do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0811/02 by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Harmonisation of rules on motor vehicles.
Date: 2002-03-25
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Austria, bus, intra-EU transport, technical regulations, transport regulations, weight and size

C 88 E/288

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

WRITTEN QUESTIONS WITH ANSWER
(Part 2)

(2004/C 88 E/0294)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0811/02

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(25 March 2002)

Subject: Harmonisation of rules on motor vehicles

News of delays to coach tours passing through Austria has recently provoked astonishment. On Sunday,
10 March 2002, the police in Kundl carried out checks and stopped coaches from Germany, Denmark and
Belgium from continuing their journeys because they exceeded the maximum permissible length of
12 metres. Special authorisation is required so that such coaches can travel through Austria.

Does the Commission not take the view that rules on vehicles, in this case on the maximum length of
coaches, must be brought into line and harmonised EU-wide? It is also incomprehensible that the special
authorisations currently required cannot be obtained at all times, including on Sundays.

Will the Commission comment on this situation and explain what progress is being made in this area?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 2002)

The Commission is aware of the problem submitted by the Honourable Member.

Indeed, Directive 2002/7/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 18 February 2002 amending Council
Directive 96/53/EC laying down for certain road vehicles circulating within the Community the maximum
authorised dimensions in national and international traffic (1) and the maximum authorised weights in
international traffic, has fixed the following maximum lengths for buses:

(cid:1) 13,50 meter (m) for a bus with two axles;

(cid:1) 15,00 m for a bus with more than two axles;

(cid:1) 18,75 m for an articulated bus;

(cid:1) 18,75 m for a bus with trailer.

Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to
comply with this Directive by 9 March 2004 at the latest. Until the transposition of this Directive by the
Austrian authorities, the current national restrictions would remain applicable.

(1) OJ L 67, 9.3.2002.
Corrigendum to the final adoption of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2002 (OJ L 29 of 31.1.2002)
Date: 2002-03-25
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: financial year, general budget (EU)

L 81/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25.3.2002

CORRIGENDA

Corrigendum to the final adoption of the general budget of the European Union
for the financial year 2002

(Official Journal of the European Communities L 29, 31 January 2002)

On page 841, the fifth paragraph shall read as follows :

‘This appropriation can also be used to finance actions involving the social partners of candidate countries.’

*41RECT-EN-32*

10:54-(19/03) - b41RECT-EN-32
Commission Regulation (EC) No 536/2002 of 25 March 2002 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2002-03-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit

26.3.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 82/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 536/2002

of 25 March 2002

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 26 March 2002.

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

Done at Brussels, 25 March 2002.

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 82/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

26.3.2002

to the Commission Regulation of 25 March 2002 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 10 10, 0805 10 30, 0805 10 50

0805 50 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
624
999
052
204
999
052
204
999
052
204
212
220
421
448
624
999
052
600
999
060
388
400
404
508
512
524
528
720
728
999
388
400
512
528
999

187,7
152,0
185,6
212,2
184,4
152,5
27,7
90,1
139,7
52,8
96,3
51,4
54,0
45,9
48,4
29,6
26,7
81,0
48,1
53,3
49,8
51,5
41,6
107,5
123,6
94,8
79,8
85,4
92,0
82,1
114,3
131,3
95,2
79,7
192,1
72,6
72,3
104,2

(1) Country nomenclature as fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2020/2001 (OJ L 273, 16.10.2001, p. 6). Code ‘999’ stands for ‘of

other origin’.
Final report of the Hearing Officer in case COMP/M.2568 — Haniel/Ytong (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 — OJ L 162, 19.6.2001, p. 21) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2002-03-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: audit, building materials, competition law, economic concentration, merger control, report

C 107/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.5.2003

Final report of the Hearing Officer in case COMP/M.2568 — Haniel/Ytong

(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 — OJ L 162, 19.6.2001, p. 21)

(2003/C 107/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

The draft decision does not give rise to any observations on the right to be heard, neither with regard to
the parties to the concentration nor with regard to interested third parties.

