# Official Journal L 49/2009

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 49 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5220 February 2009 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 49

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5220 February 2009

---

| Contents | | I   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | | Commission Regulation (EC) No 139/2009 of 19 February 2009 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 1 |
| | | Commission Regulation (EC) No 140/2009 of 19 February 2009 fixing the export refunds on milk and milk products | 3 |
| | | Commission Regulation (EC) No 141/2009 of 19 February 2009 fixing the maximum export refund for butter in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 619/2008 | 7 |
| | | Commission Regulation (EC) No 142/2009 of 19 February 2009 fixing the maximum export refund for skimmed milk powder in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 619/2008 | 9 |
| | | Commission Regulation (EC) No 143/2009 of 19 February 2009 fixing representative prices in the poultrymeat and egg sectors and for egg albumin, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1484/95 | 10 |
| | | Commission Regulation (EC) No 144/2009 of 19 February 2009 fixing the rates of the refunds applicable to milk and milk products exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty | 12 |

Contents

I   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is obligatory

page

REGULATIONS

Commission Regulation (EC) No 139/2009 of 19 February 2009 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

Commission Regulation (EC) No 140/2009 of 19 February 2009 fixing the export refunds on milk and milk products

3

Commission Regulation (EC) No 141/2009 of 19 February 2009 fixing the maximum export refund for butter in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 619/2008

7

Commission Regulation (EC) No 142/2009 of 19 February 2009 fixing the maximum export refund for skimmed milk powder in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 619/2008

9

Commission Regulation (EC) No 143/2009 of 19 February 2009 fixing representative prices in the poultrymeat and egg sectors and for egg albumin, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1484/95

10

Commission Regulation (EC) No 144/2009 of 19 February 2009 fixing the rates of the refunds applicable to milk and milk products exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty

12

| | | II   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is not obligatory |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | | Council |
| | | 2009/144/EC |
| | * | Council Decision of 19 February 2009 extending the period of application of the measures in Decision 2002/148/EC concluding consultations with Zimbabwe under Article 96 of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement | 15 |
| | | Commission |
| | | 2009/145/EC |
| | * | Commission Decision of 10 December 2008 concerning State aid C 15/06 (ex N 291/2000) which France plans to implement in favour of Pilkington/Interpane
  (notified under document number C(2008) 7799)

   (
  1
  ) | 18 |
| | | 2009/146/EC |
| | * | Commission Decision of 19 February 2009 on the appointment of the members and advisors of the Scientific Committees and the Pool set up by Decision 2008/721/EC | 33 |
| | | 2009/147/EC |
| | * | Commission Decision of 19 February 2009 on a Community financial contribution for 2008 to cover expenditure incurred by Germany, the Netherlands and Slovenia for the purpose of combating organisms harmful to plants or plant products
  (notified under document number C(2009) 1013) | 43 |
| | | 2009/148/EC |
| | * | Commission Decision of 19 February 2009 amending Decision 2008/883/EC as regards Brazil concerning the date for which imports into the Community of certain fresh bovine meat are authorised
  (notified under document number C(2009) 1040)

   (
  1
  ) | 46 |

II   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is not obligatory

DECISIONS

Council

2009/144/EC

*

Council Decision of 19 February 2009 extending the period of application of the measures in Decision 2002/148/EC concluding consultations with Zimbabwe under Article 96 of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement

15

Commission

2009/145/EC

*

Commission Decision of 10 December 2008 concerning State aid C 15/06 (ex N 291/2000) which France plans to implement in favour of Pilkington/Interpane
  (notified under document number C(2008) 7799)

   (
  1
  )

(notified under document number C(2008) 7799)

1

18

2009/146/EC

*

Commission Decision of 19 February 2009 on the appointment of the members and advisors of the Scientific Committees and the Pool set up by Decision 2008/721/EC

33

2009/147/EC

*

Commission Decision of 19 February 2009 on a Community financial contribution for 2008 to cover expenditure incurred by Germany, the Netherlands and Slovenia for the purpose of combating organisms harmful to plants or plant products
  (notified under document number C(2009) 1013)

(notified under document number C(2009) 1013)

43

2009/148/EC

*

Commission Decision of 19 February 2009 amending Decision 2008/883/EC as regards Brazil concerning the date for which imports into the Community of certain fresh bovine meat are authorised
  (notified under document number C(2009) 1040)

   (
  1
  )

(notified under document number C(2009) 1040)

1

46

| | | Corrigenda |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Corrigendum to Council Directive 92/65/EEC of 13 July 1992 laying down animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of animals, semen, ova and embryos not subject to animal health requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A (I) to Directive 90/425/EEC ( OJ L 268, 14.9.1992 ) | 48 |
| | * | Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EC) No 1167/2008 of 24 October 2008 amending and updating Regulation (EC) No 1334/2000 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports of dual-use items and technology ( OJ L 325, 3.12.2008 ) | 48 |

Corrigenda

*

Corrigendum to Council Directive 92/65/EEC of 13 July 1992 laying down animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of animals, semen, ova and embryos not subject to animal health requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A (I) to Directive 90/425/EEC ( OJ L 268, 14.9.1992 )

48

*

Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EC) No 1167/2008 of 24 October 2008 amending and updating Regulation (EC) No 1334/2000 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports of dual-use items and technology ( OJ L 325, 3.12.2008 )

48

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Note to the reader (see page 3 of the cover) | s3 |

*

Note to the reader (see page 3 of the cover)

Note to the reader

s3

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

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.

---

I Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is obligatory

REGULATIONS

| 20.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 49/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 49/1

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 139/2009

of 19 February 2009

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 of 21 December 2007 laying down implementing rules for Council Regulations (EC) No 2200/96, (EC) No 2201/96 and (EC) No 1182/2007 in the fruit and vegetable sector (2), and in particular Article 138(1) thereof,

Whereas:

Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XV, Part A thereto,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard import values referred to in Article 138 of Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 are fixed in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 20 February 2009.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 19 February 2009.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 350, 31.12.2007, p. 1.

2

---

ANNEX

Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

| (EUR/100 kg) |
| --- |
| CN code | Third country code (1) | Standard import value |
| 0702 00 00 | IL | 129,4 |
| JO | 62,0 |
| MA | 46,5 |
| TN | 132,6 |
| TR | 75,4 |
| ZZ | 89,2 |
| 0707 00 05 | JO | 161,3 |
| MA | 88,2 |
| TR | 177,4 |
| ZZ | 142,3 |
| 0709 90 70 | JO | 239,8 |
| MA | 69,2 |
| TR | 119,2 |
| ZZ | 142,7 |
| 0709 90 80 | EG | 94,1 |
| ZZ | 94,1 |
| 0805 10 20 | EG | 41,1 |
| IL | 53,2 |
| MA | 53,4 |
| TN | 44,6 |
| TR | 65,3 |
| ZZ | 51,5 |
| 0805 20 10 | IL | 145,4 |
| MA | 99,4 |
| TR | 73,0 |
| ZZ | 105,9 |
| 0805 20 30 , 0805 20 50 , 0805 20 70 , 0805 20 90 | EG | 75,3 |
| IL | 82,3 |
| JM | 119,0 |
| MA | 112,2 |
| PK | 52,7 |
| TR | 62,2 |
| ZZ | 84,0 |
| 0805 50 10 | EG | 81,5 |
| MA | 44,0 |
| TR | 60,2 |
| ZZ | 61,9 |
| 0808 10 80 | CA | 89,7 |
| CL | 67,7 |
| CN | 93,5 |
| MK | 25,2 |
| US | 118,0 |
| ZZ | 78,8 |
| 0808 20 50 | AR | 112,5 |
| CL | 73,7 |
| CN | 75,9 |
| US | 119,1 |
| ZA | 109,2 |
| ZZ | 98,1 |

(EUR/100 kg)

CN code

Third country code (1)

Standard import value

0702 00 00

IL

129,4

JO

62,0

MA

46,5

TN

132,6

TR

75,4

ZZ

89,2

0707 00 05

JO

161,3

MA

88,2

TR

177,4

ZZ

142,3

0709 90 70

JO

239,8

MA

69,2

TR

119,2

ZZ

142,7

0709 90 80

EG

94,1

ZZ

94,1

0805 10 20

EG

41,1

IL

53,2

MA

53,4

TN

44,6

TR

65,3

ZZ

51,5

0805 20 10

IL

145,4

MA

99,4

TR

73,0

ZZ

105,9

0805 20 30 , 0805 20 50 , 0805 20 70 , 0805 20 90

EG

75,3

IL

82,3

JM

119,0

MA

112,2

PK

52,7

TR

62,2

ZZ

84,0

0805 50 10

EG

81,5

MA

44,0

TR

60,2

ZZ

61,9

0808 10 80

CA

89,7

CL

67,7

CN

93,5

MK

25,2

US

118,0

ZZ

78,8

0808 20 50

AR

112,5

CL

73,7

CN

75,9

US

119,1

ZA

109,2

ZZ

98,1

---

(1)  Nomenclature of countries laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1833/2006 (OJ L 354, 14.12.2006, p. 19). Code ‘
  ZZ
  ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.

---

| 20.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 49/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 49/3

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 140/2009

of 19 February 2009

fixing the export refunds on milk and milk products

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1), and in particular Article 164(2), in conjunction with Article 4, thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Article 162(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 provides that the difference between prices on the world market for the products listed in Part XVI of Annex I to that Regulation and prices for those products on the Community market may be covered by an export refund. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Article 162(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 provides that the difference between prices on the world market for the products listed in Part XVI of Annex I to that Regulation and prices for those products on the Community market may be covered by an export refund.

| (2) | Given the present situation on the market in milk and milk products, export refunds should be fixed in accordance with the rules and certain criteria provided for in Articles 162, 163, 164, 167, 169 and 170 of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Given the present situation on the market in milk and milk products, export refunds should be fixed in accordance with the rules and certain criteria provided for in Articles 162, 163, 164, 167, 169 and 170 of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007.

| (3) | Article 164(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 provides that export refunds may vary according to destination, especially where the world market situation, the specific requirements of certain markets or obligations resulting from agreements concluded in accordance with Article 300 of the Treaty make this necessary. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Article 164(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 provides that export refunds may vary according to destination, especially where the world market situation, the specific requirements of certain markets or obligations resulting from agreements concluded in accordance with Article 300 of the Treaty make this necessary.

| (4) | In accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the European Community and the Dominican Republic on import protection for milk powder in the Dominican Republic (2) approved by Council Decision 98/486/EC (3), a certain amount of Community milk products exported to the Dominican Republic can benefit from reduced customs duties. For this reason, export refunds granted to products exported under this scheme should be reduced by a certain percentage. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

In accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the European Community and the Dominican Republic on import protection for milk powder in the Dominican Republic (2) approved by Council Decision 98/486/EC (3), a certain amount of Community milk products exported to the Dominican Republic can benefit from reduced customs duties. For this reason, export refunds granted to products exported under this scheme should be reduced by a certain percentage.

| (5) | The Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chair, |
| --- | --- |

(5)

The Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chair,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Export refunds as provided for in Article 164 of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 shall be granted on the products and for the amounts set out in the Annex to this Regulation, subject to the conditions provided for in Article 3(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1282/2006 (4).

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 20 February 2009.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 19 February 2009.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 218, 6.8.1998, p. 46.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 218, 6.8.1998, p. 45.

3

(4)  
  OJ L 234, 29.8.2006, p. 4.

4

---

ANNEX

Export refunds on milk and milk products applicable from 20 February 2009

| Product code | Destination | Unit of measurement | Refunds |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 0401 30 31 9100 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 10,43 |
| 0401 30 31 9400 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 16,34 |
| 0401 30 31 9700 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 18,02 |
| 0401 30 39 9100 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 10,43 |
| 0401 30 39 9400 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 16,34 |
| 0401 30 39 9700 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 18,02 |
| 0401 30 91 9100 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 20,56 |
| 0401 30 99 9100 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 20,56 |
| 0401 30 99 9500 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 30,26 |
| 0402 10 11 9000 | L20  (1) | EUR/100 kg | 19,00 |
| 0402 10 19 9000 | L20  (1) | EUR/100 kg | 19,00 |
| 0402 10 99 9000 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 19,00 |
| 0402 21 11 9200 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 19,00 |
| 0402 21 11 9300 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 26,35 |
| 0402 21 11 9500 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 27,36 |
| 0402 21 11 9900 | L20  (1) | EUR/100 kg | 29,00 |
| 0402 21 17 9000 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 19,00 |
| 0402 21 19 9300 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 26,35 |
| 0402 21 19 9500 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 27,36 |
| 0402 21 19 9900 | L20  (1) | EUR/100 kg | 29,00 |
| 0402 21 91 9100 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 29,16 |
| 0402 21 91 9200 | L20  (1) | EUR/100 kg | 29,32 |
| 0402 21 91 9350 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 29,59 |
| 0402 21 99 9100 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 29,16 |
| 0402 21 99 9200 | L20  (1) | EUR/100 kg | 29,32 |
| 0402 21 99 9300 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 29,59 |
| 0402 21 99 9400 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 30,99 |
| 0402 21 99 9500 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 31,49 |
| 0402 21 99 9600 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 33,46 |
| 0402 21 99 9700 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 34,55 |
| 0402 29 15 9200 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 19,00 |
| 0402 29 15 9300 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 26,35 |
| 0402 29 15 9500 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 27,36 |
| 0402 29 19 9300 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 26,35 |
| 0402 29 19 9500 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 27,36 |
| 0402 29 19 9900 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 29,00 |
| 0402 29 99 9100 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 29,16 |
| 0402 29 99 9500 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 30,99 |
| 0402 91 10 9370 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 2,88 |
| 0402 91 30 9300 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 3,41 |
| 0402 91 99 9000 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 20,56 |
| 0402 99 10 9350 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 7,41 |
| 0402 99 31 9300 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 10,43 |
| 0403 90 11 9000 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 19,00 |
| 0403 90 13 9200 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 19,00 |
| 0403 90 13 9300 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 26,35 |
| 0403 90 13 9500 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 27,36 |
| 0403 90 13 9900 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 29,00 |
| 0403 90 33 9400 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 26,35 |
| 0403 90 59 9310 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 10,43 |
| 0403 90 59 9340 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 16,34 |
| 0403 90 59 9370 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 18,02 |
| 0404 90 21 9120 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 16,21 |
| 0404 90 21 9160 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 19,00 |
| 0404 90 23 9120 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 19,00 |
| 0404 90 23 9130 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 26,35 |
| 0404 90 23 9140 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 27,36 |
| 0404 90 23 9150 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 29,00 |
| 0404 90 81 9100 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 19,00 |
| 0404 90 83 9110 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 19,00 |
| 0404 90 83 9130 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 26,35 |
| 0404 90 83 9150 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 27,36 |
| 0404 90 83 9170 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 29,00 |
| 0405 10 11 9500 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 53,66 |
| 0405 10 11 9700 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 55,00 |
| 0405 10 19 9500 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 53,66 |
| 0405 10 19 9700 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 55,00 |
| 0405 10 30 9100 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 53,66 |
| 0405 10 30 9300 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 55,00 |
| 0405 10 30 9700 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 55,00 |
| 0405 10 50 9500 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 53,66 |
| 0405 10 50 9700 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 55,00 |
| 0405 10 90 9000 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 57,01 |
| 0405 20 90 9500 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 50,30 |
| 0405 20 90 9700 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 52,32 |
| 0405 90 10 9000 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 66,60 |
| 0405 90 90 9000 | L20 | EUR/100 kg | 55,00 |
| 0406 10 20 9640 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 11,78 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 14,72 |
| 0406 10 20 9650 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 9,82 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 12,27 |
| 0406 10 20 9830 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 7,03 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 8,79 |
| 0406 10 20 9850 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 6,85 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 8,56 |
| 0406 20 90 9913 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 8,54 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 10,68 |
| 0406 20 90 9915 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 11,61 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 14,51 |
| 0406 20 90 9917 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 12,34 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 15,42 |
| 0406 20 90 9919 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 13,79 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 17,24 |
| 0406 30 31 9730 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 5,29 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 6,61 |
| 0406 30 31 9930 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 5,69 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 7,11 |
| 0406 30 31 9950 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 5,17 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 6,46 |
| 0406 30 39 9500 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 4,62 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 5,77 |
| 0406 30 39 9700 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 4,96 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 6,20 |
| 0406 30 39 9930 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 5,31 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 6,64 |
| 0406 30 39 9950 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 5,11 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 6,39 |
| 0406 40 50 9000 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 12,47 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 15,59 |
| 0406 40 90 9000 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 13,82 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 17,28 |
| 0406 90 13 9000 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 17,58 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 21,98 |
| 0406 90 15 9100 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 18,17 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 22,71 |
| 0406 90 17 9100 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 18,17 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 22,71 |
| 0406 90 21 9900 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 17,60 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 22,00 |
| 0406 90 23 9900 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 15,93 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 19,91 |
| 0406 90 25 9900 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 15,53 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 19,41 |
| 0406 90 27 9900 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 14,06 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 17,58 |
| 0406 90 32 9119 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 13,02 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 16,28 |
| 0406 90 35 9190 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 18,63 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 23,29 |
| 0406 90 35 9990 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 18,63 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 23,29 |
| 0406 90 37 9000 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 17,58 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 21,98 |
| 0406 90 61 9000 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 20,31 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 25,39 |
| 0406 90 63 9100 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 19,93 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 24,91 |
| 0406 90 63 9900 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 19,93 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 24,91 |
| 0406 90 69 9910 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 19,56 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 24,45 |
| 0406 90 73 9900 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 16,20 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 20,25 |
| 0406 90 75 9900 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 16,61 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 20,76 |
| 0406 90 76 9300 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 14,65 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 18,31 |
| 0406 90 76 9400 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 16,41 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 20,51 |
| 0406 90 76 9500 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 15,02 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 18,77 |
| 0406 90 78 9100 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 16,53 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 20,66 |
| 0406 90 78 9300 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 15,87 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 19,84 |
| 0406 90 79 9900 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 13,22 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 16,53 |
| 0406 90 81 9900 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 16,41 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 20,51 |
| 0406 90 85 9930 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 18,12 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 22,65 |
| 0406 90 85 9970 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 16,61 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 20,76 |
| 0406 90 86 9200 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 17,30 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 21,63 |
| 0406 90 86 9400 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 17,60 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 22,00 |
| 0406 90 86 9900 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 18,12 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 22,65 |
| 0406 90 87 9300 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 15,89 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 19,86 |
| 0406 90 87 9400 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 15,61 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 19,51 |
| 0406 90 87 9951 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 16,12 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 20,15 |
| 0406 90 87 9971 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 16,12 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 20,15 |
| 0406 90 87 9973 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 15,82 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 19,78 |
| 0406 90 87 9974 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 16,85 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 21,06 |
| 0406 90 87 9975 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 16,50 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 20,63 |
| 0406 90 87 9979 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 15,93 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 19,91 |
| 0406 90 88 9300 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 13,82 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 17,28 |
| 0406 90 88 9500 | L04 | EUR/100 kg | 13,52 |
| L40 | EUR/100 kg | 16,90 |
| The destinations are defined as follows:







  L20 | : | All destinations with the exception of:






  (a) | third countries: Andorra, Holy See (Vatican City State), Liechtenstein and the United States of America; |

Product code

Destination

Unit of measurement

Refunds

0401 30 31 9100

L20

EUR/100 kg

10,43

0401 30 31 9400

L20

EUR/100 kg

16,34

0401 30 31 9700

L20

EUR/100 kg

18,02

0401 30 39 9100

L20

EUR/100 kg

10,43

0401 30 39 9400

L20

EUR/100 kg

16,34

0401 30 39 9700

L20

EUR/100 kg

18,02

0401 30 91 9100

L20

EUR/100 kg

20,56

0401 30 99 9100

L20

EUR/100 kg

20,56

0401 30 99 9500

L20

EUR/100 kg

30,26

0402 10 11 9000

L20  (1)

EUR/100 kg

19,00

0402 10 19 9000

L20  (1)

EUR/100 kg

19,00

0402 10 99 9000

L20

EUR/100 kg

19,00

0402 21 11 9200

L20

EUR/100 kg

19,00

0402 21 11 9300

L20

EUR/100 kg

26,35

0402 21 11 9500

L20

EUR/100 kg

27,36

0402 21 11 9900

L20  (1)

EUR/100 kg

29,00

0402 21 17 9000

L20

EUR/100 kg

19,00

0402 21 19 9300

L20

EUR/100 kg

26,35

0402 21 19 9500

L20

EUR/100 kg

27,36

0402 21 19 9900

L20  (1)

EUR/100 kg

29,00

0402 21 91 9100

L20

EUR/100 kg

29,16

0402 21 91 9200

L20  (1)

EUR/100 kg

29,32

0402 21 91 9350

L20

EUR/100 kg

29,59

0402 21 99 9100

L20

EUR/100 kg

29,16

0402 21 99 9200

L20  (1)

