do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.3312 — Nestlé/Ingman Foods) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2004-01-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: dairy ice cream, economic concentration, exchange of information, foodstuff, merger control, milk product

20.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 14/3

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3297 — Norsk Hydro/Duke Energy)

(2004/C 14/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 19 December 2003, 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 303M3297. 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.3312 — Nestlé/Ingman Foods)

(2004/C 14/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 17 December 2003, 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 303M3312. 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.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0040/04 by Elspeth Attwooll (ELDR) to the Commission. Size of the Commission.
Date: 2004-01-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, European official, regulations for civil servants, statistics

C 78 E/920

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

was learnt from the SARS outbreak. The EU should move to a position where a system for obtaining
advice on a Europe-wide scale is in place. The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control
proposed by the Commission should contribute to this and be relied upon for timely and effective
interventions to deal with threats like SARS.

(2004/C 78 E/0972)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0040/04

by Elspeth Attwooll (ELDR) to the Commission

(20 January 2004)

Subject: Size of the Commission

Can the Commission provide information on the number of fonctionnaires employed by the Commission
at the various grades (A, B, C, D, etc.)?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(12 February 2004)

The Commission interprets the question from the Honourable Member as referring to officials in active
employment (Staff Regulations Article 36).

The permanent staff employed by the Commission on 1 January 2004 was 18 603 officials. The
breakdown of officials per category, as defined in the Staff Regulations, under all budget lines, was as
follows:

A

LA

B

C

D

Category

Number

6 891

1 670

3 712

5 722

608

Total

18 603

Furthermore, the Commission informs the Honourable Member that, at the same date, the Commission
employed 2 409 temporary agents.

(2004/C 78 E/0973)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0041/04

by Elspeth Attwooll (ELDR) to the Commission

(20 January 2004)

Subject: Trade between Scotland and the rest of the European Union

What key actions, either at the EU or domestic level, does the Commission believe are needed to improve
trade between Scotland and the rest of the European Union?
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.3315 — Investcorp Group/Hilding Anders AB) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2004-01-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, exchange of information, investment company, merger control, textile industry, wood industry

C 14/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.1.2004

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3315 — Investcorp Group/Hilding Anders AB)

(2004/C 14/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 17 December 2003, 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 303M3315. 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.3323 — Cardinal Health/Intercare Group)

(2004/C 14/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 16 December 2003, 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 303M3323. 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.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 91/2004 of 20 January 2004 laying down to what extent applications for issue of export licences submitted during January 2004 for beef products which may benefit from special import treatment in a third country may be accepted
Date: 2004-01-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: beef, export licence, import

21.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 14/5

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 91/2004

of 20 January 2004

laying down to what extent applications for issue of export licences submitted during January
2004 for beef products which may benefit from special import treatment in a third country may
be accepted

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1445/95 of
26 June 1995 on rules of application for import and export
licences in the beef sector and repealing Regulation (EEC) No
2377/80 (1), and in particular Article 12(8) thereof,

Article 1

No applications for export licences were lodged for the beef
referred to in Regulation (EEC) No 2973/79 for the first quarter
of 2004.

Whereas:

Article 2

(1)

(2)

Regulation (EC) No 1445/95 lays down, in Article 12,
detailed rules for export
licence applications for the
products referred to in Article 1 of Commission Regu-
lation (EEC) No 2973/79 (2).

Regulation (EEC) No 2973/79 fixed the quantities of
meat which might be exported on special terms for the
first quarter of 2004. No applications were submitted
for export licences for beef,

Applications for licences in respect of the meat referred to in
Article 1 may be lodged in accordance with Article 12 of Regu-
lation (EC) No 1445/95 during the first 10 days of the second
quarter of 2004 the total quantity available being 2 500 t.

Article 3

This Regulation shall enter into force on 21 January 2004.

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

Done at Brussels, 20 January 2004.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Agriculture Director-General

(1) OJ L 143, 27.6.1995, p. 35. Regulation as last amended by Regu-

lation (EC) No 852/2003 (OJ L 123, 17.5.2003, p. 9).

(2) OJ L 336, 29.12.1979, p. 44. Regulation as last amended by Regu-

lation (EC) No 3434/87 (OJ L 327, 18.11.1987, p. 7).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0039/04 by Elspeth Attwooll (ELDR) to the Commission. Amount of EU legislative acts.
Date: 2004-01-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Council of the European Union, EU law, European Commission, statistics

C 84 E/298

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

system of inspecting third countries’ aircraft, particularly with regard to public information. It will also
ensure a more rigorous application of the most stringent standards.

(1) OJ C 78 E, 27.3.2004.

(2004/C 84 E/0345)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0039/04

by Elspeth Attwooll (ELDR) to the Commission

(20 January 2004)

Subject: Amount of EU legislative acts

Can the Commission provide a breakdown of the number of legislative acts adopted by the institutions of
the European Union in 2003, broken down by institution (Commission, Council and EP/Council) and by
nature of the acts (Recommendation, Decision, Directive, Regulation, etc.)?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(6 February 2004)

A table giving the number of legislative instruments which were adopted, repealed or expired in 2003,
listed by type of instrument and institution concerned, is being sent direct to the Honourable Member and
to Parliament’s Secretariat.

The data is taken from the General Report on the Activities of the European Union for 2003, which each
year, is transmitted to Parliament on the second Tuesday of February under Article 212 of the EC Treaty.

