----

----

I Information

Commission

----

Euro exchange rates (1)

25 August 2006

(2006/C 204/01)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

----

----

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

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(2006/C 204/02)

(Text with EEA relevance)

Date of adoption: 

Member States: Italy

Aid No: N 11/06

Title: Prolongation of Environmental Aid Scheme N433/04 in Friuli-Venice-Julia

Objective: Environmental protection

Legal basis: Decisione della Giunta Regionale n. 1002 del 22 aprile 2004 concernente la Legge regionale 18/2003

Budget: EUR 2 million

Aid intensity or amount: 30 % plus bonuses of 10 % for SMEs or 5 % for enterprises in art. 87(3)c. areas. 15 % for SMEs for the adoption of new Community standards

Duration: 2006-2007

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: 

Member State: Cyprus

Aid No: N 65/2006

Title: Tροποποίηση του καθεστώτος ενισχύσεων για τεχνολογική αναβάθμιση του μεταποιητικού τομέα

Objective: Regional development — Small and medium-sized enterprises

Legal basis: Υπ. Α. 15.11.2005

Annual expenditure planned: EUR 5,1 million

Duration (end date): 

Economic sectors: Limited to the manufacturing industry

Name and address of the granting authority: Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Tourism, Nicosia

Other information: Aid scheme — Direct grant

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: 

Member State: United Kingdom

Aid No: N 117/2005

Title: Aggregated Public Sector Procurement of Broadband in Scotland

Objective: The envisaged measure aims to connect various public administration bodies such as schools, libraries and town halls in certain areas of Scotland to advanced broadband services. The project envisages aggregating public sector demand for such services and procuring them via public sector procurements

Legal basis: The measure will be implemented under Section 69 of the Local Government Act 1973 and Section 20 of the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003

Overall Budget: The overall budget of the procurements financed by state resources is expected to be around GBP 100 million (about EUR 145 million)

Aid intensity: 100 %

Duration of project: 5-7 years

Other information: The selected provider(s) will be mandated to provide non-discriminatory wholesale access to third party operators in case it uses some of the assets procured under the project to also serve residents and business customers

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: 

Member State: United Kingdom

Aid No: N 194/2006

Title: Screen East Content Investment Fund

Objective(s): Risk Capital for SMEs

Legal basis: ‘National Lottery Act 1993’ amendment of section 23 (No 2) Order 1999

Budget: GBP 2 285 714 (approximately EUR 3,32 million)

Duration: until 30 September 2008

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: 

Member State: Ireland

Aid No: N 230/2006

Title: Transitional extension to the scheme of reliefs for the renewal of certain urban areas (ex N 264/2004 and 270/2002)

Objective(s): Regional aid

Legal basis: Finance Act 2006

Budget: EUR 20 000 000

Aid intensity or amount: 4,4 %-11,56 % net

Duration: 

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: 

Member State: Ireland

Aid No: N 231/2006

Title: Transitional extension to the scheme of reliefs for the renewal of certain rural areas (ex N 257/2004 and N 271/2002)

Objective(s): Regional aid

Legal basis: Finance Act 2006

Budget: EUR 4 000 000

Aid intensity or amount: 4,4 %-11,56 % net

Duration: 

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: 

Member State: Ireland

Aid No: N 232/2006

Title: State Aid No N 232/2006 — Transitional extension to Capital Allowances Depreciation Regime for Hotels in Ireland (ex N 832/2000) — Ireland

Objective(s): Regional aid

Legal basis: Finance Act 2006

Budget: EUR 35 000 000

Aid intensity or amount: 4,5 %-12,5 % net

Duration: 

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: 

Member State: Italy

Aid No: N 512/2005

Title: State aid for the rescue of firms in difficulty — Volare Airlines Spa

Objectives: To keep the business going, safeguard jobs and protect creditors' interests (Air transport)

Form: bank loan guarantee

Legal basis: 

Budget: EUR 25 million

Duration: Six months

Other information: Submission of periodic reports on the implementation of the aid

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: 

Member State: France (Department of Var)

Aid No: N 563/05

Title: Aid to Ryanair for the air service between Toulon and London

Legal basis: Loi no 2005-882 du 2 août 2005

Budget: EUR 500 000 per annum for 3 years

Aid intensity or amount: 50 % of additional costs

Duration: 3 years

Economic sectors: Air Transport

Name and address of the granting authority: 

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: 

Member State: Poland [Dolny Śląsk]

Aid No: N 629/2005

Title: Pomoc regionalna dla Global e-Business Operations Centre Sp. z o. o.

Objective: Regional development [Accounting and book keeping (NACE 74.12)]

Legal basis: Umowa ramowa o udzielenie dotacji celowej z dnia 15 kwietnia 2005 r. pomiędzy Ministrem Gospodarki i Pracy a Global e-Business Operations Centre Sp. z o. o, Uchwała nr 33/2004 z dnia 1 lutego 2005 r. w sprawie ustanowienia programu wieloletniego pod nazwą ‘Wsparcie finansowe inwestycji realizowanej przez Global e-Business Operations Centre Sp. z o. o., we Wrocławiu pod nazwą: “Global Business Centre”, w latach 2005-2009’

Art. 80 ustawy z dnia 26 listopada 1998 r. o finansach publicznych (Dz. U. z 2003 r., Nr 15, poz. 148)

Budget: Overall aid amount granted: PLZ 8 640 000

Maximum aid intensity: 10,53 %

Duration: End date: 31.12.2009

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: 

Member State: Deutschland

Aid No: NN 7/2006

Title: Forschungskonzept ‘Mobilität und bodengebundener Verkehr’

Objective: Research and development (All sectors)

Legal basis: Bundeshaushaltsplan, Einzelplan 30, Kapitel 3006, Titel 68340

Budget: EUR 80 000 000

Maximum aid intensity: 100 %

Duration: 1.1.2005—31.12.2006

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/

----

----

STATE AID — SWEDEN

State aid C 35/2006 (ex NN 37/2006) — Sale of land below market price

Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty

(2006/C 204/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

By means of the letter dated 19 July 2006 reproduced in the authentic language on the pages following this summary, the Commission notified Sweden of its decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty concerning the above-mentioned aid.