EUR/100 kg

29,32

0402 21 99 9300

L20

EUR/100 kg

29,59

0402 21 99 9400

L20

EUR/100 kg

30,99

0402 21 99 9500

L20

EUR/100 kg

31,49

0402 21 99 9600

L20

EUR/100 kg

33,46

0402 21 99 9700

L20

EUR/100 kg

34,55

0402 29 15 9200

L20

EUR/100 kg

19,00

0402 29 15 9300

L20

EUR/100 kg

26,35

0402 29 15 9500

L20

EUR/100 kg

27,36

0402 29 19 9300

L20

EUR/100 kg

26,35

0402 29 19 9500

L20

EUR/100 kg

27,36

0402 29 19 9900

L20

EUR/100 kg

29,00

0402 29 99 9100

L20

EUR/100 kg

29,16

0402 29 99 9500

L20

EUR/100 kg

30,99

0402 91 10 9370

L20

EUR/100 kg

2,88

0402 91 30 9300

L20

EUR/100 kg

3,41

0402 91 99 9000

L20

EUR/100 kg

20,56

0402 99 10 9350

L20

EUR/100 kg

7,41

0402 99 31 9300

L20

EUR/100 kg

10,43

0403 90 11 9000

L20

EUR/100 kg

19,00

0403 90 13 9200

L20

EUR/100 kg

19,00

0403 90 13 9300

L20

EUR/100 kg

26,35

0403 90 13 9500

L20

EUR/100 kg

27,36

0403 90 13 9900

L20

EUR/100 kg

29,00

0403 90 33 9400

L20

EUR/100 kg

26,35

0403 90 59 9310

L20

EUR/100 kg

10,43

0403 90 59 9340

L20

EUR/100 kg

16,34

0403 90 59 9370

L20

EUR/100 kg

18,02

0404 90 21 9120

L20

EUR/100 kg

16,21

0404 90 21 9160

L20

EUR/100 kg

19,00

0404 90 23 9120

L20

EUR/100 kg

19,00

0404 90 23 9130

L20

EUR/100 kg

26,35

0404 90 23 9140

L20

EUR/100 kg

27,36

0404 90 23 9150

L20

EUR/100 kg

29,00

0404 90 81 9100

L20

EUR/100 kg

19,00

0404 90 83 9110

L20

EUR/100 kg

19,00

0404 90 83 9130

L20

EUR/100 kg

26,35

0404 90 83 9150

L20

EUR/100 kg

27,36

0404 90 83 9170

L20

EUR/100 kg

29,00

0405 10 11 9500

L20

EUR/100 kg

53,66

0405 10 11 9700

L20

EUR/100 kg

55,00

0405 10 19 9500

L20

EUR/100 kg

53,66

0405 10 19 9700

L20

EUR/100 kg

55,00

0405 10 30 9100

L20

EUR/100 kg

53,66

0405 10 30 9300

L20

EUR/100 kg

55,00

0405 10 30 9700

L20

EUR/100 kg

55,00

0405 10 50 9500

L20

EUR/100 kg

53,66

0405 10 50 9700

L20

EUR/100 kg

55,00

0405 10 90 9000

L20

EUR/100 kg

57,01

0405 20 90 9500

L20

EUR/100 kg

50,30

0405 20 90 9700

L20

EUR/100 kg

52,32

0405 90 10 9000

L20

EUR/100 kg

66,60

0405 90 90 9000

L20

EUR/100 kg

55,00

0406 10 20 9640

L04

EUR/100 kg

11,78

L40

EUR/100 kg

14,72

0406 10 20 9650

L04

EUR/100 kg

9,82

L40

EUR/100 kg

12,27

0406 10 20 9830

L04

EUR/100 kg

7,03

L40

EUR/100 kg

8,79

0406 10 20 9850

L04

EUR/100 kg

6,85

L40

EUR/100 kg

8,56

0406 20 90 9913

L04

EUR/100 kg

8,54

L40

EUR/100 kg

10,68

0406 20 90 9915

L04

EUR/100 kg

11,61

L40

EUR/100 kg

14,51

0406 20 90 9917

L04

EUR/100 kg

12,34

L40

EUR/100 kg

15,42

0406 20 90 9919

L04

EUR/100 kg

13,79

L40

EUR/100 kg

17,24

0406 30 31 9730

L04

EUR/100 kg

5,29

L40

EUR/100 kg

6,61

0406 30 31 9930

L04

EUR/100 kg

5,69

L40

EUR/100 kg

7,11

0406 30 31 9950

L04

EUR/100 kg

5,17

L40

EUR/100 kg

6,46

0406 30 39 9500

L04

EUR/100 kg

4,62

L40

EUR/100 kg

5,77

0406 30 39 9700

L04

EUR/100 kg

4,96

L40

EUR/100 kg

6,20

0406 30 39 9930

L04

EUR/100 kg

5,31

L40

EUR/100 kg

6,64

0406 30 39 9950

L04

EUR/100 kg

5,11

L40

EUR/100 kg

6,39

0406 40 50 9000

L04

EUR/100 kg

12,47

L40

EUR/100 kg

15,59

0406 40 90 9000

L04

EUR/100 kg

13,82

L40

EUR/100 kg

17,28

0406 90 13 9000

L04

EUR/100 kg

17,58

L40

EUR/100 kg

21,98

0406 90 15 9100

L04

EUR/100 kg

18,17

L40

EUR/100 kg

22,71

0406 90 17 9100

L04

EUR/100 kg

18,17

L40

EUR/100 kg

22,71

0406 90 21 9900

L04

EUR/100 kg

17,60

L40

EUR/100 kg

22,00

0406 90 23 9900

L04

EUR/100 kg

15,93

L40

EUR/100 kg

19,91

0406 90 25 9900

L04

EUR/100 kg

15,53

L40

EUR/100 kg

19,41

0406 90 27 9900

L04

EUR/100 kg

14,06

L40

EUR/100 kg

17,58

0406 90 32 9119

L04

EUR/100 kg

13,02

L40

EUR/100 kg

16,28

0406 90 35 9190

L04

EUR/100 kg

18,63

L40

EUR/100 kg

23,29

0406 90 35 9990

L04

EUR/100 kg

18,63

L40

EUR/100 kg

23,29

0406 90 37 9000

L04

EUR/100 kg

17,58

L40

EUR/100 kg

21,98

0406 90 61 9000

L04

EUR/100 kg

20,31

L40

EUR/100 kg

25,39

0406 90 63 9100

L04

EUR/100 kg

19,93

L40

EUR/100 kg

24,91

0406 90 63 9900

L04

EUR/100 kg

19,93

L40

EUR/100 kg

24,91

0406 90 69 9910

L04

EUR/100 kg

19,56

L40

EUR/100 kg

24,45

0406 90 73 9900

L04

EUR/100 kg

16,20

L40

EUR/100 kg

20,25

0406 90 75 9900

L04

EUR/100 kg

16,61

L40

EUR/100 kg

20,76

0406 90 76 9300

L04

EUR/100 kg

14,65

L40

EUR/100 kg

18,31

0406 90 76 9400

L04

EUR/100 kg

16,41

L40

EUR/100 kg

20,51

0406 90 76 9500

L04

EUR/100 kg

15,02

L40

EUR/100 kg

18,77

0406 90 78 9100

L04

EUR/100 kg

16,53

L40

EUR/100 kg

20,66

0406 90 78 9300

L04

EUR/100 kg

15,87

L40

EUR/100 kg

19,84

0406 90 79 9900

L04

EUR/100 kg

13,22

L40

EUR/100 kg

16,53

0406 90 81 9900

L04

EUR/100 kg

16,41

L40

EUR/100 kg

20,51

0406 90 85 9930

L04

EUR/100 kg

18,12

L40

EUR/100 kg

22,65

0406 90 85 9970

L04

EUR/100 kg

16,61

L40

EUR/100 kg

20,76

0406 90 86 9200

L04

EUR/100 kg

17,30

L40

EUR/100 kg

21,63

0406 90 86 9400

L04

EUR/100 kg

17,60

L40

EUR/100 kg

22,00

0406 90 86 9900

L04

EUR/100 kg

18,12

L40

EUR/100 kg

22,65

0406 90 87 9300

L04

EUR/100 kg

15,89

L40

EUR/100 kg

19,86

0406 90 87 9400

L04

EUR/100 kg

15,61

L40

EUR/100 kg

19,51

0406 90 87 9951

L04

EUR/100 kg

16,12

L40

EUR/100 kg

20,15

0406 90 87 9971

L04

EUR/100 kg

16,12

L40

EUR/100 kg

20,15

0406 90 87 9973

L04

EUR/100 kg

15,82

L40

EUR/100 kg

19,78

0406 90 87 9974

L04

EUR/100 kg

16,85

L40

EUR/100 kg

21,06

0406 90 87 9975

L04

EUR/100 kg

16,50

L40

EUR/100 kg

20,63

0406 90 87 9979

L04

EUR/100 kg

15,93

L40

EUR/100 kg

19,91

0406 90 88 9300

L04

EUR/100 kg

13,82

L40

EUR/100 kg

17,28

0406 90 88 9500

L04

EUR/100 kg

13,52

L40

EUR/100 kg

16,90

The destinations are defined as follows:

L20

:

All destinations with the exception of:

(a)

third countries: Andorra, Holy See (Vatican City State), Liechtenstein and the United States of America;

| (b) | territories of the EU Member States not forming part of the customs territory of the Community: the Faeroe Islands, Greenland, Heligoland, Ceuta, Melilla, the Communes of Livigno and Campione d'Italia, and the areas of the Republic of Cyprus in which the Government of the Republic of Cyprus does not exercise effective control; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

territories of the EU Member States not forming part of the customs territory of the Community: the Faeroe Islands, Greenland, Heligoland, Ceuta, Melilla, the Communes of Livigno and Campione d'Italia, and the areas of the Republic of Cyprus in which the Government of the Republic of Cyprus does not exercise effective control;

| (c) | European territories for whose external relations a Member State is responsible and not forming part of the customs territory of the Community: Gibraltar |
| --- | --- |

(c)

European territories for whose external relations a Member State is responsible and not forming part of the customs territory of the Community: Gibraltar

| (d) | the destinations referred to in Article 36(1), Article 44(1) and Article 45(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 (OJ L 102, 17.4.1999, p. 11). |
| --- | --- |

(d)

the destinations referred to in Article 36(1), Article 44(1) and Article 45(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 (OJ L 102, 17.4.1999, p. 11).

L04

:

Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Kosovo (), Montenegro and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

L40

:

All destinations with the exception of:

| (a) | third countries: L04, Andorra, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland, Holy See (Vatican City State), the United States of America, Croatia, Turkey, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

third countries: L04, Andorra, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland, Holy See (Vatican City State), the United States of America, Croatia, Turkey, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa;

| (b) | territories of the EU Member States not forming part of the customs territory of the Community: the Faeroe Islands, Greenland, Heligoland, Ceuta, Melilla, the Communes of Livigno and Campione d'Italia, and the areas of the Republic of Cyprus in which the Government of the Republic of Cyprus does not exercise effective control; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

territories of the EU Member States not forming part of the customs territory of the Community: the Faeroe Islands, Greenland, Heligoland, Ceuta, Melilla, the Communes of Livigno and Campione d'Italia, and the areas of the Republic of Cyprus in which the Government of the Republic of Cyprus does not exercise effective control;

| (c) | European territories for whose external relations a Member State is responsible and not forming part of the customs territory of the Community: Gibraltar. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

European territories for whose external relations a Member State is responsible and not forming part of the customs territory of the Community: Gibraltar.

| (d) | the destinations referred to in Article 36(1), Article 44(1) and Article 45(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 (OJ L 102, 17.4.1999, p. 11). |
| --- | --- |

(d)

the destinations referred to in Article 36(1), Article 44(1) and Article 45(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 (OJ L 102, 17.4.1999, p. 11).

---

(1)  As for the relevant products intended for exports to Dominican Republic under the quota 2008/2009 referred to in the Decision 98/486/EC, and complying with the conditions laid down in Chapter III, Section 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1282/2006, the following rates should apply:

| (a) | products falling within CN codes 0402 10 11 9000 and 0402 10 19 9000 |
| --- | --- |

(a)

products falling within CN codes 0402 10 11 9000 and 0402 10 19 9000

0,00 EUR/100 kg

| (b) | products falling within CN codes 0402 21 11 9900 , 0402 21 19 9900 , 0402 21 91 9200 and 0402 21 99 9200 |
| --- | --- |

(b)

products falling within CN codes 0402 21 11 9900 , 0402 21 19 9900 , 0402 21 91 9200 and 0402 21 99 9200

0,00 EUR/100 kg

(*1)  As defined by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 of 10 June 1999.

---

| 20.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 49/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 49/7

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 141/2009

of 19 February 2009

fixing the maximum export refund for butter in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 619/2008

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1), and in particular Article 164(2), in conjunction with Article 4, thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 619/2008 of 27 June 2008 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds concerning certain milk products (2) provides for a standing invitation to tender procedure. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 619/2008 of 27 June 2008 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds concerning certain milk products (2) provides for a standing invitation to tender procedure.

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 6 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1454/2007 of 10 December 2007 laying down common rules for establishing a tender procedure for fixing export refunds for certain agricultural products (3), and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for the tendering period ending on 17 February 2009. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 6 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1454/2007 of 10 December 2007 laying down common rules for establishing a tender procedure for fixing export refunds for certain agricultural products (3), and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for the tendering period ending on 17 February 2009.

| (3) | The Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chair, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chair,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the standing invitation to tender opened by Regulation (EC) No 619/2008, for the tendering period ending on 17 February 2009, the maximum amount of refund for the products and destinations referred to in Article 1(a) and (b) and in Article 2 respectively of that Regulation shall be as shown in the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 20 February 2009.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 19 February 2009.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 168, 28.6.2008, p. 20.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 325, 11.12.2007, p. 69.

3

---

ANNEX

| (EUR/100 kg) |
| --- |
| Product | Export refund Code | Maximum amount of export refund for exports to the destinations referred to in Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 619/2008 |
| Butter | ex ex 0405 10 19 9700 | 60,00 |
| Butteroil | ex ex 0405 90 10 9000 | 73,00 |

(EUR/100 kg)

Product

Export refund Code

Maximum amount of export refund for exports to the destinations referred to in Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 619/2008

Butter

ex ex 0405 10 19 9700

60,00

Butteroil

ex ex 0405 90 10 9000

73,00

---

| 20.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 49/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 49/9

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 142/2009

of 19 February 2009

fixing the maximum export refund for skimmed milk powder in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 619/2008

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1), and in particular Article 164(2), in conjunction with Article 4, thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 619/2008 of 27 June 2008 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds concerning certain milk products (2) provides for a standing invitation to tender procedure. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 619/2008 of 27 June 2008 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds concerning certain milk products (2) provides for a standing invitation to tender procedure.

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 6 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1454/2007 of 10 December 2007 laying down common rules for establishing a tender procedure for fixing export refunds for certain agricultural products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for the tendering period ending on 17 February 2009. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 6 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1454/2007 of 10 December 2007 laying down common rules for establishing a tender procedure for fixing export refunds for certain agricultural products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for the tendering period ending on 17 February 2009.

| (3) | The Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chair, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chair,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the standing invitation to tender opened by Regulation (EC) No 619/2008, for the tendering period ending on 17 February 2009, the maximum amount of refund for the products and destinations referred to in Article 1(c) and in Article 2 of that Regulation shall be EUR 21,98/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 20 February 2009.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 19 February 2009.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 168, 28.6.2008, p. 20.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 325, 11.12.2007, p. 69.

3

---

| 20.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 49/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 49/10

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 143/2009

of 19 February 2009

fixing representative prices in the poultrymeat and egg sectors and for egg albumin, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1484/95

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1), and in particular Article 143 thereof,

Having regard to Regulation (EEC) No 2783/75 of the Council of 29 October 1975 on the common system of trade for ovalbumin and lactalbumin, and in particular Article 3(4) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1484/95 (2) lays down detailed rules for implementing the system of additional import duties and fixes representative prices for poultrymeat and egg products and for egg albumin. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1484/95 (2) lays down detailed rules for implementing the system of additional import duties and fixes representative prices for poultrymeat and egg products and for egg albumin.

| (2) | Regular monitoring of the data used to determine representative prices for poultrymeat and egg products and for egg albumin shows that the representative import prices for certain products should be amended to take account of variations in price according to origin. The representative prices should therefore be published. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Regular monitoring of the data used to determine representative prices for poultrymeat and egg products and for egg albumin shows that the representative import prices for certain products should be amended to take account of variations in price according to origin. The representative prices should therefore be published.

| (3) | In view of the situation on the market, this amendment should be applied as soon as possible. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In view of the situation on the market, this amendment should be applied as soon as possible.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1484/95 is replaced by the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 19 February 2009.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 145, 29.6.1995, p. 47.

2

---

ANNEX

to the Commission Regulation of 19 February 2009 fixing representative prices in the poultrymeat and egg sectors and for egg albumin, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1484/95

‘ANNEX I

| CN code | Description of goods | Representative price
  (EUR/100 kg) | Security under Article 3(3)
  (EUR/100 kg) | Origin (1) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 0207 12 10 | Fowls of the species Gallus domesticus, not cut in pieces, presented as “70 % chickens”, frozen | 114,6 | 0 | BR |
| 116,4 | 0 | AR |
| 0207 12 90 | Fowls of the species Gallus domesticus, not cut in pieces, presented as “65 % chickens”, frozen | 129,4 | 0 | BR |
| 124,6 | 0 | AR |
| 0207 14 10 | Fowls of the species Gallus domesticus, boneless cuts, frozen | 213,4 | 26 | BR |
| 252,7 | 14 | AR |
| 282,7 | 5 | CL |
| 0207 14 50 | Fowls of the species Gallus domesticus, breasts, frozen | 192,0 | 6 | BR |
| 0207 14 60 | Fowl of the species Gallus domesticus, legs, frozen | 125,5 | 5 | BR |
| 0207 25 10 | Turkeys, not cut in pieces, presented as “80 % turkeys”, frozen | 213,5 | 0 | BR |
| 0207 27 10 | Turkeys, boneless cuts, frozen | 194,6 | 31 | BR |
| 251,3 | 14 | CL |
| 0408 11 80 | Egg yolks | 422,1 | 0 | AR |
| 0408 91 80 | Eggs, not in shell, dried | 426,2 | 0 | AR |
| 1602 32 11 | Preparations of fowls of the species Gallus domesticus, uncooked | 234,8 | 16 | BR |
| 3502 11 90 | Egg albumin, dried | 602,4 | 0 | AR |

CN code

Description of goods

Representative price

(EUR/100 kg)

Security under Article 3(3)

(EUR/100 kg)

Origin (1)

0207 12 10

Fowls of the species Gallus domesticus, not cut in pieces, presented as “70 % chickens”, frozen

114,6

0

BR

116,4

0

AR

0207 12 90

Fowls of the species Gallus domesticus, not cut in pieces, presented as “65 % chickens”, frozen

129,4

0

BR

124,6

0

AR

0207 14 10

Fowls of the species Gallus domesticus, boneless cuts, frozen

213,4

26

BR

252,7

14

AR

282,7

5

CL

0207 14 50

Fowls of the species Gallus domesticus, breasts, frozen

192,0

6

BR

0207 14 60

Fowl of the species Gallus domesticus, legs, frozen

125,5

5

BR

0207 25 10

Turkeys, not cut in pieces, presented as “80 % turkeys”, frozen

213,5

0

BR

0207 27 10

Turkeys, boneless cuts, frozen

194,6

31

BR

251,3

14

CL

0408 11 80

Egg yolks

422,1

0

AR

0408 91 80

Eggs, not in shell, dried

426,2

0

AR

1602 32 11

Preparations of fowls of the species Gallus domesticus, uncooked

234,8

16

BR

3502 11 90

Egg albumin, dried

602,4

0

AR

---

(1)  Nomenclature of countries laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1833/2006 (OJ L 354, 14.12.2006, p. 19). The code “
  ZZ
  ” represents “other origins”.’

1

---

| 20.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 49/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 49/12

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 144/2009

of 19 February 2009

fixing the rates of the refunds applicable to milk and milk products exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (single CMO Regulation) (1), and in particular Article 164(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Article 162(1)b of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 provides that the difference between prices in international trade for the products referred to in Article 1(1)(p) and listed in Part XVI of Annex I to that Regulation and prices within the Community may be covered by an export refund where these goods are exported in the form of goods listed in Part IV of Annex XX to that Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Article 162(1)b of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 provides that the difference between prices in international trade for the products referred to in Article 1(1)(p) and listed in Part XVI of Annex I to that Regulation and prices within the Community may be covered by an export refund where these goods are exported in the form of goods listed in Part IV of Annex XX to that Regulation.

| (2) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1043/2005 of 30 June 2005 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 3448/93 as regards the system of granting export refunds on certain agricultural products exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty, and the criteria for fixing the amount of such refunds (2), specifies the products for which a rate of refund is to be fixed, to be applied where these products are exported in the form of goods listed in Part IV of Annex XX to Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1043/2005 of 30 June 2005 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 3448/93 as regards the system of granting export refunds on certain agricultural products exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty, and the criteria for fixing the amount of such refunds (2), specifies the products for which a rate of refund is to be fixed, to be applied where these products are exported in the form of goods listed in Part IV of Annex XX to Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007.

| (3) | In accordance with the second paragraph, subparagraph (a) of Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 1043/2005, the rate of the refund per 100 kilograms for each of the basic products in question is to be fixed for a period of the same duration as that for which refunds are fixed for the same products exported unprocessed. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In accordance with the second paragraph, subparagraph (a) of Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 1043/2005, the rate of the refund per 100 kilograms for each of the basic products in question is to be fixed for a period of the same duration as that for which refunds are fixed for the same products exported unprocessed.

| (4) | Article 11 of the Agreement on Agriculture concluded under the Uruguay Round lays down that the export refund for a product contained in a good may not exceed the refund applicable to that product when exported without further processing. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Article 11 of the Agreement on Agriculture concluded under the Uruguay Round lays down that the export refund for a product contained in a good may not exceed the refund applicable to that product when exported without further processing.

| (5) | However, in the case of certain milk products exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty, there is a danger that, if high refund rates are fixed in advance, the commitments entered into in relation to those refunds may be jeopardised. In order to avert that danger, it is therefore necessary to take appropriate precautionary measures, but without precluding the conclusion of long-term contracts. The fixing of specific refund rates for the advance fixing of refunds in respect of those products should enable those two objectives to be met. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

However, in the case of certain milk products exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty, there is a danger that, if high refund rates are fixed in advance, the commitments entered into in relation to those refunds may be jeopardised. In order to avert that danger, it is therefore necessary to take appropriate precautionary measures, but without precluding the conclusion of long-term contracts. The fixing of specific refund rates for the advance fixing of refunds in respect of those products should enable those two objectives to be met.

| (6) | Article 15(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1043/2005 provides that, when the rate of the refund is being fixed, account is to be taken, where appropriate, of production refunds, aids or other measures having equivalent effect applicable in all Member States in accordance with the Regulation on the common organisation of the agricultural markets to the basic products listed in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1043/2005 or to assimilated products. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

Article 15(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1043/2005 provides that, when the rate of the refund is being fixed, account is to be taken, where appropriate, of production refunds, aids or other measures having equivalent effect applicable in all Member States in accordance with the Regulation on the common organisation of the agricultural markets to the basic products listed in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1043/2005 or to assimilated products.

| (7) | Article 100(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 provides for the payment of aid for Community-produced skimmed milk processed into casein if such milk and the casein manufactured from it fulfil certain conditions. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

Article 100(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 provides for the payment of aid for Community-produced skimmed milk processed into casein if such milk and the casein manufactured from it fulfil certain conditions.

| (8) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1898/2005 of 9 November 2005 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 as regards measures for the disposal of cream, butter and concentrated butter (3), lays down that butter and cream at reduced prices should be made available to industries which manufacture certain goods. |
| --- | --- |

(8)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1898/2005 of 9 November 2005 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 as regards measures for the disposal of cream, butter and concentrated butter (3), lays down that butter and cream at reduced prices should be made available to industries which manufacture certain goods.

| (9) | The Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chair, |
| --- | --- |

(9)

The Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chair,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The rates of the refunds applicable to the basic products listed in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1043/2005 and in Part XVI of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, and exported in the form of goods listed in Part IV of Annex XX to Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, shall be fixed as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 20 February 2009.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 19 February 2009.

For the Commission

Heinz ZOUREK

Director-General Enterprise and Industry

---

(1)  
  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 172, 5.7.2005, p. 24.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 308, 25.11.2005, p. 1.

