do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Regulation (EC) No 663/2002 of 18 April 2002 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2002-04-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit

19.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 103/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 663/2002

of 18 April 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 19 April 2002.

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

Done at Brussels, 18 April 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 103/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

19.4.2002

to the Commission Regulation of 18 April 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
999
052
220
999
052
204
624
999
052
204
212
220
624
999
052
999
060
388
400
404
508
512
524
528
720
804
999
388
512
528
800
999

113,3
116,2
110,5
113,3
155,2
237,0
196,1
120,2
32,0
68,2
73,5
65,8
43,2
53,7
56,0
51,2
54,0
48,9
48,9
34,8
90,3
113,1
103,5
85,3
88,9
73,3
83,8
138,1
116,4
92,7
76,1
73,2
80,1
65,8
73,8

(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’.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 668/2002 of 18 April 2002 correcting Regulation (EC) No 643/2002 concerning the issue of licences for the import of garlic
Date: 2002-04-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: bulb vegetable, import licence

19.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 103/9

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 668/2002

of 18 April 2002

correcting Regulation (EC) No 643/2002 concerning the issue of licences for the import of garlic

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

(2)

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 565/2002 of
2 April 2002 establishing the method for managing the tariff
quotas and introducing a system of certificates of origin for
garlic imported from third countries (1),

Whereas:

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 643/2002 (2) sets the
percentages for the issue of import licences covered by
applications under Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No
565/2002 for products originating in China on 8 and 9
April 2002 and forwarded to the Commission on 11
April 2002.

Examination has revealed a mistake in the calculation of
one of the percentages. That mistake should be corrected
without delay in the Regulation in question,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

In Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 643/2002, the percentage
‘8,487 %’

is replaced by ‘15,932 %’.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 19 April 2002.

It shall apply from 13 April 2002.

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

Done at Brussels, 18 April 2002.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 86, 3.4.2002, p. 11.
(2) OJ L 96, 13.4.2002, p. 21.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1087/02 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Progress of the Regional Operational Programmes in Greece.
Date: 2002-04-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Community support framework, Greece, Structural Funds, management, operational programme, regional policy

C 28 E/68

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2003

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(31 May 2002)

The main objective of the future revision of Council Directive 91/157/EEC of 18 March 1991 on batteries
and accumulators containing certain dangerous substances (1) will be to ensure the environmentally sound
management of all batteries and accumulators. In particular, the Commission is currently analysing a
number of possible risk reduction measures in relation to Nickel-Cadmium (NiCd) batteries. The latter
include mandatory take back systems, deposit schemes and marketing and use restrictions. Different
measures could be envisaged for different applications of NiCd batteries.

The Commission is evaluating the feasibility as well as the potential effectiveness of deposit schemes as
part of its overall analysis of appropriate measures in relation to NiCd batteries.

(1) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991.

(2003/C 28 E/075)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1087/02

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Progress of the Regional Operational Programmes in Greece

(18 April 2002)

It is clear from the progress made to date that there are teething problems in starting implementation of
individual measures and programmes included in the Regional Operational Programmes of the third CSF in
Greece. This delay is linked both to the two years that have elapsed since the theoretical start of the third
CSF and the implementation of the national (sectoral) programmes, where progress is less slow.

1. What are the reasons for this delay?

2. When does the Commission believe that the situation will be resolved?

Does the Commission not believe that because of this delay there may in the future be problems

3.
regarding the overall progress of the third CSF in Greece?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(26 July 2002)

Most of the operational programmes (OPs) under the Community support framework (CSF) for Greece
during the 2000-2006 period were adopted at the beginning of 2001. It was only at that point in time
that the new management structures,
in particular the relevant managing authorities required by the
regulation (1), were in place and operational.

A first series of projects were approved by the managing authorities some six months later, following the
publication of a call for proposals. In the period since then, further calls for project proposals have been
issued.

The financial plan for the OPs were rescheduled to take account of their effective date of commencement,
the contribution from the Structural Funds remaining unchanged.

