do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1523/98 of 16 July 1998 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit, stone fruit

17. 7. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 201/27

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1523/98

of 16 July 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 17 July 1998.

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

Done at Brussels, 16 July 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 201/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17. 7. 98

to the Commission Regulation of 16 July 1998 establishing the standard import values for
determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

ANNEX

CN code

0702 00 00

0709 90 70

0805 30 10

0808 10 20, 0808 10 50, 0808 10 90

0808 20 50

0809 10 00

0809 20 95

0809 40 05

Third country
code (1)

Standard import
value

(ECU/100 kg)

066
999
052
999
382
388
524
528
999
064
388
400
508
512
524
528
804
999
388
512
528
804
999
052
064
066
999
052
064
400
404
616
999
064
624
999

42,2
42,2
45,9
45,9
62,3
65,8
66,5
61,7
64,1
89,8
77,0
83,3
96,7
72,0
88,7
77,8
110,7
87,0
109,4
97,4
106,0
181,6
123,6
231,0
138,7
89,3
153,0
339,5
208,0
289,6
426,5
155,9
283,9
116,4
270,8
193,6

(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'.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2242/98 by Allan MACARTNEY to the Commission. Human rights in Guatemala
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: European Parliament, MACARTNEY
Subjects: Guatemala, civil war, homicide, human rights, judicial inquiry, military regime, peacekeeping, violence

22.2.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 50/135

3.

the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF)?

4. Community research programmes?

5. Community energy programmes?

6. Community environmental programmes?

7. Community initiatives?

8.

other Community programmes?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(11 September 1998)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as
soon as possible.

(1999/C 50/196)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2242/98

by Allan Macartney (ARE) to the Commission

(16 July 1998)

Subject: Human rights in Guatemala

The assassination in April 1998 of Monseigneur Juan Gerardi, Auxiliary Bishop of Guatemala and Coordinator of
the Archbishop(cid:146)s Human Rights Office, was carried out two days after the publication of Nunca Jamas, a report
which blamed the military for 80 % of the atrocities of the Guatemalan civil war.

Noting this, and given the commitment of the European Union to the protection of human rights, has the
Commission taken any steps to monitor the investigation into Monseigneur Gerardi(cid:146)s death?

What influence is the Commission bringing to bear in ensuring that peace accords are being adhered to in
Guatemala?

Answer given by Mr Mar(cid:237)n on behalf of the Commission

(8 September 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-2191/98 by
Mr Ford (1).

(1) OJ C 13, 18.1.1999.

(1999/C 50/197)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2251/98

by Miguel Arias Caæete (PPE) to the Commission

(22 July 1998)

Subject: The EAGGF Guarantee Section in Spain from 1986 to 1995

Can the Commission indicate the total amount received by Spain under the EAGGF Guarantee Section from 1986
to 1995 and provide a breakdown of expenditure:

› by heading (arable crops, sugar, fibre plants and silk worms, other plant products, wine products, tobacco,
milk and milk products, beef/veal, sheepmeat and goatmeat, pigmeat, eggs and poultry, other measures
concerning animal products, refunds on certain goods obtained by processing agricultural products, refunds
in connection with Community food aid, distribution of agricultural products to deprived persons,
accompanying measures, rural development measures linked to markets, other measures, income aid, and
the European Fisheries Guarantee Fund); and
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2228/98 by Kirsi PIHA to the Commission. Freezing of budget appropriations for grants
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: European Parliament, PIHA
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union, action programme, aid system, budget, budget authorisation, welfare

8.4.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 96/59

national and European levels and its impact on employment duly evaluated(cid:146), and to encouraging the social
partners to (cid:145)reinforce, implement and evaluate the impact of their contributions (on the employment strategy)(cid:146). In
particular, the social partners at national and European levels play a very important role in ensuring the success of
this strategy in terms of the (cid:145)modernisation of the contractual and institutional framework for reconciling
flexibility and security, establishment of systems for lifelong learning and the promotion of new forms of work
organisation and employment patterns such as job rotation systems(cid:146).

The Commission hopes that these recommendations on the contribution of the social players to the employment
strategy will be increasingly followed up by each Member State, depending on its circumstances, in the drawing
up, implementation and evaluation of the employment guidelines.

(1) COM(98) 316 final.

(1999/C 96/084)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2224/98

by Kirsi Piha (PPE) to the Council

(16 July 1998)

Subject: Situation in Tibet; EU policy on Tibet

Tibet(cid:146)s political and spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, visited Finland on 19 June, eliciting assessments as to what
the EU might be able and willing to do to adopt a common policy on Tibet. This would be desirable, as it would
make it possible to intervene effectively in the human rights situation in Tibet and for the EU, in common with
others, to exert pressure on the negotiations between China and Tibet.

Does the Council have any plans for adopting a common EU policy on Tibet, and if so, what would its broad
outlines be?

Reply

(22 October 1998)

As the Honourable Member is aware of, a mission to Tibet by the EU Troika Ambassadors to Peking took place
between 1 and 10 May 1998. The report from the mission was published on 19 June.