The draft decision deals only with objections in respect of which the parties have been afforded the
opportunity of marking known their views.

Done at Brussels, 25 March 2002.

Karen WILLIAMS
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0815/02 by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Council. European Maritime Safety Agency.
Date: 2002-03-25
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, EU office or agency, Galicia, maritime safety, seat of institution

17.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92 E/25

The Commission is re-considering its position on this matter and recognises the force of the argument that
the standards for raw milk must apply to the milk before collection from the farm without being altered
artificially.

(1) OJ C 365 E, 19.12.2000.
(2) OJ L 268, 14.9.1992.

(2003/C 92 E/028)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0815/02

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(25 March 2002)

Subject: European Maritime Safety Agency

What stage has been reached in deciding on the location of the European Maritime Safety Agency?
Is Galicia a candidate? What location does the Spanish presidency of the EU favour?

Reply

(16-19 December 2002)

The Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of a European
Maritime Safety Agency, proposed by the Commission at the end of 2000 as part of the second ‘Erika’
package, was adopted in June 2002 (1) and was published in the Official Journal on 5 August 2002.
It entered into force 20 days later.

The Regulation contains no provision regarding the location of the Agency. A decision on this has yet to
be taken. It is up to the Spanish Government, if it so wishes, to make an official bid, along with any other
Member States which may be interested.

In any event, Article 23 of the Regulation lays down that the Agency shall be ‘operational within twelve
months of the entry into force of this Regulation’, i.e. by no later than 28 August 2003. It will, therefore,
be for the Community institutions, and more especially the Commission, to take the steps needed to
ensure that the Agency is operational within the timeframe set by the Regulation, even in the absence of a
decision on the Agency’s definitive location.

(1) PE-CONS 3637/02.

(2003/C 92 E/029)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0843/02

by Isidoro Sánchez García (ELDR) to the Commission

(26 March 2002)

Subject: Natural disasters in Latin America

As a member of the Delegation for relations with the countries of Central America and Mexico, the author
of this question wishes to obtain information on the EU’s interventions in the countries of Latin America
in the area of the cooperative handling of natural disasters.

Can the Commission state what interventions have occurred in the countries of Central America and South
America and in Mexico over the last five years, and provide a breakdown by country, type of intervention,
cost and financial allocation, indicating the relevant budgetary details and heading? Can it also indicate the
nature of any likely future action in this field in the short term?
2002/242/EC: Commission Decision of 25 March 2002 amending for the ninth time Decision 2001/327/EC concerning restrictions to the movement of animals of susceptible species with regard to foot-and-mouth disease (Text with EEA relevance) (notified under document number C(2002) 1179)
Date: 2002-03-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: export restriction, foot-and-mouth disease, health legislation, intra-EU trade, transport of animals, veterinary inspection

L 82/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

26.3.2002

COMMISSION DECISION

of 25 March 2002

amending for the ninth time Decision 2001/327/EC concerning restrictions to the movement of
animals of susceptible species with regard to foot-and-mouth disease

(notified under document number C(2002) 1179)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2002/242/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

(3)

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The date in Article 4 of Decision 2001/327/EC is replaced by
‘31 December 2002’.

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Article 2

Done at Brussels, 25 March 2002.

For the Commission

David BYRNE

Member of the Commission

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 90/425/EEC of 26 June
1990 concerning veterinary and zootechnical checks applicable
in intra-Community trade in certain live animals and products
with a view to the completion of the internal market (1), as last
amended by Directive 92/118/EEC (2), and in particular Article
10 thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

All Member States have implemented the restrictions to
the movement of animals of susceptible species laid
down in Commission Decision 2001/327/EC of 24
April 2001 concerning restrictions to the movement of
animals of susceptible species with regard to foot-and-
mouth disease and repealing Decision 2001/263/EC (3),
as last amended by Decision 2002/153/EC (4),

(2)

It appears appropriate to prolong the measures.

