ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
10.

following the opinions which it has adopted since the beginning of 2012 on the Commission's various legislative proposals, reiterates that: a. with regard to sub-heading 1a, 1b and the Funds covered by the Common Strategic Framework (CSF): — supports a stronger financing for research and innovation; — calls for a reinstatement of the initially proposed budget for the Connecting Europe Facility to finance investments in trans-European networks supports the creation of a CSF for the two Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund, the EAFRD and the EMFF; — reiterates its clear and firm opposition to any form of macro-economic conditionality; — welcomes that the proposal to establish a new category of ‘transition regions’ and the need to take account of the specific and unique situation of the outermost regions have been taken up; — reiterates the maintenance of a safety net for all the regions falling out the Convergence Objective consisting on two thirds of the current allocation; — supports that the level of resources to the least developed regions and Member States and the reduction of disparities in average per capita aid intensities must be ensured, as this is the priority objective of cohesion policy; — regrets that the draft European Council conclusions propose a cut of 26 % of the ‘European territorial cohesion’ objective; welcomes however that the CoR's call for an increase of the co-financing rate to 85 % has been heard; — supports the establishment of a co-financing rate that is 10 percentage points higher for Member States facing temporary budgetary difficulties; — supports non-recoverable VAT being eligible expenditure for a contribution from the CSF Funds; — reiterates its objections to the proposed performance reserve; b. with regard to heading 2: — deplores that the draft European Council conclusions propose a capping of direct payments by Member States on a voluntary basis; — urges that the direct support should be more equitably distributed between the Member States with direct payments per hectare below 90 % of the EU average in the course of the next period, starting the dynamic process of closing the gap already with the beginning of the next planning period and reaching the EU average by the mid of the next financial perspective; — welcomes a rate of 30 % for greening; — supports the option of budgetary transfers from the 1st to the 2nd pillar; — supports the inclusion of transition regions in the rural development regulation; — opposes the creation of a new reserve for crises in the agriculture sector and in particular the proposal to reimburse unspent amounts in the form of direct payments;
12.

recommends that all levels of government work together to achieve a lasting solution to the European sovereign debt and the ensuing economic and social crises and to attract investments in order to enhance competitiveness and job creation; recalls that local and regional authorities have suffered greatly during the crisis and demands respect for the Multilevel Governance model to ensure that this does not happen in the future; agrees in this context that the obligation to move those elements of economic governance which have been concluded outside the Treaties into the EU Treaty framework by 2016 provides an opportunity to address a limited number of other questions related to the future of the EU; In the context of a future revision of the EU Treaties, the CoR therefore:
18.

suggests that the module system should be open to regional priorities, formats and groups not so far identified as targets and in particular a flexible use of available modules. The aim is to adapt communication to local needs as much as possible. It should be possible to present regional projects so as to adapt communication to local needs as much as possible. This would serve to enhance the partnership between authorities which together guarantee regional coverage of appropriate public services, more pertinent and up-to-date communication strategies and more structured contacts with stakeholders and the other European networks. Provision should be made to have recourse to forms of partnership allowing for public-private cooperation, as in fact encouraged by the European Commission in the 2014-2020 programme for the European funds. These projects should be guaranteed suitable funding based on population density and public points of contact;
8.

strongly opposes any scenario for the EU27 by 2025, as contained in the White Paper on the Future of Europe, which would scale down the EU’s efforts in relation to cohesion policy. On the contrary, invites the Commission to present a comprehensive legislative proposal for a strong and effective Cohesion Policy post-2020 and recalls, as requested on previous occasions, the need for a new chapter within the 7th Cohesion Report assessing territorial cohesion implementation. The legislative proposal should be based on the principles of subsidiarity, partnership and multilevel governance, reflecting the needs and potential of local and regional authorities and the results of the simplification exercise, be based on a single set of rules and take into consideration the extensive consultations with all relevant stakeholders involved; invites the Commission to perform a thorough territorial impact analysis of the draft legislation and expresses its preparedness to cooperate with the Commission on this matter; calls for the proposals on cohesion policy post-2020 to include the harmonisation of the ESIF management procedures so that the regions can act as managing authorities vis-à-vis the European Commission;
11.

welcomes, in that context, the Commission’s commitment to strengthening territorial impact assessments and rural proofing, so that the needs and specificities of different EU territories are better taken into account. Points out the need to also take border regions into account. The CoR therefore calls on the Commission to guarantee that inception impact assessments and impact assessments include an evaluation of the potential territorially differentiated impacts of each legislative initiative; supports, moreover, its plans to organise a large-scale conference on better regulation in 2022, taking particular account of the local and regional dimension as it did in the Fit for Future platform;
28.

