do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Regulation (EC) No 719/2002 of 26 April 2002 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2002-04-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit

27.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 112/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 719/2002

of 26 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 27 April 2002.

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

Done at Brussels, 26 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 112/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.4.2002

to the Commission Regulation of 26 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
628
999
052
204
999
052
204
212
220
600
624
999
052
388
528
999
060
388
400
404
508
512
524
528
720
804
999
388
512
528
999

148,5
121,0
115,1
128,2
110,0
153,0
131,5
103,4
78,8
91,1
57,2
44,6
59,9
58,9
56,0
78,8
59,2
34,7
68,8
85,5
63,0
20,5
87,1
117,8
106,8
81,1
87,4
67,7
88,1
147,2
113,6
91,7
74,3
71,7
83,8
76,6

(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 732/2002 of 26 April 2002 fixing the maximum export refund on wholly milled long grain rice in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2010/2001
Date: 2002-04-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, export, export refund, rice, third country

L 112/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.4.2002

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 732/2002

of 26 April 2002

fixing the maximum export refund on wholly milled long grain rice in connection with the
invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2010/2001

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 of 22
December 1995 on the common organisation of the market in
rice (1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No
411/2002 (2), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,

(3)

(4)

The application of the abovementioned criteria to the
current market situation for the rice in question results
the
in the maximum export refund being fixed at
amount specified in Article 1.

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

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

An invitation to tender for the export refund on rice was
to Commission Regulation (EC) No
issued pursuant
2010/2001 (3).

Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 584/
75 (4), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 299/95 (5),
allows the Commission to fix, in accordance with the
procedure laid down in Article 22 of Regulation (EC) No
3072/95 and on the basis of the tenders submitted, a
maximum export refund. In fixing this maximum, the
criteria provided for in Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No
3072/95 must be taken into account. A contract is
awarded to any tenderer whose tender is equal to or less
than the maximum export refund.

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The maximum export refund on wholly milled long grain rice
to be exported to certain third countries pursuant to the invita-
tion to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2010/2001 is
hereby fixed on the basis of the tenders submitted from 19 to
25 April 2002 at 300,00 EUR/t.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 27 April 2002.

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

Done at Brussels, 26 April 2002.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 329, 30.12.1995, p. 18.
(2) OJ L 62, 5.3.2002, p. 27.
(3) OJ L 272, 13.10.2001, p. 19.
(4) OJ L 61, 7.3.1975, p. 25.
(5) OJ L 35, 15.2.1995, p. 8.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1205/02 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission. ACP debt relief.
Date: 2002-04-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: ACP countries, debt reduction, least-developed country

C 28 E/86

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2003

(2003/C 28 E/093)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1205/02

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(26 April 2002)

Subject: ACP debt relief

Would the Commission clarify whether the proposal to ‘settle’ all outstanding special loans to each least
implementation of HIPC means full cancellation of stock (after
developed ACP country after the full
completion point)?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(27 May 2002)

The terminology referred to in the question by the Honourable Member is from the Decision of the
ACP-EC Council of Ministers of 20 December 2001. The Council, through the decision, requires the
Commission to take the measures necessary to utilise EUR 60 million from European Development Fund
(EDF) resources to settle all ACP Least Development Countries (LDCs) (cid:1) Highly Indebted Poor Countries
(HIPC) Special Loans, which would remain after full application of normal HIPC mechanism.

A financing proposal is currently under preparation and scheduled for approval by the Commission in July
2002. Operationally, once the beneficiary country will reach ‘completion point’ the outstanding stock of
special loans should be fully relieved or cancelled from the country books. Such a proposal will bring the
total contribution of the European Union, acting as a creditor, to EUR 408,97 million of which EUR 200
million have been already transferred to a special account managed by the European Investment Bank. The
Union is also contributing to the HIPC initiative by funding the HIPC as a Donor to an amount of
EUR 680 million, out of which EUR 670 million are channelled through a Trust Fund managed by the
World Bank. EUR 500 million have already been disbursed. Both proposals are in favour of ACP HIPC
countries.

The non-ACP HIPC countries are covered from non-EDF sources of funding.

(2003/C 28 E/094)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1234/02

by Professor Sir Neil MacCormick (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Tax stamps and control of smuggling

(23 April 2002)

Faced with the problem of the smuggling of bottled spirit drinks in the Union, some Member States may
consider resorting to the device of tax stamps, with obligatory affixing of such to each bottle lawfully sold.

Has the Commission any advice on the question:

(a) whether this is likely to be an effective way of combating the evil in question; and

(b) whether there is any risk of conflict with single market law on non-discrimination?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(21 May 2002)

As regards the Honourable Member’s point (a), attitudes towards the effectiveness of tax markings in the
control of smuggling and fraud vary, not only from Member State to Member State, but also from product
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1199/02 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Procurement of emergency vaccines.
Date: 2002-04-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: award of contract, chemical weapon, public safety, restriction on competition, terrorism, vaccine

C 229 E/194

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

26.9.2002

In the meanwhile, and in accordance with the provisions of recital 10 of Commission Directive 1999/77/
EC, the Commission has consulted the Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment
(CSTEE) and asked it to conduct an analysis of scientific data since 1999 in order to re-assess the effects on
health of chrysotile and its substitutes (cf. the answer given by the Commission to Written Question No
E-0200/02 by Messrs Tannock, Arvidsson and Trakatellis (9)).