3

---

ANNEX

Rates of the refunds applicable from 20 February 2009 to certain milk products exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty (1)

| (EUR/100 kg) |
| --- |
| CN code | Description | Rate of refund |
| In case of advance fixing of refunds | Other |
| ex 0402 10 19 | Powdered milk, in granules or other solid forms, not containing added sugar or other sweetening matter, with a fat content not exceeding 1,5 % by weight (PG 2): | | |
| (a) | on exportation of goods of CN code 3501 |

(EUR/100 kg)

CN code

Description

Rate of refund

In case of advance fixing of refunds

Other

ex 0402 10 19

Powdered milk, in granules or other solid forms, not containing added sugar or other sweetening matter, with a fat content not exceeding 1,5 % by weight (PG 2):

(a)

on exportation of goods of CN code 3501

—

—

| (b) | on exportation of other goods |
| --- | --- |

(b)

on exportation of other goods

19,00

19,00

ex 0402 21 19

Powdered milk, in granules or other solid forms, not containing added sugar or other sweetening matter, with a fat content of 26 % by weight (PG 3):

| (a) | where goods incorporating, in the form of products assimilated to PG 3, reduced-price butter or cream obtained pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1898/2005 are exported |
| --- | --- |

(a)

where goods incorporating, in the form of products assimilated to PG 3, reduced-price butter or cream obtained pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1898/2005 are exported

31,50

31,50

| (b) | on exportation of other goods |
| --- | --- |

(b)

on exportation of other goods

29,00

29,00

ex 0405 10

Butter, with a fat content by weight of 82 % (PG 6):

| (a) | where goods containing reduced-price butter or cream which have been manufactured in accordance with the conditions provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1898/2005 are exported |
| --- | --- |

(a)

where goods containing reduced-price butter or cream which have been manufactured in accordance with the conditions provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1898/2005 are exported

55,00

55,00

| (b) | on exportation of goods of CN code 2106 90 98 containing 40 % or more by weight of milk fat |
| --- | --- |

(b)

on exportation of goods of CN code 2106 90 98 containing 40 % or more by weight of milk fat

56,28

56,28

| (c) | on exportation of other goods |
| --- | --- |

(c)

on exportation of other goods

55,00

55,00

---

(1)  The rates set out in this Annex are not applicable to exports to

| (a) | third countries: Andorra, the Holy See (Vatican City State), Liechtenstein, the United States of America and the goods listed in Tables I and II of Protocol 2 to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation of 22 July 1972 exported to the Swiss Confederation. |
| --- | --- |

(a)

third countries: Andorra, the Holy See (Vatican City State), Liechtenstein, the United States of America and the goods listed in Tables I and II of Protocol 2 to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation of 22 July 1972 exported to the Swiss Confederation.

| (b) | territories of EU Member States not forming part of the customs territory of the Community: Ceuta, Melilla, the Communes of Livigno and Campione d’Italia, Heligoland, Greenland, the Faeroe Islands and the areas of the Republic of Cyprus in which the Government of the Republic of Cyprus does not exercise effective control. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

territories of EU Member States not forming part of the customs territory of the Community: Ceuta, Melilla, the Communes of Livigno and Campione d’Italia, Heligoland, Greenland, the Faeroe Islands and the areas of the Republic of Cyprus in which the Government of the Republic of Cyprus does not exercise effective control.

| (c) | European territories for whose external relations a Member State is responsible and not forming part of the customs territory of the Community: Gibraltar. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

European territories for whose external relations a Member State is responsible and not forming part of the customs territory of the Community: Gibraltar.

| (d) | the destinations referred to in Article 36(1), Article 44(1) and Article 45(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 (OJ L 102, 17.4.1999, p. 11). |
| --- | --- |

(d)

the destinations referred to in Article 36(1), Article 44(1) and Article 45(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 (OJ L 102, 17.4.1999, p. 11).

---

II Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is not obligatory

DECISIONS

Council

| 20.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 49/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 49/15

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 19 February 2009

extending the period of application of the measures in Decision 2002/148/EC concluding consultations with Zimbabwe under Article 96 of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement

(2009/144/EC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 300(2) thereof,

Having regard to the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000 (1) and revised in Luxembourg on 25 June 2005 (2),

Having regard to the Internal Agreement between the representatives of the governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on measures to be taken and procedures to be followed for the implementation of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement (3), and in particular Article 3 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Whereas:

| (1) | By Council Decision 2002/148/EC (4), the consultations with the Republic of Zimbabwe under Article 96(2)(c) of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement were concluded and appropriate measures, as specified in the Annex to that Decision, were taken. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

By Council Decision 2002/148/EC (4), the consultations with the Republic of Zimbabwe under Article 96(2)(c) of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement were concluded and appropriate measures, as specified in the Annex to that Decision, were taken.

| (2) | By Decision 2008/158/EC (5), the application of the measures referred to in Article 2 of Decision 2002/148/EC, which had been extended until 20 February 2004 by Article 1 of Decision 2003/112/EC (6), until 20 February 2005 by Article 1 of Decision 2004/157/EC (7), until 20 February 2006 by Article 1 of Decision 2005/139/EC (8), until 20 February 2007 by Article 1 of Decision 2006/114/EC (9) and until 18 February 2008 by Article 1 of Decision 2007/127/EC (10), was extended for a further period of 12 months until 20 February 2009. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

By Decision 2008/158/EC (5), the application of the measures referred to in Article 2 of Decision 2002/148/EC, which had been extended until 20 February 2004 by Article 1 of Decision 2003/112/EC (6), until 20 February 2005 by Article 1 of Decision 2004/157/EC (7), until 20 February 2006 by Article 1 of Decision 2005/139/EC (8), until 20 February 2007 by Article 1 of Decision 2006/114/EC (9) and until 18 February 2008 by Article 1 of Decision 2007/127/EC (10), was extended for a further period of 12 months until 20 February 2009.

| (3) | The essential elements cited in Article 9 of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement continue to be violated by the Government of Zimbabwe, and the current conditions in Zimbabwe do not ensure respect for human rights, democratic principles and the rule of law. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The essential elements cited in Article 9 of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement continue to be violated by the Government of Zimbabwe, and the current conditions in Zimbabwe do not ensure respect for human rights, democratic principles and the rule of law.

| (4) | The period of application of the measures should therefore be extended, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The period of application of the measures should therefore be extended,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The period of application of the measures referred to in Article 2 of Decision 2002/148/EC shall be extended until 20 February 2010. The measures shall be kept under constant review.

The letter in the Annex to this Decision shall be addressed to the President of Zimbabwe.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 19 February 2009.

For the Council

The President

M. ŘÍMAN

---

(1)  
  OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 3.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 209, 11.8.2005, p. 26.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 376.

3

(4)  
  OJ L 50, 21.2.2002, p. 64.

4

(5)  
  OJ L 51, 26.2.2008, p. 19.

5

(6)  
  OJ L 46, 20.2.2003, p. 25.

6

(7)  
  OJ L 50, 20.2.2004, p. 60.

7

(8)  
  OJ L 48, 19.2.2005, p. 28.

8

(9)  
  OJ L 48, 18.2.2006, p. 26.

9

(10)  
  OJ L 53, 22.2.2007, p. 23.

10

---

ANNEX

Brussels,

The European Union attaches the utmost importance to the provisions of Article 9 of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement. As essential elements of the Partnership Agreement, respect for human rights, democratic institutions and the rule of law form the basis of our relations.

By letter of 19 February 2002, the European Union informed you of its decision to conclude the consultations held under Article 96 of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement and to take certain ‘appropriate measures’ within the meaning of Article 96(2)(c) of that Agreement.

By letters of 19 February 2003, 19 February 2004, 18 February 2005, 15 February 2006, 21 February 2007 and 19 February 2008, the European Union informed you of its decisions not to revoke the ‘appropriate measures’ and to extend the period of application until 20 February 2004, 20 February 2005, 20 February 2006, 20 February 2007, 20 February 2008 and 20 February 2009 respectively.

The European Union welcomes that, under the guidance of SADC, an agreement has been reached in Zimbabwe between the parties. It hopes that the new government will demonstrate its commitment to reform, including with respect to the rule of law, human rights and democratisation.

Nevertheless 12 months after the adoption of the latest decision on appropriate measures, the European Union considers that no significant progress has been made in the five areas referred to in the Council Decision of 18 February 2002.

In the light of the above, the European Union does not consider that the appropriate measures can yet be revoked and has decided to extend their period of application until 20 February 2010 pending reopening of consultations.

The European Union would once again emphasise that it is not penalising the Zimbabwean people and that it will continue its contribution to operations of a humanitarian nature and projects in direct support of the population, in particular projects in the social sectors, democratisation, respect for human rights and the rule of law, which are not affected by these measures.

The European Union wishes to reiterate that the application of appropriate measures within the meaning of Article 96 of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement is no obstacle to political dialogue as provided for in Article 8 of that Agreement.

With this in mind, the European Union wishes to underline once again the importance that it attaches to future EC-Zimbabwe cooperation and to confirm its willingness to carry on the dialogue and make progress in the near future towards a situation where the resumption of full cooperation becomes possible.

Yours faithfully,

For the Commission

For the Council

---

Commission

| 20.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 49/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 49/18

---

COMMISSION DECISION

of 10 December 2008

concerning State aid C 15/06 (ex N 291/2000) which France plans to implement in favour of Pilkington/Interpane

(notified under document number C(2008) 7799)

(Only the French text is authentic)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2009/145/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 88(2) thereof,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 62(1)(a) thereof,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (1) (hereinafter called ‘the Procedural Regulation’), and in particular Article 9 thereof,

Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provisions cited above (2) and having regard to their comments,

Whereas:

1.   PROCEDURE

| (1) | By letter dated 22 May 2000, registered as received on 25 May 2000 (A/34298), France notified, in accordance with the provisions of the Multisectoral Framework on regional aid for large investment projects (3) (hereinafter called ‘the 1998 MSF’), aid to two public limited companies incorporated under French law, Pilkington France SAS and Interpane Glass Coating France SAS, jointly owned by the two international glassmaking groups Interpane and Pilkington. On 7 June 2000, the Commission requested additional information. France submitted additional information by letters dated 13 June 2000, registered as received on 14 June 2000 (A/34798), 30 June 2000, registered as received on 3 July 2000 (A/35410), and 30 June 2000, registered as received on 3 July 2000 (A/35411). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

By letter dated 22 May 2000, registered as received on 25 May 2000 (A/34298), France notified, in accordance with the provisions of the Multisectoral Framework on regional aid for large investment projects (3) (hereinafter called ‘the 1998 MSF’), aid to two public limited companies incorporated under French law, Pilkington France SAS and Interpane Glass Coating France SAS, jointly owned by the two international glassmaking groups Interpane and Pilkington. On 7 June 2000, the Commission requested additional information. France submitted additional information by letters dated 13 June 2000, registered as received on 14 June 2000 (A/34798), 30 June 2000, registered as received on 3 July 2000 (A/35410), and 30 June 2000, registered as received on 3 July 2000 (A/35411).

3

| (2) | By Decision of 17 August 2000 (4), reference SG(2000) D/106264 (hereinafter called ‘the 2000 Decision’), the Commission approved the intensity of the aid for Pilkington/Interpane notified under the 1998 MSF. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

By Decision of 17 August 2000 (4), reference SG(2000) D/106264 (hereinafter called ‘the 2000 Decision’), the Commission approved the intensity of the aid for Pilkington/Interpane notified under the 1998 MSF.

4

| (3) | Annual reports were provided by France, in cooperation with the aid recipients, on 17 October 2002, 18 August 2003 and 31 August 2004 as part of the ex-post monitoring of the proper implementation of the decisions taken under the 1998 MSF (point 6.4) and in accordance with the 2000 Decision. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Annual reports were provided by France, in cooperation with the aid recipients, on 17 October 2002, 18 August 2003 and 31 August 2004 as part of the ex-post monitoring of the proper implementation of the decisions taken under the 1998 MSF (point 6.4) and in accordance with the 2000 Decision.

| (4) | By letter dated 13 January 2005, registered as received on the same day (A/30447), and by letter dated 13 June 2005, registered as received on 14 June 2005 (A/34734), the French authorities informed the Commission that the information furnished in the notification which had resulted in the 2000 Decision was incorrect, notably as regards the calculation of the amount of the business tax exemption, and asked the Commission to amend the 2000 Decision. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

By letter dated 13 January 2005, registered as received on the same day (A/30447), and by letter dated 13 June 2005, registered as received on 14 June 2005 (A/34734), the French authorities informed the Commission that the information furnished in the notification which had resulted in the 2000 Decision was incorrect, notably as regards the calculation of the amount of the business tax exemption, and asked the Commission to amend the 2000 Decision.

| (5) | By letter dated 6 March 2006 (D/57979), the Commission, in accordance with Article 9 of the Procedural Regulation, invited the French authorities to submit their comments on its intention to revoke the 2000 Decision. The French authorities submitted their comments by e-mail dated 16 March 2006, registered as received on 17 March 2006 (A/32057). |
| --- | --- |

(5)

By letter dated 6 March 2006 (D/57979), the Commission, in accordance with Article 9 of the Procedural Regulation, invited the French authorities to submit their comments on its intention to revoke the 2000 Decision. The French authorities submitted their comments by e-mail dated 16 March 2006, registered as received on 17 March 2006 (A/32057).

| (6) | By letter dated 26 April 2006, the Commission informed France of its decision to open the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of the aid at issue with a view to revoking its Decision of 17 August 2000 and adopting a new Decision. The Commission’s Decision to open the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (5). The Commission called on interested parties to submit their comments on the aid. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

By letter dated 26 April 2006, the Commission informed France of its decision to open the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of the aid at issue with a view to revoking its Decision of 17 August 2000 and adopting a new Decision. The Commission’s Decision to open the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (5). The Commission called on interested parties to submit their comments on the aid.

Official Journal of the European Union

5

| (7) | France submitted its comments by e-mail dated 2 June 2006. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

France submitted its comments by e-mail dated 2 June 2006.

| (8) | The Commission received no comments on the matter from interested parties. |
| --- | --- |

(8)

The Commission received no comments on the matter from interested parties.

| (9) | By letter dated 12 September 2007 (D/53668), the Commission requested additional information. France submitted a partial answer by letter dated 21 December 2007 (A/40607) and supplemented that answer by e-mail dated 30 May 2008 (A/10204). |
| --- | --- |

(9)

By letter dated 12 September 2007 (D/53668), the Commission requested additional information. France submitted a partial answer by letter dated 21 December 2007 (A/40607) and supplemented that answer by e-mail dated 30 May 2008 (A/10204).

| (10) | By e-mails dated 16 September and 19 September 2008 (A/19328 and A/19263), France submitted new information, which was supplemented by e-mail dated 24 October 2008 (A/22746). |
| --- | --- |

(10)

By e-mails dated 16 September and 19 September 2008 (A/19328 and A/19263), France submitted new information, which was supplemented by e-mail dated 24 October 2008 (A/22746).

2.   DESCRIPTION OF THE AID

2.1.   The aid recipients

| (11) | The following description of the recipients reflects the situation as it existed in 2000. |
| --- | --- |

(11)

The following description of the recipients reflects the situation as it existed in 2000.

2.1.1.   The companies concerned

| (12) | In its 2000 notification, France informed the Commission of its intention to grant regional investment aid to two French public limited companies (incorporated in the form of sociétés par actions simplifiées) jointly owned by two glassmaking groups, Interpane and Pilkington, and named Pilkington Glass France SAS and Interpane Glass Coating France SAS (PGF/IGCF). |
| --- | --- |

(12)

In its 2000 notification, France informed the Commission of its intention to grant regional investment aid to two French public limited companies (incorporated in the form of sociétés par actions simplifiées) jointly owned by two glassmaking groups, Interpane and Pilkington, and named Pilkington Glass France SAS and Interpane Glass Coating France SAS (PGF/IGCF).

sociétés par actions simplifiées

| (13) | Ownership of the joint ventures is shared unequally between the parent companies as follows (see also figure 1):






  — | PGF is owned 51 % by Pilkington and 49 % by Interpane, |
| --- | --- | --- |

(13)

Ownership of the joint ventures is shared unequally between the parent companies as follows (see also figure 1):

—

PGF is owned 51 % by Pilkington and 49 % by Interpane,

| — | IGCF is owned 51 % by Interpane and 49 % by Pilkington. |
| --- | --- |

—

IGCF is owned 51 % by Interpane and 49 % by Pilkington.

Figure 1

Legal structure of the companies

| (14) | The two new State-aided companies are production joint ventures. They will not operate autonomously in the market. Their sole object will be to supply the parent companies with first-stage-processed raw flat float glass either for their own use or for on-selling. |
| --- | --- |

(14)

The two new State-aided companies are production joint ventures. They will not operate autonomously in the market. Their sole object will be to supply the parent companies with first-stage-processed raw flat float glass either for their own use or for on-selling.

2.1.2.   The formation of the joint ventures

| (15) | The formation of the joint ventures was notified, by letter dated 7 April 2000, under Article 81 of the EC Treaty (6) with a view to obtaining individual exemption under Article 81(3) of the Treaty. |
| --- | --- |

(15)

The formation of the joint ventures was notified, by letter dated 7 April 2000, under Article 81 of the EC Treaty (6) with a view to obtaining individual exemption under Article 81(3) of the Treaty.

6

| (16) | The notifying parties agreed to the notification being dealt with by comfort letter. |
| --- | --- |

(16)

The notifying parties agreed to the notification being dealt with by comfort letter.

| (17) | On 29 June 2000, two comfort letters were sent by the Commission to each of the notifying parties, informing them that:






  — | the agreements contained restrictions of competition caught by the prohibition in Article 81(1) of the EC Treaty, |
| --- | --- | --- |

(17)

On 29 June 2000, two comfort letters were sent by the Commission to each of the notifying parties, informing them that:

—

the agreements contained restrictions of competition caught by the prohibition in Article 81(1) of the EC Treaty,

| — | the Directorate-General for Competition considered that the notifying parties had furnished sufficient justification for its concluding that the criteria of Article 81(3) of the EC Treaty were met, |
| --- | --- |

—

the Directorate-General for Competition considered that the notifying parties had furnished sufficient justification for its concluding that the criteria of Article 81(3) of the EC Treaty were met,

| — | consequently, the Directorate-General for Competition considered that it was unnecessary to close the procedure by proposing that the Commission adopt an exemption decision under Article 81(3) of the EC Treaty in accordance with the procedure laid down by the old Regulation No 17 (7). |
| --- | --- |

—

consequently, the Directorate-General for Competition considered that it was unnecessary to close the procedure by proposing that the Commission adopt an exemption decision under Article 81(3) of the EC Treaty in accordance with the procedure laid down by the old Regulation No 17 (7).

7

| (18) | The comfort letters were sent following an economic analysis of the situation, which can be summed up as follows:






  — | the notified operation consisted in the formation of two cooperative joint ventures, |
| --- | --- | --- |

(18)

The comfort letters were sent following an economic analysis of the situation, which can be summed up as follows:

—

the notified operation consisted in the formation of two cooperative joint ventures,

| — | the notified agreements concerned:






  (a) | the production by the joint ventures of unprocessed or intermediate products intended for further processing into finished products by the founders or for sale by their own distribution networks; |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

the notified agreements concerned:

(a)

the production by the joint ventures of unprocessed or intermediate products intended for further processing into finished products by the founders or for sale by their own distribution networks;

| (b) | the exclusive supplying of the founders by the joint ventures; this agreement was ancillary to the formation of the joint ventures in so far as it could not be dissociated from the joint ventures without calling their existence into question; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the exclusive supplying of the founders by the joint ventures; this agreement was ancillary to the formation of the joint ventures in so far as it could not be dissociated from the joint ventures without calling their existence into question;

| — | there was a strong presumption that the joint ventures were caught by Article 81(1) of the EC Treaty inasmuch as:






  (a) | there was a likelihood of sensitive information being exchanged between them; |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

there was a strong presumption that the joint ventures were caught by Article 81(1) of the EC Treaty inasmuch as:

(a)

there was a likelihood of sensitive information being exchanged between them;

| (b) | the cooperation between two major competitors could lead to coordination of the parties’ conduct in the highly concentrated market for coated glass; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the cooperation between two major competitors could lead to coordination of the parties’ conduct in the highly concentrated market for coated glass;

| — | the Directorate-General for Competition analysed the agreements in the light of Article 81(3) of the EC Treaty and, following confirmation by the parties that clause 2 of the exclusive supply agreement had been deleted, concluded that the criteria of Article 81(3) were satisfied. Clause 2, the ancillary nature of which was open to question, provided that Pilkington and Interpane could at any time obtain supplies according to their requirements from different plants of the two joint ventures. |
| --- | --- |

—

the Directorate-General for Competition analysed the agreements in the light of Article 81(3) of the EC Treaty and, following confirmation by the parties that clause 2 of the exclusive supply agreement had been deleted, concluded that the criteria of Article 81(3) were satisfied. Clause 2, the ancillary nature of which was open to question, provided that Pilkington and Interpane could at any time obtain supplies according to their requirements from different plants of the two joint ventures.

2.1.3.   The partners

| (19) | The recipient companies are co-owned by the two international glassmaking groups Interpane and Pilkington. |
| --- | --- |

(19)

The recipient companies are co-owned by the two international glassmaking groups Interpane and Pilkington.

| (20) | Interpane was set up in 1971 by Mr Georg Hesselbach, the current majority owner and chairman of the management board of the Interpane group. The group is presently active worldwide in the sector of glass for the building industry and in related fields (manufacture of windows in Germany and the United States, manufacture of equipment for the glass industry in Germany). |
| --- | --- |

(20)

Interpane was set up in 1971 by Mr Georg Hesselbach, the current majority owner and chairman of the management board of the Interpane group. The group is presently active worldwide in the sector of glass for the building industry and in related fields (manufacture of windows in Germany and the United States, manufacture of equipment for the glass industry in Germany).

| (21) | In Europe, the activities of the group (15 companies in 1999) are centred on the treatment and processing of glass for the building industry. Interpane has been present in France since 1998 following its acquisition of two glass processors (at Hoerdt in Alsace and Mitry-Mory in the Paris area). The European subsidiaries are headed by the holding company Interpane Glas Industrie AG, the registered office of which is in Lauenförde, Germany. This holding company is owned 88 % by the Hesselbach family and 12 % by the German publicly owned bank Nord/LB. |
| --- | --- |

(21)

In Europe, the activities of the group (15 companies in 1999) are centred on the treatment and processing of glass for the building industry. Interpane has been present in France since 1998 following its acquisition of two glass processors (at Hoerdt in Alsace and Mitry-Mory in the Paris area). The European subsidiaries are headed by the holding company Interpane Glas Industrie AG, the registered office of which is in Lauenförde, Germany. This holding company is owned 88 % by the Hesselbach family and 12 % by the German publicly owned bank Nord/LB.

| (22) | The holding company holds, in partnership with the Dutch holding company Interpane NV, via the holding company Interpane Glass Manufacturing BV, the Interpane group’s shares in the joint ventures receiving the aid. Interpane NV and Interpane Glass Manufacturing BV were specially created for the purposes of this transaction. They are owned by the Hesselbach family either alone or jointly with Nord/LB. |
| --- | --- |

(22)

The holding company holds, in partnership with the Dutch holding company Interpane NV, via the holding company Interpane Glass Manufacturing BV, the Interpane group’s shares in the joint ventures receiving the aid. Interpane NV and Interpane Glass Manufacturing BV were specially created for the purposes of this transaction. They are owned by the Hesselbach family either alone or jointly with Nord/LB.

| (23) | The Pilkington group is a world leader in the glass sector. Its activities cover all industrial areas of the sector: the manufacture, treatment and processing of glass for the building industry (49 % of activities) and the automotive industry (44 %), and the production of special glasses. The group’s headquarters are in the United Kingdom. The group has 24 manufacturing subsidiaries worldwide (Europe, North and South America, Asia/Pacific). |
| --- | --- |

(23)

The Pilkington group is a world leader in the glass sector. Its activities cover all industrial areas of the sector: the manufacture, treatment and processing of glass for the building industry (49 % of activities) and the automotive industry (44 %), and the production of special glasses. The group’s headquarters are in the United Kingdom. The group has 24 manufacturing subsidiaries worldwide (Europe, North and South America, Asia/Pacific).

| (24) | The group’s shareholdings in the joint ventures situated in Freyming-Merlebach are held by the Dutch holding company Pilkington BV.
  Table 1
  Turnover

  NB: The figures for Interpane are based on an exchange rate of FF 3,35 to one DM (1999 rate). The figures for Pilkington are based on an exchange rate of FF 10,60 to one GBP (January 2000 rate).







  (EUR million) |
| --- | --- |
| Interpane group |
| | World/Europe (8) | France (9) |
| 1996 | 107 | 0 |
| 1997 | 114 | 0 |
| 1998 | 118 | 0 |

(24)

The group’s shareholdings in the joint ventures situated in Freyming-Merlebach are held by the Dutch holding company Pilkington BV.

Table 1

Turnover

NB: The figures for Interpane are based on an exchange rate of FF 3,35 to one DM (1999 rate). The figures for Pilkington are based on an exchange rate of FF 10,60 to one GBP (January 2000 rate).