Interested parties may submit their comments on the aid in respect of which the Commission is initiating the procedure within one month of the date of publication of this summary and the following letter, to:

These comments will be communicated to Sweden. Confidential treatment of the identity of the interested party submitting the comments may be requested in writing, stating the reasons for the request.

SUMMARY

On 14 November 2005 the Commission was informed by an interested party about the sale allegedly below market price of a plot of land by the Municipality of Are to Konsum Jamtland ekonomisk forening, a cooperative society which sells consumer goods.

The complainant claims that Lidl Sverige KB, a direct competitor of the buyer of the land in the food and groceries retailing sector, made a formal offer of SEK 6,6 million for the same land, while the actual sale price was SEK 2 million. The alleged aid amount is therefore SEK 4,6 million (currently EUR 0,5 million).

The Commission's preliminary view is that the transaction involves state aid in the meaning of article 87(1) of the EC Treaty. The offer made by Lidl seems to be directly comparable to the actual price of the transaction. The relevant market is open to intra-Community trade. The land sale does not seem to comply with the provisions of the Commission Communication on state aid elements in sales of land and buildings by public authorities (1), namely because the sale was not conducted through an unconditional bidding procedure and there is no formal evidence of an independent expert evaluation of the land.

Since the transaction was not notified to the Commission, it comes to the preliminary conclusion that Sweden failed to comply with its obligation, under Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty, to inform the Commission, in sufficient time to enable it to submit its comments, of any plans to grant or alter aid. The measure has accordingly been treated as an unlawful aid.

The Commission has serious doubts about the compatibility of such state aid with the EC Treaty. The measure cannot be considered as aid for initial investment under the Guidelines on national regional aid (2). It seems to constitute operating aid which is not allowed in assisted areas under article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty, according to the same Guidelines. At this stage, the Commission considers that there is no further legal basis for exempting this measure from the incompatibility principle.

In accordance with Article 14 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, all unlawful aid can be subject to recovery from the recipient.

TEXT OF LETTER

‘Kommissionen önskar informera Sverige om att den, efter att ha granskat uppgifter som tillhandahållits av Era myndigheter om den ovannämnda stödåtgärden, har beslutat inleda det förfarande som anges i artikel 88.2 i EG-fördraget.

1.   FÖRFARANDE

2.   BESKRIVNING AV STÖDÅTGÄRDEN

Påstådd stödmottagare

Den klagande

Påstått statligt stöd

De svenska myndigheternas argument

Den klagandes argument

3.   BEDÖMNING AV STÖDÅTGÄRDEN

Statligt stöd enligt artikel 87.1

Användning av offentliga medel

Gynnande av vissa företag

Snedvridning av konkurrensen och påverkan på handeln mellan medlemsstaterna

Kravet på anmälan

Förenlighet

Slutsats

4.   BESLUT

----

(1)OJ C 209, 10.7.1997, p. 3.

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

(3)EGT L 10, 13.1.2001, s. 30.

(4)EGT C 209, 10.7.1997, s. 3.

(5)EGT C 74, 10.3.1998, s. 9.

(6)EUT L 83, 27.3.1999, s. 1.

----

----

STATE AID — UNITED KINGDOM

(Articles 87 to 89 of the Treaty establishing the European Community)

Commission notice pursuant to Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty, addressed to the other Member States and interested parties

State aid C 16/2005 (ex N 232/2004) — Sale of the Tote

(2006/C 204/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

By the following letter dated 5 July 2006, the Commission has informed the United Kingdom of its decision to close the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the Treaty.

‘By decision of 1 June 2005, the Commission initiated the formal investigation procedure referred to in Article 88 (2) EC Treaty in respect of the above aid. The decision to initiate the procedure was communicated to the UK authorities on 1 June 2005 and published in the Official Journal on 8 July 2005 (OJ C 168/41). The UK withdrew its notification of the aid measure in a letter registered on 5 May 2006.

The Commission takes note of the UK Government's statement that it will not pursue the current sale proposal.

The Commission notes that, according to Article 8 of the Council Regulation 659/99 (1), the Member State concerned may withdraw the notification in due time before the Commission has taken a decision on the aid. In cases where the Commission has initiated the formal investigation procedure, the Commission shall close that procedure.

Consequently, the Commission has decided to close the formal investigation procedure under Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of the relevant aid, recording that the UK has withdrawn its notification.’

----

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for application of Article 93 of the Treaty, OJ L 83, 27.3.1999, p. 1.

----

----

STATE AID — GERMANY

State aid C 34/2006 (ex N 29/2005) — Introduction of digital terrestrial television (DVB-T) in North Rhine-Westphalia

Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty

(2006/C 204/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

By means of the letter dated 19 July 2006 reproduced in the authentic language on the pages following this summary, the Commission notified the Federal Republic of Germany of its decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty concerning the abovementioned aid/measure.

Interested parties may submit their comments on the aid/measure in respect of which the Commission is initiating the procedure within one month of the date of publication of this summary and the following letter, to:

These comments will be communicated to the Federal Republic of Germany. Confidential treatment of the identity of the interested party submitting the comments may be requested in writing, stating the reasons for the request.

TEXT OF SUMMARY

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE

The notified measure concerns the introduction of digital terrestrial television (‘DVB-T’) in the German Land of North Rhine-Westphalia (‘NRW’) where it was launched in two areas in the course of the year 2004. The switchover project has been led by the media authority of NRW Landesanstalt für Medien Nordrhein-Westfalen (‘LfM’).