(1) Commission Directive 1999/77/EC of 26 July 1999 adapting to technical progress for the sixth time Annex I to
Council Directive 76/769/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the
Member States relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations
(asbestos) 0 OJ L 207, 6.8.1999.

(2) Source: Eurostat.
(3) Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the supervision and control of shipments of waste

within, into and out of the European Community 0 OJ L 30, 6.2.1993.

(4) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2455/92 of 23 July 1992 concerning the export and import of certain dangerous

chemicals 0 OJ L 251, 29.8.1992.
Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations.

(5)
(6) United Nations Environment Programme.
(7) The PIC Convention was adopted on 10 and 11 September 1998 at the Rotterdam conference, under the aegis of
the FAO and the UNEP. On 31 May 2002, 72 countries had signed the PIC Convention (+ EC), and 21 countries
had ratified it. The Convention will enter into force once it has been ratified by 50 countries.

(8) COM(2001) 803 final.
(9) OJ C 160 E, 4.7.2002, p. 197.

(2002/C 229 E/222)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1199/02

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(26 April 2002)

Subject: Procurement of emergency vaccines

What procedures are each of the Member States following in the procurement of emergency supplies of
vaccine to counter any possible terrorist threat?

(2002/C 229 E/223)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1200/02

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(26 April 2002)

Subject: Competitive tendering of contracts

Does the Commission take the view that the UK government’s award of a contract for the supply of
smallpox vaccines to PowderJect without competitive tendering is a breach of EU law?

(2002/C 229 E/224)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1201/02

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(26 April 2002)

Subject: Notification of contracts

Will the Commission state whether in its view a vaccine contract for the sum of £ 32 million placed by a
Member State ought to be notified for open competition under the procedures of the procurement
directives?
Commission Regulation (EC) No 731/2002 of 26 April 2002 fixing the maximum export refund on wholly milled round grain, medium grain and long grain A rice to be exported to certain third countries in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2009/2001
Date: 2002-04-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, export, export refund, rice, third country

27.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 112/19

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 731/2002

of 26 April 2002

fixing the maximum export refund on wholly milled round grain, medium grain and long grain A
rice to be exported to certain third countries in connection with the invitation to tender issued in
Regulation (EC) No 2009/2001

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 of 22
December 1995 on the common organisation of the market in
rice (1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No
411/2002 (2), and in particular Article 13(3) thereof,

(3)

(4)

The application of the abovementioned criteria to the
current market situation for the rice 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
accordance with the opinion of
the Management
Committee for Cereals,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

An invitation to tender for the export refund on rice was
issued pursuant
to Commission Regulation (EC) No
2009/2001 (3).

Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 584/
75 (4), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 299/95 (5),
allows the Commission to fix, in accordance with the
procedure laid down in Article 22 of Regulation (EC) No
3072/95 and on the basis of the tenders submitted, a
maximum export refund. In fixing this maximum, the
criteria provided for in Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No
3072/95 must be taken into account. A contract is
awarded to any tenderer whose tender is equal to or less
than the maximum export refund.

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The maximum export refund on wholly milled grain, medium
grain and long grain A rice to be exported to certain third
countries pursuant to the invitation to tender issued in Regula-
tion (EC) No 2009/2001 is hereby fixed on the basis of the
tenders submitted from 19 to 25 April 2002 at 175,00 EUR/t.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 27 April 2002.

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

Done at Brussels, 26 April 2002.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 329, 30.12.1995, p. 18.
(2) OJ L 62, 5.3.2002, p. 27.
(3) OJ L 272, 13.10.2001, p. 17.
(4) OJ L 61, 7.3.1975, p. 25.
(5) OJ L 35, 15.2.1995, p. 8.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1200/02 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Competitive tendering of contracts.
Date: 2002-04-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United Kingdom, award of contract, biological weapon, infectious disease, invitation to tender, public safety, terrorism, vaccine

C 229 E/194

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

26.9.2002

In the meanwhile, and in accordance with the provisions of recital 10 of Commission Directive 1999/77/
EC, the Commission has consulted the Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment
(CSTEE) and asked it to conduct an analysis of scientific data since 1999 in order to re-assess the effects on
health of chrysotile and its substitutes (cf. the answer given by the Commission to Written Question No
E-0200/02 by Messrs Tannock, Arvidsson and Trakatellis (9)).

(1) Commission Directive 1999/77/EC of 26 July 1999 adapting to technical progress for the sixth time Annex I to
Council Directive 76/769/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the
Member States relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations
(asbestos) 0 OJ L 207, 6.8.1999.

