do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
98/399/EC: Commission Decision of 8 June 1998 approving the plan presented by Italy for the eradication of classical swine fever in feral pigs in the province of Varese (notified under document number C(1998) 1491) (Only the Italian text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 1998-06-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Lombardy, action programme, animal life, animal plague, application of EU law, swine

L 176/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

20. 6. 98

COMMISSION DECISION

of 8 June 1998

approving the plan presented by Italy for the eradication of classical swine fever
in feral pigs in the province of Varese

(notified under document number C(1998) 1491)

(Only the Italian text is authentic)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(98/399/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 80/217/EEC of 22
January 1980 introducing Community measures for the
control of classical swine fever (1), as last amended by the
Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden, and in
particular Article 6a(3) thereof,

Whereas classical swine fever has occurred in feral pigs in
some areas of the province of Varese, Italy;

Whereas the Italian authorities have presented a disease
eradication plan;

Whereas the submitted plan has been examined and
found to comply with the provisions of Directive 80/
217/EEC;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in
accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary
Committee,

Article 1

The plan submitted by Italy for the eradication of class-
ical swine fever in feral pigs in the province of Varese is
hereby approved.

Article 2

Italy shall bring into force the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions
implementing the plan
for
referred to in Article 1.

Article 3

This Decision is addressed to the Italian Republic.

Done at Brussels, 8 June 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 47, 21. 2. 1980, p. 11.
98/383/EC: Council Decision of 8 June 1998 appointing a member of the Committee of the Regions
Date: 1998-06-08
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European Committee of the Regions, United Kingdom, appointment of staff

17. 6. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 171/35

COUNCIL DECISION

of 8 June 1998

appointing a member of the Committee of the Regions

(98/383/EC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community, and in particular Article 198a thereof,

Having regard to the Council Decision of 26 January
1998 (1) appointing members and alternate members of
the Committee of the Regions,

the Committee has
Whereas a seat as a member of
become vacant following the resignation of Lord Peter
Bowness, notified to the Council on 8 May 1998;

Having regard to the proposal from the United Kingdom
Government,

Sole Article

Mrs Joan Hanham is hereby appointed a member of the
Committee of the Regions in place of Lord Peter Bowness
for the remainder of his term of office, which runs until
25 January 2002.

Done at Luxembourg, 8 June 1998.

For the Council

The President

R. COOK

(1) OJ L 28, 4. 2. 1998, p. 19.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1823/98 by Alex SMITH to the Council. Nuclear safety
Date: 1998-06-08
Institutions: European Parliament, SMITH ALEX
Subjects: fuel reprocessing, ionising radiation, nuclear fuel, nuclear industry, nuclear safety, occupational health, public health, radioactive waste













EUR-Lex - 91998E1823 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E1823

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1823/98 by Alex SMITH to the Council. Nuclear safety  


Official Journal C 096 , 08/04/1999 P. 0010 





WRITTEN QUESTION P-1823/98by Alex Smith (PSE) to the Council(8 June 1998)Subject: Nuclear safetyGiven that the THORP reprocessing plant at Sellafield had its reprocessing operations shut down by the nuclear safety authorities towards the end of May following the discovery of radioactive waste from its discharge pipes, will the Presidency now initiate negotiations between Member States such as Ireland and Sweden which have expressed ongoing concern over the safety at Sellafield, in advance of the OSPAR Convention meeting in July, to assess the ways in which Sellafield can convert its operations from reprocessing to safe waste management.Reply(19 October 1998)The Council welcomes the outcome of the ministerial conference of the OSPAR Convention held in July 1998, at which the Parties agreed to take steps for discharges, emissions and losses of radioactive substances to be reduced by 2020 to levels such that, by comparison with historic levels, additional concentrations in the marine environment resulting from such discharges, emissions and losses are close to zero.The Council would also remind the Honourable Member that the Community's basic standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionizing radiation, as laid down in Council Directive 96/29/Euratom(1), apply.The Council would draw attention to the fact that the Member State in which nuclear installations are situated is responsible for the safety of the design, construction and operation of those installations. The choice of fuel cycle is also a matter for each Member State.(1) OJ L 159, 29.6.1996, p. 1.
98/374/CFSP: Common Position of 8 June 1998 defined by the Council on the basis of Article J.2 of the Treaty on European Union concerning the prohibition of new investment in Serbia
Date: 1998-06-08
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Serbia, common position, economic sanctions, international sanctions, investment abroad, regulation of investments

