do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2286/2003 of 18 December 2003 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ L 343 of 31.12.2003)
Date: 2004-02-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU law, customs regulations, customs territory (EU), customs union, legal code, simplification of formalities

L 32/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.2.2004

CORRIGENDA

Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2286/2003 of 18 December 2003 amending Regulation (EEC)
No 2454/93 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92
establishing the Community Customs Code

(Official Journal of the European Union L 343 of 31 December 2003)

On page 4, in Article 3(1):

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the

This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following that of its publication in the Official

for:

read:

‘1.
European Union.’,
‘1.
Journal of the European Union.’

Corrigendum to Council Directive 88/344/EEC of 13 June 1988 on the approximation of the laws of the
Member States on extraction solvents used in the production of foodstuffs and food ingredients

(Official Journal of the European Communities L 157 of 24 June 1988)

On page 29, Article 2(4):

for:

read:

‘4. Water, to which substances regulating acidity or alkalinity may have been added, other food substances
which possess solvent properties and ethanol are authorized as extraction solvents in the manufacture of foodstuffs
or food ingredients.’
‘4. Water, to which substances regulating acidity or alkalinity may have been added, and other food substances
which possess solvent properties are authorised as extraction solvents in the manufacture of foodstuffs or food
ingredients.’
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2004-02-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate

5.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 31/1

I

(Information)

COMMISSION

Euro exchange rates (1)

4 February 2004

(2004/C 31/01)

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

1,2524

132,04

7,4513

0,6819

9,1838

1,5693

86,45

8,721

1,9557

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

0,58617

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

33,197

NZD

New Zealand dollar

15,6466

SGD

Singapore dollar

Exchange
rate

0,6664

0,4287

4,7804

40 501

237,32

40,57

1 670 000

1,6413

1,6811

9,7392

1,844

2,1215

264,53

KRW

South Korean won

1 463,18

3,4534

ZAR

South African rand

8,6913

___________
(1) Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 201/2004 of 5 February 2004 fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar to certain third countries for the 20th partial invitation to tender issued within the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1290/2003
Date: 2004-02-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, export refund, third country, white sugar

6.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 34/7

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 201/2004

of 5 February 2004

fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar to certain third countries for the 20th partial
invitation to tender issued within the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for
in Regulation (EC) No 1290/2003

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 of 19
June 2001 on the common organisation of the markets in the
sugar sector (1), and in particular Article 27(5) thereof,

(3)

(4)

Following an examination of the tenders submitted in
invitation to tender, the
response to the 20th partial
provisions set out in Article 1 should be adopted.

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

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1290/2003 of 18 July
2003 on a standing invitation to tender to determine
levies and/or refunds on exports of white sugar (2), for
the 2003/2004 marketing year, requires partial
invita-
tions to tender to be issued for the export of this sugar
to certain third countries.

Pursuant to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1290/
2003 a maximum export refund shall be fixed, as the
case may be, account being taken in particular of the
state and foreseeable development of the Community
and world markets in sugar, for the partial invitation to
tender in question.

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the 20th partial invitation to tender for white sugar issued
to Regulation (EC) No 1290/2003 the maximum
pursuant
amount of the export refund to certain third countries is fixed
at 52,877 EUR/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 6 February 2004.

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

Done at Brussels, 5 February 2004.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 178, 30.6.2001, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commis-

sion Regulation (EC) No 39/2004 (OJ L 6, 10.1.2004, p. 16).

(2) OJ L 181, 19.7.2003, p. 7.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0272/04 by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission. Timisoara international port.
Date: 2004-02-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, Romania, building speculation, industrial infrastructure

C 88 E/174

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

This is also why the Commission places great emphasis on transparency of information for payment
service users. In order to guarantee this transparency, it proposed in its communication to the Council and
Parliament of December 2003 (1) regarding a new legal framework for payments in the internal market
transparency rules for payment service providers which would be harmonized at European level.

(1) COM(2003) 718 final.

(2004/C 88 E/0182)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0272/04

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(5 February 2004)

Subject: Timisoara international port

The dark shadow of speculation is beginning to be cast on the construction of Timisoara international port
in Romania, a project aimed at making Romania the ‘gateway to the East’.

The choice of location, originally 150 ha of public land to the north of the city, which has already been
approved by the EU, has been unexpectedly changed to a site covering only 30 ha, which could potentially
be increased to only 70 ha, in an area south of the city, towards Serbia, a direction that would rule out the
benefits brought by heavy vehicles. The original choice, which included the constraint that, in the event of
the port not being built there, the land would automatically revert to agricultural use, clearly excludes any
possibility of property speculation; the same cannot, however, be said of the current choice.