Calls on the Commission to systematically integrate the principle of energy sufficiency in the EU legislative framework, promoting systematic action to save energy, to accompany and speed up the transition towards clean, renewable, affordable and secure energy, and asks that the Commission and the co-legislators work towards a sound legislative framework to assess and fight energy and mobility poverty; asks to be included in the Energy Poverty and Vulnerable Consumers Coordination Group; stresses that renewable energy communities are a key tool for promoting the widespread use of renewable energy sources and achieving a decentralised and secure energy system; calls on the Commission and Member States to work with regional authorities to tackle the barriers to their development and devise further incentives, as well as to support necessary investments in such process. In this regard, points out that regions where the energy transition will be more costly because of their energy isolation, such as islands and the outermost regions, should not be forgotten;
23.7.92 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoC186/7
OPINIONOFTHEECSCCONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
ontheCommunitysteelindustry
(Unanimouslyadoptedatthe300thSessionof26June1992,lesstwoabstentions)
(92/C186/05)
THEEUROPEAN COALANDSTEELCOMMUNITY (ECSC)CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE ,
havingbeeninformedoftheforwardprogrammeforsteelforthesecondhalfof1992:
1.RECALLSthatthepresentsituationontheEuropeansteelmarketjustifiedtheholdingofan
extraordinarysessionoftheCommitteeon2Junelastandtheunanimousadoptionofa
specificresolution(');
2.AGREESwiththeCommissionservicesthatcurrent,extremelylowpricelevelsonthe
marketareendangeringtheviabilityofmanyCommunitysteelundertakingswhichare
facedwithastructuralsteelcrisisduetoover-capacityintheCommunityandpressurefrom
thesteelindustriesofcentralandeasternEurope;
3.REQUESTStheCommissiontoreinforcetheproactivenatureofitsforwardprogrammesfor
steel(particularlywithregardtoimportsfromthirdcountries),inordertodealmoreeffec­
tivelywiththecurrentdifficultiesoftheEuropeansteelindustry;
4.INSISTSonceagainonitsrequestforareturntoquarterlyforwardprogrammesforsteel
withquantifiedestimatesforthemainsteelproductcategories;
5.ISOFTHEVIEWthattheCommission shouldincreaseitscontactswithdealersand
Europeansteel-consuming industriesinordertoobtainaclearerviewofthesituation.
C)OJNoC161,27.6.1992,p.3.
Final report of the Hearing Officer in case COMP/34.493 - Duales System Deutschland (DSD)

(prepared pursuant to Article 15 of Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, ECSC of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of Hearing Officers in certain competition procedures - OJ L 162, 19.6.2001, p. 21)

(2001/C 328/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

The draft decision gives rise to the following observations regarding the right to be heard:

The Commission's intention to attach two obligations to the envisaged exemption of the exclusivity links that are foreseen in the service agreements between DSD and the waste collectors was communicated to DSD by letter of 13 June 2001, i.e. at a rather late stage of the proceedings. In order to give DSD enough time for preparing written comments, the Hearing Officer extended the initial two week's deadline for its response by 20 days until 18 July 2001. The draft decision deals in a detailed manner with the arguments which DSD put forward against the envisaged obligations.

From the foregoing it follows that DSD's rights of defence have been fully respected. The same is true of third parties' rights to be heard.

Done at Brussels on 23 July 2001.

Helmuth Schröter
Communication from the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany

of 11 June 2001

(2001/C 235/02)

1. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany has decided to alter, with effect from 29 October 2001, the public service obligation in respect of scheduled air services between Erfurt and Munich as published in the Official Journal of the European Communities C 114, 20.4.2000, p. 5, pursuant to Article 4(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 of 23 July 1992 on access for Community air carriers to intra-Community air routes.

2. The public service obligation is as follows:

2.1. Minimum frequency

At least three return flights daily from Monday to Friday with direct onward connections from Munich.

This requirement applies throughout the year. A limited air service is possible between Christmas and the New Year.

2.2. Capacity

Aircraft having at least 30 passenger seats must be used for the flights involved.

2.3. Flight times

The flights are to be operated between 06.00 and 21.00. Flight times must be such as to tie in with the respective connection waves in Munich. According to the current flight schedule, these are as follows:

1. From 10.00 to 11.00.

2. From 15.00 to 15.35.

3. From 19.00 to 20.00.

2.4. Aircraft types

Aircraft with pressurised cabins must be used. Flights must be operated in accordance with instrument flight rules (IFR).