10. 6. 98

‹

EN

‹

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 165/1

(Acts adopted pursuant to Title V of the Treaty on European Union)

COMMON POSITION

of 8 June 1998

defined by the Council on the basis of Article J.2 of the Treaty on European
Union concerning the prohibition of new investment in Serbia

(98/374/CFSP)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article J.2 thereof,

Whereas on 7 May 1998 the Council adopted Common Position 98/326/CFSP (1) con-
cerning the freezing of funds held abroad by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY)
and Serbian Governments; whereas a further reduction of economic and financial relations
with the FRY and Serbia was foreseen in case the conditions laid down in that common
position for the FRY and Serbian Government were not met;

Whereas, as such conditions have not been fulfilled so far, further action to reduce
economic and financial relations with Serbia should be taken;

Whereas, the restrictive measures set out in Article 1 will be reconsidered immediately if
the FRY and Serbian Governments move to adopt a framework for dialogue and a stabil-
isation package,

HAS DEFINED THIS COMMON POSITION:

New investments in Serbia are prohibited.

Article 1

Article 2

This common position shall take effect from the date of its adoption.

This common position shall be reviewed not later than six months after its adoption.

Article 3

This common position shall be published in the Official Journal.

Article 4

Done at Luxembourg, 8 June 1998.

For the Council

The President

R. COOK

(1) OJ L 143, 14. 5. 1998, p. 1.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1735/98 by Sören WIBE to the Council. Who decides how the Treaty evolves?
Date: 1998-06-08
Institutions: European Parliament, WIBE
Subjects: Denmark, European treaties, Germany, Treaty on European Union, application of EU law, case-law, jurisdiction, member country

18.1.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 13/75

In addition, under the terms of Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty, the Commission must in due course receive
general data on the plan for the proposed facility and, prior to any discharge authorisations being granted by the
national authority, issue its opinion on whether the implementation of such a plan is liable to result in the
radioactive contamination of the water, soil or airspace of another Member State.

Finally the operation of such a facility must meet the basic safety standards as set out in Council Directive
96/29/Euratom of 13 May 1996 laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and
the general public against the dangers arising from ionizing radiation (2).

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.
(2) OJ L 159, 29.6.1996.

(1999/C 13/108)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1735/98

by S(cid:246)ren Wibe (PSE) to the Council

(8 June 1998)

Subject: Who decides how the Treaty evolves?

It is a well-known fact that Germany(cid:146)s Federal Court and Denmark(cid:146)s Supreme Court have examined EC
legislation to ascertain whether it is compatible with the respective national constitutions and the powers
transferred to the EC.

The official line is that Member States(cid:146) national parliaments, and hence their citizens, decide how the Treaty
evolves. However, it is the European Council that makes the relevant proposals, which means that it wields
influence, not to say holds power, over the Treaty.

If a national court rules that a European Union treaty is incompatible with national law, whose views take
precedence, those of the EU or those of the national court?

Reply

(24 September 1998)

It is not for the Council to discuss the possible implications of the case-law of national courts. The Council notes
that neither of the Courts referred to by the Honourable Member has declared Community legislation to be
incompatible with national constitutions. It recalls that, in ratifying the Treaties establishing the European
Communities and the European Union, Member States have committed themselves to respect those Treaties.