Does not the Commission intend, in view of the possibility that European funds might be granted to help
carry out this project, to gain a better insight into the disturbing aspects of the choice of the new location
of the Timisoara international port?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 2004)

The Commission is aware of the project to build a multi-modal platform in Timisoara, but has not been
asked to give its approval to any proposed location. Furthermore, since EU pre-accession funding has not
been requested, the Commission does not intend to take a position on the issue of the location of this
terminal.

(2004/C 88 E/0183)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0288/04

by Marco Cappato (NI) to the Commission

(6 February 2004)

Subject: Drug eradication programme in Colombia

During his recent visit to Colombia, Commissioner Chris Patten expressed European criticism of the drug
eradication programme, which is supported by the United States. Commissioner Patten also said that the
EU had refused to fund fumigations on the Andes, citing their impact on the life and well-being of
Colombians, as well as the environment.

Mr Patten also confirmed the European pledges for alternative development programmes of some
EUR 50 million, tying the disbursement of the money to Colombia’s compliance with United Nations High
Commission on Human Rights recommendations.
Commission Opinion of 5 February 2004 concerning the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste resulting from modifications to Site-1 of Belgoprocess plc in Belgium, in accordance with Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty
Date: 2004-02-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Belgium, radioactive effluent, radioactive waste, safety standard, storage of waste

C 34/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

7.2.2004

COMMISSION OPINION

of 5 February 2004

concerning the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste resulting from modifications to Site-1 of
Belgoprocess plc in Belgium, in accordance with Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty

(2004/C 34/05)

(Only the Dutch text is authentic)

On 30 July 2003 the European Commission received from the Belgian Government, in accordance with
Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty, General Data relating to the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste
resulting from modifications to Site-1 of Belgoprocess plc.

On the basis of these data and additional
information provided by the Belgian Government on 7
November 2003, and following consultation with the group of experts, the Commission has drawn up
the following opinion:

(a) The planned modifications relate to the construction of a new intermediate storage facility for solid
low-active waste that is already present on-site. The operation of the new storage facility will entail
gaseous effluents only, for which specific discharge limits are envisaged. These discharge limits do not
significantly add to the existing regulatory discharge limits.

(b) The distance between the new storage facility and the nearest neighbour Member State, in this case The

Netherlands, is 11 km.

(c) During normal operation, discharges of gaseous effluent from the new storage facility will not cause an
exposure of the population in other Member States that is significant from the point of view of health.

(d) Secondary liquid and solid radioactive waste resulting from the operation of the new storage facility

will be treated, conditioned and stored on-site.

(e)

In the event of unplanned discharges of radioactive waste, which may follow an accident of the type
and magnitude considered in the general data for the new storage facility, the doses likely to be
received by the population in other Member States would not be significant from the point of view
of health.

In conclusion, the Commission is of the opinion that the implementation of the plan for the disposal of
radioactive waste in whatever form resulting from modifications to Site-1 of Belgoprocess plc in Belgium,
both in normal operation and in the event of an accident of the type and magnitude considered in the
general data, is not liable to result in the radioactive contamination, significant from the point of view of
health, of the water, soil or airspace of another Member State.
Corrigendum to Council Directive 88/344/EEC of 13 June 1988 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States on extraction solvents used in the production of foodstuffs and food ingredients (OJ L 157 of 24.6.1988)
Date: 2004-02-05
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: approximation of laws, chemical product, food chemistry, foodstuff, solvent













EUR-Lex - 31988L0344R(01) - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31988L0344R(01)

Corrigendum to Council Directive 88/344/EEC of 13 June 1988 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States on extraction solvents used in the production of foodstuffs and food ingredients (OJ L 157 of 24.6.1988)  


Official Journal L 032 , 05/02/2004 P. 0034 - 0034 





Corrigendum to Council Directive 88/344/EEC of 13 June 1988 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States on extraction solvents used in the production of foodstuffs and food ingredients(Official Journal of the European Communities L 157 of 24 June 1988)On page 29, Article 2(4):for: 4. Water, to which substances regulating acidity or alkalinity may have been added, other food substances which possess solvent properties and ethanol are authorized as extraction solvents in the manufacture of foodstuffs or food ingredients.read: 4. Water, to which substances regulating acidity or alkalinity may have been added, and other food substances which possess solvent properties are authorised as extraction solvents in the manufacture of foodstuffs or food ingredients.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.3316 — Celestica/MSL) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2004-02-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electronic equipment, exchange of information, merger control

5.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 31/19

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3316 — Celestica/MSL)

(2004/C 31/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 18 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 303M3316. 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.3322 — Polestar/Prisa/Inversiones Ibersuizas/JV)

(2004/C 31/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 15 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(2) of Council Regu-
lation (EEC) No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is only available in Spanish 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 ‘CES’ version of the CELEX database, under document No 303M3322. 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 209/2004 of 5 February 2004 concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the import of maize issued in Regulation (EC) No 2315/2003
Date: 2004-02-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, import, maize, tariff reduction

6.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 34/39

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 209/2004

of 5 February 2004

concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the import of maize issued
in Regulation (EC) No 2315/2003

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), and in particular Article 12(1) thereof,

(3)

(4)

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Articles 6 and 7
of Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 a maximum reduction in
the duty should not be fixed.