LfM has budgeted EUR 6,8 million for the introduction of DVB-T in NRW. The precise terms of LfM's financial assistance to the commercial broadcasters are set out in the directive on the financial support for DVB-T (Förderrichtlinie DVB-T) issued on 19 November 2004. The directive specifies that the support is limited to five years. The support is related to the broadcasters' transmission fees in the DVB-T network. Over the five year period, the supports amounts to on average to 30 percent of the broadcasters' transmission fees. In the first year of operation, the assistance amounts to 40 percent of the broadcasters' transmission fees. It is reduced by five percentage points in each subsequent year to reach 20 percent in the fifth year. The directive also states that the assistance is reduced by the amount which broadcasters save from the switch-off of their analogue transmissions (Abschaltgewinne). The financial assistance to the commercial broadcasters will be granted in the form of non-repayable grants.

In the case of the individual programme channels Viva, Eurosport, CNN and Terra Nova, the envisaged financial support corresponds indeed to the scheme as described in the directive. Over five years, the total financial support for these four channels thus amounts to a total of EUR 4 050 000. In case of the RTL group, which was allocated one entire multiplex with four programme channels, LfM does not envisage to grant any financial support. The reason is that RTL has considerable costs savings from switching off its transmissions in the analogue terrestrial network. The cost savings do not only originate from the analogue switch-off in NRW but also, to some extent, from the analogue switch-off in Northern Germany. In the case of ProSiebenSat.1, which was also allocated one entire multiplex, the envisaged financial support amounts to EUR 550 000 per year and is the same in all five years. Over the five years, the total financial support for ProSiebenSat.1 thus amounts to EUR 2 750 000. As in the case of the RTL group, the calculation of the subsidy takes into account the costs savings from switching off the analogue terrestrial network in NRW and Northern Germany.

ASSESSMENT OF THE MEASURE

The Commission takes the preliminary view that the subsidy granted by LfM constitutes state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1). The Commission is of the view that LfM may be considered a public body established or appointed by the State which performs a public task and that the advantages granted by this body may be considered state resources.

LfM's financial assistance seems to favour two groups of beneficiaries, firstly, the commercial broadcasters participating in DVB-T as direct beneficiaries and, secondly, the operator of the DVB-T network T-Systems as indirect beneficiary. At the level of broadcasters, the subsidy granted by LfM covers some of the broadcasters' transmission costs via the DVB-T network for a period of five years. The subsidy thus relieves them of expenses which are part of their normal operating costs. At the network level, it is not excluded that the network operator T-Systems receives an indirect advantage stemming from LfM's subsidy because T-Systems may avoid the need to charge end-users for access to DVB-T and may have been able to fix the transmission fees at a level higher than what the broadcasters would have been prepared to pay in the absence of the subsidy. However, at this stage, it is not clear whether there has been an actual transfer of state resources to the network operator.

The Commission has also doubts that the tender procedures were such as to ensure that the selective economic advantage deriving from LfM's subsidy would be minimised or even eliminated and thus adequate to prevent a distortion of competition. Instead, the measure seems to distort competition in that the share of the transmission costs covered by the subsidy is not the same for all commercial broadcasters and in so far as the subsidy does not, for example, support broadcasters who use other transmission platforms than DVB-T. There is also empirical evidence of the substitutability between the different transmission platforms at retail level and, more particularly, of the competitive effect of DVB-T launches on cable operators. Moreover, the Commission considers that the measure in question may affect trade between Member States since the presumed beneficiaries are internationally active on a number of different markets.

The German authorities have invoked Articles 87(3)(c), 87(3)(d) and 86(2) of the EC Treaty to justify the compatibility of the measure if found to constitute aid. With respect to Article 87(3)(c), the Commission has doubts that the notified measure is appropriate and necessary to ensure media plurality, promote the development of new services or foster competition between the various transmission platforms as argued by the authorities. Moreover, the Commission has no indication that the notified measure would be appropriate or necessary to overcome any other type of market failure which may hamper the switchover to digital television. On the contrary, the necessity of the measure appears doubtful because the commercial broadcasters have found it worthwhile launching DVB-T and transmitting for more than two years without any guarantee of financial assistance.

With respect to Article 87(3)(d), the Commission has the preliminary view that the measure concerns the transmission of broadcasting signals and is not related to any particular cultural content that would otherwise not be broadcast.

With respect to Article 86(2), the Commission considers, firstly, that national authorities have to define the SGEI clearly and entrust it explicitly to a particular undertaking which does not seem to have been done in the present case. Secondly, the Commission calls into question whether the present measure granting financial support to normal commercial activities of commercial undertakings over four years may rank as service of general economic interest, in particular in the presence of public service broadcasters who are explicitly charged with the public service obligation to ensure pluralism as well as to provide local and regional programme offers.

TEXT OF LETTER

‘Die Kommission teilt der Bundesrepublik Deutschland mit, dass sie nach Prüfung der von der Bundesregierung übermittelten Angaben zu der oben genannten Beihilfe beschlossen hat, das Verfahren nach Artikel 88 Absatz 2 EG-Vertrag einzuleiten.

1.   VERFAHREN

2.   AUSFÜHRLICHE BESCHREIBUNG DER BEIHILFE

2.1.   Regulatorischer und technischer Hintergrund

Die einzelnen Phasen der Umstellung

Vergabe der Rundfunklizenzen

Vergabe der Netzlizenzen

2.2.   Ausführliche Beschreibung der Maßnahme

3.   WÜRDIGUNG DER MASSNAHME

3.1.   Staatliche Beihilfe im Sinne von Artikel 87 Absatz 1 EG-Vertrag

3.1.1.   Staatliche Mittel

3.1.2.   Vorteil

3.1.3.   Wettbewerbsverfälschung

Zuteilung der Netz- und Rundfunklizenzen

Unterschiede in der öffentlichen Finanzierung für private Rundfundanbieter

Sektorielle Beihilfe

3.1.4.   Auswirkungen auf den Handel

3.1.5.   Vorläufige Schlussfolgerung zum Beihilfecharakter der Maßnahme

3.2.   Würdigung der Vereinbarkeit

3.2.1.   Artikel 87 Absatz 3 EG-Vertrag

3.2.2.   Artikel 87 Absatz 3 Buchstabe d EG-Vertrag

3.2.3.   Artikel 86 Absatz 2 EG-Vertrag

4.   SCHLUSSFOLGERUNG

Aus diesen Gründen fordert die Kommission die Bundesrepublik Deutschland im Rahmen des Verfahrens nach Artikel 88 Absatz 2 EG-Vertrag auf, innerhalb eines Monats nach Eingang dieses Schreibens ihre Stellungnahme abzugeben und alle für die Würdigung der Maßnahme sachdienlichen Informationen zu übermitteln.