NB

(EUR million)

Interpane group

World/Europe (8)

8

France (9)

9

1996

107

0

1997

114

0

1998

118

0

| Pilkington group |
| --- |
| | World | Europe | France |
| 1996/1997 | 4 380 | 2 730 | 69,5 |
| 1997/1998 | 4 830 | 2 500 | 75,0 |
| 1998/1999 | 5 000 | 2 410 | 73,0 |

Pilkington group

World

Europe

France

1996/1997

4 380

2 730

69,5

1997/1998

4 830

2 500

75,0

1998/1999

5 000

2 410

73,0

Table 2

The groups’ workforces

| (EUR million) |
| --- |
| Interpane group |
| | World | Europe (10) | France (11) |
| 1996 | na | 703 | 0 |
| 1997 | na | 721 | 0 |
| 1998 | 1 748 | 732 | 65 |

(EUR million)

Interpane group

World

Europe (10)

10

France (11)

11

1996

na

703

0

1997

na

721

0

1998

1 748

732

65

| Pilkington group |
| --- |
| | World | Europe | France |
| 1996/1997 | 39 100 | 24 200 | 537 |
| 1997/1998 | 37 800 | 23 500 | 524 |
| 1998/1999 | 32 300 | 20 500 | 497 |

Pilkington group

World

Europe

France

1996/1997

39 100

24 200

537

1997/1998

37 800

23 500

524

1998/1999

32 300

20 500

497

2.2.   The investment project

| (25) | The joint ventures are situated in the Freyming-Merlebach employment area, which was an assisted area within the meaning of Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty for the period 2000-2006 (12) in which the intensity of public investment aid may be as high as 15 % NGE. |
| --- | --- |

(25)

The joint ventures are situated in the Freyming-Merlebach employment area, which was an assisted area within the meaning of Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty for the period 2000-2006 (12) in which the intensity of public investment aid may be as high as 15 % NGE.

12

| (26) | According to the information furnished by France, the investment project is being carried out by two separate joint ventures owing to the dual ownership of the production facilities. The investment project is nevertheless fully integrated and self-contained: the float glass production unit was designed from the outset to part supply a joint glass-treatment unit, and the latter unit is present on the site only because its float glass supplier is adjacent to it. According to the same information, the integrated nature of the project is attested by the siting of the float, laminating and coating lines in the same building. France accordingly considers the joint investment project on the site in Lorraine to be an ‘initial investment in fixed assets in the creation of a new establishment’ within the meaning of point 7.2 of the 1998 MSF. There are two aid recipients, but a single investment project is being aided. |
| --- | --- |

(26)

According to the information furnished by France, the investment project is being carried out by two separate joint ventures owing to the dual ownership of the production facilities. The investment project is nevertheless fully integrated and self-contained: the float glass production unit was designed from the outset to part supply a joint glass-treatment unit, and the latter unit is present on the site only because its float glass supplier is adjacent to it. According to the same information, the integrated nature of the project is attested by the siting of the float, laminating and coating lines in the same building. France accordingly considers the joint investment project on the site in Lorraine to be an ‘initial investment in fixed assets in the creation of a new establishment’ within the meaning of point 7.2 of the 1998 MSF. There are two aid recipients, but a single investment project is being aided.

| (27) | Production was set to start at the end of the first half of 2001 and reach its maximum after five years in 2006-07. Float glass production was to amount to 147 000 tonnes during the first full year of operation in 2001-02, increasing gradually to 260 000 tonnes of usable product per year when operating at full capacity as from 2006. |
| --- | --- |

(27)

Production was set to start at the end of the first half of 2001 and reach its maximum after five years in 2006-07. Float glass production was to amount to 147 000 tonnes during the first full year of operation in 2001-02, increasing gradually to 260 000 tonnes of usable product per year when operating at full capacity as from 2006.

| (28) | The purpose of the project is to construct an integrated float glass production unit for the building, comprising the activities of raw float glass manufacture, cutting, treatment (coating) and processing by laminating. The planned glass manufacturing cycle is as follows:
  Figure 2 |
| --- | --- |

(28)

The purpose of the project is to construct an integrated float glass production unit for the building, comprising the activities of raw float glass manufacture, cutting, treatment (coating) and processing by laminating. The planned glass manufacturing cycle is as follows:

Figure 2

| (29) | By letter dated 13 January 2005, the French authorities informed the Commission that the project had been amended. Eligible expenditure now came to EUR 158,5 million in nominal terms. The number of direct jobs created was 176 and the number of indirect jobs created was 150 (see also point 5.2). |
| --- | --- |

(29)

By letter dated 13 January 2005, the French authorities informed the Commission that the project had been amended. Eligible expenditure now came to EUR 158,5 million in nominal terms. The number of direct jobs created was 176 and the number of indirect jobs created was 150 (see also point 5.2).

2.3.   The aid measures

| (30) | The planned State aid consists of several measures which either come under various authorised aid schemes or are individual ad hoc aid measures:






  — | regional planning grant (prime à l’aménagement du territoire — PAT) for industrial projects, |
| --- | --- | --- |

(30)

The planned State aid consists of several measures which either come under various authorised aid schemes or are individual ad hoc aid measures:

—

regional planning grant (prime à l’aménagement du territoire — PAT) for industrial projects,

prime à l’aménagement du territoire

| — | European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), |
| --- | --- |

—

European Regional Development Fund (ERDF),

| — | ad hoc aid for purchasing the land (discount on the selling price), |
| --- | --- |

—

ad hoc aid for purchasing the land (discount on the selling price),

| — | ad hoc aid for real estate development, |
| --- | --- |

—

ad hoc aid for real estate development,

| — | exemption from business tax, |
| --- | --- |

—

exemption from business tax,

| — | soft loan from the Société Financière pour favoriser l’industrialisation des Régions Minières (Sofirem). |
| --- | --- |

—

soft loan from the Société Financière pour favoriser l’industrialisation des Régions Minières (Sofirem).

| (31) | The PAT scheme was approved by Commission Decision of 28 June 2000 (N 782/1999). The Sofirem loans scheme was approved by Commission Decision of 15 June 1989 (NN 2/89), as amended following the taking of appropriate measures to bring the scheme into line with the 1998 Guidelines on national regional aid (13). |
| --- | --- |

(31)

The PAT scheme was approved by Commission Decision of 28 June 2000 (N 782/1999). The Sofirem loans scheme was approved by Commission Decision of 15 June 1989 (NN 2/89), as amended following the taking of appropriate measures to bring the scheme into line with the 1998 Guidelines on national regional aid (13).

13

| (32) | The five-year exemption from business tax is based on Articles 1464 B and 1465 of the General Tax Code (Code Général des Impôts — CGI), the Order of 16 December 1993, the Order of 24 November 1980 and Decrees 86/225, 80/921 and 80/922. |
| --- | --- |

(32)

The five-year exemption from business tax is based on Articles 1464 B and 1465 of the General Tax Code (Code Général des Impôts — CGI), the Order of 16 December 1993, the Order of 24 November 1980 and Decrees 86/225, 80/921 and 80/922.

Code Général des Impôts

| (33) | The current aid total is EUR 17 106 280 in nominal terms (see also point 5.2). |
| --- | --- |

(33)

The current aid total is EUR 17 106 280 in nominal terms (see also point 5.2).

3.   OPENING OF THE PROCEDURE

3.1.   The new information communicated by the French authorities

| (34) | By letter dated 13 January 2005, the French authorities informed the Commission firstly that the project had been amended and secondly that the amount of aid linked to the business tax exemption had been underestimated by France. |
| --- | --- |

(34)

By letter dated 13 January 2005, the French authorities informed the Commission firstly that the project had been amended and secondly that the amount of aid linked to the business tax exemption had been underestimated by France.

| (35) | Total eligible expenditure now came to EUR 158,5 million in nominal terms (EUR 164,7 million in the 2000 Decision). The net present value of the eligible expenditure came to EUR 149,97 million. The project ended in March 2005 and the investment was carried out in full. In March 2005, the number of direct jobs created was 176 and the number of indirect jobs created was 150 (245 and 260 respectively in the 2000 Decision). |
| --- | --- |

(35)

Total eligible expenditure now came to EUR 158,5 million in nominal terms (EUR 164,7 million in the 2000 Decision). The net present value of the eligible expenditure came to EUR 149,97 million. The project ended in March 2005 and the investment was carried out in full. In March 2005, the number of direct jobs created was 176 and the number of indirect jobs created was 150 (245 and 260 respectively in the 2000 Decision).

| (36) | In their letter of 13 January 2005, the French authorities explained that the business tax exemption had originally been underestimated. It now came to EUR 6,28 million, of which EUR 2,14 million had already been paid by the French State (being part of the EUR 17,89 million in State aid already disbursed). This sum corresponded to the amount of aid before tax and was therefore expressed as gross grant equivalent (GGE). |
| --- | --- |

(36)

In their letter of 13 January 2005, the French authorities explained that the business tax exemption had originally been underestimated. It now came to EUR 6,28 million, of which EUR 2,14 million had already been paid by the French State (being part of the EUR 17,89 million in State aid already disbursed). This sum corresponded to the amount of aid before tax and was therefore expressed as gross grant equivalent (GGE).

| (37) | The outstanding EUR 4,14 million business tax exemption forms part of the EUR 5,19 million still remaining to be paid to the project by the French State, this being the last instalment for which prior Commission authorisation is needed in accordance with point 6.2 of the 1998 MSF and the 2000 Decision, which provide that the final significant payment of the aid (e.g. 25 %) may be made only when the French authorities are satisfied that execution of the investment project by the companies is in compliance with the Commission Decision. |
| --- | --- |

(37)

The outstanding EUR 4,14 million business tax exemption forms part of the EUR 5,19 million still remaining to be paid to the project by the French State, this being the last instalment for which prior Commission authorisation is needed in accordance with point 6.2 of the 1998 MSF and the 2000 Decision, which provide that the final significant payment of the aid (e.g. 25 %) may be made only when the French authorities are satisfied that execution of the investment project by the companies is in compliance with the Commission Decision.

| (38) | France has explained that the difference compared with the aid amount notified in 2000 is due to an upward adjustment to the original estimate of the business tax exemption. |
| --- | --- |

(38)

France has explained that the difference compared with the aid amount notified in 2000 is due to an upward adjustment to the original estimate of the business tax exemption.

| (39) | The aid total is now said to come to EUR 23,09 million in nominal terms (EUR 14,65 million at net present value). The intensity of the aid to the Pilkington/Interpane project is therefore said to be 14,65/149,97 = 9,77 % net grant equivalent (NGE). According to France, this aid intensity is lower than the maximum allowable intensity recalculated to take account of the changes in the project’s parameters (9,82 % on the basis of the 1998 MSF). |
| --- | --- |

(39)

The aid total is now said to come to EUR 23,09 million in nominal terms (EUR 14,65 million at net present value). The intensity of the aid to the Pilkington/Interpane project is therefore said to be 14,65/149,97 = 9,77 % net grant equivalent (NGE). According to France, this aid intensity is lower than the maximum allowable intensity recalculated to take account of the changes in the project’s parameters (9,82 % on the basis of the 1998 MSF).

3.2.   Grounds for opening the procedure

| (40) | The new information furnished by the French authorities gives rise to a new maximum allowable aid intensity (14). The Commission is of the opinion, therefore, that it is not sufficient to amend the 2000 Decision by way of a corrigendum as in the case of typographical errors. In reality, the 2000 Decision was based on incorrect information provided by the French authorities. |
| --- | --- |

(40)

The new information furnished by the French authorities gives rise to a new maximum allowable aid intensity (14). The Commission is of the opinion, therefore, that it is not sufficient to amend the 2000 Decision by way of a corrigendum as in the case of typographical errors. In reality, the 2000 Decision was based on incorrect information provided by the French authorities.

14

| (41) | Consequently, the Commission must revoke the 2000 Decision in accordance with Article 9 of the Procedural Regulation, which states that ‘the Commission may revoke a decision ..., after having given the Member State concerned the opportunity to submit its comments, where the decision was based on incorrect information provided during the procedure which was a determining factor for the decision. Before revoking a decision and taking a new decision, the Commission shall open the formal investigation procedure pursuant to Article 4(4)’. |
| --- | --- |

(41)

Consequently, the Commission must revoke the 2000 Decision in accordance with Article 9 of the Procedural Regulation, which states that ‘the Commission may revoke a decision ..., after having given the Member State concerned the opportunity to submit its comments, where the decision was based on incorrect information provided during the procedure which was a determining factor for the decision. Before revoking a decision and taking a new decision, the Commission shall open the formal investigation procedure pursuant to Article 4(4)’.

| (42) | In their e-mail of 16 March 2006, the French authorities argued that the elements to be taken into account from both an industrial and an aid standpoint did not entail any substantial overturning of the broad logic of the 2000 Decision and that a new decision on the matter would have a limited impact on how it turned out. In the same e-mail, they stated that they accepted the procedure as set out in Article 9 of the Procedural Regulation, which requires the Commission, after opening the formal investigation procedure provided for in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty, to first revoke the 2000 Decision and then take a new decision replacing it in the light of the corrected information provided. |
| --- | --- |

(42)

In their e-mail of 16 March 2006, the French authorities argued that the elements to be taken into account from both an industrial and an aid standpoint did not entail any substantial overturning of the broad logic of the 2000 Decision and that a new decision on the matter would have a limited impact on how it turned out. In the same e-mail, they stated that they accepted the procedure as set out in Article 9 of the Procedural Regulation, which requires the Commission, after opening the formal investigation procedure provided for in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty, to first revoke the 2000 Decision and then take a new decision replacing it in the light of the corrected information provided.

4.   COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES

| (43) | The Commission did not receive any comments from interested parties. |
| --- | --- |

(43)

The Commission did not receive any comments from interested parties.

5.   COMMENTS FROM FRANCE

5.1.   E-mail of 2 June 2006

| (44) | France submitted comments on the decision to open the procedure by e-mail dated 2 June 2006. |
| --- | --- |

(44)

France submitted comments on the decision to open the procedure by e-mail dated 2 June 2006.

| (45) | It explained that the Commission had been informed of changes to the industrial project in the light of altered market conditions, and also of changes in the original aid estimate. The data relating to the industrial project itself, on the one hand, and those relating to the aid, on the other, had been set out in a letter from France dated 13 January 2005. France argued, however, that none of these changes altered the general thrust of the 2000 Decision, and the aid granted to the two companies complied with the maximum intensity authorised by the 1998 MSF. |
| --- | --- |

(45)

It explained that the Commission had been informed of changes to the industrial project in the light of altered market conditions, and also of changes in the original aid estimate. The data relating to the industrial project itself, on the one hand, and those relating to the aid, on the other, had been set out in a letter from France dated 13 January 2005. France argued, however, that none of these changes altered the general thrust of the 2000 Decision, and the aid granted to the two companies complied with the maximum intensity authorised by the 1998 MSF.

| (46) | When the 2000 Decision monitoring reports were being drawn up, the French authorities had taken the opportunity to review all the information on which the decision was based. During that review, the French authorities had discovered that two elements in relation to the aid affected the information originally transmitted to the Commission, namely:






  — | the estimate of the business tax exemption needed to be revised, |
| --- | --- | --- |

(46)

When the 2000 Decision monitoring reports were being drawn up, the French authorities had taken the opportunity to review all the information on which the decision was based. During that review, the French authorities had discovered that two elements in relation to the aid affected the information originally transmitted to the Commission, namely:

—

the estimate of the business tax exemption needed to be revised,

| — | the method of calculating the net grant equivalent also needed revising to take account of the actual investment allocation (land, buildings and equipment) and of the impact of taxation on all the aid — something which had not been done when the aid was notified. |
| --- | --- |

—

the method of calculating the net grant equivalent also needed revising to take account of the actual investment allocation (land, buildings and equipment) and of the impact of taxation on all the aid — something which had not been done when the aid was notified.

| (47) | There was no particular connection between the two changes. Taken together, though, they altered both the nominal amount of the aid and its net grant equivalent. |
| --- | --- |

(47)

There was no particular connection between the two changes. Taken together, though, they altered both the nominal amount of the aid and its net grant equivalent.

| (48) | In 2000, when the project support file was being compiled, the business tax exemption scheme applied to a basis consisting of the rental value of any tangible fixed assets (land, buildings, fixtures and fittings, physical equipment, furniture, etc.) and a portion of the amount of any wages and fees paid. As from 2003, a reform of the business tax arrangements meant that wages were no longer included in the tax basis. Since then, the business tax has been based solely on fixed assets. |
| --- | --- |

(48)

In 2000, when the project support file was being compiled, the business tax exemption scheme applied to a basis consisting of the rental value of any tangible fixed assets (land, buildings, fixtures and fittings, physical equipment, furniture, etc.) and a portion of the amount of any wages and fees paid. As from 2003, a reform of the business tax arrangements meant that wages were no longer included in the tax basis. Since then, the business tax has been based solely on fixed assets.

| (49) | France explained that the business tax exemption had originally been the subject of a clerical error following the calculation of the various hypotheses as to the timetable for implementing the industrial project. The original estimate had not been corrected until 2005 owing, firstly, to the fact that various departments were involved in compiling and administering the file and, secondly, to the time delay in the effect of the exemption. The checks carried out had induced the French authorities to inform the Commission of the re-evaluation of the original estimate in 2005. |
| --- | --- |

(49)

France explained that the business tax exemption had originally been the subject of a clerical error following the calculation of the various hypotheses as to the timetable for implementing the industrial project. The original estimate had not been corrected until 2005 owing, firstly, to the fact that various departments were involved in compiling and administering the file and, secondly, to the time delay in the effect of the exemption. The checks carried out had induced the French authorities to inform the Commission of the re-evaluation of the original estimate in 2005.

5.2.   Subsequent information

| (50) | By letter dated 12 September 2007, the Commission requested additional information in order to clarify the details of the project and of the calculation of the aid granted. After several requests for extension of the time limit for submitting the information requested, France submitted a partial reply by letter dated 21 December 2007. In this letter, France confirmed that the project completed in March 2005 was indeed the project originally planned at the time of the notification. |
| --- | --- |

(50)

By letter dated 12 September 2007, the Commission requested additional information in order to clarify the details of the project and of the calculation of the aid granted. After several requests for extension of the time limit for submitting the information requested, France submitted a partial reply by letter dated 21 December 2007. In this letter, France confirmed that the project completed in March 2005 was indeed the project originally planned at the time of the notification.

| (51) | The missing information was submitted, after further extensions of the time limit, by e-mail dated 30 May 2008. Other additional information was submitted by e-mails dated 16 and 19 September and 24 October 2008. This information was derived from calculations based on final project data on investments and jobs created. The aid linked to job creation had been recalculated from 2006 to allow for fewer jobs being created than planned. |
| --- | --- |

(51)

The missing information was submitted, after further extensions of the time limit, by e-mail dated 30 May 2008. Other additional information was submitted by e-mails dated 16 and 19 September and 24 October 2008. This information was derived from calculations based on final project data on investments and jobs created. The aid linked to job creation had been recalculated from 2006 to allow for fewer jobs being created than planned.

| (52) | In the light of all these new elements, the level of aid granted is lower than what was planned in 2000 and in 2005. The eligible costs of the project come to EUR 158,5 million (EUR 150,165 million at net present value). The total amount of aid granted is EUR 17 106 280 (EUR 12 985 610 at net present value), corresponding to an aid intensity of 8,65 % NGE. |
| --- | --- |

(52)

In the light of all these new elements, the level of aid granted is lower than what was planned in 2000 and in 2005. The eligible costs of the project come to EUR 158,5 million (EUR 150,165 million at net present value). The total amount of aid granted is EUR 17 106 280 (EUR 12 985 610 at net present value), corresponding to an aid intensity of 8,65 % NGE.

| (53) | The (nominal) amount of the final aid instalment, which ought not to be paid until after the Commission has given its authorisation (15), comes to EUR 4 276 570. France has informed the Commission, however, that 4/5 of this amount has already been disbursed and that the balance comes to EUR 727 389 (in nominal terms). France thus acknowledges having anticipated payment of the final instalment of 25 % of the aid, but this was due to errors in calculating the business tax exemption. The French authorities assert that at no time have they sought to usurp the Commission’s prerogatives. |
| --- | --- |

(53)

The (nominal) amount of the final aid instalment, which ought not to be paid until after the Commission has given its authorisation (15), comes to EUR 4 276 570. France has informed the Commission, however, that 4/5 of this amount has already been disbursed and that the balance comes to EUR 727 389 (in nominal terms). France thus acknowledges having anticipated payment of the final instalment of 25 % of the aid, but this was due to errors in calculating the business tax exemption. The French authorities assert that at no time have they sought to usurp the Commission’s prerogatives.

15

| (54) | In view of the changes (fewer jobs created than planned), some of the planned aid has had to be revised downwards. Pilkington even had to repay in September 2007 an overpayment under the PAT of EUR 146 430. The revised aid granted under the three measures at issue now comes to: EUR 993 968 under the PAT (of which EUR 34 561 still has to be paid), EUR 1 532 765 under the FIL (16) (aid linked to the PAT, of which EUR 399 851 still has to be paid) and EUR 694 426 under the FIBM (17) (part of the aid for real estate development, of which EUR 64 304 still has to be paid). To the total of EUR 498 716 still to be paid, there must be added EUR 228 673 of aid from the Conseil Général, which brings to EUR 727 389 the amount to be taken into account pending the Commission’s Decision authorising payment of the final instalment. |
| --- | --- |

(54)

In view of the changes (fewer jobs created than planned), some of the planned aid has had to be revised downwards. Pilkington even had to repay in September 2007 an overpayment under the PAT of EUR 146 430. The revised aid granted under the three measures at issue now comes to: EUR 993 968 under the PAT (of which EUR 34 561 still has to be paid), EUR 1 532 765 under the FIL (16) (aid linked to the PAT, of which EUR 399 851 still has to be paid) and EUR 694 426 under the FIBM (17) (part of the aid for real estate development, of which EUR 64 304 still has to be paid). To the total of EUR 498 716 still to be paid, there must be added EUR 228 673 of aid from the Conseil Général, which brings to EUR 727 389 the amount to be taken into account pending the Commission’s Decision authorising payment of the final instalment.

16

17

| (55) | France explains that only PGF enjoyed business tax exemption in respect of its Seingbouse establishment during the period 2001-05 (IGCF did not enjoy such exemption during that period). |
| --- | --- |

(55)

France explains that only PGF enjoyed business tax exemption in respect of its Seingbouse establishment during the period 2001-05 (IGCF did not enjoy such exemption during that period).

| (56) | The aid which PGF received by way of the exemption provided for in Article 1465 of the General Tax Code is equal to the difference between the tax actually paid by the company and the tax it would have paid had there been no exemption, the amounts taken into account being the net amounts after application, where appropriate, of the value-added ceiling (18). The amount in question comes to EUR 986 170 (business tax exemption granted to PGF’s Seingbouse establishment for the years 2001 to 2005). |
| --- | --- |

(56)

The aid which PGF received by way of the exemption provided for in Article 1465 of the General Tax Code is equal to the difference between the tax actually paid by the company and the tax it would have paid had there been no exemption, the amounts taken into account being the net amounts after application, where appropriate, of the value-added ceiling (18). The amount in question comes to EUR 986 170 (business tax exemption granted to PGF’s Seingbouse establishment for the years 2001 to 2005).

