications, catalogues and websites. The aid is to be granted in the form of subsidised services and must not involve direct payments of money to producers |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 100 % of costs concerning education and training of farmers, consultancy services and the organisation of forums, competitions, exhibitions, fairs, publications, catalogues and websites. The aid is to be granted in the form of subsidised services and must not involve direct payments of money to producers

Date of implementation: January 2008

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: Until 31.12.2013

Objective of aid: To support SMEs

Reference to Articles in Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 and eligible costs: Chapter II of the draft Rules on the co-financing of programmes for preserving and developing rural areas in the municipality of Bloke includes measures constituting State aid in accordance with the following Articles of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 of 15 December 2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products and amending Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 (OJ L 358, 16.12.2006, p. 3):

Article 4: Investment in agricultural holdings,

Article 5: Conservation of traditional landscapes and buildings,

Article 12: Aid towards the payment of insurance premiums,

Article 13: Aid for land reparcelling,

Article 14: Aid to encourage the production of quality agricultural products,

Article 15: Provision of technical support in the agricultural sector

Economic sector(s) concerned: Agriculture

Name and address of granting authority:

| Občina Bloke |
| --- |
| Nova vas 4a |
| SLO-1385 Nova vas |

Občina Bloke

Nova vas 4a

SLO-1385 Nova vas

Website: http://www.uradni-list.si/1/ulonline.jsp?urlid=2007120&dhid=93633

Other information: The measure for the payment of insurance premiums to insure crops and fruit includes the following adverse climatic events which can be assimilated to natural disasters: spring frost, hail, lightning, fire caused by lightning, storm and floods.

The municipality's Rules meet the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 concerning the measures to be adopted by the municipality and the general provisions applicable (steps preceding grant of aid, cumulation, transparency and monitoring of aid)

Aid No: XA 59/08

Member State: Republic of Slovenia

Region: Območje občine Brezovica

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving individual aid: Podpora programov razvoja kmetijstva in podeželja v občini Brezovica 2007–2013

Legal basis: Pravilnik o dodeljevanju pomoči za ohranjanje in razvoj kmetijstva ter podeželja v občini Brezovica za programsko obdobje 2007–2013

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company:

| | 2007: EUR 138 132 |
| --- | --- |

2007: EUR 138 132

| | 2008: EUR 86 668 |
| --- | --- |

2008: EUR 86 668

| | 2009: EUR 88 000 |
| --- | --- |

2009: EUR 88 000

| | 2010: EUR 90 000 |
| --- | --- |

2010: EUR 90 000

| | 2011: EUR 92 000 |
| --- | --- |

2011: EUR 92 000

| | 2012: EUR 94 000 |
| --- | --- |

2012: EUR 94 000

| | 2013: EUR 96 000 |
| --- | --- |

2013: EUR 96 000

Maximum aid intensity:

1.   Investment in agricultural holdings:

| — | up to 50 % of eligible costs in less-favoured areas or up to 40 % in other areas. |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 50 % of eligible costs in less-favoured areas or up to 40 % in other areas.

The purpose of the aid is investment to restore farm features and to purchase equipment to be used for agricultural production, to invest in permanent crops, to improve farmland and to manage pastures.

2.   Conservation of traditional landscapes and buildings:

| — | up to 100 % of actual costs for investment in non-productive features, |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 100 % of actual costs for investment in non-productive features,

| — | for investment in productive assets on farms, up to 60 % of actual costs, or 75 % in less-favoured areas, provided that the investment does not entail any increase in the production capacity of the farm, |
| --- | --- |

—

for investment in productive assets on farms, up to 60 % of actual costs, or 75 % in less-favoured areas, provided that the investment does not entail any increase in the production capacity of the farm,

| — | additional aid may be granted at a rate of up to 100 % to cover the extra costs incurred by using traditional materials necessary to preserve the heritage features of buildings. |
| --- | --- |

—

additional aid may be granted at a rate of up to 100 % to cover the extra costs incurred by using traditional materials necessary to preserve the heritage features of buildings.

3.   Aid towards the payment of insurance premiums:

| — | municipal support brings the level of support up to a maximum of 50 % of eligible costs of insurance premiums for insuring crops and fruit and for insuring livestock against disease. |
| --- | --- |

—

municipal support brings the level of support up to a maximum of 50 % of eligible costs of insurance premiums for insuring crops and fruit and for insuring livestock against disease.