Die Kommission ersucht um zusätzliche Auskünfte zu folgenden Fragen:

Ihre Behörden werden aufgefordert, unverzüglich eine Kopie dieses Schreibens an die potenziellen Beihilfeempfänger weiterzuleiten.

Die Kommission erinnert die Bundesrepublik Deutschland an die Sperrwirkung des Artikels 88 Absatz 3 EG-Vertrag und verweist auf Artikel 14 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 659/1999 des Rates, wonach alle rechtswidrigen Beihilfen von den Empfängern zurückgefordert werden können.

Die Kommission weist die Bundesrepublik Deutschland darauf hin, dass sie alle betroffenen Dritten durch die Veröffentlichung des vorliegenden Schreibens und einer aussagekräftigen Zusammenfassung desselben im Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union unterrichten wird. Außerdem wird sie die betroffenen Dritten in den EFTA-Staaten, die das EWR-Abkommen unterzeichnet haben, durch die Veröffentlichung einer Bekanntmachung in der EWR-Beilage zum Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union und die EFTA-Überwachungsbehörde durch Übermittlung einer Kopie dieses Schreibens von dem Vorgang in Kenntnis setzen. Alle Betroffenen werden aufgefordert, innerhalb eines Monats ab dem Datum dieser Veröffentlichung ihre Stellungnahme abzugeben.’

----

(1)ABl. C 216 vom 28. August 2004, S. 5.

(2)  Entscheidung K(2005)3903 der Kommission vom 9. November 2005 über die staatliche Beihilfe, die die Bundesrepublik Deutschland zugunsten der Einführung des digitalen terrestrischen Fernsehens (DVB-T) in Berlin-Brandenburg gewährt hat, siehe Amtsblatt L 200 vom 22. Juli 2006.

(3)  Mit Schreiben vom 2. Dezember 2005, 9. Dezember 2005 und 12. Dezember 2005.

(4)  DVB-T bedeutet Digital-Video-Broadcasting über ein terrestrisches Netz.

(5)  ‚eEurope 2005: Eine Informationsgesellschaft für alle‘ (KOM(2002)263 endg.); ‚Mitteilung der Kommission über den Übergang vom analogen zum digitalen Rundfunk (digitaler Übergang und Analogabschaltung)‘ (KOM(2003)541 endg.) und ‚Mitteilung der Kommission über die Beschleunigung des Übergangs vom analogen zum digitalen Rundfunk‘ (KOM(2005)204 endg.).

(6)  Die Arbeitsgemeinschaft Fernsehforschung (AGF) ist ein Zusammenschluss der größten deutschen Rundfunkanbieter zur Messung des Fernsehzuschauerverhaltens. Im Gegensatz zum Satellitenempfang, der in rund 30 % der deutschen Fernsehhaushalte digital übertragen wird, ist der Kabelempfang vorwiegend analog. Nur 10 % der Kabelhaushalte empfangen digitale Rundfunksignale.

(7)  SES/ASTRA ist der größte Satellitenbetreiber in Deutschland und veröffentlicht jedes Jahr den German Satellite Monitor über die Bedeutung der verschiedenen Fernsehübertragungswege. In Schaubild 1 sind die jeweils zum Jahresende datierten Angaben der ASTRA/Infratest-Erhebungen, z.B. Ende 2005, auf den 1. Januar des folgenden Jahres bezogen, z.B. 1.1.2006, um sie mit den Angaben von AGF/GfK vergleichbar zu machen, die jeweils zu Jahresbeginn erhoben werden.

(8)  Landesmediengesetz Nordrhein-Westfalen (‚LMG NRW‘) in der Fassung vom 2. Juli 2002. Gesetz- und Verordnungsblatt für das Land NRW vom 30. Juli 2002, Nr. 20, S. 334.

(9)  Damals hieß die LfM noch Landesanstalt für Rundfunk Nordrhein-Westfalen.

(10)  Siehe Schreiben der deutschen Behörden vom 29. April 2005, S. 9.

(11)  ARD steht für Arbeitsgemeinschaft der öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunkanstalten der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, ZDF für Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen und WDR für Westdeutscher Rundfunk.

(12)  Siehe Schreiben der deutschen Behörden vom 23. März 2004, S. 10.

(13)  Ein Multiplex entspricht einem Frequenzblock für die Rundfunkübertragung und beinhaltet in NRW vier Programme.

(14)  Einer Pressemitteilung des Projektbüros DVB-T Nordrhein-Westfalen vom 24. November 2004 zufolge können 14 der insgesamt 18 Mio. Einwohner Nordrhein-Westfalens seit dem 8. November 2004 DVB-T-Übertragungen empfangen.

(15)  In einem Teil des Ballungsraums Düsseldorf/Ruhrgebiet (Oberbergischer Kreis) erfolgte die digitale Umstellung allerdings ohne die privaten Rundfunkanbieter.

(16)Staatsvertrag über den Rundfunk im vereinten Deutschland vom 31. August 1991 (Rundfunkstaatsvertrag - RStV) in der Fassung vom 1. Juli 2002, Bayerisches Gesetz- und Verordnungsblatt, S. 162.