At present, the Council is considering what steps to take as a result of the mission.

It will continue to make known to China its concerns relating to ethnic minorities, including in Tibet, within the
bilateral dialogue on human rights.

(1999/C 96/085)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2228/98

by Kirsi Piha (PPE) to the Commission

(16 July 1998)

Subject: Freezing of budget appropriations for grants

The Court of Justice of the European Communities has frozen the Commission(cid:146)s social aid funds on the grounds
that there is no legal basis for them, because the aid programmes concerned were not endorsed by the Council.
Yet these programmes are significant from the point of view of a people(cid:146)s Europe.

How many projects, and which ones, will now be deprived of assistance, and for which will it be possible to
secure the Council(cid:146)s endorsement?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2221/98 by Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO to the Commission. Employment plan for Spain
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: CABEZON ALONSO, European Parliament
Subjects: EU Member State, European Council, Spain, action programme, job creation, summit meeting

8.4.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 96/57

It is not accurate to state that the above-mentioned Directives are inadequate, nevertheless the Commission shares
the opinion of the Honourable Member that there is a need for further legislative action to supplement and
complete, within a comprehensive Community framework, the existing national and Community provisions on
information and consultation of employees. That is why the Commission initiated the consultation process with
the social partners on a European framework for information and consultation in this regard.

(1) OJ L 245, 26.8.1992.
(2) OJ L 254, 30.9.1994.

(1999/C 96/081)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2208/98

by Ulrich Stockmann (PSE) to the Commission

(16 July 1998)

Subject: Community aid for the German Land of Saxony-Anhalt during 1997

What amounts of Community aid for the German Land of Saxony-Anhalt were approved and cancelled for which
measures and under which programmes for 1997:

1.

2.

3.

the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)?

the European Social Fund (ESF)?

the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF)?

4. Community research programmes?

5. Community energy programmes?

6. Community environmental programmes?

7. Community initiatives?

8.

other Community programmes?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(19 October 1998)

Further to its answer of 11 September 1998 (1), the Commission is now able to provide the following additional
information.

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to
Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat.

(1) OJ C 50, 22.2.1999.

(1999/C 96/082)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2221/98

by Jesœs Cabez(cid:243)n Alonso (PSE) to the Commission

(16 July 1998)

Subject: Employment plan for Spain

Having studied Spain(cid:146)s action plan for jobs, what does the Commission regard as its most innovative aspects with
a view to creating jobs, increasing the activity rate or lowering the current rate of unemployment in Spain?
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1535/98 of 16 July 1998 fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar for the 47th partial invitation to tender issued within the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1408/97
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, export refund, white sugar

17. 7. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 201/71

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1535/98

of 16 July 1998

fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar for the 47th partial invitation
to tender issued within the framework of the standing invitation to tender
provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1408/97

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81
of 30 June 1981 on the common organization of the
markets in the sugar sector (1), as last amended by Regula-
tion (EC) No 1599/96 (2), and in particular the second
subparagraph of Article 17 (5) (b) thereof,

Whereas Commission Regulation (EC) No 1408/97 of 22
July 1997 on a standing invitation to tender to determine
refunds on exports of white sugar (3),
levies and/or
requires partial invitations to tender to be issued for the
export of this sugar;

Whereas, pursuant to Article 9 (1) of Regulation (EC) No
1408/97 a maximum export refund shall be fixed, as the
case may be, account being taken in particular of the state
and foreseeable development of
the Community and
world markets in sugar, for the partial invitation to tender
in question;

following an examination of

the tenders
Whereas,
submitted in response to the 47th partial invitation to
tender, the provisions set out in Article 1 should be
adopted;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are
in accordance with the opinion of
the Management
Committee for Sugar,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the 47th partial invitation to tender for white sugar
to Regulation (EC) No 1408/97 the
issued pursuant
maximum amount of the export refund is fixed at ECU
46,854 per 100 kilograms.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 17 July 1998.

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

Done at Brussels, 16 July 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 177, 1. 7. 1981, p. 4.
(2) OJ L 206, 16. 8. 1996, p. 43.
(3) OJ L 194, 23. 7. 1997, p. 16.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2230/98 by Frédéric STRIBY to the Commission. Introduction of a European label to facilitate access to beaches by people with restricted mobility
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: European Parliament, STRIBY
Subjects: EU programme, bathing water, disabled person, elderly person, tourist infrastructure

C 50/132

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

22.2.1999

(1999/C 50/190)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2179/98

by Marie-Noºlle Lienemann (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Access to beaches for persons of restricted mobility

(10 July 1998)

The beach is a unique and universal meeting-place which breaks down all barriers because it brings together
persons of all ages, social categories, nationalities and races. At present only persons of restricted mobility are
excluded from it.

What does the Commission propose to do to remedy this unfair situation?

Should not the Commission be considering the possibility of creating a (cid:145)European label(cid:146) to promote accessibility
to beaches for persons of restricted mobility (the elderly, the physically handicapped etc.)?