4.   Aid for land reparcelling:

| — | the aid is provided in the form of grants covering up to 100 % of eligible legal and administrative costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

the aid is provided in the form of grants covering up to 100 % of eligible legal and administrative costs.

5.   Aid to encourage the production of quality agricultural products:

| — | the aid is provided in the form of grants covering up to 100 % of eligible costs. The aid is to be granted in the form of subsidized services and must not involve direct payments of money to agricultural holdings. |
| --- | --- |

—

the aid is provided in the form of grants covering up to 100 % of eligible costs. The aid is to be granted in the form of subsidized services and must not involve direct payments of money to agricultural holdings.

6.   Provision of technical support:

| — | up to 100 % of eligible costs in the form of subsidized services concerning education and training of farmers, consultancy services and the organisation of forums, competitions, exhibitions, fairs, publications, catalogues and websites. The aid is to be granted in the form of subsidised services and must not involve direct payments of money to producers |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 100 % of eligible costs in the form of subsidized services concerning education and training of farmers, consultancy services and the organisation of forums, competitions, exhibitions, fairs, publications, catalogues and websites. The aid is to be granted in the form of subsidised services and must not involve direct payments of money to producers

Date of implementation: January 2008

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: Until 31.12.2013

Objective of the aid: To support SMEs

Reference to Articles in Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 and eligible costs: Chapter II of the draft Rules on granting aid for preserving and developing rural areas in the municipality of Brezovica for the programming period 2007-2013 includes measures constituting State aid in accordance with the following Articles of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 of 15 December 2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products and amending Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 (OJ L 358, 16.12.2006, p. 3):

Article 4: Investment in agricultural holdings,

Article 5: Conservation of traditional landscapes and buildings,

Article 12: Aid towards the payment of insurance premiums,

Article 13: Aid for land reparcelling,

Article 14: Aid to encourage the production of quality agricultural products,

Article 15: Provision of technical support in the agricultural sector

Economic sector(s) concerned: Agriculture

Name and address of granting authority:

| Občina Brezovica |
| --- |
| Tržaška c. 390 |
| SLO-1351 Brezovica |

Občina Brezovica

Tržaška c. 390

SLO-1351 Brezovica

Website: http://www.uradni-list.si/1/ulonline.jsp?urlid=2007119&dhid=93518

Other information: The measure for the payment of insurance premiums to insure crops and fruit includes the following adverse climatic events which can be assimilated to natural disasters: spring frost, hail, lightning, fire caused by lightning, storm and floods.

The municipality's Rules meet the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 concerning the measures to be adopted by the municipality and the general provisions applicable (steps preceding grant of aid, cumulation, transparency and monitoring of aid)

Aid No: XA 62/08

Member State: Republic of Slovenia

Region: Območje občine Žirovnica

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving individual aid: Pomoči za ohranjanje in razvoj kmetijstva, gozdarstva in podeželja v občini Žirovnica

Legal basis: Pravilnik o dodelitvi pomoči za ohranjanje in razvoj kmetijstva, gozdarstva in podeželja v občini Žirovnica (II. Poglavje)

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company:

| | 2008: EUR 10 800 |
| --- | --- |

2008: EUR 10 800

| | 2009: EUR 10 800 |
| --- | --- |

2009: EUR 10 800

| | 2010: EUR 10 800 |
| --- | --- |

2010: EUR 10 800

| | 2011: EUR 10 800 |
| --- | --- |

2011: EUR 10 800

| | 2012: EUR 10 800 |
| --- | --- |

2012: EUR 10 800

| | 2013: EUR 10 800 |
| --- | --- |

2013: EUR 10 800

Maximum aid intensity:

1.   Investment in agricultural holdings for primary production:

| — | up to 50 % of eligible costs in less-favoured areas, |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 50 % of eligible costs in less-favoured areas,

| — | up to 40 % of eligible costs in other areas. |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 40 % of eligible costs in other areas.

The purpose of the aid is investment to restore farm features and to purchase equipment to be used for agricultural production, to invest in permanent crops, to improve farmland and to manage pastures.

2.   Aid towards the payment of insurance premiums:

| — | the difference between the amount of co-financing of insurance premiums from the national budget and up to 50 % of eligible costs of insurance premiums for insuring crops and fruit and for insuring livestock against disease. |
| --- | --- |

—

the difference between the amount of co-financing of insurance premiums from the national budget and up to 50 % of eligible costs of insurance premiums for insuring crops and fruit and for insuring livestock against disease.