(17)  Erstmalige Zuweisung von Übertragungskapazitäten für die landesweite digitale terrestrische Verbreitung bzw. Weiterleitung von Fernsehprogrammen und Mediendiensten im DVB-T Standard in Nordrhein-Westfalen, Bekanntmachung der LfM vom 4. Dezember 2003, veröffentlicht im Landesministerialblatt vom 30. Dezember 2003.

(18)  Grundlage der Maßgabe, dass bei der Vergabe von Lizenzen für die digitale terrestrische Übertragung im Fernsehen Fernsehveranstalter mit denjenigen Programmen vorrangig zu berücksichtigen sind, die in dem jeweils betroffenen Verbreitungsgebiet analog verbreitet werden, ist in Artikel 52a Absatz 1 des Rundfunkstaatsvertrags und in § 28 Absatz 1 des LMG NRW enthalten.

(19)  Siehe Randnummer 0.

(20)  Terra Nova ist der Nachfolgesender von Onyx-TV, dem die ursprüngliche Lizenz erteilt wurde. Am 15. September 2004 ersetzte die französische Groupe AB ihren Musiksender Onyx durch den Dokumentarsender Terra Nova.

(21)  Amtsblatt RegTP Nr. 3/2004, Vfg Nr. 3/2004, S. 82.

(22)  Amtsblatt RegTP Nr. 23/2002, Vfg Nr. 36/2002, S. 1695.

(23)  45 % des auf NRW entfallenden Rundfunkgebührenanteils wird an die Filmstiftung NRW überwiesen.

(24)  Siehe Randnummer (10).

(25)  In der Anmeldung hat Deutschland berechnet, dass die Übertragungskosten pro Programm für einen Zeitraum von fünf Jahren insgesamt 2,7 Mio. EUR betragen; diese Summe steht jedoch im Widerspruch zu allen anderen übermittelten Informationen.

(26)  Rs. T-358/94, Air France/Kommission, Slg. 1996 II-2109 und Rs. C-482/99, France/Kommission, Stardust Marine Slg. 2002 I-4397.

(27)  LMG NRW, insbesondere § 87 und § 88.

(28)  LMG NRW, § 117.

(29)  LMG NRW, § 113 und § 114.

(30)  Siehe Randnummer 17.

(31)  LMG NRW, § 27 Absatz 1.

(32)  Rs. C-482/99 Frankreich/Kommission, Stardust Marine Slg. 2002 I-4397, Randnummer 23 und darin genannte Verweise.

(33)  Siehe Schreiben der deutschen Behörden vom 29. April 2005, S. 8.

(34)  Siehe Randnummer 9.

(35)  Die analoge terrestrische Lizenz für VOX scheint 2002 verlängert worden zu sein.

(36)  Siehe Randnummer 10.

(37)  Obwohl dem WDR ein Teil des DVB-T-Netzes (zwei Multiplexe) zugeteilt wurde, kann er nicht als Begünstigter angesehen werden, da diese Multiplexe ausschließlich von öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunkanstalten genutzt werden, die keine Zuschüsse von der LfM erhalten.

(38)  Media Perspektiven, Basisdaten: Daten zur Mediensituation in Deutschland 2004, S. 11 und S. 18; AGF/GfK Fernsehforschung und I-Punkt Deutschland auf der Grundlage von Nielsen Media Research.

(39)  Urteil vom 24. Juli 2004 in der Rs. C-280/00 Altmark Trans GmbH, Slg. 2003 I-7747, Randnummern 88-94.

(40)  Siehe Randnummern 8 und 28.

(41)  Siehe Randnummer 14.

(42)  Siehe Randnummern 13 bis 15.

(43)  Bei den drei Sendern handelt es sich um RTL, VOX und Sat.1 (siehe Tabelle 1).

(44)  Siehe Randnummer 14.

(45)  Bei einem völlig transparenten und offenen Ausschreibungsverfahren wäre von den bietenden Rundfunkanbietern zu erwarten, dass sie einen zuschussbedingten Vorteil ganz oder teilweise in höhere oder qualitativ bessere Lizenzgebote umsetzen.

(46)  Siehe Randnummer 16.

(47)  Im Schreiben der deutschen Behörden vom 25. April 2005 heißt es auf Seite 13: ‚Die Förderung der Landesmedienanstalt ist völlig unabhängig von den potentiellen und dem tatsächlichen Netzbetreiber festgelegt worden und spielte für das telekommunikationsrechtliche Ausschreibungsverfahren der RegTP keine Rolle.‘

(48)  Der Kommission ist nicht bekannt, wann die RegTP über die Frequenzzuteilung entschieden hat.

(49)  Siehe Randnummer 16.

(50)  Siehe Schreiben der deutschen Behörden vom 29. April 2005, S. 3.

(51)  Entscheidung der Kommission vom 4. September 2001 (Sache Nr. COMP/M.2558 - Havas/Tempus; ABl. C 319 vom 14. November 2001, Randnummer 9 und darin genannte Verweise).

(52)  Für einen Überblick über neuere Fälle siehe Entscheidung der Kommission im Fall Telenor/Canal+/Canal Digital (COMP/C.2/38.287 vom 29. Dezember 2003, insbesondere die Randnummern 32-50).

(53)  Siehe TPS I (IV/36.237 vom 3. März 1999, Randnummer 30), British Interactive Broadcasting/Open (IV/36.539 vom 15. September 1999, ABl. L 312, Randnummer 26) und Telenor/Canal+/Canal Digital (COMP/C.2/38.287 vom 29. Dezember 2003, Randnummer 50).

(54)  Ein ‚Lock-in-Effekt‘ liegt vor, wenn Haushalte nicht bereit sind, in einen anderen Übertragungsmodus zu investieren, so dass ein Wechsel zwischen verschiedenen Plattformen unwahrscheinlich ist; siehe Entscheidung der Kommission im Fall MSG Media Service (ABl. L 364 vom 31. Dezember 1994, Randnummer 42).

