do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Regulation (EC) No 601/2003 of 2 April 2003 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2003-04-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, perennial vegetable, pip fruit

3.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 86/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 601/2003

of 2 April 2003

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,

(2)

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
import arrangements
last
amended by Regulation (EC) No 1947/2002 (2), and in parti-
cular 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 3 April 2003.

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

Done at Brussels, 2 April 2003.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Agriculture Director-General

(1) OJ L 337, 24.12.1994, p. 66.
(2) OJ L 299, 1.11.2002, p. 17.

L 86/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.4.2003

to the Commission Regulation of 2 April 2003 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

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
096
204
999

220
999

052
204
999

052
204
212
220
624
999

060
388
400
508
512
524
528
720
728
999

388
512
528
720
999

114,9
91,0
107,6
104,5

87,0
48,8
111,3
82,4

187,0
187,0

119,3
125,1
122,2

65,9
46,0
57,1
43,6
66,6
55,8

64,4
87,1
103,9
87,6
86,7
79,5
74,6
132,1
102,5
90,9

67,9
75,7
68,6
49,1
65,3

(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’.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1243/03 by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission. Death of dolphins.
Date: 2003-04-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: by-catch, fishing net, fishing regulations, marine mammal, protection of animal life

6.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 33 E/101

information on these taxes in the Member States. The following information can be found in the
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) database on environmental taxes (2):

Denmark

Netherlands

Austria

Finland

Sweden

(euro/tonne)

50,3

13 - 78,8

5,8 - 101,6

15,1

31,1

United Kingdom

3,2 - 19,3

(1) COM(1999) 752final.
(2) http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/enveco/database_env_taxation.htm.

(2004/C 33 E/100)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1243/03

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(2 April 2003)

Subject: Death of dolphins

The UK Fisheries Minister has proposed (20 March 2003) that it should be a legal requirement for some
UK fishing vessels to attach pingers or other acoustic warning devices to nets in a bid to keep dolphins
and porpoises from being caught.

Will the Commission now introduce similar measures with the requirement that they apply to all EU
vessels using fishing methods of concern in this respect?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 May 2003)

The use of acoustic deterrent devices (pingers) has proven successful
in reducing by-catches of small
cetaceans in certain type of fisheries. The Commission is aware that such a measure has already been made
mandatory since 2000 by Danish authorities, and is at present under consideration by the United Kingdom
authorities within their consultation paper published on 20 March 2003.

As stated in the answer given to Question H-0122/2003 by Mrs McAvan (1), the mandatory use of acoustic
alarms in certain gillnet fisheries is part of a package of measures under preparation and for which the
Commission has already engaged a consultation with stakeholders. The Commission intends to finalise this
package as a proposal to the Council within the coming months.

(1) Written answer of 11.3.2003.

(2004/C 33 E/101)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1252/03

by Freddy Blak (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Common European packaging return scheme

(3 April 2003)

European Parliament and Council Directive 94/62/EC (1) refers to the need to harmonise national measures
concerning the management of packaging and packaging waste in order to prevent or reduce its impact on
the environment, thus providing a high level of environmental protection, and to ensure the functioning of
the internal market and to avoid obstacles to trade and distortion and restriction of competition within the
Community.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1220/03 by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission. Use of funds under the Framework for action on sustainable urban development in the European Union by the municipality of Prato.
Date: 2003-04-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, Tuscany, local government, urban problem, urbanisation

C 65 E/68

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

13.3.2004

can the Commission state:

1. whether the municipality of Pistoia has submitted projects for the Framework for action on

sustainable urban development in the European Union?

2. whether the municipality of Pistoia has secured funding for these projects?

3. whether this funding has been used?

(2004/C 65 E/076)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1220/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(2 April 2003)

Subject: Use of funds under the Framework for action on sustainable urban development in the European

Union by the municipality of Prato

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report
on the spending of EU funds.

The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by
some regional authorities.

The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been
echoed by the Commission.

Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Prato, urgently need to use
European funds to promote sustainable urban development,

can the Commission state:

1. whether the municipality of Prato has submitted projects for the Framework for action on sustainable

urban development in the European Union?

2. whether the municipality of Prato has secured funding for these projects?

3. whether this funding has been used?

(2004/C 65 E/077)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1221/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(2 April 2003)

Subject: Use of funds under the Framework for action on sustainable urban development in the European

Union by the municipality of Siena

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report
on the spending of EU funds.

The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by
some regional authorities.

The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been
echoed by the Commission.

Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Siena, urgently need to use
European funds to promote sustainable urban development,
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1218/03 by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission. Use of funds under the Framework for action on sustainable urban development in the European Union by the municipality of Pisa.
Date: 2003-04-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, Tuscany, local government, urban problem, urbanisation

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65 E/67

can the Commission state:

1. whether the municipality of Pesaro has submitted projects for the Framework for action on sustainable

urban development in the European Union?

2. whether the municipality of Pesaro has secured funding for these projects?