18

| (57) | The French authorities state that they cannot explain the error made in 2005 in respect of the amount then overestimated otherwise than by the existence of a misunderstanding between two government departments over the nature of the information to be produced within the framework of the annual report and, it would appear, of confusion between the relief stemming from the ceiling (general measure) and the exemption (aid measure). |
| --- | --- |

(57)

The French authorities state that they cannot explain the error made in 2005 in respect of the amount then overestimated otherwise than by the existence of a misunderstanding between two government departments over the nature of the information to be produced within the framework of the annual report and, it would appear, of confusion between the relief stemming from the ceiling (general measure) and the exemption (aid measure).

| (58) | France has recalculated the net grant equivalent for the aid elements taken both together and separately, using the current discount rate of 5,70 %. Each of the aid elements (apart from the aid for the land, which is not subject to tax) has been apportioned between buildings (19,24 %) and equipment (78,82 %). This apportionment is based once more on the reality of the investment on the ground, whereas at the time of the notification the calculation was made using a standard distribution of the aid basis (5 % land, 50 % buildings, 45 % equipment). Next, the annual integrated share of the aid is calculated, for each of the aid elements, on the basis of the depreciation period (20 years for the building and seven years for the equipment). The results of these calculations are set out in the table below:
  Table 3









  Aid measure | Aid amount
  (in EUR, nominal value) | Aid amount
  (in EUR, NGE) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| PAT (and FIL) | 2 526 740 | | 1 623 160 | |
| ERDF | 2 667 570 | | 1 761 250 | |
| Aid for land purchase | 2 816 000 | | 2 816 000 | |
| Real estate development | 7 974 690 | | 6 100 300 | |
| — | of which Conseil régional |

(58)

France has recalculated the net grant equivalent for the aid elements taken both together and separately, using the current discount rate of 5,70 %. Each of the aid elements (apart from the aid for the land, which is not subject to tax) has been apportioned between buildings (19,24 %) and equipment (78,82 %). This apportionment is based once more on the reality of the investment on the ground, whereas at the time of the notification the calculation was made using a standard distribution of the aid basis (5 % land, 50 % buildings, 45 % equipment). Next, the annual integrated share of the aid is calculated, for each of the aid elements, on the basis of the depreciation period (20 years for the building and seven years for the equipment). The results of these calculations are set out in the table below:

Table 3

Aid measure

Aid amount

(in EUR, nominal value)

Aid amount

(in EUR, NGE)

PAT (and FIL)

2 526 740

1 623 160

ERDF

2 667 570

1 761 250

Aid for land purchase

2 816 000

2 816 000

Real estate development

7 974 690

6 100 300

—

of which Conseil régional

2 988 100

1 983 190

| — | of which Conseil général |
| --- | --- |

—

of which Conseil général

1 753 160

1 126 820

| — | of which District |
| --- | --- |

—

of which District

2 539 000

2 539 000

| — | of which State (FIBM) |
| --- | --- |

—

of which State (FIBM)

694 430

451 290

Business tax exemption

986 170

593 730

SOFIREM

135 110

91 170

Total

17 106 280

12 985 610

Aid intensity

10,79  %

8,65  %

6.   ASSESSMENT

6.1.   Preliminary remarks

| (59) | On 17 August 2000, the Commission approved the intensity of the aid for Pilkington/Interpane as notified by France on 22 May 2000. Subsequently, France pointed out to the Commission that incorrect information had been furnished in the original notification and, insofar as that information constituted a decisive factor for the decision, the Commission decided on 26 April 2006 to open the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of the aid at issue with a view to revoking the 2000 Decision and adopting a new decision. |
| --- | --- |

(59)

On 17 August 2000, the Commission approved the intensity of the aid for Pilkington/Interpane as notified by France on 22 May 2000. Subsequently, France pointed out to the Commission that incorrect information had been furnished in the original notification and, insofar as that information constituted a decisive factor for the decision, the Commission decided on 26 April 2006 to open the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of the aid at issue with a view to revoking the 2000 Decision and adopting a new decision.

| (60) | The 2000 Decision contains a full assessment of the notification. The assessment in the 2000 Decision is reproduced in the present Decision with the exception of the elements that must be corrected in the light of the information submitted by France on 13 January 2005, which formed the subject matter of the opening decision of 26 April 2006, and of the information subsequently submitted to the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

(60)

The 2000 Decision contains a full assessment of the notification. The assessment in the 2000 Decision is reproduced in the present Decision with the exception of the elements that must be corrected in the light of the information submitted by France on 13 January 2005, which formed the subject matter of the opening decision of 26 April 2006, and of the information subsequently submitted to the Commission.

6.1.1.   Applicable guidelines

| (61) | France notified the aid for PGF/IGCF by letter dated 22 May 2000, registered as received on 25 May 2000. Footnote 58 of the Guidelines on national regional aid for 2007-2013 (19) states that ‘Individually notifiable investment projects will be assessed in accordance with the rules in force at the time of notification’. Consequently, the Commission considers that the present project falls within the scope of the 1998 MSF and must be examined in the light of that framework. |
| --- | --- |

(61)

France notified the aid for PGF/IGCF by letter dated 22 May 2000, registered as received on 25 May 2000. Footnote 58 of the Guidelines on national regional aid for 2007-2013 (19) states that ‘Individually notifiable investment projects will be assessed in accordance with the rules in force at the time of notification’. Consequently, the Commission considers that the present project falls within the scope of the 1998 MSF and must be examined in the light of that framework.

19

6.1.2.   Relevant facts

| (62) | The present assessment reflects the facts and situations as they existed at the time of notification, i.e. 22 May 2000. |
| --- | --- |

(62)

The present assessment reflects the facts and situations as they existed at the time of notification, i.e. 22 May 2000.

| (63) | The Commission must adopt a decision on the basis of ex-ante estimates of future prospects and market shares. Aid intensities are not adjusted subsequently if several years later — ex post — the figures show that the market, for example, has evolved differently from what was originally expected. Although in the present case the Commission is having to take a decision eight years after the original notification, it must nevertheless base its assessment on the facts and situations as they existed at the time of notification. |
| --- | --- |

(63)

The Commission must adopt a decision on the basis of ex-ante estimates of future prospects and market shares. Aid intensities are not adjusted subsequently if several years later — ex post — the figures show that the market, for example, has evolved differently from what was originally expected. Although in the present case the Commission is having to take a decision eight years after the original notification, it must nevertheless base its assessment on the facts and situations as they existed at the time of notification.

ex-ante

ex post

| (64) | In calculating the maximum aid intensity, the Commission will take account, however, of the new information submitted by France. France has reduced the aid granted to take account of the actual number of jobs created by the investment (revised downwards compared with the data contained in the notification) and to rectify an error in the calculation of the amount of the business tax exemption as notified in 2000. |
| --- | --- |

(64)

In calculating the maximum aid intensity, the Commission will take account, however, of the new information submitted by France. France has reduced the aid granted to take account of the actual number of jobs created by the investment (revised downwards compared with the data contained in the notification) and to rectify an error in the calculation of the amount of the business tax exemption as notified in 2000.

6.2.   The formation of joint ventures considered in the light of Article 81(3) of the EC Treaty

| (65) | First of all it should be observed that, whilst the procedure laid down in Articles 87 and 88 leaves a wide discretion to the Commission and, in certain conditions, to the Council to come to a decision regarding the compatibility of a system of aids granted by States with the requirements of the common market, it is clear from the general plan of the Treaty that that procedure must never produce a result which is contrary to the specific provisions of the Treaty (20). |
| --- | --- |

(65)

First of all it should be observed that, whilst the procedure laid down in Articles 87 and 88 leaves a wide discretion to the Commission and, in certain conditions, to the Council to come to a decision regarding the compatibility of a system of aids granted by States with the requirements of the common market, it is clear from the general plan of the Treaty that that procedure must never produce a result which is contrary to the specific provisions of the Treaty (20).

20

| (66) | The Court of Justice has also held that those aspects of aid which contravene specific provisions of the Treaty other than Articles 87 and 88 may be so indissolubly linked to the object of the aid that it is impossible to evaluate them separately (21). |
| --- | --- |

(66)

The Court of Justice has also held that those aspects of aid which contravene specific provisions of the Treaty other than Articles 87 and 88 may be so indissolubly linked to the object of the aid that it is impossible to evaluate them separately (21).

21

| (67) | This obligation on the part of the Commission to ensure that Articles 87 and 88 are applied consistently with other provisions of the Treaty is all the more necessary where those other provisions also pursue, as in the present case, the objective of undistorted competition in the common market. When adopting a decision on the compatibility of aid with the common market, the Commission must be aware of the risk of individual traders undermining competition in the common market. |
| --- | --- |

(67)

This obligation on the part of the Commission to ensure that Articles 87 and 88 are applied consistently with other provisions of the Treaty is all the more necessary where those other provisions also pursue, as in the present case, the objective of undistorted competition in the common market. When adopting a decision on the compatibility of aid with the common market, the Commission must be aware of the risk of individual traders undermining competition in the common market.

| (68) | Nevertheless, the procedure under Articles 81 et seq. and that under Articles 87 et seq. of the Treaty are independent procedures governed by specific rules. |
| --- | --- |

(68)

Nevertheless, the procedure under Articles 81 et seq. and that under Articles 87 et seq. of the Treaty are independent procedures governed by specific rules.

et seq.

et seq.

| (69) | Consequently, when taking a decision on the compatibility of State aid with the common market, the Commission is not obliged to await the outcome of a parallel procedure initiated under Regulation No 17, once, in the exercise of its discretion, it has reached the conclusion, based on an economic analysis of the situation, that the recipient of the aid is not in breach of Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty. |
| --- | --- |

(69)

Consequently, when taking a decision on the compatibility of State aid with the common market, the Commission is not obliged to await the outcome of a parallel procedure initiated under Regulation No 17, once, in the exercise of its discretion, it has reached the conclusion, based on an economic analysis of the situation, that the recipient of the aid is not in breach of Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty.

| (70) | In the light of the facts described in point 3.1.2 above, and having regard to the abovementioned case law of the Court of Justice, the Commission considers that there is no obstacle to authorising the aid planned for PGF/IGCF. |
| --- | --- |

(70)

In the light of the facts described in point 3.1.2 above, and having regard to the abovementioned case law of the Court of Justice, the Commission considers that there is no obstacle to authorising the aid planned for PGF/IGCF.

6.3.   Existence of aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty

| (71) | The aid at issue has been granted by a Member State through State resources within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty (see point 2.3 of this Decision). The aid confers an advantage on PGF/IGCF without which the companies would have had to bear all the investment costs on their own. Insofar as a substantial volume of raw glass is transported across national borders, international trade takes place in the raw glass market. Consequently, the financial advantages conferred on the companies may distort competition and affect trade between Member States. In its assessment, the Commission therefore considers that the notified measure constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty. |
| --- | --- |

(71)

The aid at issue has been granted by a Member State through State resources within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty (see point 2.3 of this Decision). The aid confers an advantage on PGF/IGCF without which the companies would have had to bear all the investment costs on their own. Insofar as a substantial volume of raw glass is transported across national borders, international trade takes place in the raw glass market. Consequently, the financial advantages conferred on the companies may distort competition and affect trade between Member States. In its assessment, the Commission therefore considers that the notified measure constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty.

6.4.   Notification requirement

| (72) | Since the three cumulative conditions laid down in point 2.1(i) of the 1998 MSF are met, the aid proposal must be notified and the maximum allowable aid intensity must be determined in accordance with the 1998 MSF. Ad hoc aid must, moreover, be notified to the Commission under Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty. |
| --- | --- |

(72)

Since the three cumulative conditions laid down in point 2.1(i) of the 1998 MSF are met, the aid proposal must be notified and the maximum allowable aid intensity must be determined in accordance with the 1998 MSF. Ad hoc aid must, moreover, be notified to the Commission under Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty.

6.5.   Legal basis of certain aid measures

| (73) | Part of the aid is being granted on the basis of regional investment aid schemes approved by the Commission and in force at the time the aid was notified (see point 2.3 of this Decision), while another part is being granted as ad hoc aid. |
| --- | --- |

(73)

Part of the aid is being granted on the basis of regional investment aid schemes approved by the Commission and in force at the time the aid was notified (see point 2.3 of this Decision), while another part is being granted as ad hoc aid.

| (74) | As regards aid granted under the ERDF, Article 25 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (22) provides that those Funds may finance expenditure in respect of major economic projects the cost of which exceeds EUR 50 million. The ERDF can thus supplement national measures such as the PAT and assistance towards business premises where the single programming documents (DOCUP) of the region concerned so provide. The Freyming-Merlebach area is included in the French map for Objective 2 ‘Economic and social conversion of areas facing structural difficulties’ approved by the Commission on 16 January 2000. |
| --- | --- |

(74)

As regards aid granted under the ERDF, Article 25 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (22) provides that those Funds may finance expenditure in respect of major economic projects the cost of which exceeds EUR 50 million. The ERDF can thus supplement national measures such as the PAT and assistance towards business premises where the single programming documents (DOCUP) of the region concerned so provide. The Freyming-Merlebach area is included in the French map for Objective 2 ‘Economic and social conversion of areas facing structural difficulties’ approved by the Commission on 16 January 2000.

22

| (75) | The possibility of ad hoc aid for purchasing land and buildings is open by law to regional and local authorities in regionally aided areas. |
| --- | --- |

(75)

The possibility of ad hoc aid for purchasing land and buildings is open by law to regional and local authorities in regionally aided areas.

| (76) | By letter dated 30 June 2000 (A/35411), the French authorities provided a breakdown of the calculation of the amount of business tax exemption showing that, in the present case, the cost of the investments and the cost of the permanent jobs created had been taken as a basis for calculating the exemption. However, in 2003, a reform of business tax law led to wages being removed from the tax basis. Since then, business tax has been based solely on fixed assets. Consequently, the aid can be considered investment aid within the meaning of the 1998 Guidelines on national regional aid. |
| --- | --- |

(76)

By letter dated 30 June 2000 (A/35411), the French authorities provided a breakdown of the calculation of the amount of business tax exemption showing that, in the present case, the cost of the investments and the cost of the permanent jobs created had been taken as a basis for calculating the exemption. However, in 2003, a reform of business tax law led to wages being removed from the tax basis. Since then, business tax has been based solely on fixed assets. Consequently, the aid can be considered investment aid within the meaning of the 1998 Guidelines on national regional aid.

| (77) | The award of ad hoc aid to businesses is conditional on their committing themselves to maintaining the aided jobs and investment in the area for at least five years. |
| --- | --- |

(77)

The award of ad hoc aid to businesses is conditional on their committing themselves to maintaining the aided jobs and investment in the area for at least five years.

| (78) | The Commission’s examination in the present proceeding is limited to assessing the compatibility of the notified aid intensity of 8,65 % according to the criteria of the 1998 MSF. |
| --- | --- |

(78)

The Commission’s examination in the present proceeding is limited to assessing the compatibility of the notified aid intensity of 8,65 % according to the criteria of the 1998 MSF.

6.6.   Assessment under the 1998 MSF

| (79) | The maximum allowable aid intensity for projects under the 1998 MSF must be determined on the basis of the maximum intensity rate applicable to regional aid in the assisted area in question at the time the aid was notified. |
| --- | --- |

(79)

The maximum allowable aid intensity for projects under the 1998 MSF must be determined on the basis of the maximum intensity rate applicable to regional aid in the assisted area in question at the time the aid was notified.

| (80) | The Commission considers that the new elements do not call into question its overall assessment of the market and its evolution as set out in its 2000 Decision. |
| --- | --- |

(80)

The Commission considers that the new elements do not call into question its overall assessment of the market and its evolution as set out in its 2000 Decision.

| (81) | The Commission would recall that none of the companies taking part in the project at issue held, at the time the project was notified, a high market share within the meaning of point 3.6 of the 1998 MSF. |
| --- | --- |

(81)

The Commission would recall that none of the companies taking part in the project at issue held, at the time the project was notified, a high market share within the meaning of point 3.6 of the 1998 MSF.

6.6.1.   The relevant product and market

| (82) | Float glass can be used to make windows for buildings and for motor vehicles. The plant forming the subject-matter of the notification is configured to produce glass for the building industry. The product and market definitions contained in the 2000 Decision have been neither called into question nor modified and did not form part of the decision of 26 April 2006 to open the procedure. The assessment that follows is therefore reproduced from the 2000 Decision. |
| --- | --- |

(82)

Float glass can be used to make windows for buildings and for motor vehicles. The plant forming the subject-matter of the notification is configured to produce glass for the building industry. The product and market definitions contained in the 2000 Decision have been neither called into question nor modified and did not form part of the decision of 26 April 2006 to open the procedure. The assessment that follows is therefore reproduced from the 2000 Decision.

The product

| (83) | Raw float glass is produced by floating a continuous stream of molten glass onto a bath of molten tin in an atmosphere of nitrogen (so-called float glass process developed by Pilkington in the 1960s). |
| --- | --- |

(83)

Raw float glass is produced by floating a continuous stream of molten glass onto a bath of molten tin in an atmosphere of nitrogen (so-called float glass process developed by Pilkington in the 1960s).

| (84) | Coated glass is a basic glass which has undergone a surface treatment or coating (applied under vacuum using an electromagnetic process (23)) designed to eliminate reflections or ensure thermal insulation. It is thus possible to obtain a thermo-regulating glass (low-emission, or ‘low-E’, glass: Iplus brand for Interpane) or a solar control glass (sunlight-reflective glass: Ipasol brand for Interpane). It is planned to produce 90 % of low-emission glass and 10 % of sunlight-reflective glass of a thickness of either 4,6 mm or 8 mm. |
| --- | --- |

(84)

Coated glass is a basic glass which has undergone a surface treatment or coating (applied under vacuum using an electromagnetic process (23)) designed to eliminate reflections or ensure thermal insulation. It is thus possible to obtain a thermo-regulating glass (low-emission, or ‘low-E’, glass: Iplus brand for Interpane) or a solar control glass (sunlight-reflective glass: Ipasol brand for Interpane). It is planned to produce 90 % of low-emission glass and 10 % of sunlight-reflective glass of a thickness of either 4,6 mm or 8 mm.

23

| (85) | Laminated glass is a type of safety glass composed of two or more panes of glass with PVB (polyvinyl butyral) or resin film in between (24). |
| --- | --- |

(85)

Laminated glass is a type of safety glass composed of two or more panes of glass with PVB (polyvinyl butyral) or resin film in between (24).

24

| (86) | First-stage-processed raw float glass and coated glass are listed together in the statistical nomenclature under codes:






  — | CN 7005: Float glass and surface ground or polished glass, in sheets, whether or not having an absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer, but not otherwise worked, |
| --- | --- | --- |

(86)

First-stage-processed raw float glass and coated glass are listed together in the statistical nomenclature under codes:

—

CN 7005: Float glass and surface ground or polished glass, in sheets, whether or not having an absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer, but not otherwise worked,

| — | NACE 26.1.A: Manufacture of flat glass. |
| --- | --- |

—

NACE 26.1.A: Manufacture of flat glass.

| (87) | Unworked float glass is used in the building and automotive industries. According to the GEPVP, 80 % of European float glass production is intended for the building industry. The investors will manufacture only glass for buildings at the Freyming-Merlebach site. A special feature of this type of production is that the manufacturing plant works to order (for batch sizes and the thickness and other specifications of the glass) on small production runs. |
| --- | --- |

(87)

Unworked float glass is used in the building and automotive industries. According to the GEPVP, 80 % of European float glass production is intended for the building industry. The investors will manufacture only glass for buildings at the Freyming-Merlebach site. A special feature of this type of production is that the manufacturing plant works to order (for batch sizes and the thickness and other specifications of the glass) on small production runs.

| (88) | The products resulting from the first-stage processing of raw float glass are intermediate goods used in the manufacture of safety glass (statistical code CN 7007 — consisting of toughened (tempered) or laminated glass) and of multiple-walled insulating units of glass for the building industry (statistical code CN 7008 — consisting of at least two panes of glass separated by one or more hermetically sealed spaces enclosing dehydrated air and/or other gases). Glass insulating units are made mostly from coated glass. |
| --- | --- |

(88)

The products resulting from the first-stage processing of raw float glass are intermediate goods used in the manufacture of safety glass (statistical code CN 7007 — consisting of toughened (tempered) or laminated glass) and of multiple-walled insulating units of glass for the building industry (statistical code CN 7008 — consisting of at least two panes of glass separated by one or more hermetically sealed spaces enclosing dehydrated air and/or other gases). Glass insulating units are made mostly from coated glass.

| (89) | The companies will also produce laminated glass for the building industry at the Lorraine plant. This product is listed for statistical purposes under CN heading 7007 29 00 — Laminated safety glass — Other. The other types of laminated glass included under this heading are used in the automotive industry, which is the leading consumer of laminated glass manufactured in Europe (windscreens). |
| --- | --- |

(89)

The companies will also produce laminated glass for the building industry at the Lorraine plant. This product is listed for statistical purposes under CN heading 7007 29 00 — Laminated safety glass — Other. The other types of laminated glass included under this heading are used in the automotive industry, which is the leading consumer of laminated glass manufactured in Europe (windscreens).

| (90) | Float glass can be used to make windows for buildings and for motor vehicles. The Commission notes that, in keeping with the investors’ wishes to satisfy the increasing demand for glass for building construction, the Freyming-Merlebach plant is configured to produce glass for the building industry. This speciality now represents the totality of Interpane’s business. The group has no capacity for processing primary glass into car widows, nor has it any commercial relations with motor manufacturers. The coated glass produced at the new plant will have properties that are useful for buildings only (25). The laminated glass will likewise be used to make safety glass for buildings. Consequently, the investors’ decision to manufacture only glass for the building industry at Freyming-Merlebach would appear to be irreversible. |
| --- | --- |

(90)

Float glass can be used to make windows for buildings and for motor vehicles. The Commission notes that, in keeping with the investors’ wishes to satisfy the increasing demand for glass for building construction, the Freyming-Merlebach plant is configured to produce glass for the building industry. This speciality now represents the totality of Interpane’s business. The group has no capacity for processing primary glass into car widows, nor has it any commercial relations with motor manufacturers. The coated glass produced at the new plant will have properties that are useful for buildings only (25). The laminated glass will likewise be used to make safety glass for buildings. Consequently, the investors’ decision to manufacture only glass for the building industry at Freyming-Merlebach would appear to be irreversible.

25

| (91) | In the light of the above, and with a view to comparing market trends, the Commission considers that a distinction must be drawn between the trend in raw float glass and the trend in intermediate products such as laminated glass or coated glass which undergo subsequent treatment for final use as architectural or building glass. This distinction is consistent with the Commission’s analysis of the relevant market in the context of the abovementioned agreements on the formation of two joint ventures, where a distinction is made between the raw float glass market as such and the final use of the various types of glass (including laminated and coated glasses) as architectural or building glass. |
| --- | --- |

(91)

In the light of the above, and with a view to comparing market trends, the Commission considers that a distinction must be drawn between the trend in raw float glass and the trend in intermediate products such as laminated glass or coated glass which undergo subsequent treatment for final use as architectural or building glass. This distinction is consistent with the Commission’s analysis of the relevant market in the context of the abovementioned agreements on the formation of two joint ventures, where a distinction is made between the raw float glass market as such and the final use of the various types of glass (including laminated and coated glasses) as architectural or building glass.

Geographic scope

| (92) | The geographic market comprises in principle the EEA or, where appropriate, any substantial part of the territory of the EEA if the conditions of competition are appreciably different there from those prevailing in the rest of the EEA. |
| --- | --- |

(92)

The geographic market comprises in principle the EEA or, where appropriate, any substantial part of the territory of the EEA if the conditions of competition are appreciably different there from those prevailing in the rest of the EEA.

| (93) | In the present case, no evidence to show that the relevant geographic market is different from the EEA emerged during the investigation. The relevant geographic market must therefore be defined as the EEA. |
| --- | --- |

(93)

In the present case, no evidence to show that the relevant geographic market is different from the EEA emerged during the investigation. The relevant geographic market must therefore be defined as the EEA.