(55)  Siehe Randnummer 7 und Fußnote 6 .

(56)  Auf die 24 Programme, die das DVB-T in NRW anbietet, entfielen 2004 über 80 % der Zuschauer und mehr als 90 % der Einnahmen aus der Fernsehwerbung in Deutschland; (siehe Fußnote 38).

(57)  Vgl. den oben genannten Fall C25/04 Einführung des digitalen terrestrischen Fernsehens (DVB-T) in Berlin-Brandenburg.

(58)  Kurzfristig konnten die Kabelbetreiber Zuschauer, die am analogen Empfang über Kabel festhalten wollten, abwerben; dies war jedoch nur ein einmaliger Effekt, der sich nach der digitalen Umstellung nicht fortsetzte. Mittelfristig haben die Kabelbetreiber Kunden an die gebührenfreie DVB-T-Plattform verloren. Quelle: Emnid-Studie vom 30.4.2003, zitiert im Mabb-Bericht ‚Berlin goes digital‘, und ‚DVB-T-Region Berlin/Potsdam: Terrestrik wächst weiter‘, in: Media Perspektiven 7/2004, S. 296.

(59)  Quelle: ASTRA (2006): Reichweiten in Deutschland: Marktdaten Jahresende 2005: 7,4 % (gegenüber 2,8 % im Jahr 2004) ist das gewogene Mittel von Berlin mit 8,9 % (3,6 %) und Brandenburg mit 5,2 % (1,5 %).

(60)  Siehe ‚Berlin/Potsdam: Erste DVB-T-Region Deutschland‘, in: Media Perspektiven 12/2003, S. 565.

(61)  Insbesondere in Italien, Frankreich, Schweden und dem Vereinigten Königreich.

(62)  Siehe Schreiben vom 29. April 2005, Ziffer 2: ‚Technisch gesehen kann nahezu jeder Haushalt in NRW Rundfunk über Satellit empfangen.‘

(63)  Interaktivität kann lediglich durch Bereitstellung eines DVB-RCT (Return Channel Terrestrial – terrestrischer Rückkanal) mit zusätzlichen Kosten und mittels eines teureren Decoders oder durch herkömmliche Rückkanäle wie das Telefon- oder ein interaktives Fernsehkabel erreicht werden.

(64)  Im Gegensatz zum digitalen Kabel, das parallel zur bloßen Übertragung für komplexe interaktive Dienstleistungen mit einem Rückkanal aufgerüstet werden kann.

(65)  ‚Mitteilung über den Übergang vom analogen zum digitalen Rundfunk‘ (digitaler Übergang und Analogabschaltung) (KOM(2003) 541 endg.).

(66)  Siehe insbesondere den Fall C25/04 DVB-T in Berlin-Brandenburg und die Mitteilung der Kommission KOM(2003) 541 endg.

(67)  Siehe Randnummer 9.

(68)  Siehe Randnummer 14.

(69)  Entscheidungen der Kommission in den Sachen NN 88/98, BBC 24-stündiger werbefreier Nachrichtenkanal (ABl. C 78 vom 18.3.2000) und NN 70/98, ‚Kinderkanal und Phoenix‘ (ABl. C 238 vom 21. 8.1999).

----

----

Publication of an application pursuant to Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs

(2006/C 204/06)

This publication confers the right to object to the application pursuant to Article 7 of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006. Statements of objection must reach the Commission within six months from the date of this publication.

SUMMARY

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 510/2006

Application for registration according to Article 5 and Article 17(2)

‘POMME DU LIMOUSIN’

EC No: FR/0442/29.11.2004

PDO ( X ) PGI ( )

This summary has been drawn up for information only. For full details, interested parties are invited to consult the full version of the product specification obtainable from the national authorities indicated in section 1 or from the European Commission (1).

1.   Responsible department in the Member State:

2.   Group:

3.   Type of product:

Class 1.6 — Fresh fruit

4.   Specification (summary of requirements under Article 4(2))

4.1   Name: ‘Pomme du Limousin’

4.2   Description: ‘Pomme du Limousin’ is a fresh apple with the following characteristics:

it has a slightly elongated shape, with a clearly marked eye and eye cavity,

it has a minimum size of 65 mm,

the flesh is white, firm, crispy, juicy and non-floury,

the flavour is balanced as regards sweetness and acidity.

The apple is produced from the ‘Golden delicious’ variety.

‘Pomme du Limousin’ has a refractive index of at least 12,5 % Brix, firmness of at least 5 kg/cm2 and acidity of at least 3,7 g/l of malic acid.

The apple falls within marketing classes ‘Extra’ and ‘1’, as defined by Regulation (EC) No 85/2004 of 15 January 2004, or marketing class 2 purely because of the degree of russetting.

‘Pomme du Limousin’ is greeny-white to yellow in colour and may have a pink blush.

Products made from the apple (juice, compote, etc.) may not use the ‘Pomme du Limousin’ PDO.

4.3   Geographical area: The apples are grown, graded and packed in 100 municipalities in the Departments of la Corrèze, la Creuse, la Dordogne and la Haute-Vienne.

The full list of municipalities is given in the product specification.

4.4   Proof of origin: All operators complete a declaration of aptitude, registered with the Institut National des Appellations d'Origin (INAO).

The purpose of the documentary follow-up is to monitor the product from planting to shipping of the fruit.

The apples are identified and stored after harvest at the unit of homogeneous production, as defined in the specification. On completion of harvest, each producer sends INAO a summary harvest declaration.

Undertakings storing/packing ‘Pomme du Limousin’ PDO apples must keep up-to-date records showing the provenance and destination of the apples and the quantities of apples handled and placed into circulation.

During packing, an individual sticker is affixed to apples protected by the ‘Pomme du Limousin’ PDO.