The services of the Commission,
progress in an effort to ensure full use of the resources available.

in partnership with the Greek authorities, will continue to monitor

(1) Règlement CE No 1260/1999 du Conseil du 21 juin 1999.
Opinion of the Governing Council of the European Central Bank of 18 April 2002 on a recommendation from the Council of the European Union on the appointment of the Vice-President of the European Central Bank (CON/2002/11)
Date: 2002-04-18
Institutions: European Central Bank
Subjects: European Central Bank, appointment of staff, vice-president of an institution

C 100/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25.4.2002

EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

OPINION OF THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

of 18 April 2002

on a recommendation from the Council of the European Union on the appointment of the Vice-
President of the European Central Bank

(CON/2002/11)

(2002/C 100/06)

the proposed candidate as the Vice-President of the ECB. In
accordance with Article 13.1 and Article 46.1 of the Statute
the
the European System of Central Banks and of
of
European Central Bank (hereinafter
the
referred to as
‘Statute’) the function of Vice-President is exercised by the
same person in the three decision-making bodies of the
the position should be officially
and therefore
ECB,
termed as ‘Vice-President of
‘Vice-
President of the Executive Board of the ECB’.

instead of

the ECB’

5. The Governing Council of the ECB has adopted this opinion
the Treaty and

in accordance with Article 112(2)(b) of
Article 11.2 and Article 43.3 of the Statute.

6. This opinion shall be published in the Official Journal of the

European Communities.

Done at Frankfurt am Main on 18 April 2002.

On behalf of the Governing Council of the ECB

The President

Willem F. DUISENBERG

1. By letter of 15 April 2002, the President of the Council of
the European Union requested the Governing Council of the
European Central Bank (ECB) to deliver its opinion on the
Council Recommendation of 15 April 2002 on the
appointment of the Vice-President of the Executive Board
of the European Central Bank (2002/287/EC) (1).

2. The abovementioned Recommendation, which will be
submitted for decision to the Heads of State or Government
of the Member States which have adopted the euro after
consultation of the Governing Council of the ECB and the
that Mr Lucas D.
recommends
European Parliament,
Papademos
the
Executive Board of the ECB for a term of office of eight
years with effect from 1 June 2002.

as Vice-President

appointed

be

of

3. The Governing Council of the ECB is of the opinion that the
proposed candidate is a person of recognised standing and
professional experience in monetary or banking matters as
required by Article 112(2)(b) of the Treaty establishing the
the
European Community (hereinafter
‘Treaty’).

referred to as

4. The Governing Council of the ECB has no objection to the
Council's Recommendation relating to the appointment of

(1) OJ L 101, 17.4.2002, p. 17.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1085/02 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Funding of Community support framework programmes in Greece.
Date: 2002-04-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, Greece, financial management, operational programme, project management

C 205 E/250

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

29.8.2002

What view does the Commission take of the Conference discussing the possibility of transferring some of
the Union’s institutions to cities other than Brussels and Luxembourg, such as the more historic capitals in
the Union, e.g. Rome, Berlin, Paris and Athens? Would it be possible to hold such a discussion at the
Conference and to take decisions to move the seats of some of the main institutions of the Union?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(14 May 2002)

Under current law, the seat of the institutions is decided by common accord of the governments of the
Member States (Article 289 of the EC Treaty).

In addition, the decisions already taken on this subject were included in the relevant Protocol in the Annex
to the Amsterdam Treaty and are, therefore, henceforth governed by the EU’s primary legislation.

According to the conclusions of the Laeken European Council held on 14/15 December 2001, the
mandate of the Convention on the future of the Union, whose work began on 28 February 2002, does not
include drawing up proposals on the seat of the institutions.

(2002/C 205 E/278)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1085/02

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 April 2002)

Subject: Funding of Community support framework programmes in Greece

According to information published in the Greek press, the Greek Government has asked the Commission
to accelerate funding (potentially in excess of the original stipulations on this point in Regulation (EC)
1260/1999 (1) on the Structural Funds) of the CSF operational programmes, which it believes can advance
more quickly in the future, in compensation for the non-funding of other programmes which are not
sufficiently ready.

1.

Is this information true?

2.

How does the Commission intend to respond to the Greek Government’s request?

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(27 May 2002)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 672/2002 of 18 April 2002 concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of common wheat issued in Regulation (EC) No 943/2001
Date: 2002-04-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: common wheat, export, export refund, third country

L 103/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

19.4.2002

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 672/2002

of 18 April 2002

concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the export of common
wheat issued in Regulation (EC) No 943/2001

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 602/2001 (4), and in
particular Article 4 thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of
common wheat to all third countries, with the exclusion
of Poland, was opened pursuant to Commission Regula-
tion (EC) No 943/2001 (5).

Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 allows the
Commission to decide, in accordance with the procedure
laid down in Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92

and on the basis of the tenders notified, to make no
award.

(3)

(4)

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of
Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 a maximum refund should
not be fixed.

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 12 to 18
April 2002 in response to the invitation to tender for the
refund for the export of common wheat issued in Regulation
(EC) No 943/2001.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 19 April 2002.