Market trends

| (94) | The Commission is not disposed to accept the data enclosed with the notification showing a high rate of utilisation of production capacity. The data were supplied by the glass industry (GEPVP) (26) and correspond to what the industry calls ‘saleable capacities’ (27). This calculation method may be useful to the industry, but it makes it hard to compare the capacity utilisation data with those available for other industrial sectors. |
| --- | --- |

(94)

The Commission is not disposed to accept the data enclosed with the notification showing a high rate of utilisation of production capacity. The data were supplied by the glass industry (GEPVP) (26) and correspond to what the industry calls ‘saleable capacities’ (27). This calculation method may be useful to the industry, but it makes it hard to compare the capacity utilisation data with those available for other industrial sectors.

26

27

| (95) | Consequently, the Commission based its analysis in its 2000 Decision on the evolution of apparent consumption. |
| --- | --- |

(95)

Consequently, the Commission based its analysis in its 2000 Decision on the evolution of apparent consumption.

| (96) | The notification included volume data on the evolution of apparent consumption of float glass (CN 7005) during the period 1993-98. |
| --- | --- |

(96)

The notification included volume data on the evolution of apparent consumption of float glass (CN 7005) during the period 1993-98.

| (97) | The results show a fall in price levels (28). Such a fall, together with a volume growth rate of 4,89 %, points to average growth being below the annual average of 5,78 % for EEA manufacturing industry as a whole, which suggests that the market is in decline within the meaning of the 1998 MSF. |
| --- | --- |

(97)

The results show a fall in price levels (28). Such a fall, together with a volume growth rate of 4,89 %, points to average growth being below the annual average of 5,78 % for EEA manufacturing industry as a whole, which suggests that the market is in decline within the meaning of the 1998 MSF.

28

| (98) | The Commission considers however — as indicated above — that a distinction must be drawn between the trend in raw float glass and the trend in intermediate products such as laminated glass or coated glass which undergo subsequent treatment for final use as architectural or building glass. |
| --- | --- |

(98)

The Commission considers however — as indicated above — that a distinction must be drawn between the trend in raw float glass and the trend in intermediate products such as laminated glass or coated glass which undergo subsequent treatment for final use as architectural or building glass.

| (99) | The Commission notes in particular that prices of sealed units (CN 7008) (29) increased substantially during the period 1993-98. The increases were due to the introduction of new European standards concerning the use of insulating materials in building and to the long-term trend in the industry towards using insulating products and materials. |
| --- | --- |

(99)

The Commission notes in particular that prices of sealed units (CN 7008) (29) increased substantially during the period 1993-98. The increases were due to the introduction of new European standards concerning the use of insulating materials in building and to the long-term trend in the industry towards using insulating products and materials.

29

| (100) | The Commission notes also that the average growth in consumption of insulating products (including insulating glass for building) will experience a strong upward trend owing to the stricter carbon emission controls following the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol to the 1997 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. In the residential and building sector, thermal insulation is an effective technology in terms of energy saving and hence in terms of carbon emissions reduction. Implementation of the new standards for insulation types (ISO 10456) and for heat loss (ISO 832) will entail higher heat loss values which will lead to an increased need for energy savings. |
| --- | --- |

(100)

The Commission notes also that the average growth in consumption of insulating products (including insulating glass for building) will experience a strong upward trend owing to the stricter carbon emission controls following the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol to the 1997 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. In the residential and building sector, thermal insulation is an effective technology in terms of energy saving and hence in terms of carbon emissions reduction. Implementation of the new standards for insulation types (ISO 10456) and for heat loss (ISO 832) will entail higher heat loss values which will lead to an increased need for energy savings.

| (101) | Consequently, in line with the analysis in the Commission Decision in the Rockwool case (30), the strong upward trend shown by intermediate glass products which undergo subsequent treatment for final use as architectural or building glass points to the conclusion that the market is not in decline (31). |
| --- | --- |

(101)

Consequently, in line with the analysis in the Commission Decision in the Rockwool case (30), the strong upward trend shown by intermediate glass products which undergo subsequent treatment for final use as architectural or building glass points to the conclusion that the market is not in decline (31).

Rockwool

30

31

| (102) | To conclude, a different trend is found to exist in the case of (i) raw float glass and (ii) intermediate glass products which undergo subsequent treatment for final use as architectural or building glass (such as laminated glass or coated glass): as regards (i), the Commission considers that the market is in decline within the meaning of the multisectoral framework; as regards (ii), the market is not in decline. |
| --- | --- |

(102)

To conclude, a different trend is found to exist in the case of (i) raw float glass and (ii) intermediate glass products which undergo subsequent treatment for final use as architectural or building glass (such as laminated glass or coated glass): as regards (i), the Commission considers that the market is in decline within the meaning of the multisectoral framework; as regards (ii), the market is not in decline.

Market shares

| (103) | Where a project results in a capacity expansion in a sector facing structural overcapacity and/or a declining market and is likely to reinforce high market share (32), there is a risk that the award of the maximum levels of aid normally allowed in the region concerned will unduly distort competition. In such cases, the 1998 MSF provides for the application of an adjustment factor of 0,50. |
| --- | --- |

(103)

Where a project results in a capacity expansion in a sector facing structural overcapacity and/or a declining market and is likely to reinforce high market share (32), there is a risk that the award of the maximum levels of aid normally allowed in the region concerned will unduly distort competition. In such cases, the 1998 MSF provides for the application of an adjustment factor of 0,50.

32

| (104) | In the present case, the Commission has identified the raw float glass market as being a market in decline. None of the founders of the two joint ventures has a share of 40 % or more of this market. |
| --- | --- |

(104)

In the present case, the Commission has identified the raw float glass market as being a market in decline. None of the founders of the two joint ventures has a share of 40 % or more of this market.

6.6.2.   Determination of the maximum allowable aid intensity

| (105) | In accordance with the provisions of the 1998 MSF, the Commission determines the maximum allowable intensity for a notified aid measure according to a formula which takes into account various factors. The calculation begins by identifying the maximum aid intensity (regional ceiling) which a large company may obtain in the assisted area concerned within the context of the authorised regional aid system valid at the moment of notification. In order to calculate the maximum allowable aid intensity for the project in question, a range of adjustment factors are then applied to the percentage obtained in accordance with three specific assessment criteria, namely: competition, the capital-labour ratio and regional impact. |
| --- | --- |

(105)

In accordance with the provisions of the 1998 MSF, the Commission determines the maximum allowable intensity for a notified aid measure according to a formula which takes into account various factors. The calculation begins by identifying the maximum aid intensity (regional ceiling) which a large company may obtain in the assisted area concerned within the context of the authorised regional aid system valid at the moment of notification. In order to calculate the maximum allowable aid intensity for the project in question, a range of adjustment factors are then applied to the percentage obtained in accordance with three specific assessment criteria, namely: competition, the capital-labour ratio and regional impact.

Maximum aid intensity in the assisted area concerned (R)

| (106) | According to the applicable French regional aid map for the period 2000-06, the Freyming-Merlebach employment area is an assisted area within the meaning of Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty in which the intensity of public investment aid can be as high as 15 % NGE. |
| --- | --- |

(106)

According to the applicable French regional aid map for the period 2000-06, the Freyming-Merlebach employment area is an assisted area within the meaning of Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty in which the intensity of public investment aid can be as high as 15 % NGE.

The competition factor (T)

| (107) | The competition factor (points 3.2 to 3.6 of the 1998 MSF), as determined in the 2000 Decision, has been neither challenged nor amended and did not form part of the decision of 26 April 2006 to open the procedure. The assessment that follows is therefore reproduced from the 2000 Decision. |
| --- | --- |

(107)

The competition factor (points 3.2 to 3.6 of the 1998 MSF), as determined in the 2000 Decision, has been neither challenged nor amended and did not form part of the decision of 26 April 2006 to open the procedure. The assessment that follows is therefore reproduced from the 2000 Decision.

| (108) | The competition factor involves an analysis of whether the notified project will be implemented in a sector or subsector suffering from structural overcapacity. |
| --- | --- |

(108)

The competition factor involves an analysis of whether the notified project will be implemented in a sector or subsector suffering from structural overcapacity.

| (109) | In accordance with the provisions of the 1998 MSF (point 3.3), the potential existence of structural overcapacity is evaluated by considering the difference between the average capacity utilisation rate for manufacturing industry as a whole and the capacity utilisation rate of the relevant sector or subsector. In the absence of sufficient data on capacity utilisation, the Commission considers whether the investment is taking place in a declining market. For this purpose, it compares the evolution of apparent consumption of the product(s) in question with the growth rate of EEA manufacturing industry as a whole. |
| --- | --- |

(109)

In accordance with the provisions of the 1998 MSF (point 3.3), the potential existence of structural overcapacity is evaluated by considering the difference between the average capacity utilisation rate for manufacturing industry as a whole and the capacity utilisation rate of the relevant sector or subsector. In the absence of sufficient data on capacity utilisation, the Commission considers whether the investment is taking place in a declining market. For this purpose, it compares the evolution of apparent consumption of the product(s) in question with the growth rate of EEA manufacturing industry as a whole.

| (110) | As indicated above, the Commission is faced with an absence of reliable data on the sector concerned. It is therefore impossible to calculate capacity utilisation, or even apparent consumption, for this sector. |
| --- | --- |

(110)

As indicated above, the Commission is faced with an absence of reliable data on the sector concerned. It is therefore impossible to calculate capacity utilisation, or even apparent consumption, for this sector.

| (111) | On the basis of the market trend analysis, a factor of 0,75 must be applied to the part of the investment that is devoted to the production of raw float glass (CN 7005). For the part of the investment that relates to laminated or coated building glass falling under CN headings 7007 and 7008, a competition factor of 1 should be applied. |
| --- | --- |

(111)

On the basis of the market trend analysis, a factor of 0,75 must be applied to the part of the investment that is devoted to the production of raw float glass (CN 7005). For the part of the investment that relates to laminated or coated building glass falling under CN headings 7007 and 7008, a competition factor of 1 should be applied.

| (112) | The 1998 MSF does not envisage a situation in which two or more competition factors might be applied to a single investment for which a different market trend has been assessed for each relevant product. Insofar as, in the present case, the application of only one of the two factors to the whole investment would be not only disproportionate but also inaccurate, the Commission considers that the competition factor should be weighted so as to reflect the market trend for each relevant product. |
| --- | --- |

(112)

The 1998 MSF does not envisage a situation in which two or more competition factors might be applied to a single investment for which a different market trend has been assessed for each relevant product. Insofar as, in the present case, the application of only one of the two factors to the whole investment would be not only disproportionate but also inaccurate, the Commission considers that the competition factor should be weighted so as to reflect the market trend for each relevant product.

| (113) | Inasmuch as the project consists in a fully integrated plant, it would be artificial to establish an adjustment factor calculated on the basis of the relative value of the investment in relation to each of the relevant products. The Commission has therefore used an adjustment factor (40/60) which is based on the respective capacities placed on the market by the aid recipient. |
| --- | --- |

(113)

Inasmuch as the project consists in a fully integrated plant, it would be artificial to establish an adjustment factor calculated on the basis of the relative value of the investment in relation to each of the relevant products. The Commission has therefore used an adjustment factor (40/60) which is based on the respective capacities placed on the market by the aid recipient.

| (114) | This results in a factor T of 0,85 (33), which represents the competition factor (1 and 0,75) in the two markets. |
| --- | --- |

(114)

This results in a factor T of 0,85 (33), which represents the competition factor (1 and 0,75) in the two markets.

33

The capital-labour factor (I)

| (115) | The new information furnished by the French authorities gives rise to a new capital-labour coefficient. The amount of eligible investment is EUR 158,5 million. France has indicated that the number of direct jobs created will ultimately be 176. The capital-labour ratio is therefore 900. As this ratio is between 701 and 1 000, a factor I of 0,7 should be applied instead of 0,8 as originally provided (point 3.10(2) of the 1998 MSF). |
| --- | --- |

(115)

The new information furnished by the French authorities gives rise to a new capital-labour coefficient. The amount of eligible investment is EUR 158,5 million. France has indicated that the number of direct jobs created will ultimately be 176. The capital-labour ratio is therefore 900. As this ratio is between 701 and 1 000, a factor I of 0,7 should be applied instead of 0,8 as originally provided (point 3.10(2) of the 1998 MSF).

The regional impact factor (M)

| (116) | The new information furnished by the French authorities gives rise to a new indirect jobs-direct jobs coefficient. France has indicated that the number of indirect jobs created is 150, equivalent to 85 % of the number of direct jobs. As this percentage is between 50 % and 100 %, a factor M of 1,1 should be applied instead of 1,2 as originally provided (point 3.10(3) of the 1998 MSF). |
| --- | --- |

(116)

The new information furnished by the French authorities gives rise to a new indirect jobs-direct jobs coefficient. France has indicated that the number of indirect jobs created is 150, equivalent to 85 % of the number of direct jobs. As this percentage is between 50 % and 100 %, a factor M of 1,1 should be applied instead of 1,2 as originally provided (point 3.10(3) of the 1998 MSF).

Calculation of the maximum allowable aid intensity

| (117) | In the light of the above, the revised maximum allowable intensity of the aid in the present case is therefore: R × T × I × M = 15 % × 0,85 × 0,7 × 1,1 = 9,82 % (whereas it was 12,24 % in the 2000 Decision). |
| --- | --- |

(117)

In the light of the above, the revised maximum allowable intensity of the aid in the present case is therefore: R × T × I × M = 15 % × 0,85 × 0,7 × 1,1 = 9,82 % (whereas it was 12,24 % in the 2000 Decision).

6.7.   Conclusion on the compatibility of the aid granted

| (118) | In the light of all these new elements, the level of aid granted is lower than what was planned in 2000. The eligible costs of the project come to EUR 158,5 million (EUR 150,165 million at net present value). |
| --- | --- |

(118)

In the light of all these new elements, the level of aid granted is lower than what was planned in 2000. The eligible costs of the project come to EUR 158,5 million (EUR 150,165 million at net present value).

| (119) | Basing themselves on the method described in Annex I to the 1998 Guidelines on national regional aid, the French authorities state that the result is an NGE of EUR 12 985 610 for a nominal aid amount of EUR 17 106 280. |
| --- | --- |

(119)

Basing themselves on the method described in Annex I to the 1998 Guidelines on national regional aid, the French authorities state that the result is an NGE of EUR 12 985 610 for a nominal aid amount of EUR 17 106 280.

| (120) | According to the French authorities, the intensity of the aid to the PGF/IGCF project therefore comes to 8,65 % NGE (12 985 610/150 165 000), which is lower than the maximum allowable intensity recalculated to take account of the changes in the project’s parameters (9,82 % NGE). |
| --- | --- |

(120)

According to the French authorities, the intensity of the aid to the PGF/IGCF project therefore comes to 8,65 % NGE (12 985 610/150 165 000), which is lower than the maximum allowable intensity recalculated to take account of the changes in the project’s parameters (9,82 % NGE).

| (121) | The notified aid intensity of 8,65 % NGE which France proposes to grant to PGF/IGCF fulfils the conditions for its being considered compatible with the 1998 MSF. |
| --- | --- |

(121)

The notified aid intensity of 8,65 % NGE which France proposes to grant to PGF/IGCF fulfils the conditions for its being considered compatible with the 1998 MSF.

| (122) | Given that the investment project has been completed, there can be no application of the ex-post monitoring conditions provided for in point 6 of the 1998 MSF. France can therefore be authorised to pay the balance of the final aid instalment, namely EUR 727 389 (in nominal terms), to PGF/IGCF, |
| --- | --- |

(122)

Given that the investment project has been completed, there can be no application of the ex-post monitoring conditions provided for in point 6 of the 1998 MSF. France can therefore be authorised to pay the balance of the final aid instalment, namely EUR 727 389 (in nominal terms), to PGF/IGCF,

ex-post

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The Decision adopted on 17 August 2000 in Case N 291/2000 is hereby revoked.

Article 2

The State aid which France plans to implement in favour of PGF/IGCF of an intensity of 8,65 % NGE is compatible with the common market within the meaning of Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty.

Implementation of the aid is accordingly authorised.

France is authorised to pay the balance of the aid, namely EUR 727 389 (in nominal terms), to PGF/IGCF.

Article 3

This Decision is addressed to the French Republic.

Done at Brussels, 10 December 2008.

For the Commission

Neelie KROES

Member of the Commission

---

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

1

(2)  
  OJ C 196, 19.8.2006, p. 3.

2

(3)  
  OJ C 107, 7.4.1998, p. 7.

3

(4)  
  OJ C 293, 14.10.2000, p. 7.

4

(5)  
  OJ C 196, 19.8.2006, p. 3.

5

(6)  On the basis of Article 4 of Council Regulation No 17 (OJ 13, 21.2.1962, p. 204/62).

6

(7)  First Regulation implementing Articles 81 and 82 (formerly Articles 85 and 86) of the Treaty.

7

(8)  Holding company Interpane Glas Industrie AG.

8

(9)  Two subsidiaries of the Interpane group have been active since 1998 in the insulating glass sector in France: Interpane Hoerdt SA (67) and Interpane Ile-de-France at Mitry-Mory (77). These subsidiaries employed 97 people in 1999.

9

(10)  Holding company Interpane Glas Industrie AG.

10

(11)  Two subsidiaries of the Interpane group have been active since 1998 in the insulating glass sector in France: Interpane Hoerdt SA (67) and Interpane Ile-de-France at Mitry-Mory (77). These subsidiaries employed 97 people in 1999.

11

(12)  Commission Decision of 15 March 2000 defining the regional aid map for France 2000-2006 (N 45/2000).

12

(13)  
  OJ C 74, 10.3.1998, p. 9.

13

(14)  Calculated on the basis of point 3.10 of the 1998 MSF.

14

(15)  In accordance with point 6 of the 1998 MSF.

15

(16)  Fonds d’Industrialisation de la Lorraine.

16

(17)  Fonds d’Industrialisation des Bassins Miniers.

17

(18)  The General Tax Code provides for a ceiling on business tax on the basis of value added. The provision is a general one and cannot be considered State aid (Article 1 647 B sexies of the General Tax Code).

18

sexies

(19)  
  OJ C 54, 4.3.2006, p. 13.

19

(20)  Case 73/79 Commission v Italy [1980] ECR 1533, paragraph 11.

20

Commission

Italy

(21)  Case 74/76 Iannelli & Volpi v Meroni [1977] ECR 557, paragraph 14.

21

Iannelli & Volpi

Meroni

(22)  
  OJ L 161, 26.6.1999, p. 1.

22

(23)  The process used is the ‘magnetron’ process whereby the raw glass is treated on a separate production line. There exists another process, the pyrolitic treatment process (pulverisation), which makes it possible to treat the glass directly on the float line.

23

(24)  All definitions have been taken from the work L’industrie du verre by the Secrétariat d’Etat à l’industrie, Service des Etudes et des Statistiques Industrielles (SESSI), 1999.

24

L’industrie du verre

(25)  Standards and requirements in terms of solar and thermal reflectivity are different in the automotive industry.

25

(26)  European Flat-Glass Producers Association.

26

(27)  Saleable capacities are calculated from the nominal melt capacity corrected for losses (approximately 15 % of the float glass produced is lost during the manufacturing process) and for furnace stoppages to change the glass colour and thickness and to carry out major periodic repairs.

27

(28)  EUR 366,9/t in 1993 and EUR 338,19/t in 1995, peaking in 1995.

28

(29)  Multiple-walled insulating units of glass, consisting of one or more hermetically sealed spaces enclosing dehydrated air and/or other gases.

29

(30)  Commission Decision of 21 April 1999 in Case N 94/99 Rockwool Peninsular SA.

30

Rockwool Peninsular SA.

(31)  See point 7.8 of the 1998 MSF.

31

(32)  Put, for the purposes of the 1998 MSF, at least 40 %.

32

(33)  (0,4 × 1) + (0,6 × 0,75).

33

---

| 20.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 49/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 49/33

---

COMMISSION DECISION

of 19 February 2009

on the appointment of the members and advisors of the Scientific Committees and the Pool set up by Decision 2008/721/EC

(2009/146/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Commission Decision 2008/721/EC of 5 September 2008 setting up an advisory structure of Scientific Committees and experts in the field of consumer safety, public health and the environment and repealing Decision 2004/210/EC (1), and in particular Articles 3 and 4 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | By Decision 2008/721/EC the Commission has set up three scientific committees, on consumer safety (SCCS), on health and environmental risks (SCHER) and on emerging and newly identified health risks (SCENIHR) and a pool of scientific advisors on risk assessment (hereinafter the Pool), in the field of consumer safety, public health and the environment. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

By Decision 2008/721/EC the Commission has set up three scientific committees, on consumer safety (SCCS), on health and environmental risks (SCHER) and on emerging and newly identified health risks (SCENIHR) and a pool of scientific advisors on risk assessment (hereinafter the Pool), in the field of consumer safety, public health and the environment.

| (2) | The SCCS, SCHER and SCENIHR shall each consist of a maximum of 17 members and the number of scientific advisors in the Pool at any time is decided by the Commission based on its need for scientific advice. In order to adequately cover the wide range of scientific issues on which it is planned to consult the scientific committees during their term of office, it is appropriate to fix at 17 the number of members of each scientific committee and to fix at 189 the number of scientific advisors of the Pool. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The SCCS, SCHER and SCENIHR shall each consist of a maximum of 17 members and the number of scientific advisors in the Pool at any time is decided by the Commission based on its need for scientific advice. In order to adequately cover the wide range of scientific issues on which it is planned to consult the scientific committees during their term of office, it is appropriate to fix at 17 the number of members of each scientific committee and to fix at 189 the number of scientific advisors of the Pool.

| (3) | In accordance with Articles 3(4) and 4(2) of Decision 2008/721/EC a call for expression of interest was published which also set the selection criteria and the evaluation procedure, which led to lists of suitable candidates from which the Commission appoints the members of the scientific committees and the scientific advisors of the Pool. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In accordance with Articles 3(4) and 4(2) of Decision 2008/721/EC a call for expression of interest was published which also set the selection criteria and the evaluation procedure, which led to lists of suitable candidates from which the Commission appoints the members of the scientific committees and the scientific advisors of the Pool.

| (4) | In accordance with Article 3(2) of Decision 2008/721/EC, the selection of the members of the Committees has been made on the basis of their expertise and consistent with this a geographical distribution that reflects the diversity of scientific problems and approaches, notably in Europe, and, in accordance with Article 4(1) of the same Decision, the selection of the advisors has been made taking into account the objective to cover the widest possible range of disciplines, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

In accordance with Article 3(2) of Decision 2008/721/EC, the selection of the members of the Committees has been made on the basis of their expertise and consistent with this a geographical distribution that reflects the diversity of scientific problems and approaches, notably in Europe, and, in accordance with Article 4(1) of the same Decision, the selection of the advisors has been made taking into account the objective to cover the widest possible range of disciplines,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Sole Article

The number of members of each of the three scientific committees set up by Decision 2008/721/EC is fixed at 17. The experts listed in Annex I to this Decision are appointed as members of those Committees.

The number of scientific advisors in the Pool is fixed at 189 and the experts listed in Annex II to this Decision are appointed as scientific advisors on risk assessment to the Pool set up by Decision 2008/721/EC.

Done at Brussels, 19 February 2009.

For the Commission

Androulla VASSILIOU

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 241, 10.9.2008, p. 21.

1

---

ANNEX I

List of experts appointed as members of the scientific committees

List in alphabetical order of the experts appointed as members of the scientific committees set up by Decision 2008/721/EC.

Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety

| Last name | First name | Institute or organisation of affiliation |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Angerer | Jürgen | Institute for Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Erlagen, Germany |
| Bernauer | Ulrike | Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany |
| Chambers | Claire | Chambers Toxicological Consulting, Wicklow, Ireland |
| Chaudhry | Mohammad | Central Science Laboratory, Sand Hutton, York, United Kingdom |
| Degen | Gisela | Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors (IfADo), Dortmund, Germany |
| Eisenbrand | Gerhard | University of Kaiserslautern, Kaiserslautern, Germany |
| Galli | Corrado | University of Milan, Milan, Italy |
| Platzek | Thomas | Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany |
| Rastogi | Suresh | Retired |
| Rogiers | Vera | Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium |
| Rousselle | Christophe | French Agency for Environmental and Occupationnal Health Safety (Afsset), Maisons-Alfort, France |
| Sanner | Tore | Retired |
| Savolainen | Kai | Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki, Finland |
| Van Engelen | Jacqueline | National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands |
| Vinardell | Maria | University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain |
| Waring | Rosemary | University of Birmingham, Edgbaston Birmingham, United Kingdom |
| White | Ian | Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Hospitals, London, United Kingdom |

Last name

First name

Institute or organisation of affiliation

Angerer

Jürgen

Institute for Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Erlagen, Germany

Bernauer

Ulrike

Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany

Chambers

Claire

Chambers Toxicological Consulting, Wicklow, Ireland

Chaudhry

Mohammad

Central Science Laboratory, Sand Hutton, York, United Kingdom

Degen

Gisela

Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors (IfADo), Dortmund, Germany

Eisenbrand

Gerhard

University of Kaiserslautern, Kaiserslautern, Germany

Galli

Corrado

University of Milan, Milan, Italy

Platzek

Thomas

Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany

Rastogi

Suresh

Retired

Rogiers

Vera

Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium

Rousselle

Christophe

French Agency for Environmental and Occupationnal Health Safety (Afsset), Maisons-Alfort, France

Sanner

Tore

Retired

Savolainen

Kai

Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki, Finland

Van Engelen

Jacqueline

National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands

Vinardell

Maria

University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

Waring

Rosemary

University of Birmingham, Edgbaston Birmingham, United Kingdom

White

Ian

Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Hospitals, London, United Kingdom

Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks

| Last name | First name | Institute or organisation of affiliation |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Ackermann-Liebrich | Ursula | Swiss School of Public Health, Zürich, Switzerland |
| Autrup | Herman | University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark |
| Bard | Denis | École des Hautes Études en Santé Publique (EHESP), Rennes, France |
| Calow | Peter | Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark |
| Canna-Michaelidou | Stella | State General Laboratory, Nicosia, Cyprus |
| Davison | John | French National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA), Paris, France |
| Dekant | Wolfgang | University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany |
| De Voogt | Pim | University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands |
| Gard | Arielle | University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France |
| Greim | Helmut | Retired |
| Hirvonen | Ari | Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki, Finland |
| Janssen | Colin | Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium |
| Linders | Jan | National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands |
| Peterlin | Borut | University Medical Center Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia |
| Tarazona | Jose | Spanish National Institute for Agriculture and Food Research and Technology, Madrid, Spain |
| Testai | Emanuela | Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy |
| Vighi | Marco | University of Milano Bicocca, Milan, Italy |

Last name

First name

Institute or organisation of affiliation

Ackermann-Liebrich

Ursula

Swiss School of Public Health, Zürich, Switzerland

Autrup

Herman

University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark

Bard

Denis

École des Hautes Études en Santé Publique (EHESP), Rennes, France

Calow

Peter

Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark

Canna-Michaelidou

Stella

State General Laboratory, Nicosia, Cyprus

Davison

John

French National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA), Paris, France

Dekant

Wolfgang

University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany

De Voogt

Pim

University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Gard

Arielle

University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France

Greim

Helmut

Retired

Hirvonen

Ari

Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki, Finland

Janssen

Colin

Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

Linders

Jan

National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands

Peterlin

Borut

University Medical Center Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia

Tarazona

Jose

Spanish National Institute for Agriculture and Food Research and Technology, Madrid, Spain

Testai

Emanuela

Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy

Vighi

Marco

University of Milano Bicocca, Milan, Italy

Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks

| Last name | First name | Institute or organisation of affiliation |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Auvinen | Anssi | University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland |
| Bridges | James | Retired |
| Dawson | Kenneth | University College Dublin, Belfield, Ireland |
| De Jong | Wim | National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands |
| Hartemann | Philippe | Université Henri Poincaré, Nancy, France |
| Hoet | Peter | Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium |
| Jung | Thomas | Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland |
| Mattsson | Mats-Olof | Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden |
| Norppa | Hannu | Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki, Finland |
| Pagès | Jean-Marie | Inserm and Université de la Méditerranée, Marseille, France |
| Proykova | Ana | University of Sofia, Sofia, Bulgaria |
| Rodríguez-Farré | Eduardo | Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas (CSIC), Madrid, Spain |
| Schulze-Osthoff | Klaus | University Clinics Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany |
| Schüz | Joachim | Danish Cancer Society, Institute of Cancer Epidemiology, Copenhagen, Denmark |
| Stahl | Dorothea | Paracelsus Private Medical University, Salzburg, Austria |
| Thomsen | Mogens | Retired |
| Vermeire | Theodorus | National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), the Netherlands |

Last name

First name

Institute or organisation of affiliation

Auvinen

Anssi

University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland

Bridges

James

Retired

Dawson

Kenneth

University College Dublin, Belfield, Ireland

De Jong

Wim

National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands

Hartemann

Philippe

Université Henri Poincaré, Nancy, France

Hoet

Peter

Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

Jung

Thomas

Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland

Mattsson

Mats-Olof

Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden

Norppa

Hannu

Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki, Finland

Pagès

Jean-Marie

Inserm and Université de la Méditerranée, Marseille, France

Proykova

Ana

University of Sofia, Sofia, Bulgaria

Rodríguez-Farré

Eduardo

Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas (CSIC), Madrid, Spain

Schulze-Osthoff

Klaus

University Clinics Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany

Schüz

Joachim

Danish Cancer Society, Institute of Cancer Epidemiology, Copenhagen, Denmark

Stahl

Dorothea

Paracelsus Private Medical University, Salzburg, Austria

Thomsen

Mogens

Retired

Vermeire

Theodorus

National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), the Netherlands

---

ANNEX II

List of experts appointed as scientific advisors on risk assessment

List in alphabetical order of the experts appointed by the Commission as scientific advisors on risk assessment to the Pool set up by Decision 2008/721/EC.

| Last name | First name | Institute or organisation of affiliation |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Ahlers | Jan | Retired |
| Algorta | Jaime | Progenika Biopharma Group, Derio, Spain |
| Altenburger | Rolf | Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Leipzig, Germany |
| Ambrogi | Nicoletta | Department of pharmaceutical assistance Local Public Health Unit 4, Terni, Italy |
| André | Jean-Claude | Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Paris, France |
| Assmuth | Timo | Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE), Helsinki, Finland |
| Baars | Aalbert | Retired |
| Bailey | Andrew | ViruSure GmbH, Vienna, Austria |
| Balicer | Ran | Clalit Health Services, Tel-Aviv, Israel |
| Bell | David | University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom |
| Bernard | Alfred | Université catholique de Louvain (UCL), Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium |
| Berry | Bernard | Berry Environmental Ltd, Shepperton, United Kingdom |
| Bommelaer | Jean | Laboratoire Shadeline France, Mouans-Sartoux, France |
| Boogaard | Pieter | Shell, The Hague, the Netherlands |
| Borrego | Carlos | University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal |
| Breckenridge | Ross | University College London, London, United Kingdom |
| Broschard | Thomas | Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany |
| Brunnhuber | Stefan | University of Essen, Essen, Germany |
| Bubenheim | Michael | University Hospital of Rouen, Rouen, France |
| Cabanes | Pierre-André | Électricité de France, Paris, France |
| Calvo Rojas | Gonzalo | Hospital Clinic i Provincial of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain |
| Carroquino | Maria | Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain |
| Cazals | Yves | Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale (Inserm), Paris, France |
| Colbeck | Ian | University of Essex, Colchester, United Kingdom |
| Coleman | Michael | Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom |
| Cooke | Allan Melvin | Alchemy Compliance Ltd, Nottinghamshire, United Kingdom |
| Cotrim | Teresa | Technical University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal |
| Crawford-Brown | Douglas | Pell Frischmann, London, United Kingdom |
| Cuypers | Ann | Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium |
| Dal Negro | Gianni | GlaxoSmithKline, Verona, Italy |
| Darbre | Philippa | University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom |
| De Gaetano | Giovanni | Catholic University, Campobasso, Italy |
| Del Mazo | Jesus | Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas (CSIC), Madrid, Spain |
| De Paepe | Boel | Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium |
| De Sutter | Petra | Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium |
| Di Guardo | Antonio | University of Insubria, Varese, Italy |
| Dorigan | Lee | Public Health – Seattle & King County, Seattle, US |
| Dreher | Jean-Claude | Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Bron, France |
| Duffus | John | John H Duffus, Edinburgh, United Kingdom |
| Ellerbrok | Heinz | Robert-Koch-Institut, Berlin, Germany |
| Emmanouil-Nikoloussi | Elpida-Niki | Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (AUTH), Thessaloniki, Greece |
| Fernandes | Teresa | Napier University, Edinburgh, United Kingdom |
| Figueras | Maria | University Rovira I Virgili, Tarragona, Spain |
| Fillet | Anne-Marie | Électricité de France, Paris, France |
| Floc’h | François | ITEConsult, Genay, France |
| Fruijtier-Pölloth | Claudia | CATS Consultants GmbH, Gräfelfing, Germany |
| Fustinoni | Silvia | Fondazione IRCCS Ospedale Maggiore Policlicnico Mangiagalli e Regina Elena, Milan, Italy |
| Galley-Taylor | Magdalen | Leicestershire County and Rutland Primary Care Trust, Enderby, United Kingdom |
| Garrigue | Jean-Luc | ImmunoSearch, Grasse, France |
| Gheber | Levi | Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel |
| Gibb | Herman | Tetra Tech Sciences, Arlington, US |
| Giménez-Arnau | Ana | Hospital del Mar. IMAS., Barcelona, Spain |
| Gjomarkaj | Mark | Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Rome, Italy |
| Goldberg | Michel | Retired |
| Gordts | Bart | Algemeen Ziekenhuis Sint-Jan, Bruges, Belgium |
| Górski | Andrzej | Warsaw Medical University/Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland |
| Grandjean | Philippe | University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark |
| Greil | Gerald | King’s College London, London, United Kingdom |
| Griem | Peter | Clariant Produkte (Deutschland) GmbH, Sulzbach, Germany |
| Gushulak | Brian | Government of Canada – Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Ottawa, Canada |
| Håkansson | Helen | Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden |
| Hanke | Wojciech | Nofer Institute of Occupational Medicine (NIOM), Lodz, Poland |
| Harrison | Paul | PTCH Consultancy Limited, Market Harborough, United Kingdom |
| Hassenzahl | David | University of Nevada, Las Vegas, US |
| Hauptmann | Michael | Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands |
| Hayward | Gordon | Consumer Risk Limited, London, United Kingdom |
| Heederik | Dirk | Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands |
| Hellebek | Annemarie | Hvidovre Hospital, Hvidovre, Denmark |
| Hensten | Arne | University of Tromsö, Tromsö, Norway |
| Hurley | John Fintan | Institute of Occupational Medicine, Edinburgh, United Kingdom |
| Jacobsen | Hans-Jörg | Leibniz University Hannover, Hannover, Germany |
| Jaźwiec-Kanyion | Bożena | Medical Center OMEGA, Sosnowiec, Poland |
| Jensen | Allan | Force Technology, Brøndby, Denmark |
| Jobling | Susan | Brunel University, Uxbridge, United Kingdom |
| Johansen | Jeanne Duus | Gentofte Hospital, Hellerup, Denmark |
| Kneuer | Carsten | Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany |
| Koennecker | Gustav | Fraunhofer Institute of Toxicology and Experimental Medicine (ITEM), Hannover, Germany |
| Komulainen | Hannu | National Public Health Institute, Helsinki, Finland |
| Koppe | Janna | Retired |
| Krätke | Renate | Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany |
| Kreyling | Wolfgang | Helmholtz Zentrum München, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Neuherberg/München, Germany |
| Kruize | Hanneke | National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands |
| Lambré | Claude | Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale (Inserm), Paris, France |
| Lambrozo | Jacques | Électricité de France, Paris, France |
| Landsiedel | Robert | BASF, Ludwigshafen, Germany |
| Latini | Giuseppe | Perrino Hospital, Brindisi, Italy |
| Laurent | Christian | Unemployed |
| Lebret | Erik | National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands |
| Lens | Piet | Unesco-IHE, Delft, the Netherlands |
| Lichtenbeld | Hera | NanoTox BV and Biomedbooster BV, Maastricht, the Netherlands |
| Lilienblum | Werner | LiCoTox (Lilienblum Consulting Toxicology), Hemmingen/Hannover, Germany |
| Liu | Qintao | AstraZeneca UK Ltd, Brixham, United Kingdom |
| Lopes | Isabel | University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal |
| Luches | Armando | University of Salento, Lecce, Italy |
| MacPherson | Douglas | Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada |
| Maillard | Jean-Yves | Welsh School of Pharmacy, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom |
| Mamo | Julian | University of Malta, Msida, Malta |
| Mangelsdorf | Inge | Fraunhofer Institute of Toxicology and Experimental Medicine (ITEM), Hannover, Germany |
| Marti | Amelia | University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain |
| Marti-Mestres | Gilberte | University of Montpellier I, Montpellier, France |
| Martínez Serrano | Alberto | Autonomous University of Madrid (UAM), Madrid, Spain |
| Melhus | Äsa | Uppsala University, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden |
| Melissos | Dimitrios | QACS Ltd, Athens, Greece |
| Minor | Philip | National Institute for Biological Standards and Control, Blanche Lane, South Mimms, Potters Bar, United Kingdom |
| Mølhave | Lars | University of Aarhus, Århus, Denmark |
| Montanaro | Fabio | Fabio Montanaro, Genova, Italy |
| Moseley | Harry | University of Dundee Ninewells Hospital & Medical School, Dundee, United Kingdom |
| Moulin | Gérard | National agency for veterinary medicinal products, Fougères, France |
| Mühlemann | Marc | Agroscope Liebefeld-Posieux Research Station ALP, Berne, Switzerland |
| Mulon | Laurence | Mulon Conseil, Saint-Maurice, France |
| Navas | José | Spanish National Institute for Agricultural and Food Research and Technology, Madrid, Spain |
| Nemery de Bellevaux | Benoit | Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium |
| Nielsen | Elsa | Technical University of Denmark, Søborg, Denmark |
| Nogueira | António | University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal |
| Nohynek | Gerhard | L’Oreal Research and Development, Asnières, France |
| Nordberg | Monica | Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden |
| Nübling | Claudius | Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Langen, Germany |
| Nychas | George-John | Agricultural University of Athens, Athens, Greece |
| Pallapies | Dirk | Forschungsinstitut für Arbeitsmedizin der Deutschen Gesetzlichen Unfallversicherung (BGFA), Bochum, Germany |
| Papadopoulou | Chrissanthy | University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece |
| Pandiella | Atanasio | Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas (CSIC), Madrid, Spain |
| Pauwels | Marleen | Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium |
| Peijnenburg | Willie | National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands |
| Peltonen | Kimmo | Finnish Food Safety Authority (Evira), Helsinki, Finland |
| Pereira | Ruth | University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal |
| Petrova | Rumiana | Retired |
| Pickup | Roger | Natural Environment Research Council, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Bailrigg, United Kingdom |
| Pirnay | Jean-Paul | Queen Astrid Military Hospital, Brussels, Belgium |
| Pitard | Alexandre | Fédération des réseaux de santé de Franche-Comté, Besançon, France |
| Polettini | Aldo | University of Verona, Verona, Italy |
| Popov | Todor | Retired |
| Porzsolt | Franz | University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany |
| Pratt | Iona | Food Safety Authority of Ireland, Dublin, Ireland |
| Pukkala | Eero | Finnish Cancer Registry, Helsinki, Finland |
| Quesniaux | Valérie | Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Paris, France |
| Ramsden | David | Retired |
| Richert | Susann | Industriepark Wolfgang GmbH, Hanau, Germany |
| Riese | Hans | Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain |
| Robbins | Anthony | Retired |
| Ryffel | Bernhard | Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Orléans, France |
| Sacile | Roberto | University of Genova, Genova, Italy |
| Sakellaris | George | National Hellenic Research Foundation (NHRF), Athens, Greece |
| Salifoglou | Athanasios | Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece |
| Salman | Mo | Colorado State University, Colorado, US |
| Sans Menéndez | Susana | Institute of Health Studies – Generalitat of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain |
| Santos-Sanches | Ilda | Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal |
| Saravanane | Raman | Pondicherry Engineering College, Pondicherry, India |
| Schnekenburger | Jürgen | Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität, Münster, Germany |
| Schowanek | Diederik | Procter & Gamble Eurocor, Strombeek-Bever, Belgium |
| Schulte | Stefan | BASF, Ludwigshafen, Germany |
| Scialli | Anthony | Tetra Tech Sciences, Arlington, US |
| Sharp | Stephen | Medical Research Council, Cambridge, United Kingdom |
| Simms | Ian | Health Protection Agency (HPA), London, United Kingdom |
| Simkó | Myrtill | Austrian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Technology Assessment, Vienna, Austria |
| Straif | Kurt | International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), Lyon, France |
| Stück | Wolfgang | Wolfgang Stück, Koblenz, Germany |
| Spindler | Per | University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark |
| Suh Macintosh | Helen | Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, US |
| Sweet | Jeremy | Sweet Environmental Consultants, Cambridge, UK |
| Tchepel | Oxana | University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal |
| Torok | Andrea | National Institute for Environmental Health, Budapest, Hungary |
| Torrence | Mary | Department of Agriculture – Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, US |
| Trevisan | Marco | Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Piacenza, Italy |
| Tribsch | Andreas | University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria |
| Tytgat | Jan | Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium |
| Uter | Wolfgang | Friedrich-Alexander University (FAU), Erlangen, Germany |
| Vallaeys | Tatiana | University of Montpellier II, Montpellier, France |
| Van Beelen | Patrick | National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands |
| Van Benthem | Jan | National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands |
| Van De Meent | Dirk | National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands |
| Van Den Hazel | Peter | Public Health Services Gelderland Midden, Arnhem, the Netherlands |
| Van Der Laan | Jan Willem | National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands |
| Vanhaecke | Tamara | Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium |
| Van Rongen | Eric | Health Council of the Netherlands, The Hague, the Netherlands |
| Verbeken | Gilbert | Ministry of Defence, Brussels, Belgium |
| Viluksela | Matti | National Public Health Institute, Kuopio, Finland |
| Virtanen | Jorma | University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland |
| Voncina | Ernest | Institute of Public Health, Maribor, Slovenia |
| Von Stackelberg | Katherine | Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, US |
| Wallet | France | Électricité de France, Paris, France |
| Walochnik | Julia | Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria |
| Wester | Piet | National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands |
| Widén | Frederik | Statens veterinärmedicinska anstalt, Uppsala, Sweden |
| Willing | Andreas | Cognis GmbH, Düsseldorf, Germany |
| Wu | Qinglan | Det Norske Veritas As, Hoevik, Norway |
| Yang | Hong | US Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, Maryland, US |
| Yu | Il Je | Korea Environment & Merchandise Testing Institute, Incheon, Korea |
| Zappa | Giovanna | Italian National Agency for New Technology, Energy and the Environment (ENEA), Rome, Italy |
| Zouali | Moncef | Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale (Inserm), Paris, France |

Last name

First name

Institute or organisation of affiliation

Ahlers

Jan

Retired

Algorta

Jaime

Progenika Biopharma Group, Derio, Spain

Altenburger

Rolf

Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Leipzig, Germany

Ambrogi

Nicoletta

Department of pharmaceutical assistance Local Public Health Unit 4, Terni, Italy

André

Jean-Claude

Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Paris, France

Assmuth

Timo

Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE), Helsinki, Finland

Baars

Aalbert

Retired

Bailey

Andrew

ViruSure GmbH, Vienna, Austria

Balicer

Ran

Clalit Health Services, Tel-Aviv, Israel

Bell

David

University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom

Bernard

Alfred

Université catholique de Louvain (UCL), Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium

Berry

Bernard

Berry Environmental Ltd, Shepperton, United Kingdom

Bommelaer

Jean

Laboratoire Shadeline France, Mouans-Sartoux, France

Boogaard

Pieter

Shell, The Hague, the Netherlands

Borrego

Carlos

University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

Breckenridge

Ross

University College London, London, United Kingdom

Broschard

Thomas

Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany

Brunnhuber

Stefan

University of Essen, Essen, Germany

Bubenheim

Michael

University Hospital of Rouen, Rouen, France

Cabanes

Pierre-André

Électricité de France, Paris, France

Calvo Rojas

Gonzalo

Hospital Clinic i Provincial of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

Carroquino

Maria

Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain

Cazals

Yves

Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale (Inserm), Paris, France

Colbeck

Ian

University of Essex, Colchester, United Kingdom

Coleman

Michael

Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom

Cooke

Allan Melvin

Alchemy Compliance Ltd, Nottinghamshire, United Kingdom

Cotrim

Teresa

Technical University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

Crawford-Brown

Douglas

Pell Frischmann, London, United Kingdom

Cuypers

Ann

Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium

Dal Negro

Gianni

GlaxoSmithKline, Verona, Italy

Darbre

Philippa

University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom

De Gaetano

Giovanni

Catholic University, Campobasso, Italy

Del Mazo

Jesus

Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas (CSIC), Madrid, Spain

De Paepe

Boel

Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium

De Sutter

Petra

Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

Di Guardo

Antonio

University of Insubria, Varese, Italy

Dorigan

Lee

Public Health – Seattle & King County, Seattle, US

Dreher

Jean-Claude

Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Bron, France

Duffus

John

John H Duffus, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

Ellerbrok

Heinz

Robert-Koch-Institut, Berlin, Germany

Emmanouil-Nikoloussi

Elpida-Niki

Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (AUTH), Thessaloniki, Greece

Fernandes

Teresa

Napier University, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

Figueras

Maria

University Rovira I Virgili, Tarragona, Spain

Fillet

Anne-Marie

Électricité de France, Paris, France

Floc’h

François

ITEConsult, Genay, France

Fruijtier-Pölloth

Claudia

CATS Consultants GmbH, Gräfelfing, Germany

Fustinoni

Silvia

Fondazione IRCCS Ospedale Maggiore Policlicnico Mangiagalli e Regina Elena, Milan, Italy

Galley-Taylor

Magdalen

Leicestershire County and Rutland Primary Care Trust, Enderby, United Kingdom

Garrigue

Jean-Luc

ImmunoSearch, Grasse, France

Gheber

Levi

Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel

Gibb

Herman

Tetra Tech Sciences, Arlington, US

Giménez-Arnau

Ana

Hospital del Mar. IMAS., Barcelona, Spain

Gjomarkaj

Mark

Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Rome, Italy

Goldberg

Michel

Retired

Gordts

Bart

Algemeen Ziekenhuis Sint-Jan, Bruges, Belgium

Górski

Andrzej

Warsaw Medical University/Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland

Grandjean

Philippe

University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark

Greil

Gerald

King’s College London, London, United Kingdom

Griem

Peter

Clariant Produkte (Deutschland) GmbH, Sulzbach, Germany

Gushulak

Brian

Government of Canada – Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Ottawa, Canada

