do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2001-03-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, euro, exchange rate, national currency

22.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 91/1

I

(Information)

COMMISSION

Euro exchange rates (1)

21 March 2001

(2001/C 91/01)

1 euro

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

7,4639

Danish krone

9,1875

Swedish krona

0,62930 Pound sterling

0,8990

United States dollar

1,4138

Canadian dollar

111,25

Japanese yen

1,5338

Swiss franc

8,1235

Norwegian krone

79,09

Icelandic kr(cid:243)na (2)

1,8057

Australian dollar

2,1590

New Zealand dollar

7,1830

South African rand (2)

(1) Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
(2) Source: Commission.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 561/2001 of 22 March 2001 granting a temporary derogation from Regulation (EC) No 1445/95 on rules of application for import and export licences in the beef and veal sector
Date: 2001-03-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: beef, common organisation of markets, export licence, import licence, quantitative restriction

L 84/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

23.3.2001

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 561/2001

of 22 March 2001

granting a temporary derogation from Regulation (EC) No 1445/95 on rules of application for
import and export licences in the beef and veal sector

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

(3)

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in
accordance with the opinion of
the Management
Committee for Beef and Veal,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17
May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef
and veal (1), and in particular Article 29 thereof,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

Article 10(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1445/
95 (2), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 24/
2001 (3), provides that export licences are to be issued
on the fifth working day following that on which the
application was lodged provided that no specific action
has been taken by the Commission in the meantime.

the Official

Because of the public holidays in 2001 and the irregular
publication of
the European
Communities during those holidays, the period for reflec-
tion of five working days will be too brief to guarantee
proper administration of the market. It should therefore
be extended temporarily.

Journal of

By derogation from Article 10(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1445/
95,
licences for which applications are lodged during the
periods specified below shall be issued on the corresponding
dates provided that no specific action as indicated in paragraph
2 of that Article has been taken prior to those dates:

— from 9 to 11 April 2001, to be issued on 19 April 2001,

— from 21 to 22 May 2001, to be issued on 30 May 2001,

— from 29 to 30 October 2001, to be issued on 7 November

2001.

Article 2

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

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

Done at Brussels, 22 March 2001.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 21.
(2) OJ L 143, 27.6.1995, p. 35.
(3) OJ L 3, 6.1.2001, p. 9.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 559/2001 of 22 March 2001 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2001-03-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit

23.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 84/3

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 559/2001

of 22 March 2001

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

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

(2)

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

In compliance with the above criteria,
the standard
import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the
Annex to this Regulation,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of
21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the
last
import arrangements
amended by Regulation (EC) No 1498/98 (2), and in particular
Article 4(1) thereof,

fruit and vegetables (1), as

for

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Whereas:

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the
outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade nego-
tiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the
standard values for imports from third countries,
in
respect of the products and periods stipulated in the
Annex thereto.

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

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 23 March 2001.

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

Done at Brussels, 22 March 2001.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 337, 24.12.1994, p. 66.
(2) OJ L 198, 15.7.1998, p. 4.

L 84/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

23.3.2001

to the Commission Regulation of 22 March 2001 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 10 00

0709 90 70

0805 10 10, 0805 10 30, 0805 10 50

0805 30 10

0808 10 20, 0808 10 50, 0808 10 90

0808 20 50

Third country
code (1)

Standard import
value

(EUR/100 kg)

052
204
212
999
052
999
220
999
052
204
999
052
204
212
624
999
052
999
388
400
404
508
512
528
720
728
999
388
512
528
999

84,8
39,5
106,0
76,8
91,6
91,6
255,0
255,0
126,7
120,0
123,3
63,8
47,4
54,5
56,6
55,6
57,2
57,2
91,4
88,4
83,7
85,1
83,2
91,0
105,5
105,3
91,7
69,8
67,3
67,7
68,3

(1) Country nomenclature as fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2032/2000 (OJ L 243, 28.9.2000, p. 14). Code ‘999’ stands for ‘of

other origin’.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.2272 — Rewe/BML/Standa Commerciale) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2001-03-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: database, dissemination of EU information, economic concentration, merger control, restrictive-practice authorisation

C 91/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

22.3.2001

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.2272 (cid:151) Rewe/BML/Standa Commerciale)

(2001/C 91/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 8 February 2001 the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to
declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is only available in German and will be
made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

(cid:151) as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

(cid:151) in electronic form in the (cid:145)CDE(cid:146) version of the CELEX database, under document No 301M2272. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations (OP/A/4-B),
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 424 55, fax (352) 29 29 427 63.