3.   Aid for land reparcelling:

| — | up to 50 % of actual legal and administrative costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 50 % of actual legal and administrative costs.

4.   Provision of technical support in the agricultural sector:

| — | up to 100 % of costs concerning education and training of farmers, consultancy services, the organisation of forums, competitions, exhibitions, fairs, publications, catalogues and websites and replacement services. The aid is to be granted in the form of subsidised services and does not involve direct payments of money to producers |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 100 % of costs concerning education and training of farmers, consultancy services, the organisation of forums, competitions, exhibitions, fairs, publications, catalogues and websites and replacement services. The aid is to be granted in the form of subsidised services and does not involve direct payments of money to producers

Date of implementation: January 2008

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: Until 31.12.2013

Objective of the aid: To support SMEs

Reference to Articles in Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 and eligible costs: Chapter II of the draft Rules on granting aid for preserving and developing agriculture, forestry and rural areas in the municipality of Žirovnica includes measures constituting State aid in accordance with the following Articles of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 of 15 December 2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products and amending Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 (OJ L 358, 16.12.2006, p. 3):

Article 4: Investment in agricultural holdings,

Article 12: Aid towards the payment of insurance premiums,

Article 13: Aid for land reparcelling,

Article 15: Provision of technical support in the agricultural sector

Economic sector(s) concerned: Agriculture

Name and address of granting authority:

| Občina Žirovnica |
| --- |
| Breznica 3 |
| SLO-4274 Žirovnica |

Občina Žirovnica

Breznica 3

SLO-4274 Žirovnica

Website: http://www.uradni-list.si/1/ulonline.jsp?urlid=2007122&dhid=93759

Other information: The measure for the payment of insurance premiums to insure crops and fruit includes the following adverse climatic events which can be assimilated to natural disasters: spring frost, hail, lightning, fire caused by lightning, storm and floods.

The municipality's Rules meet the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 relating to the measures to be adopted by the municipality and the general provisions applicable (steps preceding grant of aid, cumulation, transparency and monitoring of aid)

Signature of person responsible

Leopold POGAČAR

Župan

Aid No: XA 63/08

Member State: Republic of Slovenia

Region: Območje občine Šalovci

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving individual aid: Državne pomoči za razvoja podeželja v občini Šalovci

Legal basis: Pravilnik o dodeljevanju državnih pomoči na področju razvoja kmetijstva v občini Šalovci

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company:

| | 2007: EUR 2 000 |
| --- | --- |

2007: EUR 2 000

| | 2008: EUR 2 000 |
| --- | --- |

2008: EUR 2 000

| | 2009: EUR 2 000 |
| --- | --- |

2009: EUR 2 000

| | 2010: EUR 2 000 |
| --- | --- |

2010: EUR 2 000

| | 2011: EUR 2 000 |
| --- | --- |

2011: EUR 2 000

| | 2012: EUR 2 000 |
| --- | --- |

2012: EUR 2 000

| | 2013: EUR 2 000 |
| --- | --- |

2013: EUR 2 000

Maximum aid intensity:

1.   Aid towards the payment of insurance premiums:

| — | the amount of municipal co-financing is the difference between the amount of co-financing of insurance premiums from the national budget and up to 50 % of eligible costs of insurance premiums for insuring crops and fruit and for insuring livestock against disease |
| --- | --- |

—

the amount of municipal co-financing is the difference between the amount of co-financing of insurance premiums from the national budget and up to 50 % of eligible costs of insurance premiums for insuring crops and fruit and for insuring livestock against disease

Date of implementation: January 2008

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: Until 31.12.2013

Objective of the aid: To support SMEs

Reference to Articles in Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 and eligible costs: Chapter II of the draft Rules on granting State aid for agricultural development in the municipality of Šalovci includes measures constituting State aid in accordance with the following Articles of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 of 15 December 2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products and amending Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 (OJ L 358, 16.12.2006, p. 3):

Article 12: Aid towards the payment of insurance premiums

Economic sector(s) concerned: Agriculture

Name and address of granting authority:

| Občina Šalovci |
| --- |
| Šalovci 162 |
| SLO-9204 Šalovci |

Občina Šalovci

Šalovci 162

SLO-9204 Šalovci

Website: http://www.uradni-list.si/1/ulonline.jsp?urlid=2007117&dhid=93384

Other information: The measure for the payment of insurance premiums to insure crops and fruit includes the following adverse climatic events which can be assimilated to natural disasters: spring frost, hail, lightning, fire caused by lightning, storm and floods.