(1999/C 50/191)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2230/98

by FrØdØric Striby (I-EDN) to the Commission

(16 July 1998)

Subject: Introduction of a European label to facilitate access to beaches by people with restricted mobility

In 1995 the Commission recognised, in connection with the Helios II programme, the valuable experience gained
from the arrangements introduced in Hendaye, in France, to make the beach more accessible for persons with
restricted mobility. The introduction of a European label indicating that a beach was accessible to such persons
could be linked to the existing directives on the quality of bathing water (the blue flag system). Could the
Commission consider this idea put forward by the (cid:145)Handiplage(cid:146) association in Jaxtou, France, to improve
awareness at European level?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-2179/98 and E-2230/98
given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(5 August 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Members to its answer to Written Question P-2136/98 by
Mrs Elmalan (1).

(1) See page 130.

(1999/C 50/192)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2187/98

by Jean-Antoine Giansily (UPE) to the Commission

(7 July 1998)

Subject: Presidential elections in Togo

Presidential elections were held in Togo on Sunday, 21 June 1998.

According to press reports, DG VIII allocated almost ECU 2 million to those elections.

Would the Commission provide a break-down of those funds and a list of the organizations that received more
than ECU 100 000 in relation to each action?

What criteria were used for the selection of beneficiaries, and what committee decided on the nature of the
European Union(cid:146)s intervention? Was the European Parliament associated in these decisions, and if so, how?

A group called Reporters Without Frontiers was heavily involved in these elections, in the course of which it
showed a strong tendency to interfere in Togo(cid:146)s internal affairs. This organisation claimed, meanwhile, to be
acting at the behest of the European Union.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1528/98 of 16 July 1998 fixing the maximum export refund on common wheat in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1079/98
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, common wheat, export refund

L 201/60

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17. 7. 98

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1528/98

of 16 July 1998

fixing the maximum export refund on common wheat in connection with the
invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1079/98

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92
of 30 June 1992 on the common organisation of the
market in cereals (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC)
No 923/96 (2),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/
95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for
the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92
on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the
measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the
market for cereals (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC)
No 2052/97 (4), and in particular Article 4 thereof,

Whereas an invitation to tender for the refund and/or the
tax for the export of common wheat to all third countries
was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No
1079/98 (5);

Whereas Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95
provides that the Commission may, on the basis of the
tenders notified, in accordance with the procedure laid
down in Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92,
decide to fix a maximum export refund taking account of
the criteria referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No

1501/95; whereas in that case a contract is awarded to any
than the
tenderer whose bid is equal
maximum refund, as well as to any tenderer whose bid
relates to an export tax;

to or

lower

Whereas the application of the abovementioned criteria
to the current market situation for the cereal in question
results in the maximum export refund being fixed at the
amount specified in Article 1;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are
the Management
in accordance with the opinion of
Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For tenders notified from 10 July to 16 July 1998,
pursuant to the invitation to tender issued in Regulation
(EC) No 1079/98, the maximum refund on exportation of
common wheat shall be ECU 27,94 per tonne.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 17 July 1998.

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

Done at Brussels, 16 July 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 181, 1. 7. 1992, p. 21.
(2) OJ L 126, 24. 5. 1996, p. 37.
(3) OJ L 147, 30. 6. 1995, p. 7.
(4) OJ L 287, 21. 10. 1997, p. 14.
(5) OJ L 154, 28. 5. 1998, p. 24.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1530/98 of 16 July 1998 fixing the maximum export refund on barley in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1078/98
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, barley, export refund

L 201/62

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17. 7. 98

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1530/98

of 16 July 1998

fixing the maximum export refund on barley in connection with the invitation to
tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1078/98

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92
of 30 June 1992 on the common organisation of the
market in cereals (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC)
No 923/96 (2),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/
95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for
the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92
on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the
measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the
market for cereals (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC)
No 2052/97 (4), and in particular Article 4 thereof,

Whereas an invitation to tender for the refund and/or the
tax for the export of barley to all third countries was
opened pursuant
to Commission Regulation (EC) No
1078/98 (5);

Whereas Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95
provides that the Commission may, on the basis of the
tenders notified, in accordance with the procedure laid
down in Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92,
decide to fix a maximum export refund taking account of
the criteria referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No

1501/95; whereas in that case a contract is awarded to any
than the
tenderer whose bid is equal
maximum refund, as well as to any tenderer whose bid
relates to an export tax;

to or

lower

Whereas the application of the abovementioned criteria
to the current market situation for the cereal in question
results in the maximum export refund being fixed at the
amount specified in Article 1;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are
the Management
in accordance with the opinion of
Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For tenders notified from 10 to 16 July 1998, pursuant to
the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No
1078/98, the maximum refund on exportation of barley
shall be ECU 46,00 per tonne.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 17 July 1998.

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

Done at Brussels, 16 July 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 181, 1. 7. 1992, p. 21.
(2) OJ L 126, 24. 5. 1996, p. 37.
(3) OJ L 147, 30. 6. 1995, p. 7.
(4) OJ L 287, 21. 10. 1997, p. 14.
(5) OJ L 154, 28. 5. 1998, p. 20.