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

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

(1)

(2)

An invitation to tender for the maximum reduction in
the duty on maize imported into Portugal from third
countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regu-
lation (EC) No 2315/2003 (3).

Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1839/
95 (4), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2235/
2000 (5), allows the Commission to decide,
in accord-
ance 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.

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 30
January to 5 February 2004 in response to the invitation to
tender for the reduction in the duty on imported maize issued
in Regulation (EC) No 2315/2003.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 6 February 2004.

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

Done at Brussels, 5 February 2004.

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 342, 30.12.2003, p. 34.
(4) OJ L 177, 28.7.1995, p. 4.
(5) OJ L 256, 10.10.2000, p. 13.
Corrigendum to Council Directive 88/344/EEC of 13 June 1988 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States on extraction solvents used in the production of foodstuffs and food ingredients (OJ L 157 of 24.6.1988)
Date: 2004-02-05
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: approximation of laws, chemical product, food chemistry, foodstuff, solvent

L 32/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

5.2.2004

CORRIGENDA

Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2286/2003 of 18 December 2003 amending Regulation (EEC)
No 2454/93 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92
establishing the Community Customs Code

(Official Journal of the European Union L 343 of 31 December 2003)

On page 4, in Article 3(1):

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the

This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following that of its publication in the Official

for:

read:

‘1.
European Union.’,
‘1.
Journal of the European Union.’

Corrigendum to Council Directive 88/344/EEC of 13 June 1988 on the approximation of the laws of the
Member States on extraction solvents used in the production of foodstuffs and food ingredients

(Official Journal of the European Communities L 157 of 24 June 1988)

On page 29, Article 2(4):

for:

read:

‘4. Water, to which substances regulating acidity or alkalinity may have been added, other food substances
which possess solvent properties and ethanol are authorized as extraction solvents in the manufacture of foodstuffs
or food ingredients.’
‘4. Water, to which substances regulating acidity or alkalinity may have been added, and other food substances
which possess solvent properties are authorised as extraction solvents in the manufacture of foodstuffs or food
ingredients.’
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0277/04 by Philip Claeys (NI) to the Commission. EU participation in a project to build a multi-purpose hall in Brussels.
Date: 2004-02-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Brussels region, EU financing, building, cultural transmission, promotion of the European idea

C 84 E/348

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

the basis for national regulations as they put the requirements of SOLAS 1974 and Marpol 73/78
Conventions into effect. The IMDG Code lays down basic principles; detailed recommendations for
individual substances, materials and articles; and a number of recommendations for good operational
practice including advice on terminology, packing,
labelling storage, segregation and handling, and
emergency response action.

(1) OJ P 196, 16.8.1967.
(2) OJ L 84, 5.4.1993.
(3) OJ L 4, 9.1.2003.

(2004/C 84 E/0405)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0277/04

by Philip Claeys (NI) to the Commission

(5 February 2004)

Subject: EU participation in a project to build a multi-purpose hall in Brussels

The Brussels Capital City Region intends to build a multi-purpose hall in the ‘European district’, in the
so-called Van Maerlant block. According to the spokesman for the Brussels Chief Minister, Mr Ducarme,
the European Union has agreed to co-finance the project, meeting 30 % of the total cost.

Is this information accurate?

What specific undertakings have been given to the Brussels Capital City Region?

What added value does the proposed multi-purpose hall offer the European institutions when set against
the existing (and planned) infrastructure?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 2004)

The ‘Plan Médiateur’, a study commissioned by the Belgian government, produced ideas for 133 initiatives
on which the Belgian authorities are consulting the public. Among those ideas was one which would
involve the construction of a cultural centre in the Place Jean Rey the activities of which would be centred
round the concept of ‘European culture’.

In the ‘Plan Médiateur’ co-financing from the European Institutions (Parliament, Council, Committee of the
Regions, Economic and Social Committee and Commission) of up to 30 % for the whole project was
suggested.

The Commission welcomes the exercise as a contribution to the ongoing debate on ways to improve the
‘Quartier Européen’. As made clear in its Communication of 10 December 2003 (1), the Commission would
like to work in partnership with the Belgian authorities in efforts to achieve a variety of possible
improvements relating to the area.

However, the Honourable Member will wish to note that the Commission has yet to submit its comments
to the Belgian authorities on the Plan Médiateur and there have been no formal discussions of any kind on
any possible financial contribution.

(1) COM(2003) 755 final.