2.5. Fares

The maximum basic fare for a single flight between Erfurt and Munich must not exceed DEM 400,00 (EUR 204,52) including VAT and charges. There must be interline agreements in accordance with IATA rules offering through-fares.

2.6. Continuity for air services

The number of flights cancelled for reasons that can be directly attributed to the air carrier may not exceed 2 % of the estimated annual number of flights.

3. Community air carriers are informed that the operation of the scheduled air services will be put out to tender and that contracts are to be awarded with effect from 29 October 2001, if by 28 September 2001 no air carrier has tendered to commence air services in accordance with the public service obligation imposed and without requesting compensation. An appropriate invitation to tender pursuant to Article 4(1)(d) of Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 will shortly be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

Further information can be obtained from: Thüringer Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Arbeit und Infrastruktur Referat Luftverkehr (Air Transport Section) Postfach 242 D - 99005 Erfurt Tel. (49-361) 379 76 40 Fax (49-361) 379 76 09.
Opinion

of the Advisory Committee on Concentrations given at its 91st meeting on 31 January 2001 concerning a preliminary draft decision relating to case COMP/M.1853 - EDF/EnBW

(2002/C 53/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

1. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the notified operation constitutes a concentration within the meaning of Article 3(1)(a) of the Merger Regulation.

2. The Advisory Committee agrees with the product market definiton given in the draft decision concerning the supply of electricity to eligible customers.

3. The Advisory Committee agrees with the geographic market definition given in the draft decision, which limits the market for the supply of electricity to eligible customers to a national dimension.

4. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the market affected by the concentration is the market for the supply of electricity to eligible customers in France.

5. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the merger would strengthen the dominant position of EDF in the French market for the supply of electricity to eligible customers.

6. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that, after the merger, effective competition would be significantly impeded in the relevant market, so that the concentration is incompatible with the common market.

7. The majority of the Advisory Committee believes that the undertakings proposed by the parties can remove the concerns raised in the case and make the concentration compatible with the common market. With regard to point 3(d) of the undertakings, it is the understanding of a majority of the Advisory Committee that the period of five years is a minimum and can be increased subject to a review by the Commission. The Advisory Committee also notes the Commission's intention to consult Member States prior to reaching any decision. A minority of the Advisory Committee believes that the undertakings proposed by the parties do not remove the concerns raised in the case (because quantity of capacity is insufficient, there is a lack of interconnection capacity to enter the market and there is no direct connection between generation capacity and behaviour in the supply market).

8. The Commission takes into account the remarks and comments made by the Advisory Committee.

9. The Advisory Committee agrees to the publication of the opinion of the Advisory Committee.
Communication from the French Government concerning Directive 94/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 1994 on the conditions for granting and using authorisations to prospect for, exploit and extract hydrocarbons(1)

(2002/C 181/08)

(Text with EEA relevance)

Notice regarding an application for an exclusive licence to prospect for liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons, designated the "Parentis Maritime Licence"

By request of 13 June 2002, Hunt Overseas Oil Company, with registered offices af 1445 Ross at Field, Dallas, Texas 75202-2785 (United States) applied for an exclusive five-year licence, designated the "Parentis Maritime" licence, to prospect for liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons in an 8110 km2 area of seabed off the departments of Gironde and the Landes.

The perimeter of the area covered by this license is made up of the meridian and parallel arcs successively joining the vertices defined below by their geographical coordinates, the original meridian being that of Paris (the Greenwich coordinates are given for information):

>TABLE>

Vertex 16= Intersectrion of parallel 49,50° N (044 33 00 N) and the Atlantic shore.

Vertex 17= Intersection of parallel 49,00° N (044 06 00 N) and the Atlantic shore.

Vertex 18= Intersection of parallel 49,00° N (044 06 00 N) and the dividing line between the French and Spanish continental shelves.

Vertex 19= Intersection of parallel 49,50° N (044 33 00 N) and the dividing line between the French and Spanish continental shelves.

>TABLE>

16 to 17= Atlantic shore.

18 to 19= Dividing line between the French and Spanish continental shelves.

Interested companies may, within 90 days of the publication of this notice, submit a competing application in accordance with the procedure summarised in the "Notice regading the granting of mining rights for hydrocarbons in France" published in Official Journal of the European Communities C 374 of 30 December 1994, page 11, and established by Decree 95-427 of 19 April 1995 regarding mining rights (Journal officiel de la République française of 22 April 1995).