3. whether this funding has been used?

(2004/C 65 E/074)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1218/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(2 April 2003)

Subject: Use of funds under the Framework for action on sustainable urban development in the European

Union by the municipality of Pisa

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report
on the spending of EU funds.

The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by
some regional authorities.

The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been
echoed by the Commission.

Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Pisa, urgently need to use
European funds to promote sustainable urban development,

can the Commission state:

1. whether the municipality of Pisa has submitted projects for the Framework for action on sustainable

urban development in the European Union?

2. whether the municipality of Pisa has secured funding for these projects?

3. whether this funding has been used?

(2004/C 65 E/075)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1219/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(2 April 2003)

Subject: Use of funds under the Framework for action on sustainable urban development in the European

Union by the municipality of Pistoia

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report
on the spending of EU funds.

The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by
some regional authorities.

The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been
echoed by the Commission.

Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Pistoia, urgently need to use
European funds to promote sustainable urban development,
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1246/03 by Kathleen Van Brempt (PSE) to the Commission. Safety of crash barriers.
Date: 2003-04-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European standard, mortality, road network, road safety, safety device, transport accident, transport policy, two-wheeled vehicle

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70 E/35

frequently have to pay for an operating system they don’t want, they are also expected to pay extra to have
it removed from the PC they want to buy. There can be little doubt that this amounts to an irregularity on
the internal market. These practices would appear to constitute a form of tied sales, not least because
consumers cannot, for example, freely chose a different operating system without incurring extra costs.

Is the Commission aware of this state of affairs?

Does it consider this manner of trading as complying with Community law in force?

What action will it take to put a stop to these practices and again allow consumers a free choice?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(22 May 2003)

The Commission is aware of the difficulties encountered by consumers in obtaining a personal computer
(PC) from PC vendors without an operating system pre-installed. The Commission understands that
Microsoft’s licensing agreements with PC manufacturers require the pre-installation on PCs of an operating
system, although this does not have to be a Microsoft operating system. The Commission intends to
examine this question in greater detail once its ongoing Microsoft investigation has concluded.

(2004/C 70 E/039)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1246/03

by Kathleen Van Brempt (PSE) to the Commission

(2 April 2003)

Subject: Safety of crash barriers

A report by FEMA, the Federation of European Motorcyclists’ Associations,
indicates that somewhere
between 10 and 15 percent of fatal accidents involving motorcyclists are attributable to crash barriers.
Associations representing motorcyclists say that safe crash barriers could significantly reduce the number
of deaths. Although many safe crash barrier systems have now been developed, there are still no new
European regulations on safety requirements for crash barriers.

Can the Commission say whether it is thinking of introducing European safety requirements for crash
barriers?

What are its plans?

What is the timetable?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(21 May 2003)

The Honourable Member is asked to refer to the answer given by the Commission to written question
E-3226/02 by Mrs Villiers (1).

(1) See page 10.
Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 2,50 % on 1 April 2003 — Euro exchange rates
Date: 2003-04-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Central Bank, euro, exchange rate, interest

2.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/1

I

(Information)

COMMISSION

Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations (1):

2,50 % on 1 April 2003

Euro exchange rates (2)

1 April 2003

(2003/C 79/01)

1 euro =

USD

JPY

DKK

GBP

SEK

CHF

ISK

NOK

BGN

CYP

CZK

EEK

HUF

LTL

Currency

US dollar

Japanese yen

Danish krone

Pound sterling

Swedish krona

Swiss franc

Iceland króna

Norwegian krone

Bulgarian lev

Cyprus pound

Czech koruna

Estonian kroon

Hungarian forint

Lithuanian litas

Exchange
rate

1,0891

128,8

7,4265

0,6908

9,2284

1,4768

84,07

7,925

1,9497

LVL

MTL

PLN

ROL

SIT

SKK

TRL

AUD

CAD

Currency

Latvian lats

Maltese lira

Polish zloty

Romanian leu

Slovenian tolar

Slovak koruna

Turkish lira

Australian dollar

Canadian dollar

0,58395

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

31,967

NZD

New Zealand dollar

15,6466

SGD

Singapore dollar

Exchange
rate

0,6293

0,4246

4,4298

36 210

232,2

41,17

1 849 000

1,8048

1,5995

8,4943

1,9693

1,9288

248,06

KRW

South Korean won

1 368,51

3,4525

ZAR

South African rand

8,5848

___________
(1) Rate applied to the most recent operation carried out before the indicated day. In the case of a variable rate tender,

the interest rate is the marginal rate.

(2) Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 605/2003 of 2 April 2003 amending Regulation (EC) No 851/2002 as regards the model certificate
Date: 2003-04-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Cyprus, fresh fruit, fresh vegetable, import, marketing standard, quality label

3.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 86/13

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 605/2003

of 2 April 2003

amending Regulation (EC) No 851/2002 as regards the model certificate

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 of 28
October 1996 on the common organisation of the market in
fruit and vegetables (1), as last amended by Commission Regula-
tion (EC) No 47/2003 (2), and in particular Article 10 thereof,

(2)

(3)

(4)

The Cypriot authorities have informed the Commission
that the certificate used has been amended.

