13.3.2009   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 68/1

13.3.2009   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 68/3

(1)

The Council agreed on 7 October 2008 that it is a priority to restore confidence and proper functioning of the financial sector. It undertook to take all necessary measures to protect the deposits of individual savers and welcomed the intention of the Commission to bring forward urgently an appropriate proposal to promote convergence of deposit-guarantee schemes.

(2)

Directive 94/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (3) already provides for basic coverage for depositors. However, the ongoing financial turmoil necessitates an improvement of that coverage.

(3)

The current minimum coverage level provided for in Directive 94/19/EC is set at EUR 20 000 with the option for Member States to determine higher coverage. However, this has proved not to be adequate for a large number of deposits in the Community. In order to maintain depositor confidence and attain greater stability on the financial markets, the minimum coverage level should therefore be increased to EUR 50 000. By 31 December 2010, coverage for the aggregate deposits of each depositor should be set at EUR 100 000, unless a Commission impact assessment, submitted to the European Parliament and the Council by 31 December 2009, concludes that such an increase and such harmonisation are inappropriate and are not financially viable for all Member States in order to ensure consumer protection and financial stability in the Community and to avoid distortions of competition between Member States. In the event that the impact assessment reveals that such an increase and such harmonisation are inappropriate, the Commission should submit appropriate proposals to the European Parliament and the Council.

(4)

The same coverage level should apply to all depositors regardless of whether a Member State’s currency is the euro or not. Member States outside the euro area should have the possibility to round off the amounts resulting from the conversion without compromising the equivalent protection of depositors.

(5)

A report to be submitted to the European Parliament and to the Council by the Commission should analyse all related issues such as set-offs and counterclaims, the determination of contributions to schemes, the scope of products and depositors covered, the effectiveness of cross-border cooperation between deposit-guarantee schemes and the link between deposit-guarantee schemes and alternative means for reimbursing depositors, such as emergency payout mechanisms. For the purpose of that report, Member States should collect the relevant data and submit them to the Commission on request.

(6)

Some Member States have established deposit-guarantee schemes under Directive 94/19/EC which provide full coverage for certain kinds of long-term deposits, such as claims on pensions. It is necessary to respect the rights and expectations of the depositors in such schemes.

(7)

Some Member States have established or plan to establish deposit-guarantee schemes under Directive 94/19/EC which provide full coverage for certain temporarily increased account balances. The Commission should assess, by 31 December 2009, whether full coverage for certain temporarily increased account balances should be maintained or introduced.

(8)

The functioning of systems which protect the credit institution itself and, in particular, ensure its liquidity and solvency, thus guaranteeing protection for depositors at least equivalent to that provided by a deposit-guarantee scheme, and voluntary systems of depositors compensation which are not introduced or officially recognised by a Member State should not be affected by this Directive.

(9)

Member States should encourage deposit-guarantee schemes to consider entering into agreements or improving existing agreements concerning their respective obligations.

(10)

The payout delay of three months currently provided for, which can be extended to nine months, runs counter to the need to maintain depositor confidence and does not meet their needs. The payout delay should therefore be reduced to a period of 20 working days. That period should be extended only under exceptional circumstances and after approval by the competent authorities. Two years after the entry into force of this Directive the Commission should submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report on the effectiveness and delays of the payout procedures assessing whether a further reduction of the delay to 10 working days would be appropriate.

(11)

Furthermore, in cases where the payout is triggered by a determination of the competent authorities, the decision period of 21 days currently provided for should be reduced to five working days in order not to impede rapid payout. The competent authorities should, however, first be satisfied that a credit institution has failed to repay deposits which are due and payable. That assessment should be subject to the judicial or administrative procedures of the Member States.

(12)

Deposits may be considered unavailable once early intervention or reorganisation measures have been unsuccessful. This should not prevent competent authorities from making further restructuring efforts during the payout delay.

(13)

Member States should aim at ensuring the continuity of banking services and access to liquidity of banks, in particular in periods of financial turmoil. For this purpose, Member States are encouraged to make arrangements as soon as possible for ensuring emergency payouts of appropriate amounts upon the application of the affected depositor, within no more than three days of such application. Since the reduction of the current payout delay of three months will have a positive impact on depositor confidence and the proper functioning of the financial markets, Member States and their deposit-guarantee schemes should ensure that the payout delay is as short as possible.