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.2224 (cid:151) Siemens/Demag Krauss-Maffei)

(2001/C 91/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 20 December 2000 the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to
declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is only available in German and will be
made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

(cid:151) as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

(cid:151) in electronic form in the (cid:145)CDE(cid:146) version of the CELEX database, under document No 300M2224. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations (OP/A/4-B),
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 424 55, fax (352) 29 29 427 63.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0859/01 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Commission's withdrawal of proposals.
Date: 2001-03-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, drafting of EU law, proposal (EU)

18.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 261 E/209

(2001/C 261 E/237)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0858/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

Subject: Commission right to withdraw proposals

(22 March 2001)

Does the Commission take the view that it is entitled effectively to (cid:145)veto(cid:146) legislation by withdrawing

1.
from the Council and the European Parliament any proposal that it has submitted?

2.

Has its view been challenged by the legal services of any other institution?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(18 April 2001)

1.
Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty (formerly Article 189a(2)) states that (cid:145)As long as the Council has not
acted, the Commission may alter its proposal at any time during the procedures leading to the adoption of
a Community act(cid:146). The Commission(cid:146)s power to alter proposals, combined with its right of initiative, has as
its corollary the power to withdraw proposals, although the Commission cannot exercise this power unless
certain conditions are met.

The Commission(cid:146)s current stance is that it may withdraw proposals in two cases, namely:

(cid:129) where there is a risk that the Council may alter the nature of the proposal or where the decision taken
on the proposal may result in an infringement of the EC Treaty (first indent of Article 211 (formerly
Article 155) of the EC Treaty). The Commission does not exercise this power, however, if the Council
is thereby placed in the position of failing to meet a Treaty obligation, i.e. it does not exercise any
right of veto;

(cid:129) where a proposal has become outdated or has been replaced by another proposal. In such cases, it is
withdrawn for purely administrative reasons. Parliament is duly informed one month before the
decision to withdraw the proposal is published in the Official Journal.

2.
It is not for the Commission to express an opinion on the position taken by the legal services of the
other institutions. It notes, however, that no decision to withdraw a proposal has yet been the subject of
proceedings before the Court of Justice.

(2001/C 261 E/238)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0859/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(22 March 2001)

Subject: Commission(cid:146)s withdrawal of proposals

Will the Commission indicate the number of occasions on which it has withdrawn a proposal for a
directive or regulation from the Council of Ministers or the European Parliament in each of the last five
years, giving the reference number of the proposal and a brief description of the subject?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(18 April 2001)

Over the last five years no proposals have been withdrawn for reasons of substance. As regards proposals
withdrawn for administrative reasons, the Honourable Member is referred to the answer given to Question
E-858/01 (1).

(1) See page 210.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0868/01 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission. Visits of Taiwanese government officials to the EU.
Date: 2001-03-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, Taiwan, admission of aliens, diplomatic representation

C 261 E/210

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.9.2001

(2001/C 261 E/239)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0868/01

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(22 March 2001)

Subject: Visits of Taiwanese government officials to the EU

Can the Commission confirm whether it is EU policy not to allow Taiwanese government officials to visit
any EU Member State? If this is the case, can the Commission reveal who took the decision?

Moreover, can the Commission explain why such a decision was taken and is still in force today, since
Taiwan is a strong democratic state with amicable ties with the EU, while the PRC has repeatedly been
criticised over its human rights violations?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(15 May 2001)

There is no Union policy to deny entry visas to Taiwanese government officials.

Under Council Regulation (EC) No 574/1999 of 12 March 1999 determining the third countries whose
nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders of the Members States (1),
Taiwanese citizens required entry visas when travelling to the Member States.

The new Council Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 of 15 March 2001 listing the third countries whose
nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are
exempt from that requirement (2), which replaces Regulation No 574/1999, entered into force on 10 April
2001. The new negotiation, which maintains the visa obligation for Taiwanese citizens, is not applied by
Ireland and the United Kingdom. They are free to review their policy in the matter should they so wish.

For the Member States which apply the Schengen acquis (3), decisions on the granting of individual short
stay visas are made according to the rules of the Schengen Convention and the Common consular
instructions. These rules require an individual assessment of every application. The consular services must
verify, in particular, whether the applicant fulfils the conditions for entry as specified by the Schengen
Convention (e.g. the applicant must be in possession of a valid travel document, have sufficient means of
subsistence, shall not be a person for whom an alert has been issued for the purpose of refusing entry,
shall not be considered to be a threat to public policy, national security or the international relations of
any of the Member States applying the Convention).

Decisions on visa refusals may have been taken vis-(cid:224)-vis Taiwanese citizens, in common with decisions
concerning other third country nationals, in cases where the above-mentioned conditions for entry were
not fulfilled.

It should also be mentioned that a Schengen visa is valid for all Member States (Ireland and United
Kingdom excepted) and for Iceland and Norway.