Regulation (EC) No 851/2002 should therefore be
amended accordingly.

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in
accordance with the opinion of
the Management
Committee for Fresh Fruit and Vegetables,

Whereas:

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 851/2002 of 22 May
2002 approving operations to check conformity to the
marketing standards applicable to fresh fruit and vegeta-
bles carried out in Cyprus prior to import
into the
European Community (3)
includes a model certificate
pursuant to Article 7(3) of Commission Regulation (EC)
No 1148/2001 of 12 June 2001 on checks on confor-
mity to the marketing standards applicable to fruit and
vegetables (4), as last amended by Commission Regula-
tion (EC) No 408/2003 (5).

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 851/2002 is replaced by the
text in the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter
into force on the 20th day
following its publication in the Official Journal of the European
Union.

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

Done at Brussels, 2 April 2003.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 297, 21.11.1996, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 7, 11.1.2003, p. 64.
(3) OJ L 135, 23.5.2002, p. 14.
(4) OJ L 156, 13.6.2001, p. 9.
(5) OJ L 62, 6.3.2003, p. 8.

L 86/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.4.2003

ANNEX

‘ANNEX II

MODEL CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 7(3) OF REGULATION (EC) No 1148/2001
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1222/03 by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission. Use of funds under the Framework for action on sustainable urban development in the European Union by the municipality of Terni.
Date: 2003-04-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, Umbria, local government, urban problem, urbanisation

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65 E/69

can the Commission state:

1. whether the municipality of Siena has submitted projects for the Framework for action on sustainable

urban development in the European Union?

2. whether the municipality of Siena has secured funding for these projects?

3. whether this funding has been used?

(2004/C 65 E/078)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1222/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(2 April 2003)

Subject: Use of funds under the Framework for action on sustainable urban development in the European

Union by the municipality of Terni

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report
on the spending of EU funds.

The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by
some regional authorities.

The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been
echoed by the Commission.

Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Terni, urgently need to use
European funds to promote sustainable urban development,

can the Commission state:

1. whether the municipality of Terni has submitted projects for the Framework for action on sustainable

urban development in the European Union?

2. whether the municipality of Terni has secured funding for these projects?

3. whether this funding has been used?

(2004/C 65 E/079)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1223/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(2 April 2003)

Subject: Use of funds under the Framework for action on sustainable urban development in the European

Union by the municipality of Fiumicino

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report
on the spending of EU funds.

The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by
some regional authorities.

The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been
echoed by the Commission.

Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Fiumicino, urgently need to use
European funds to promote sustainable urban development,
2003/234/EC: Commission Decision of 2 April 2003 amending Decision 74/360/EEC as regards the United Kingdom's exemption from applying to hemp (Cannabis sativa) Council Directive 2002/57/EC on the marketing of seed of oil and fibre plants (notified under document number C(2003) 1055)
Date: 2003-04-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: United Kingdom, hemp, marketing standard, oleaginous plant, seed, textile plant

L 86/48

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.4.2003

COMMISSION

COMMISSION DECISION

of 2 April 2003

amending Decision 74/360/EEC as regards the United Kingdom's exemption from applying to
hemp (Cannabis sativa) Council Directive 2002/57/EC on the marketing of seed of oil and fibre
plants

(notified under document number C(2003) 1055)

(Only the English text is authentic)

(2003/234/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

(4)

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 2002/57/EC of 13 June
2002 on the marketing of seed of oil and fibre plants (1), as last
amended by Directive 2002/68/EC (2), and in particular Article
28(b) thereof,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accor-
dance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on
Seeds and Propagating Material for Agriculture, Horticul-
ture and Forestry,

Whereas:

Article 1

(1)

(2)

(3)

Under Commission Decision 74/360/EEC (3) the United
Kingdom was released from the obligation to apply to,
inter alia, hemp (Cannabis sativa) provisions of Council
Directive 69/208/EEC of 30 June 1969 on the marketing
of seed of oil and fibre plants (4), which has been
replaced by Directive 2002/57/EC.

The United Kingdom has informed the Commission that
the availability of improved varieties of hemp in the EU
Common Catalogue suitable for growing conditions in
the United Kingdom has led to the propagation of hemp
seed becoming an established practice.

The exemption applying to hemp should therefore be
revoked and Decision 74/360/EEC should be amended
accordingly.

In Article 1 of Decision 74/360/EEC, point (b) is deleted.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland.

Done at Brussels, 2 April 2003.

For the Commission

David BYRNE

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 193, 20.7.2002, p. 74.
(2) OJ L 195, 24.7.2002, p. 32.
(3) OJ L 196, 19.7.1974, p. 18.
(4) OJ L 169, 10.7.1969, p. 3.