Håkansson

Helen

Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden

Hanke

Wojciech

Nofer Institute of Occupational Medicine (NIOM), Lodz, Poland

Harrison

Paul

PTCH Consultancy Limited, Market Harborough, United Kingdom

Hassenzahl

David

University of Nevada, Las Vegas, US

Hauptmann

Michael

Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Hayward

Gordon

Consumer Risk Limited, London, United Kingdom

Heederik

Dirk

Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands

Hellebek

Annemarie

Hvidovre Hospital, Hvidovre, Denmark

Hensten

Arne

University of Tromsö, Tromsö, Norway

Hurley

John Fintan

Institute of Occupational Medicine, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

Jacobsen

Hans-Jörg

Leibniz University Hannover, Hannover, Germany

Jaźwiec-Kanyion

Bożena

Medical Center OMEGA, Sosnowiec, Poland

Jensen

Allan

Force Technology, Brøndby, Denmark

Jobling

Susan

Brunel University, Uxbridge, United Kingdom

Johansen

Jeanne Duus

Gentofte Hospital, Hellerup, Denmark

Kneuer

Carsten

Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany

Koennecker

Gustav

Fraunhofer Institute of Toxicology and Experimental Medicine (ITEM), Hannover, Germany

Komulainen

Hannu

National Public Health Institute, Helsinki, Finland

Koppe

Janna

Retired

Krätke

Renate

Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany

Kreyling

Wolfgang

Helmholtz Zentrum München, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Neuherberg/München, Germany

Kruize

Hanneke

National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands

Lambré

Claude

Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale (Inserm), Paris, France

Lambrozo

Jacques

Électricité de France, Paris, France

Landsiedel

Robert

BASF, Ludwigshafen, Germany

Latini

Giuseppe

Perrino Hospital, Brindisi, Italy

Laurent

Christian

Unemployed

Lebret

Erik

National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands

Lens

Piet

Unesco-IHE, Delft, the Netherlands

Lichtenbeld

Hera

NanoTox BV and Biomedbooster BV, Maastricht, the Netherlands

Lilienblum

Werner

LiCoTox (Lilienblum Consulting Toxicology), Hemmingen/Hannover, Germany

Liu

Qintao

AstraZeneca UK Ltd, Brixham, United Kingdom

Lopes

Isabel

University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

Luches

Armando

University of Salento, Lecce, Italy

MacPherson

Douglas

Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Maillard

Jean-Yves

Welsh School of Pharmacy, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom

Mamo

Julian

University of Malta, Msida, Malta

Mangelsdorf

Inge

Fraunhofer Institute of Toxicology and Experimental Medicine (ITEM), Hannover, Germany

Marti

Amelia

University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain

Marti-Mestres

Gilberte

University of Montpellier I, Montpellier, France

Martínez Serrano

Alberto

Autonomous University of Madrid (UAM), Madrid, Spain

Melhus

Äsa

Uppsala University, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden

Melissos

Dimitrios

QACS Ltd, Athens, Greece

Minor

Philip

National Institute for Biological Standards and Control, Blanche Lane, South Mimms, Potters Bar, United Kingdom

Mølhave

Lars

University of Aarhus, Århus, Denmark

Montanaro

Fabio

Fabio Montanaro, Genova, Italy

Moseley

Harry

University of Dundee Ninewells Hospital & Medical School, Dundee, United Kingdom

Moulin

Gérard

National agency for veterinary medicinal products, Fougères, France

Mühlemann

Marc

Agroscope Liebefeld-Posieux Research Station ALP, Berne, Switzerland

Mulon

Laurence

Mulon Conseil, Saint-Maurice, France

Navas

José

Spanish National Institute for Agricultural and Food Research and Technology, Madrid, Spain

Nemery de Bellevaux

Benoit

Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

Nielsen

Elsa

Technical University of Denmark, Søborg, Denmark

Nogueira

António

University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

Nohynek

Gerhard

L’Oreal Research and Development, Asnières, France

Nordberg

Monica

Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden

Nübling

Claudius

Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, Langen, Germany

Nychas

George-John

Agricultural University of Athens, Athens, Greece

Pallapies

Dirk

Forschungsinstitut für Arbeitsmedizin der Deutschen Gesetzlichen Unfallversicherung (BGFA), Bochum, Germany

Papadopoulou

Chrissanthy

University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece

Pandiella

Atanasio

Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas (CSIC), Madrid, Spain

Pauwels

Marleen

Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium

Peijnenburg

Willie

National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands

Peltonen

Kimmo

Finnish Food Safety Authority (Evira), Helsinki, Finland

Pereira

Ruth

University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

Petrova

Rumiana

Retired

Pickup

Roger

Natural Environment Research Council, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Bailrigg, United Kingdom

Pirnay

Jean-Paul

Queen Astrid Military Hospital, Brussels, Belgium

Pitard

Alexandre

Fédération des réseaux de santé de Franche-Comté, Besançon, France

Polettini

Aldo

University of Verona, Verona, Italy

Popov

Todor

Retired

Porzsolt

Franz

University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany

Pratt

Iona

Food Safety Authority of Ireland, Dublin, Ireland

Pukkala

Eero

Finnish Cancer Registry, Helsinki, Finland

Quesniaux

Valérie

Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Paris, France

Ramsden

David

Retired

Richert

Susann

Industriepark Wolfgang GmbH, Hanau, Germany

Riese

Hans

Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain

Robbins

Anthony

Retired

Ryffel

Bernhard

Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Orléans, France

Sacile

Roberto

University of Genova, Genova, Italy

Sakellaris

George

National Hellenic Research Foundation (NHRF), Athens, Greece

Salifoglou

Athanasios

Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

Salman

Mo

Colorado State University, Colorado, US

Sans Menéndez

Susana

Institute of Health Studies – Generalitat of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain

Santos-Sanches

Ilda

Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

Saravanane

Raman

Pondicherry Engineering College, Pondicherry, India

Schnekenburger

Jürgen

Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität, Münster, Germany

Schowanek

Diederik

Procter & Gamble Eurocor, Strombeek-Bever, Belgium

Schulte

Stefan

BASF, Ludwigshafen, Germany

Scialli

Anthony

Tetra Tech Sciences, Arlington, US

Sharp

Stephen

Medical Research Council, Cambridge, United Kingdom

Simms

Ian

Health Protection Agency (HPA), London, United Kingdom

Simkó

Myrtill

Austrian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Technology Assessment, Vienna, Austria

Straif

Kurt

International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), Lyon, France

Stück

Wolfgang

Wolfgang Stück, Koblenz, Germany

Spindler

Per

University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

Suh Macintosh

Helen

Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, US

Sweet

Jeremy

Sweet Environmental Consultants, Cambridge, UK

Tchepel

Oxana

University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

Torok

Andrea

National Institute for Environmental Health, Budapest, Hungary

Torrence

Mary

Department of Agriculture – Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, US

Trevisan

Marco

Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Piacenza, Italy

Tribsch

Andreas

University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria

Tytgat

Jan

Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

Uter

Wolfgang

Friedrich-Alexander University (FAU), Erlangen, Germany

Vallaeys

Tatiana

University of Montpellier II, Montpellier, France

Van Beelen

Patrick

National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands

Van Benthem

Jan

National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands

Van De Meent

Dirk

National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands

Van Den Hazel

Peter

Public Health Services Gelderland Midden, Arnhem, the Netherlands

Van Der Laan

Jan Willem

National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands

Vanhaecke

Tamara

Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium

Van Rongen

Eric

Health Council of the Netherlands, The Hague, the Netherlands

Verbeken

Gilbert

Ministry of Defence, Brussels, Belgium

Viluksela

Matti

National Public Health Institute, Kuopio, Finland

Virtanen

Jorma

University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

Voncina

Ernest

Institute of Public Health, Maribor, Slovenia

Von Stackelberg

Katherine

Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, US

Wallet

France

Électricité de France, Paris, France

Walochnik

Julia

Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

Wester

Piet

National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands

Widén

Frederik

Statens veterinärmedicinska anstalt, Uppsala, Sweden

Willing

Andreas

Cognis GmbH, Düsseldorf, Germany

Wu

Qinglan

Det Norske Veritas As, Hoevik, Norway

Yang

Hong

US Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, Maryland, US

Yu

Il Je

Korea Environment & Merchandise Testing Institute, Incheon, Korea

Zappa

Giovanna

Italian National Agency for New Technology, Energy and the Environment (ENEA), Rome, Italy

Zouali

Moncef

Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale (Inserm), Paris, France

---

| 20.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 49/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 49/43

---

COMMISSION DECISION

of 19 February 2009

on a Community financial contribution for 2008 to cover expenditure incurred by Germany, the Netherlands and Slovenia for the purpose of combating organisms harmful to plants or plant products

(notified under document number C(2009) 1013)

(Only the Dutch, German and Slovenian texts are authentic)

(2009/147/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community (1), and in particular Article 23 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Directive 2000/29/EC, a financial contribution from the Community may be granted to Member States to cover expenditure relating directly to the necessary measures which have been taken or are planned to be taken for the purpose of combating harmful organisms introduced from third countries or from other areas in the Community, in order to eradicate or, if that is not possible, to contain them. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Directive 2000/29/EC, a financial contribution from the Community may be granted to Member States to cover expenditure relating directly to the necessary measures which have been taken or are planned to be taken for the purpose of combating harmful organisms introduced from third countries or from other areas in the Community, in order to eradicate or, if that is not possible, to contain them.

| (2) | Germany, the Netherlands and Slovenia have each established a programme of actions to eradicate organisms harmful to plants introduced in their territories. These programmes specify the objectives to be achieved, the measures carried out, their duration and their cost. Germany, the Netherlands and Slovenia have applied for the allocation of a Community financial contribution to these programmes within the time limit set out in Directive 2000/29/EC and in accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 1040/2002 of 14 June 2002 establishing detailed rules for the implementation of the provisions relating to the allocation of a financial contribution from the Community for plant health control and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2051/97 (2). |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Germany, the Netherlands and Slovenia have each established a programme of actions to eradicate organisms harmful to plants introduced in their territories. These programmes specify the objectives to be achieved, the measures carried out, their duration and their cost. Germany, the Netherlands and Slovenia have applied for the allocation of a Community financial contribution to these programmes within the time limit set out in Directive 2000/29/EC and in accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 1040/2002 of 14 June 2002 establishing detailed rules for the implementation of the provisions relating to the allocation of a financial contribution from the Community for plant health control and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2051/97 (2).

| (3) | The technical information provided by Germany, the Netherlands and Slovenia has enabled the Commission to analyse the situation accurately and comprehensively and to conclude that the conditions for the granting of a Community financial contribution, as laid down in particular in Article 23 of Directive 2000/29/EC, have been met. Accordingly, it is appropriate to provide a Community financial contribution to cover the expenditure on these programmes. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The technical information provided by Germany, the Netherlands and Slovenia has enabled the Commission to analyse the situation accurately and comprehensively and to conclude that the conditions for the granting of a Community financial contribution, as laid down in particular in Article 23 of Directive 2000/29/EC, have been met. Accordingly, it is appropriate to provide a Community financial contribution to cover the expenditure on these programmes.

| (4) | The Community financial contribution may cover up to 50 % of eligible expenditure. However, in accordance with Article 23(5) third paragraph of Directive 2000/29/EC, the rate of the Community financial contribution for part of the programme presented by the Netherlands for the control of Diabrotica virgifera virgifera Le Conte should be reduced as the programme notified by this Member State has already been the subject of Community funding under Commission Decision 2007/877/EC (3). |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The Community financial contribution may cover up to 50 % of eligible expenditure. However, in accordance with Article 23(5) third paragraph of Directive 2000/29/EC, the rate of the Community financial contribution for part of the programme presented by the Netherlands for the control of Diabrotica virgifera virgifera Le Conte should be reduced as the programme notified by this Member State has already been the subject of Community funding under Commission Decision 2007/877/EC (3).

| (5) | In accordance with Article 24 of Directive 2000/29/EC the Commission shall ascertain whether the introduction of the relevant harmful organism has been caused by inadequate examinations or inspections and adopt the measures required by the findings from its verification. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

In accordance with Article 24 of Directive 2000/29/EC the Commission shall ascertain whether the introduction of the relevant harmful organism has been caused by inadequate examinations or inspections and adopt the measures required by the findings from its verification.

| (6) | In accordance with Article 3(2)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 of 21 June 2005 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (4), plant health measures are to be financed from the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund. For the purpose of financial control of these measures Articles 9, 36 and 37 of the above Regulation shall apply. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

In accordance with Article 3(2)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 of 21 June 2005 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (4), plant health measures are to be financed from the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund. For the purpose of financial control of these measures Articles 9, 36 and 37 of the above Regulation shall apply.

| (7) | The measures provided in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plant Health, |
| --- | --- |

(7)

The measures provided in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plant Health,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The allocation of a Community financial contribution for 2008 to cover expenditure incurred by Germany, the Netherlands and Slovenia relating to necessary measures as specified in Article 23(2) of Directive 2000/29/EC and taken for the purpose of combating the organisms concerned by the eradication programmes listed in the Annex is hereby approved.

Article 2

1.   The total amount of the financial contribution referred to in Article 1 is EUR 871 953.

2.   The maximum amounts of the Community financial contribution for each of the programmes shall be as indicated in the Annex.

Article 3

The Community financial contribution as set out in the Annex shall be paid on the following conditions:

| (a) | evidence of the measures taken has been given in accordance with the provisions laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1040/2002. |
| --- | --- |

(a)

evidence of the measures taken has been given in accordance with the provisions laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1040/2002.

| (b) | a request for payment has been submitted by the Member State concerned to the Commission, in accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1040/2002. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

a request for payment has been submitted by the Member State concerned to the Commission, in accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1040/2002.

The payment of the financial contribution is without prejudice to the verifications by the Commission under Article 24 of Directive 2000/29/EC.

Article 4

This Decision is addressed to the Federal Republic of Germany, the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Republic of Slovenia.

Done at Brussels, 19 February 2009.

For the Commission

Androulla VASSILIOU

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 169, 10.7.2000, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 157, 15.6.2002, p. 38.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 344, 28.12.2007, p. 51.

3

(4)  
  OJ L 209, 11.8.2005, p. 1.

4

---

ANNEX

ERADICATION PROGRAMMES

Legend:

a= Year of implementation of the eradication programme.

Section I —   Programmes whose Community financial contribution corresponds to 50 % of eligible expenditure

| Member State | Harmful organisms combated | Affected plants | Year | Eligible expenditure
  (EUR) | Maximum Community contribution
  per programme (EUR) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Germany, Baden-Wurttemberg region | Diabrotica virgifera | Zea mays | 2007 | 481 817 | 240 908 |
| Germany, Bavaria region | Diabrotica virgifera | Zea mays | 2007 | 197 319 | 98 659 |
| Netherlands | Diabrotica virgifera | Zea mays | 2006 | 125 320 | 62 660 |
| Netherlands | PSTVd | Brugmansia spp., Solanum jasminoides | 2006, 2007 | 687 606 | 343 803 |
| Netherlands | TRSV | Hemerocallis spp., Iris spp. | 2006 | 148 589 | 74 294 |
| Slovenia | Dryocosmus kuriphilus | Castanea sp. | 2007 | 41 307 | 20 653 |

Member State

Harmful organisms combated

Affected plants

Year

Eligible expenditure

(EUR)

Maximum Community contribution

per programme (EUR)

Germany, Baden-Wurttemberg region

Diabrotica virgifera

Zea mays

2007

481 817

240 908

Germany, Bavaria region

Diabrotica virgifera

Zea mays

2007

197 319

98 659

Netherlands

Diabrotica virgifera

Zea mays

2006

125 320

62 660

Netherlands

PSTVd

Brugmansia spp., Solanum jasminoides

2006, 2007

687 606

343 803

Netherlands

TRSV

Hemerocallis spp., Iris spp.

2006

148 589

74 294

Slovenia

Dryocosmus kuriphilus

Castanea sp.

2007

41 307

20 653

Section II —   Programmes whose Community financial contribution rates differ, in application of degressivity

| Member State | Harmful organisms combated | Affected plants | Year | a | Eligible expenditure
  (EUR) | Rate
  (%) | Maximum Community contribution
  (EUR) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Netherlands | Diabrotica virgifera | Zea mays | 2007 | 3 | 68 837 | 45 | 30 976 |

Member State

Harmful organisms combated

Affected plants

Year

a

Eligible expenditure

(EUR)

Rate

(%)

Maximum Community contribution

(EUR)

Netherlands

Diabrotica virgifera

Zea mays

2007

3

68 837

45

30 976

| Total Community contribution (EUR) | 871 953 |
| --- | --- |

Total Community contribution (EUR)

871 953

---

| 20.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 49/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 49/46

---

COMMISSION DECISION

of 19 February 2009

amending Decision 2008/883/EC as regards Brazil concerning the date for which imports into the Community of certain fresh bovine meat are authorised

(notified under document number C(2009) 1040)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2009/148/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 2002/99/EC of 16 December 2002 laying down the animal health rules governing the production, processing, distribution and introduction of products of animal origin for human consumption (1), and in particular the introductory phrase of Article 8, the first subparagraph of Article 8(1) and Article 8(4) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Council Decision 79/542/EEC of 21 December 1976 drawing up a list of third countries or parts of third countries, and laying down animal and public health and veterinary certification conditions, for importation into the Community of certain live animals and their fresh meat (2) establishes the sanitary conditions for the importation into the Community of live animals excluding equidae, and the importation of fresh meat of such animals, including equidae, but excluding meat preparations. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Council Decision 79/542/EEC of 21 December 1976 drawing up a list of third countries or parts of third countries, and laying down animal and public health and veterinary certification conditions, for importation into the Community of certain live animals and their fresh meat (2) establishes the sanitary conditions for the importation into the Community of live animals excluding equidae, and the importation of fresh meat of such animals, including equidae, but excluding meat preparations.

| (2) | Decision 79/542/EEC provides that imports of fresh meat intended for human consumption are only allowed if such meat comes from a territory of a third country or a part thereof listed in Part 1 of Annex II to that Decision, and the fresh meat meets the requirements set out in the appropriate veterinary certificate for that meat in accordance with the models set out in Part 2 of that Annex, taking into account any specific conditions or supplementary guarantees required for the meat. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Decision 79/542/EEC provides that imports of fresh meat intended for human consumption are only allowed if such meat comes from a territory of a third country or a part thereof listed in Part 1 of Annex II to that Decision, and the fresh meat meets the requirements set out in the appropriate veterinary certificate for that meat in accordance with the models set out in Part 2 of that Annex, taking into account any specific conditions or supplementary guarantees required for the meat.

| (3) | Decision 79/542/EEC, as amended by Commission Decision 2008/642/EC (3), inter alia, reinstated the States of Paraná and São Paulo in the entry for Brazil in Part 1 of Annex II to Decision 79/542/EEC, with code of territory BR-3 for the importation into the Community of bovine de-boned and matured meat from animals slaughtered on or after 1 August 2008. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Decision 79/542/EEC, as amended by Commission Decision 2008/642/EC (3), inter alia, reinstated the States of Paraná and São Paulo in the entry for Brazil in Part 1 of Annex II to Decision 79/542/EEC, with code of territory BR-3 for the importation into the Community of bovine de-boned and matured meat from animals slaughtered on or after 1 August 2008.

| (4) | Decision 79/542/EEC, as amended by Commission Decision 2008/883/EC (4), further amended that Annex as regards the entry for Brazil with code of territory BR-1 in order to re-instate Mato Grosso do Sul and include the rest of the States of Minas Gerais and Mato Grosso in order to allow the importation into the Community of bovine de-boned and matured meat from animals slaughtered on or after 1 December 2008. However, Article 2 of Decision 2008/883/EC allows the importation into the Community of consignments of fresh de-boned and matured beef from the territory with code BR-1 as defined in Decision 2008/642/EC and obtained from animals slaughtered before 1 December 2008 until 14 January 2009. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Decision 79/542/EEC, as amended by Commission Decision 2008/883/EC (4), further amended that Annex as regards the entry for Brazil with code of territory BR-1 in order to re-instate Mato Grosso do Sul and include the rest of the States of Minas Gerais and Mato Grosso in order to allow the importation into the Community of bovine de-boned and matured meat from animals slaughtered on or after 1 December 2008. However, Article 2 of Decision 2008/883/EC allows the importation into the Community of consignments of fresh de-boned and matured beef from the territory with code BR-1 as defined in Decision 2008/642/EC and obtained from animals slaughtered before 1 December 2008 until 14 January 2009.

| (5) | More time should be given to allow stocks of bovine meat from animals slaughtered on or before 1 December 2008 from the territory of Brazil with code BR-1 as set out in the entry for that country in Part 1 of Annex II to Decision 79/542/EEC, as amended by Decision 2008/642/EC, to continue to be able to be imported into the Community as there are no animal health concerns, being those territories already authorised before that date for import of fresh meat into the Community. Accordingly, Article 2 of Decision 2008/883/EC should be amended in order to allow such imports until 30 June 2009. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

More time should be given to allow stocks of bovine meat from animals slaughtered on or before 1 December 2008 from the territory of Brazil with code BR-1 as set out in the entry for that country in Part 1 of Annex II to Decision 79/542/EEC, as amended by Decision 2008/642/EC, to continue to be able to be imported into the Community as there are no animal health concerns, being those territories already authorised before that date for import of fresh meat into the Community. Accordingly, Article 2 of Decision 2008/883/EC should be amended in order to allow such imports until 30 June 2009.

| (6) | Decision 2008/883/EC should therefore be amended accordingly. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

Decision 2008/883/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.

| (7) | The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health, |
| --- | --- |

(7)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

In Decision 2008/883/EC, Article 2 is replaced by the following:

‘Article 2

Consignments of fresh de-boned and matured bovine meat from the territory of Brazil with code BR-1, as set out in Part 1 of Annex II to Decision 79/542/EEC, as amended by Commission Decision 2008/642/EC (*1), from animals slaughtered on or before 1 December 2008 may continue to be imported into the Community until 30 June 2009.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 19 February 2009.

For the Commission

Androulla VASSILIOU

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 18, 23.1.2003, p. 11.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 146, 14.6.1979, p. 15.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 207, 5.8.2008, p. 36.

3

(4)  
  OJ L 316, 26.11.2008, p. 14.

4

---

Corrigenda

| 20.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 49/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 49/48

---

Corrigendum to Council Directive 92/65/EEC of 13 July 1992 laying down animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of animals, semen, ova and embryos not subject to animal health requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A (I) to Directive 90/425/EEC

(
  Official Journal of the European Communities L 268 of 14 September 1992
  )

On page 62, Article 17(2):

for:

‘2.   Only animals, semen, ova and embryos referred to in Article 1 which satisfy the following requirements may be imported into the Community:’,

read:

‘2.   Only animals and semen, ova and embryos referred to in Article 11 which satisfy the following requirements may be imported into the Community:’.

---

| 20.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 49/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 49/48

---

Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EC) No 1167/2008 of 24 October 2008 amending and updating Regulation (EC) No 1334/2000 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports of dual-use items and technology

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 325 of 3 December 2008
  )

On page 88, in the Annex, Category 2, in reference 2B006, b.1.c.2.:

for:

| ‘2. | maintaining for at least 12 hours at a temperature of ± 20 °C all of the following:’, |
| --- | --- |

‘2.

maintaining for at least 12 hours at a temperature of ± 20 °C all of the following:’,

read:

| ‘2. | maintaining for at least 12 hours at a temperature of 20 ± 1 °C all of the following:’. |
| --- | --- |

‘2.

maintaining for at least 12 hours at a temperature of 20 ± 1 °C all of the following:’.

---

20.2.2009

| 20.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 49/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 49/s3

---

NOTE TO THE READER

The institutions have decided no longer to quote in their texts the last amendment to cited acts.

Unless otherwise indicated, references to acts in the texts published here are to the version of those acts currently in force.

---