The municipality's Rules meet the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 relating to the measures to be adopted by the municipality and the general provisions applicable (steps preceding grant of aid, cumulation, transparency and monitoring of aid)

Signature of person responsible

Aleksander ABRAHAM

Aid No: XA 64/08

Member State: Republic of Slovenia

Region: Območje občine Mežica

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving individual aid: Pomoči za ohranjanje in razvoj kmetijstva in podeželja v občini Mežica za programsko obdobje 2007–2013

Legal basis: Pravilnik o dodeljevanju pomoči za ohranjanje in razvoj kmetijstva in podeželja v občini Mežica za programsko obdobje 2007–2013 (II. Poglavje)

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company:

| | 2007: EUR 13 383 |
| --- | --- |

2007: EUR 13 383

| | 2008: EUR 13 383 |
| --- | --- |

2008: EUR 13 383

| | 2009: EUR 13 383 |
| --- | --- |

2009: EUR 13 383

| | 2010: EUR 13 383 |
| --- | --- |

2010: EUR 13 383

| | 2011: EUR 13 383 |
| --- | --- |

2011: EUR 13 383

| | 2012: EUR 13 383 |
| --- | --- |

2012: EUR 13 383

| | 2013: EUR 13 383 |
| --- | --- |

2013: EUR 13 383

Maximum aid intensity:

1.   Investment in agricultural holdings for primary production:

| — | up to 50 % of eligible costs in less-favoured areas, |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 50 % of eligible costs in less-favoured areas,

| — | up to 40 % of eligible costs in other areas, |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 40 % of eligible costs in other areas,

| — | up to 60 % of eligible costs in less-favoured areas, and up to 50 % of eligible costs in other areas, in the case of investments made by young farmers within five years of setting up. |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 60 % of eligible costs in less-favoured areas, and up to 50 % of eligible costs in other areas, in the case of investments made by young farmers within five years of setting up.

The purpose of the aid is investment to restore farm features and to purchase equipment to be used for agricultural production, to invest in permanent crops, to improve farmland and to manage pastures.

2.   Conservation of traditional landscapes and buildings:

| — | for non-productive features, up to 100 % of actual costs, |
| --- | --- |

—

for non-productive features, up to 100 % of actual costs,

| — | for productive assets on farms, up to 60 % of actual costs, or 75 % in less-favoured areas, provided that the investment does not entail any increase in the production capacity of the farm, |
| --- | --- |

—

for productive assets on farms, up to 60 % of actual costs, or 75 % in less-favoured areas, provided that the investment does not entail any increase in the production capacity of the farm,

| — | additional aid may be granted at a rate of up to 100 % to cover the extra costs incurred by using traditional materials necessary to maintain the heritage features of buildings. |
| --- | --- |

—

additional aid may be granted at a rate of up to 100 % to cover the extra costs incurred by using traditional materials necessary to maintain the heritage features of buildings.

3.   Relocation of farm buildings in the public interest:

| — | up to 100 % of actual costs where the relocation simply consists of the dismantling, removal and re-erection of existing facilities, |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 100 % of actual costs where the relocation simply consists of the dismantling, removal and re-erection of existing facilities,

| — | where the relocation results in the farmer benefiting from more modern facilities, the farmer must contribute at least 60 %, or 50 % in less-favoured areas, of the increase in the value of the facilities concerned after relocation. If the beneficiary is a young farmer, his contribution is to be at least 55 % or 45 % respectively, |
| --- | --- |

—

where the relocation results in the farmer benefiting from more modern facilities, the farmer must contribute at least 60 %, or 50 % in less-favoured areas, of the increase in the value of the facilities concerned after relocation. If the beneficiary is a young farmer, his contribution is to be at least 55 % or 45 % respectively,

| — | where the relocation results in an increase in production capacity, the contribution from the beneficiary must be at least 60 %, or 50 % in less-favoured areas, of the expenses relating to this increase. If the beneficiary is a young farmer, his contribution is to be at least 55 % or 45 % respectively. |
| --- | --- |

—

where the relocation results in an increase in production capacity, the contribution from the beneficiary must be at least 60 %, or 50 % in less-favoured areas, of the expenses relating to this increase. If the beneficiary is a young farmer, his contribution is to be at least 55 % or 45 % respectively.