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

Done at Brussels, 18 April 2002.

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 89, 29.3.2001, p. 16.
(5) OJ L 133, 16.5.2001, p. 3.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.2296 — ENI/Lasmo) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2002-04-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Publications Office of the European Union, database, dissemination of EU information, economic concentration, merger control, restrictive-practice authorisation

C 93/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

18.4.2002

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.2296 — ENI/Lasmo)

(2002/C 93/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 1 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 English and will be
made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

— as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

— in electronic form in the ‘CEN’ version of the CELEX database, under document No 301M2296. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations,
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 427 18, fax (352) 29 29 427 09.

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.1615 — HSBC/Lindengruppen/CIH)

(2002/C 93/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 9 August 1999 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 English and will be made public after it
is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

— as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

— in electronic form in the ‘CEN’ version of the CELEX database, under document No 399M1615. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations,
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 427 18, fax (352) 29 29 427 09.
Initiation of proceedings (Case COMP/M.2706 — Carnival Corporation/P&O Princess) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2002-04-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Commission, economic concentration, exchange of information, merger control

18.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 93/7

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.2672 — SAS/Spanair)

(2002/C 93/07)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 5 March 2002 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 English and will be made public after it
is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

— as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

— in electronic form in the ‘CEN’ version of the CELEX database, under document No 302M2672. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations,
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 427 18, fax (352) 29 29 427 09.

Initiation of proceedings

(Case COMP/M.2706 — Carnival Corporation/P&O Princess)

(2002/C 93/08)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 11 April 2002 the Commission decided to initiate proceedings in the abovementioned case after
finding that the notified concentration raises serious doubts as to its compatibility with the common
market. The initiation of proceedings opens a second phase investigation with regards to the notified
concentration. The decision is based on Article 6(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their observations on the proposed concen-
tration.

In order to be fully taken into account in the procedure, observations should reach the Commission not
later than 15 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.2706 — Carnival Corporation/P&O
Princess, to:

European Commission,
Directorate-General for Competition,
Directorate B — Merger Task Force,
J-70,
B-1049 Brussels.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1094/02 by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission. Management of ESF funds by the Madrid Institute for Employment and Business Training (IMEFE).
Date: 2002-04-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Social Fund, Spain, audit, financial control, fraud against the EU, vocational training

6.3.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52 E/37

(2003/C 52 E/046)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1094/02

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(18 April 2002)

Subject: Management of ESF funds by the Madrid Institute for Employment and Business Training (IMEFE)

What is the situation as regards the public accusations of misappropriation of ESF funds at the IMEFE
relating to the 1994-1999 programming period, in particular with regard to:

1.

2.

3.

financial corrections;

suspected fraud;

action taken by the authorities responsible for combating abuses?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(13 May 2002)

The Unidad Administradora del Fondo Social Europeo (UAFSE) has informed the Commission that the
Intervención General de la Administración del Estado (IGAE) has finalised its audit report on the Madrid
Institute for Employment and Business Training (IMEFE), in which this department discovered irregularities
during the period 1994-1997 concerning a sum of EUR 3 783 033 from the European Social Fund (ESF).

Following the IGAE audit, the UAFSE began a further audit of the IMEFE (internal and external actions),
the financial conclusions of which could lead to even more significant corrections, although the
provisional report has not yet been sent to the Commission.

Following these provisional conclusions, the UAFSE informed the Commission that a further audit was
currently being carried out on the external courses ‘Asistencias Técnicas’ in order to increase the size of the
sample it had initially audited.

The UAFSE also informed the Commission that once it has the final audit reports it should be able to
establish the total amount concerned and to submit the relevant financial correction dossier to the
Commission at that stage.

In the meantime, the Commission is going to initiate a suspension procedure in application of Article 24
of Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 (1).

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 of 19 December 1988, laying down provisions for implementing Regulation
(EEC) No 2052/88 as regards coordination of the activities of the different Structural Funds between themselves and
with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing financial
instruments. OJ L 374,
31.12.1988.

(2003/C 52 E/047)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1096/02

by Rainer Wieland (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(9 April 2002)

Subject: Discrimination against Germans in Austrian hunting areas

Is it true that Austrian hunters (in this case in Mittelberg, Kleinwalsertal) pay a hunting tax of 15 % on the
lease for a hunting ground, whereas German hunters pay 35 %?

If so, does the Commission regard this as an instance of unequal treatment of German hunters vis-à-vis
(local) Austrian hunters?

What steps does the Commission plan to take?