Analyses and organoleptic tests are carried out on samples of apples protected by the ‘Pomme du Limousin’ PDO to ensure that they exhibit the characteristics described in point 4.2.

4.5   Method of production: 

Variety:

The apples are of the ‘Golden delicious’ variety or of one of the mutants authorised for the PDO (standard characteristics or characteristics close to those of standard ‘Golden delicious’).

Rootstock and grafts must be certified.

Growing methods:

The maximum yield is 58 tonnes per hectare. If that yield is exceeded, the whole production of the unit of homogeneous production concerned loses PDO status.

Density:

The planting density for the trees must be between 1 000 and 3 000 trees per hectare.

The presence of pollinating varieties is authorised but their fruit cannot have PDO status.

Pruning:

The trees are pruned at least every two years, from the third leaf, using the vertical axis system. Pruning involves simplifying the fruiting branches and removing branches growing underneath these or receiving little light.

Irrigation:

Only localised irrigation or micro-irrigation is authorised and equipment to monitor the volume of water used must be installed.

Fertirrigation is prohibited.

Irrigation may not be carried out after 31 August or during the 15 days preceding harvest.

Plant-health treatments:

Chemical disinfection of the soil before planting is prohibited.

Growers must keep an up-to-date cultural register in which they record all cultural operations carried out on each unit of homogeneous production.

Harvesting:

The date at which harvest can begin is laid down by prefectoral order on a proposal from INAO.

The apples are harvested by hand.

Under no circumstances may plant-health treatments be applied to the fruit after harvest.

Storage of the apples:

The apples must be stored cold in order to preserve their firmness, texture and juiciness.

From 15 December, apples to be packed must have been kept in rooms with a controlled environment. These rooms must be airtight and have equipment for recording and monitoring temperature and the levels of carbon dioxide and oxygen.

Packing:

The apples are packed in suitable packaging to ensure that their characteristics and quality are preserved. Packing takes place in the geographical area described in point 4.3.

Packages may contain no more than 20 kg of apples and the use of plastic bags and paper bags is prohibited.

After a specified date, apples may no longer be released for circulation as ‘Pomme du Limousin’ PDO. This is determined on the basis of the colour of the apples and varies from 1 June to 1 August.

4.6   Link: The production area for ‘Pomme du Limousin’ is located on the plateaux of Haut-Limousin, the foothills of the Massif Central, between the Auvergne and the Aquitaine Basin. This geographical and geological area lies in the administrative regions of Limousin and Aquitaine in the Departments of la Corrèze, la Creuse, la Dordogne and la Haute-Vienne.

The light, deep soil lies on a crystalline basement and has good water-retention properties.

The area enjoys a humid, ocean climate, with fairly abundant, although not excessive, rainfall and temperatures that do not reach extremes. The average temperature of more than 9oC defines the physiological limit of the crop and can be directly linked to the day/night temperature variation, which is a decisive factor in September and October. The alternance of cold nights and hot, sunny days promotes the development of aromatic substances and anthocyanins, which give the skin its pink pigmentation.

Another factor is altitude. Apple trees grow best at an altitude of between 300 and 500 metres and there is a precise correlation between the taste of an apple and the altitude at which it is grown, altitude mitigating the higher temperatures that often inhibit the development of aromatic substances and anthocyanins. ‘Golden delicious’ grown at altitude has an elongated shape and is firmer, with a higher sugar content.

Encouraged by the increasing success of ‘Pomme du Limousin’, including on export markets, the whole of the sector has worked together to publicise the original characteristics of the product, promoting various initiatives, such as the ‘Route de la Pomme du Limousin’ (Pomme du Limousin Trail), tourist, cultural and sporting events organised around the PDO and the special menus created by artisans and restaurateurs to bring out the taste of the apple.

4.7   Inspection body: 

4.8   Labelling: Each apple is identified by a sticker bearing:

the letters ‘AOC’, in characters at least as large as those of the other wording on the sticker;

the name ‘Pomme du Limousin’, in characters at least half as large as the letters ‘AOC’.

In addition, each individual package bears:

the name ‘Pomme du Limousin’ in characters at least as large as the largest characters on the label;

the letters ‘AOC’ or the words ‘appellation d'origine contrôlée’.

Where the label shows, in addition to the address, the name of the packer or a brand name, the name ‘Pomme du Limousin’ is repeated between the words ‘appellation’ and ‘contrôlée’.

In addition to the label, all the accompanying documents and invoices must bear the words ‘Pomme du Limousin’ and ‘appellation d'origine contrôlée’ or ‘AOC’.

4.9   National requirements: —

----

(1)  European Commission, Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, Agricultural Product Quality Policy, B-1049 Brussels.

----

----

Publication of an application pursuant to Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs

(2006/C 204/07)

This publication confers the right to object to the application pursuant to Article 7 of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006. Statements of objection must reach the Commission within six months from the date of this publication

SUMMARY

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 510/2006

Application for registration according to Article 5 and Article 17(2)

‘ŽATECKÝ CHMEL’

EC No: CZ/PDO/005/0402/19.10.2004

PDO ( X ) PGI ( )

This summary has been drawn up for information only. For full details, interested parties are invited to consult the full version of the product specification obtainable from the national authorities indicated in section 1 or from the European Commission (1).

1.   Responsible department in the Member State:

2.   Group:

3.   Type of product:

Class 1.8 — hops

4.   Specification (summary of requirements under article 4(2))

4.1   Name: ‘Žatecký chmel’

4.2   Description: A specific property of ‘Žatecký chmel’ is the appearance of the cone (moderately to elongated ovoid, 100 cones weighing 13-17 g; strig fine, regular, 12-16 mm in length), the delicate hoppy aroma and the golden colour of the lupulin. Characteristic features of ‘Žatecký chmel’ are the red colour of the bine, the fine strig, a low myrcene content and a balanced alpha and beta acid content. Typical of the composition of the hop resins is a relatively low alpha-bitter acid content of 2,5-5,5 %. The beta-bitter acid content is higher than the alpha-bitter acid content, the ratio between them most often being 0,60-0,80. The myrcene content is 25-40 %. Another characteristic feature is the presence of a large amount of beta-farnesene (14-20 %), which in other hops is present only in very small amounts. The general character of the fragrance of ‘Žatecký chmel’ is determined by the ratio between all the individual constituents of the hop oils. ‘Žatecký chmel’ hops are semi-early. They are supplied to the market pressed or granulated.