4.   Aid towards the payment of insurance premiums:

| — | the amount of municipal support is the difference between the amount of co-financing of insurance premiums from the national budget and up to 50 % of eligible costs of insurance premiums for insuring crops and fruit and for insuring livestock against disease. |
| --- | --- |

—

the amount of municipal support is the difference between the amount of co-financing of insurance premiums from the national budget and up to 50 % of eligible costs of insurance premiums for insuring crops and fruit and for insuring livestock against disease.

5.   Aid for land reparcelling:

| — | up to 100 % of actual legal and administrative costs incurred. |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 100 % of actual legal and administrative costs incurred.

6.   Aid to encourage the production of quality agricultural products:

| — | up to 100 % of eligible costs in the form of subsidised services; this must not involve direct payments of money to producers. |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 100 % of eligible costs in the form of subsidised services; this must not involve direct payments of money to producers.

7.   Provision of technical support:

| — | up to 100 % of costs concerning education and training of farmers, consultancy services, the organisation of forums, competitions, exhibitions, fairs, publications, catalogues and websites, and the costs of replacement services. The aid is to be granted in the form of subsidised services and must not involve direct payments of money to producers |
| --- | --- |

—

up to 100 % of costs concerning education and training of farmers, consultancy services, the organisation of forums, competitions, exhibitions, fairs, publications, catalogues and websites, and the costs of replacement services. The aid is to be granted in the form of subsidised services and must not involve direct payments of money to producers

Date of implementation: January 2008

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: Until 31.12.2013

Objective of the aid: To support SMEs

Reference to Articles in Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 and eligible costs: Chapter II of the draft Rules on granting aid for preserving and developing agriculture, forestry and rural areas in the municipality of Mežica includes measures constituting State aid in accordance with the following Articles of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 of 15 December 2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products and amending Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 (OJ L 358, 16.12.2006, p. 3):

Article 4: Investment in agricultural holdings,

Article 5: Conservation of traditional landscapes and buildings,

Article 6: Relocation of farm buildings in the public interest,

Article 12: Aid towards the payment of insurance premiums,

Article 13: Aid for land reparcelling,

Article 14: Aid to encourage the production of quality agricultural products,

Article 15: Provision of technical support in the agricultural sector

Economic sector(s) concerned: Agriculture

Name and address of granting authority:

| Občina Mežica |
| --- |
| Trg svobode 1 |
| SLO-2392 Mežica |

Občina Mežica

Trg svobode 1

SLO-2392 Mežica

Website: http://www.uradni-list.si/1/ulonline.jsp?urlid=2007120&dhid=93633

Other information: The measure for the payment of insurance premiums to insure crops and fruit includes the following adverse climatic events which can be assimilated to natural disasters: spring frost, hail, lightning, fire caused by lightning, storm and floods.

The municipality's Rules meet the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 concerning the measures to be adopted by the municipality and the general provisions applicable (steps preceding grant of aid, cumulation, transparency and monitoring of aid)

Signature of person responsible

Dušan KREBEL

Župan

---

V Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

| 19.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 154/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 154/22

---

NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITION EPSO/AST/65/08

(2008/C 154/05)

The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising open competition EPSO/AST/65/08 for the recruitment of language editors having Latvian as their main language.

The competition notice is published in Official Journal C 154 A of 19 June 2008 in English, French and German only.

Full details are available on the EPSO website: http://europa.eu/epso

---

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY

Commission

| 19.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 154/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 154/23

---

Withdrawal of notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.5126 — Ineos/BASF Assets)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 154/06)

(Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004)

On 7 May 2008, the Commission of the European Communities received notification of a proposed concentration between Ineos and BASF Assets. On 3 June 2008, the notifying parties informed the Commission that they withdrew their notification.

---

Corrigenda

| 19.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 154/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 154/24

---

Corrigendum to the Agreement between the European Parliament and the Commission on procedures for implementing Council Decision 1999/468/EC laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission, as amended by Decision 2006/512/EC

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 143 of 10 June 2008
  )

(2008/C 154/07)

On page 2, footnote number 2:

for:

‘OJ C 121, 24.4.2001, p. 122.’,

read:

‘OJ C 117 E, 18.5.2006, p. 123.’.

---