(14)

Directive 94/19/EC provides the possibility for Member States to limit coverage to a specified percentage. That option has been demonstrated to undermine depositor confidence and should thus be discontinued.

(15)

The measures necessary for the implementation of Directive 94/19/EC should be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission (4).

(16)

In particular, the Commission should be empowered to adjust the coverage level according to inflation in the European Union on the basis of changes in the harmonised index of consumer prices published by the Commission. Since that measure is of general scope and is designed to amend non-essential elements of Directive 94/19/EC, it must be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny provided for in Article 5a of Decision 1999/468/EC.

(17)

Since the objectives of this Directive, namely the harmonisation of coverage levels and of payout delays, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States because of the multitude of different rules existing in the legal systems of the various Member States and can therefore be better achieved at Community level, the Community may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.

(18)

Directive 94/19/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.

(19)

In accordance with point 34 of the Interinstitutional Agreement on better law-making (5), Member States are encouraged to draw up, for themselves and in the interest of the Community, their own tables illustrating, as far as possible, the correlation between this Directive and the transposition measures and to make them public,

1.

in Article 1(3)(i), the second paragraph shall be replaced by the following:

‘The competent authorities shall make that determination as soon as possible and in any event no later than five working days after first becoming satisfied that a credit institution has failed to repay deposits which are due and payable; or’;

2.

Article 4 shall be amended as follows:

3.

Article 7 shall be amended as follows:

4.

the following Article shall be inserted:

‘Article 7a

1.   The Commission shall be assisted by the European Banking Committee established by Commission Decision 2004/10/EC (6).

2.   Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5a(1) to (4), and Article 7 of Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission (7) shall apply, having regard to the provisions of Article 8 thereof.

5.

in Article 9, paragraph 1 shall be replaced by the following:

‘1.   Member States shall ensure that credit institutions make available to actual and intending depositors the information necessary for the identification of the deposit-guarantee scheme of which the institution and its branches are members within the Community or any alternative arrangement provided for in the second subparagraph of Article 3(1) or in Article 3(4). The depositors shall be informed of the provisions of the deposit-guarantee scheme or any alternative arrangement applicable, including the amount and scope of the cover offered by the deposit-guarantee scheme. When a deposit is not guaranteed by a deposit-guarantee scheme in accordance with Article 7(2), the credit institution shall inform the depositor accordingly. All information shall be made available in a readily comprehensible manner.

Information about the conditions for compensation and the formalities which must be completed to obtain compensation shall be given on request.’;

6.

Article 10 shall be amended as follows:

7.

Article 12 shall be replaced by the following:

‘Article 12

1.   The Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and to the Council by 31 December 2009 a report on:

If necessary, the Commission shall put forward appropriate proposals to amend this Directive.

2.   Member States shall inform the Commission and the European Banking Committee if they intend to change the scope or level of coverage for deposits and on any difficulty encountered when cooperating with other Member States.’;

8.

Annex III shall be deleted.

13.3.2009   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 68/8

(1)

By letter dated 16 March 2005 the Czech Permanent Representation notified an aid scheme to support combined transport. The aid was registered under N 132/05. By letter dated 19 May 2005 the Commission asked further questions regarding this scheme to which the Czech authorities replied by letter registered by DG TREN on 11 July 2005. A technical meeting between the Czech authorities and the Commission services took place on 14 June 2005. A second request of information was sent by letter dated on 5 September 2005. The reply to this request was sent by the Czech authorities by letter dated on 5 October 2005. A third request of information was sent by letter on 1 December 2005. The reply to this request was sent by the Czech authorities by letter dated on 9 January 2006.

(2)

By letter dated 4 April 2006, the Commission informed the Czech Republic that it had decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of one specific measure regarding the aid for the purchase of certain types of wagons for the use of combined transport and decided not to raise any objection concerning the rest of the aid measures.

(3)

The Commission Decision to initiate the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Union  (2). The Commission called on interested parties to submit their comments.

(4)

The Commission received no comments from interested parties.

(5)

The Czech authorities forwarded to the Commission their comments to the Commission Decision of 4 April 2006 by letter dated 9 May 2006.