(1) OJ L 224, 18.8.1990, p. 29.
(2) OJ L 62, 15.3.1993, p. 49.
(3) OJ L 115, 25.4.2001, p. 12.
(4) OJ L 50, 21.2.2002, p. 98.
Council Decision of 25 March 2002 appointing a member of the Advisory Committee of the Euratom Supply Agency
Date: 2002-03-25
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Euratom Supply Agency, advisory committee (EU), appointment of staff

10.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 86/1

I

(Information)

COUNCIL

COUNCIL DECISION

of 25 March 2002

appointing a member of the Advisory Committee of the Euratom Supply Agency

(2002/C 86/01)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

(2) That vacancy should be filled.

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic
Energy Community, and in particular the second and third
paragraphs of Article 54 thereof,

Having regard to Article X of the Statutes of the Euratom
Supply Agency (1), as last amended by Decision 95/1/EC,
Euratom, ECSC of 1 January 1995 (2),

Having regard to the Council Decision of 14 June 1999
appointing the members of the Advisory Committee of the
Euratom Supply Agency (3),

Having regard to the opinion of the Commission,

(3) Having regard to the nomination submitted by the French

Government on 7 February 2002,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Sole Article

Ms Caroline CHEVASSON is hereby appointed a member of the
Advisory Committee of the Euratom Supply Agency for the
remainder of
i.e. until 28
the Committee's term of office,
March 2003.

Whereas:

Done at Brussels, 25 March 2002.

(1) A member's seat on the aforementioned Committee has
become vacant
following the resignation of Mr Eric
PROUST, which was brought to the Council's attention on
7 February 2002.

For the Council

The President

A. M. BIRULÉS Y BERTRÁN

(1) OJ 27, 6.12.1958, p. 534/58.
(2) OJ L 1, 1.1.1995, p. 1.
(3) OJ C 186, 2.7.1999, p. 1.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0809/02 by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Definition of raw milk.
Date: 2002-03-25
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU law, dairy industry, foodstuffs legislation, health legislation, raw milk

17.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92 E/23

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(25 April 2002)

The Commission regrets the violence which has occurred in the aftermath of the presidential elections
which took place in December 2001. It supports the mediation efforts of the Organisation of African
Unity and the United Nations, and has issued declarations encouraging the parties involved to enter into a
democratic dialogue and demonstrate moderation.

The Commission is being informed of political developments through its Delegation in Antananarivo on a
daily basis. Electoral observation reports provided to the Commission’s Delegation by the Local Electoral
Consortium point to irregularities in the electoral process. The Consortium’s figures, however, are at odds
with official data. Furthermore, they are only partial.

It has not been possible to reach a definitive conclusion on the election results because no external election
monitoring took place.

In 2001, Madagascar received EUR 46,4 million in development aid from Member States (France,
Germany, United Kingdom), and EUR 96,1 million from the Community (of which EUR 23 million from
the European Investment Bank (EIB)).

Two Member States, namely Germany and the United Kigdom, have granted aid towards the electoral
process by supporting the Local Electoral Consortium.

The Commission has not granted aid towards the electoral process. Nonetheless, it is considering the
possibility of providing assistance, if new elections are held. To this end, it is proposing that Madagascar be
considered as a priority country for elections observation under the 2002 budget line.

In light of the above, the Commission sent a mission to Madagascar last February 2002, in order to assess
the needs for assistance in particular to domestic observers. The deployment of an Union Elections
Observation Mission will, of course, be effected according to the established procedures, and will be
preceded by an elections exploratory mission.

(2003/C 92 E/025)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0809/02

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(25 March 2002)

Subject: Definition of raw milk

Can the Commission present an unambiguous definition of ‘raw milk’ and will it explain what efforts it has
made to produce such a definition?

(2003/C 92 E/026)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0810/02

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(25 March 2002)

Subject: Clear ban on microfiltration

A clear ban on the microfiltration of raw milk on the production holding is absolutely essential.

Can the Commission state to what extent such a ban will be implemented and what action it proposes to
take in this matter?