Further information can be obtained from the Ministry of Economic Affairs, Finance and Industry (direction générale de l'énergie et des matières premières, Direction des ressources énergétiques et minérales, bureau de la législation minière), 61, Boulevard Vincent Auriol, Télédoc 133, F-75703 Paris Cedex 13, (tel. (33-1) 44 97 09 06, fax (33-1) 44 97 05 70).

(1) OJ L 164, 30.6.1994, p. 3.
Final report of the hearing officer in case COMP/36.490 - Graphite Electrodes (pursuant to Article 15 of Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, ECSC of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of hearing officers in certain competition proceedings)

(2002/C 90/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

The draft Decision does not give rise to any particular observation regarding the right to be heard. No procedural problems were indicated by the parties. The draft Decision contains no elements in respect of which the parties have not been afforded the opportunity of making known their views.

Done at Brussels on 28 May 2001.

Helmuth Schröter
Implementing rules

(2002/C 252/06)

On 3 September 2002, the European Ombudsman adopted implementing rules concerning the tasks, duties and powers of the Ombudsman's Data Protection Officer, in accordance with the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000(1) on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data.

The implementing rules concerning the tasks, duties and powers of the Ombudsman's Data Protection Officer are available on the website of the European Ombudsman:

http://www.euro-ombudsman.eu.int

(1) OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1.
Final Report of the Hearing Officer in case COMP/E-1/36.604 - Citric Acid, pursuant to Article 15 of Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, ECSC of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of Hearing Officers in certain competition proceedings

(2002/C 212/04)

The draft Decision does not give rise to observations as to the right of being heard.

The proceedings, in their written phase, took a normal course. An oral hearing was not requested by the parties.

The rights of defence were fully respected.

The draft Decision dealt only with objections in respect of which the parties were afforded the opportunity of making known their views.

Done at Brussels on 15 November 2001.

Serge Durande
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on Concentrations

given at its 104th meeting on 10 December 2001 concerning a preliminary draft decision relating to case COMP/M.2389 - Shell/DEA

(2003/C 14/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

1. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the notified operation constitutes a concentration within the meaning of the Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation, and that the notified operation has a Community dimension as defined by the Article 1(2) of the Merger Regulation.

2. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that, for the purposes of this case, ethylene and toluene constitute the relevant separate product markets.

3. The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment on the geographic market, i.e. the pipeline network for ethylene transport and its extensions (ARG+), as well as a European market (EEA and Switzerland) for toluene.

4. The majority of the Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission to jointly assess BP/E.ON and Shell/DEA concentration cases. A minority of the Advisory Committee abstained and one Member State disagrees.

5. The majority of the Committee agrees with the Commission that the notified concentration assessed jointly with the case M.2533 BP/E.ON, leads to the creation of a collective dominant position in the supply of ethylene in the ARG+ as a result of which effective competition would be significantly impeded in the common market or in a substantial part of it. A minority did not agree with the collective dominance finding but agreed with the finding that there would result a loss of competition and a danger of market partitioning. A minority of the Advisory Committee abstains.

6. The majority of the Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that, taking into account the undertakings offered by the parties, the proposed operation will not lead to the creation of a dominant position in the market for the supply of the ethylene on the ARG+, and hence should be declared compatible with the common market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement. A minority of the Advisory Committee abstains.

7. The majority of the Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the proposed entity will not create or strengthen a dominant position as a result of which effective competition would be significantly impeded in the common market or in a substantial part of it as regards toluene. A minority considers that the Shell/DEA operation can be declared compatible without commitments. A minority of the Advisory Committee abstains. One Member State disagrees.

8. The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

9. The Advisory Committee asks the Commission to take into account the remarks and comments made the Advisory Committee.
Final report of the Hearing Officer

in Case COMP/M.2495 - Haniel/Fels

(prepared under Article 15 of Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, ECSC of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of Hearing Officers in certain competition proceedings - OJ L 162, 19.6.2001, p. 21)

(2003/C 97/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

The draft decision does not give rise to particular observations regarding the right to be heard.

Following the initiation of proceedings under Article 6(1)(c) of Council Regulation EEC No 4064/89, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1310/97, the Commission, after an indepth investigation of the markets in question, reached the conclusion that the serious doubts which it had initially expressed as to the compatibility of the notified concentration with the common market could no longer be maintained.

The Commission therefore desisted from sending a Statement of Objections.

Brussels, 5 February 2002.

Karen Williams