(2004/C 84 E/0346)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0043/04

by Elspeth Attwooll (ELDR) to the Commission

(20 January 2004)

Subject: Trade impact of the euro

In the answer to Written Question E-1883/03 (1) by Chris Huhne, Commissioner Solbes made a number of
comments regarding the trade impact of the euro. Is the Commission now able to provide any additional
information based on economic developments over the last six months?

(Original Question by Chris Huhne: Will the Commission summarise the conclusions of any major studies,
including its own, on the impact of the euro on trade within the euro-area? Will it estimate the size of any
increase in trade as a result of the introduction of the euro?)

(1) OJ C 58 E, 6.3.2004, p. 106.

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(23 February 2004)

In its reply to Written Question E-1883/03 by the Honourable Member Mr Huhne (1), the Commission
gave an overview of the results of several academic studies assessing the euro’s impact on trade within the
euro-area. In the Quarterly Report on the Euro Area published on 30 September 2003, the Commission
2004/94/EC: Council Decision of 20 January 2004 appointing a Belgian member and two Belgian alternate members of the Committee of the Regions
Date: 2004-01-20
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Belgium, European Committee of the Regions, appointment of staff

31.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 28/21

II

(Acts whose publication is not obligatory)

COUNCIL

COUNCIL DECISION
of 20 January 2004
appointing a Belgian member and two Belgian alternate members of the Committee of the Regions

(2004/94/EC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 263 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Belgian Government,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

On 22 January 2002 the Council adopted Decision 2002/60/EC (1) appointing the members and
alternate members of the Committee of the Regions.

The seats of one member and two alternate members of the Committee of the Regions have become
vacant following expiry of the mandates of Mr Patrick DEWAEL, Mr Bert ANCIAUX and Mr Guy
SWENNEN, of which the Council was notified on 8 December 2003,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Sole Article

(a) Mr Bart SOMERS Minister President for the Vlaamse Regering is hereby appointed a member of the

Committee of the Regions in place of Mr Patrick DEWAEL.

(b) The following are appointed alternate members of the Committee of the Regions:

1. Mr Jos BEX

Vlaams Volksvertegenwoordiger
in place of Mr Bert ANCIAUX

2. Ms Josée VERCAMMEN

Vlaams Volksvertegenwoordiger
in place of Mr Guy SWENNEN

for the remainder of their terms of office, which end on 25 January 2006.

Done at Brussels, 20 January 2004.

For the Council
The President
C. McCREEVY

(1) OJ L 24, 26.1.2002, p. 38.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0022/04 by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission. Support for the Po Valley dairy farmers' campaign.
Date: 2004-01-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, agricultural quota, cheese factory, dairy production, regulation of agricultural production

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/527

up operation and, second, from extending the other areas of [their] holding planted with apple trees (other
than cider-apple trees), pear trees (other than perry-pear trees), peach trees and/or nectarine trees’ (1). This
requirement, not aimed at any particular variety of dessert apple, was necessary in order to give the
grubbing up operations the full economic effect desired and avoid wasting Community funds.

(1) See Article 3(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2467/97 of 11 December 1997 laying down detailed rules for
the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/97 on the improvement of the Community production of
apples, pears, peaches and nectarines, OJ L 341, 12.12.1997.

(2004/C 84 E/0602)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0022/04

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(20 January 2004)

Subject: Support for the Po Valley dairy farmers’ campaign

Does the European Commission not consider that the current milk quota scheme, is particularly hard on
dairy producers in the Po valley as Italy is the only one of the Member States where consumption is much
higher than production quotas?

Is the European Commission aware that this anomaly has had serious repercussions on farmers in the
Po Valley who are even now still being forced to leave their farms to take part in demonstrations or man
roadblocks in Milan and Rome to demand that the Italian Government safeguard the rights of Po Valley
dairy production at European level?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(23 February 2004)

Milk quotas were introduced by the Council in 1984 to reduce the imbalance between supply and demand
in the milk sector. The production quotas were allocated on the basis not of consumption per geographical
area but of the output of each individual producer over a specified period. That was the only way of
avoiding discrimination between producers.

Since introduction of the quota scheme the reference quantities allocated to Italy have been increased
considerably, by 19,6 % over the period 1984 to 2004, whereas in most of the other Member States
quotas have been either stabilised or reduced.

We consider that the milk quota scheme holds out the prospect of stable production and income security
to farmers without impeding restructuring of milk production in the Union, and take the view that full and
correct application is a guarantee of its being comprehensively effective.

(2004/C 84 E/0603)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0033/04

by Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Commission

(20 January 2004)

Subject: Distortion of competition by the introduction of regional premiums

Chapter 5 of the new Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 (1) concerning direct support schemes gives
Member States the option of introducing regional premiums. Denmark and Germany are reported to be
about to introduce such an arrangement.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.3331 — KKR/MTU) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2004-01-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: aircraft, economic concentration, exchange of information, investment company, merger control, turbine

20.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 14/5

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3306 — E.ON/Midlands)

(2004/C 14/07)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 16 December 2003, 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 303M3306. 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.3331 — KKR/MTU)

(2004/C 14/08)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 22 December 2003, 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 303M3331. 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.3306 — E.ON/Midlands) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2004-01-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: chemical product, economic concentration, electrical energy, exchange of information, gas, merger control, petroleum, property market, telecommunications, water

20.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 14/5

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3306 — E.ON/Midlands)

(2004/C 14/07)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 16 December 2003, 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 303M3306. 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.3331 — KKR/MTU)

(2004/C 14/08)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 22 December 2003, 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 303M3331. 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.