(1999/C 13/109)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1742/98

by Phillip Whitehead (PSE) to the Commission

(5 June 1998)

Subject: Asbestos

Is the Commission currently undertaking a full consideration of health and safety concerns surrounding white
asbestos?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(17 July 1998)

Yes. Commission policy regarding the protection of health and safety against risks from white or chrysotile
asbestos comprises public health, workplace, internal market and environmental components, and takes fully into
account health and safety aspects of chrysotile asbestos. In this context, the Honourable Member is asked to refer
to the answer given by the Commission to written question P-1451/98 by Mr Skinner on the same subject (1).
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1732/98 by Gerardo FERNÁNDEZ-ALBOR to the Council. Encouraging official aid for pro-European associations
Date: 1998-06-08
Institutions: European Parliament, FERNANDEZ ALBOR
Subjects: European Union, association, financial aid, member country, promotion of the European idea













EUR-Lex - 91998E1732 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E1732

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1732/98 by Gerardo FERNÁNDEZ-ALBOR to the Council. Encouraging official aid for pro-European associations  


Official Journal C 013 , 18/01/1999 P. 0072 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1732/98by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE) to the Council(8 June 1998)Subject: Encouraging official aid for pro-European associationsPromoting awareness of pro-European values is a necessary ambition which the European Union must endorse unreservedly, for it will ensure that European citizens of all backgrounds and from every walk of life identify with the ideal of a Community whose ideas and aspirations bind the nations of Europe together.Pro-European associations work especially hard to publicize and promote this ideal. Their efforts have given many European citizens a focus through which they can express their pro-European aspirations and contribute towards achieving them. However, these associations must have the resources necessary to carry out their activities.Does the Council not think it should encourage all Member States to introduce fixed financing arrangements for the said associations, so that the funding thus provided would ensure that they possessed sufficient resources to lend their invaluable assistance to the cause of helping citizens identify with the European Union's aims?Reply(24 September 1998)The Council notes with satisfaction the considerable efforts already made by Member States on the issue of subsidies for pro-European associations.As regards the possibility, to which the Honourable Member refers, of Member States introducing "fixed financing arrangements" for such associations, it is not for the Council, but for the Member States themselves, to deal with this matter.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1182/98 of 8 June 1998 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 1998-06-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit

9. 6. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 164/3

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1182/98

of 8 June 1998

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 Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/
94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the applica-
the import arrangements for fruit and veget-
tion of
ables (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2375/
96 (2), and in particular Article 4 (1) thereof,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3813/92
of 28 December 1992 on the unit of account and the
conversion rates to be applied for the purposes of the
common agricultural policy (3), as last amended by Regu-
lation (EC) No 150/95 (4), and in particular Article 3 (3)
thereof,

Whereas Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down,
pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilat-
eral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commis-

sion fixes the standard values for imports from third
countries, in respect of the products and periods stipu-
lated in the Annex thereto;

Whereas, in compliance with the above criteria, the stand-
ard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the
Annex to this Regulation,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of
Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in
the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 9 June 1998.

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

Done at Brussels, 8 June 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 337, 24. 12. 1994, p. 66.
(2) OJ L 325, 14. 12. 1996, p. 5.
(3) OJ L 387, 31. 12. 1992, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 22, 31. 1. 1995, p. 1.

L 164/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

9. 6. 98

to the Commission Regulation of 8 June 1998 establishing the standard import values for
determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

ANNEX

CN code

0702 00 00

0707 00 05

0709 90 70

0805 30 10

0808 10 20, 0808 10 50, 0808 10 90

0809 10 00

0809 20 95

Third country
code (1)

Standard import
value

(ECU/100 kg)

204
999
052
999
052
999
382
388
528
999
388
400
404
508
512
524
528
804
999
052
999
616
999

85,8
85,8
94,8
94,8
69,8
69,8
56,3
56,3
59,1
57,2
71,2
86,1
91,1
93,2
75,3
63,6
65,5
104,5
81,3
293,8
293,8
376,1
376,1

(1) Country nomenclature as fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2317/97 (OJ L 321, 22. 11. 1997, p. 19). Code

‘999' stands for ‘of other origin'.