(1) OJ L 72, 18.3.1999.
(2) OJ L 81, 21.3.2001.
(3) All Member States, except Ireland and United Kingdom.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.2333 — De Beers/LVMH) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2001-03-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, luxury products industry, merger control, precious stones

22.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 91/7

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.2333 (cid:151) De Beers/LVMH)

(2001/C 91/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

1.
On 9 March 2001 the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to
Article 4 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1310/97 (2),
by which the undertaking Riverbank Investments Limited, controlled by the De Beers Group (De Beers),
and Sofidiv UK Limited, controlled by LVMH Moºt Henessy Louis Vuitton (LVMH), acquire, within the
meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Regulation, joint control of the newly formed company, Rapids World
Limited (Rapids World), by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint
venture.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

(cid:151) De Beers: rough diamonds,

(cid:151) LVMH: luxury goods, media, art,

(cid:151) Rapids World: retail of diamond jewellery.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified concentration could fall within

3.
the scope of Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit

4.
proposed operation.

their possible observations on the

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication.
Observations can be sent by fax (No (32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference
COMP/M.2333 (cid:151) De Beers/LVMH, to:

European Commission,
Directorate-General for Competition,
Directorate B (cid:151) Merger Task Force,
Rue Joseph II/Jozef II-straat 70,
B-1000 Brussels.

(1) OJ L 395, 30.12.1989, p. 1; corrigendum: OJ L 257, 21.9.1990, p. 13.
(2) OJ L 180, 9.7.1997, p. 1; corrigendum: OJ L 40, 13.2.1998, p. 17.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0867/01 by John McCartin (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Radon gas levels in schools and homes in Ireland.
Date: 2001-03-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU environmental policy, Ireland, radiation protection, rare gas, safety standard

C 318 E/138

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.11.2001

It seems that insurance firms will not generally charge a supplement, either because the amount insured is
already sufficient to cover the increase in cash held (common in the case of large retailers) or because the
costs of changing the contract are greater than the additional risk borne (common in the case of small
traders).

The Commission finds that, on the whole, the banks have followed its recommendations, whether on
charges for exchange transactions or on an early changeover of bank accounts and non-cash means of
payment to the euro. In its Communication of 3 April 2001 (2), it urged that bank opening hours be
extended and branches open to all or some customers on 1 January 2002.

Bank account numbers usually include a component identifying the bank and/or branch and therefore
cannot be retained if a customer changes banks.

(1) OJ C 303, 24.10.2000.
(2) COM(2001) 190 final.

(2001/C 318 E/147)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0867/01

by John McCartin (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 March 2001)

Subject: Radon gas levels in schools and homes in Ireland

Is the Commission aware of a recent study carried out by the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland
which shows that one-quarter of Irish schools and 91 000 homes throughout Ireland have high levels of
radon gas which put the safety of the public at risk.

Can the Commission state whether the failure of the Irish Government to take effective action to remedy
this hazard is in breach of European environmental legislation?

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(15 May 2001)

radon gas
The Radiological Protection Institute of
concentrations in homes and schools, respectively completed in 1999 and to be completed in 2001. The
study demonstrates that in 8,8 % of Irish homes the reference level of 200 Becquerel per cubic meter
(Bqm-3) is exceeded, while this level would be exceeded in one or more classrooms for 23 % of Irish
schools.

Ireland conducted a comprehensive survey of

The Irish Government is thus fully in line with the Commission Recommendation 90/143/Euratom of
In this
21 February 1990, on the protection of
Recommendation, a reference level of 400 Bqm-3 is proposed for the consideration of single but effective
measures to reduce the radon level, and a design level of 200 Bqm-3 for future constructions.

indoor exposure to radon (1).

the public against

Member States are not required to take remedial action; this is the responsibility of the individual
household. Ireland nevertheless initiated a scheme of grants to assist householders with the cost of
remedying radon problems in their dwellings. It is hoped that this financial incentive to householders to
take remedial action will significantly improve the situation.

(1) OJ L 80, 27.3.1990.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 569/2001 of 22 March 2001 fixing the maximum export refund on oats in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2097/2000
Date: 2001-03-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Finland, Sweden, award of contract, export licence, export refund, oats

L 84/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

23.3.2001

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 569/2001

of 22 March 2001

fixing the maximum export refund on oats in connection with the invitation to tender issued in
Regulation (EC) No 2097/2000

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 1666/
2000 (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 2513/98 (4),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2097/2000
intervention measure for
of 3 October 2000 on a special
cereals in Finland and Sweden (5), as amended by Regulation
(EC) No 393/2001 (6), and in particular Article 8 thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of
oats produced in Finland and Sweden for export from
Finland or Sweden to all third countries was opened
pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 2097/2000.

Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 2097/2000 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.
In that case a contract is awarded to any tenderer whose
bid is equal to or lower than the maximum refund.

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.

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

(3)

(4)

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For tenders notified from 16 to 22 March 2001, pursuant to
the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2097/
2000, the maximum refund on exportation of oats shall be
EUR 39,23/t.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 23 March 2001.

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

Done at Brussels, 22 March 2001.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 181, 1.7.1992, p. 21.
(2) OJ L 193, 29.7.2000, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 7.
(4) OJ L 313, 21.11.1998, p. 16.
(5) OJ L 249, 4.10.2000, p. 15.
(6) OJ L 58, 28.2.2001, p. 8.