4.3   Geographical area: ‘Žatecký chmel’ hops are grown in what is termed the Žatec hop-growing area. This comprises cadastral areas in the districts of Louny, Rakovník, Chomutov, Kladno, Plzeň-sever and Rokycany. Further details are provided in the specification.

4.4   Proof of origin: In the Czech Republic, hops are subject to certification which is governed both by Act No 97/1996 Coll. on the protection of hops and by Council Regulation (EC) No 1952/2005, Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1784/77 and Commission Regulation (EEC) No 890/78. The body authorised to certify hops in the Czech Republic is ÚKZÚZ (Central Institute for Supervision and Testing in Agriculture, hereinafter ‘Institute’).

Proof of origin is guaranteed by a procedure which is laid down by law. Producers weigh the hops produced, duly label them, apply a seal and issue a declaration as to the number and weight of the labelled packages of hops by cadastral area and variety of hops. The Institute carries out verification of the labelled hops and hop products and issues a certificate, and ensures monitoring of compliance with the requirements laid down in the Act on the protection of hops and in the European Community legislation. The Institute also keeps records of hop gardens and hop growers.

The State Agricultural and Food Inspection Authority [Státní zemědělská a potravinářská inspekce] conducts checks on the specifications and issues decisions in conjunction with the Institute.

4.5   Method of production: ‘Žatecký chmel’ hops are grown on hop-poles in the Žatec hop-growing area. The springtime work begins in April with cutting and wiring, followed by training, cultivation and the application of chemical protection. During the growing period, a number of spraying operations are carried out in order to control pests and diseases. The hops are harvested in the second half of August and early September. The hops are processed into pressed or granulated hops.

The hop-poles are constructed of wooden (and in some cases concrete) posts. Wire is also used, or steel rope in the case of new hop-poles. The hop-poles are about 7 metres high (optimum height for hops grown in this area). One hectare of hop garden contains 2500-3500 hop plants, depending on planting density (determined by farming techniques, the growth properties of the plants and crop structure optimisation). Hops are a perennial plant that remains on the same site for up to 20 years. Only female plants are grown for production purposes in a hop garden. The presence of male plants is undesirable in terms of its effects on the quality of the hops.

‘Žatecký chmel’ hops have been grown in their traditional area for more than 1000 years. Only the following clones may be referred to as ‘Žatecký chmel’: Lučan (registered 1941), Blato (1952), Osvaldův klon 31 (1952), Osvaldův klon 72 (1952), Osvaldův klon 114 (1952), Siřem (1969), Zlatan (1976), Podlešák (1989) and Blšanka (1993).

4.6   Link: It is the specific natural conditions in the Žatec hop-growing area that provide the basis for the uniqueness of ‘Žatecký chmel’ (cf. paragraph 4.2). This area is protected to the north-west by the Ore Mountains, the Doupov Hills and the Bohemian uplands, which produce a rain shadow. The total annual rainfall in this area is therefore only about 450 mm. The timing of the rainfall is, however, favourable to the development of the hops (average rainfall during the growing period is about 260 mm). The average annual temperature is 8-9 °C (but 14-16 °C during the growing period). The quality of the hops is determined not only by the climatic conditions but also by the area's soil. This consists mainly of Permian red-bed soils, but there are also lighter sandy marl soils. The growth and development of the hops is also influenced by the situation of the hop gardens, which is determined in particular by the altitude (200-500 metres above sea level) and the position within the lie of the land, the gradient and exposure to the different points of the compass. The hop gardens are located in particular in broad, open valleys with a free airflow which are sufficiently sheltered from strong west and north winds. The hops would not achieve such quality or yields in other areas, where these conditions do not exist. The environment has an influence in particular on the content and growth of the hops. The conditions described above (combination of average rainfall, temperatures, soil profiles, altitude and light) are unique to the Žatec hop-growing area. Other hop-growing areas in the world will always differ in respect of certain of the basic conditions (e.g. higher rainfall, higher average temperatures, shorter average length of day/daylight during the growing period).

4.7   Inspection body: 

The final decision rests with the State Agricultural and Food Inspection Authority.

4.8   Labelling: The inscription ‘ŽATECKÝ CHMEL’ is affixed to every outer package.

4.9   National requirements: —

----

(1)  European Commission, Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, Agricultural Product Quality Policy, B-1049 Brussels.

----

----

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.4091 — Linde/Spectra)

(2006/C 204/08)

(Text with EEA relevance)

----

(1)OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

----

----

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M. 4182 — Hörmann/MN/ACP JV)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(2006/C 204/09)

(Text with EEA relevance)

----

(1)OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

(2)OJ C 56, 5.3.2005, p. 32.

----

----

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.4294 — Arcelor/SNCFL/CFL Cargo)

(2006/C 204/10)

(Text with EEA relevance)

----

(1)OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

----

III Notices

Commission

----

Notice of invitation to tender for the refund for the export of oats from Finland and Sweden for 2006-07

(2006/C 204/11)

I.   SUBJECT

II.   TIME LIMITS

III.   TENDERS

IV.   SECURITY FOR TENDER

The security for tender must be made out in favour of the competent authority concerned.

V.   AWARD OF CONTRACTS

The award will:

----

(1)OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78.

(2)OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p.7. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 444/2004 (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 50).

(3)OJ L 233, 26.8.2006, p. 6.

----