(2) Source: Eurostat.
(3) Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the supervision and control of shipments of waste

within, into and out of the European Community 0 OJ L 30, 6.2.1993.

(4) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2455/92 of 23 July 1992 concerning the export and import of certain dangerous

chemicals 0 OJ L 251, 29.8.1992.
Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations.

(5)
(6) United Nations Environment Programme.
(7) The PIC Convention was adopted on 10 and 11 September 1998 at the Rotterdam conference, under the aegis of
the FAO and the UNEP. On 31 May 2002, 72 countries had signed the PIC Convention (+ EC), and 21 countries
had ratified it. The Convention will enter into force once it has been ratified by 50 countries.

(8) COM(2001) 803 final.
(9) OJ C 160 E, 4.7.2002, p. 197.

(2002/C 229 E/222)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1199/02

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(26 April 2002)

Subject: Procurement of emergency vaccines

What procedures are each of the Member States following in the procurement of emergency supplies of
vaccine to counter any possible terrorist threat?

(2002/C 229 E/223)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1200/02

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(26 April 2002)

Subject: Competitive tendering of contracts

Does the Commission take the view that the UK government’s award of a contract for the supply of
smallpox vaccines to PowderJect without competitive tendering is a breach of EU law?

(2002/C 229 E/224)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1201/02

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(26 April 2002)

Subject: Notification of contracts

Will the Commission state whether in its view a vaccine contract for the sum of £ 32 million placed by a
Member State ought to be notified for open competition under the procedures of the procurement
directives?
Commission Regulation (EC) No 722/2002 of 26 April 2002 fixing the maximum purchasing price for butter for the 49th invitation to tender carried out under the standing invitation to tender governed by Regulation (EC) No 2771/1999
Date: 2002-04-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, butter, maximum price, purchase price

L 112/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.4.2002

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 722/2002

of 26 April 2002

fixing the maximum purchasing price for butter for the 49th invitation to tender carried out under
the standing invitation to tender governed by Regulation (EC) No 2771/1999

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17
May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk
and milk products (1), as last amended by Commission Regula-
tion (EC) No 509/2002 (2), and in particular Article 10 thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

Article 13 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2771/
1999 of 16 December 1999 laying down detailed rules
for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/
1999 as regards intervention on the market in butter
and cream (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No
1614/2001 (4), provides that, in the light of the tenders
received for each invitation to tender, a maximum
buying-in price is to be fixed in relation to the interven-
tion price applicable and that it may also be decided not
to proceed with the invitation to tender.

(2)

(3)

As a result of
buying-in price should be fixed as set out below.

the tenders received,

the maximum

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the 49th invitation to tender issued under Regulation (EC)
No 2771/1999, for which tenders had to be submitted not
later than 23 April 2002, the maximum buying-in price is
fixed at 295,38 EUR/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 27 April 2002.

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

Done at Brussels, 26 April 2002.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 48.
(2) OJ L 79, 22.3.2002, p. 15.
(3) OJ L 333, 24.12.1999, p. 11.
(4) OJ L 214, 8.8.2001, p. 20.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 723/2002 of 26 April 2002 fixing the maximum aid for concentrated butter for the 268th special invitation to tender opened under the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EEC) No 429/90
Date: 2002-04-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, butter, maximum price, product quality, purchase price

27.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 112/7

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 723/2002

of 26 April 2002

fixing the maximum aid for concentrated butter for the 268th special invitation to tender opened
under the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EEC) No 429/90

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17
May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk
and milk products (1), as last amended by Commission Regula-
tion (EC) No 509/2002 (2), and in particular Article 10 thereof,

(2)

(3)

In the light of the tenders received, the maximum aid
should be fixed at the level specified below and the
end-use security determined accordingly.

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

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

(1)

In accordance with Commission Regulation (EEC) No
429/90 of 20 February 1990 on the granting by invita-
tion to tender of an aid for concentrated butter intended
for direct consumption in the Community (3), as last
amended by Regulation (EC) No 124/1999 (4), the inter-
vention agencies are opening a standing invitation to
tender for the granting of aid for concentrated butter;
Article 6 of that Regulation provides that in the light of
the tenders received in response to each special invita-
tion to tender, a maximum amount of aid is to be fixed
for concentrated butter with a minimum fat content of
96 % or a decision is to be taken to make no award; the
end-use security must be fixed accordingly.

Article 1

For the 268th special invitation to tender under the standing
invitation to tender opened by Regulation (EEC) No 429/90,
the maximum aid and the amount of the end-use security shall
be as follows:

— maximum aid:
— end-use security:

EUR 105/100 kg,
EUR 116/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 27 April 2002.

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

Done at Brussels, 26 April 2002.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 48.
(2) OJ L 79, 22.3.2002, p. 15.
(3) OJ L 45, 21.2.1990, p. 8.
(4) OJ L 16, 21.1.1999, p. 19.