(6)

By letter dated 1 February 2007 the Czech authorities informed the Commission on the modifications introduced to the notified aid scheme as regards the purchase of certain types of wagons for the use of combined transport. Additional information was submitted to the Commission on 27 April 2007. By letter of 28 June 2007, the Czech authorities informed the Commission on new modifications introduced in the scheme as regards the purchase of certain types of wagons for the use of combined transport.

(7)

The aim of the scheme is to develop combined transport in order to achieve a traffic shift from freight road transport to other modes of transport. The scheme is made up of number of sub-programmes:

(8)

The scheme should mainly increase the use of unaccompanied combined transport by improving its competitiveness.

(9)

The legal basis will be the Resolution of the Government of the Czech Republic on the framework policy for the development of, and support for combined transport in the 2006-2010 period.

(10)

Beneficiaries will be combined transport operators, railway hauliers and operators of terminals.

(11)

All EU companies having registered offices, agencies, branches or subsidiaries in the Czech Republic will have access to the aid.

(12)

The aid will take the form of non-reimbursable subsidies.

Sub-programme 2 provides for aid in form of investment grants for the acquisition of combined transport equipment, including purchase of certain types of wagons for combined transport.

(13)

The State aid measures included in sub-programmes 1 and 3 and those within sub-programme 2 with the exclusion of the aid for the purchase of certain types of wagons for the use in combined transport were the object of the Commission Decision adopted on 4 April 2006 whereby the present investigative procedure was opened. In relation to all other measure excepting the purchase of certain types of wagons for the use in combined transport the Commission decided not to raise any objection. Consequently, the present decision only concerns the aid for the purchase of certain types of wagons for use in combined transport.

(14)

The Czech authorities consider in their notification that these special wagons cannot be used for traditional railway services, but exclusively and only for the transport of intermodal transport units. These wagons have a special construction, modified only for the transport of intermodal transport units, which makes it impossible to use these wagons for carrying goods carried by traditional railway cars — for example, the wagons do not have a floor, sidings or end boards, but are equipped with fixing pieces (twistlocks). The subsidy will only be provided for these special railway wagons and the applicant will have to provide their precise specification and use them for a specific new combined transport line. The principal objective of the support is to secure the necessary number of railway wagons for the respective combined transport line, or the railway wagons for the ‘new’ combined transport systems (e.g. preparation of road trailers), which have not been operated in the Czech Republic so far. The same principle will be used also for the special road vehicles for combined transport, and the support will be also extended to intermodal transport units with the exception of ISO containers.

(15)

The aid intensity is 30 % of the eligible costs.

(16)

The expected budget for the period 2006-2010 is CZK 1 580 million (EUR 55 702 450) for the overall programme.

(17)

The procedure to grant the aid, the project assessment, the cumulation and the control measures are exactly the same as those authorised by the Commission in its decision of 4 April 2006.

(18)

As regards the specific part of the aid concerning the special wagons for combined transport, the Commission had doubts whether it could be declared compatible with the EC Treaty.

(19)

In light of the Commission policy encouraging combined transport, the measure in question could be considered compatible on the basis of Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty if, in particular it were ensured that the wagons, the purchase of which is supported by the aid, can only be used for combined transport operations. At the stage of opening procedures, the Commission did not have sufficient information available in order to definitively establish that these wagons can only and exclusively be used in the framework of a combined transport service.

(20)

Alternatively, aid granted for the acquisition of rolling stock not exclusively dedicated to combined transport could be declared compatible if the beneficiaries of the aid were only small or medium-size enterprises (SMEs). Article 4(5) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to small and medium-sized enterprises (3) allows for aid investments in railway wagons for SMEs. In particular, the aid intensity fixed by Article 4(2) is 15 % for small and 7,5 % for medium-sized enterprises. In order to apply these provisions, the Commission requested the confirmation that the intended measure would only benefit small and medium-size enterprises and within these thresholds.

(21)

In their letter of 9 May 2006, the authorities of the Czech Republic submitted the following comments.

(22)

The proposed aid covers the purchase of special railway wagons intended for use only in combined transport, which cannot be used for other rail-transport purposes on account of their special design.

(23)

According to the UIC international letter marking system, these are wagons in the S category, or possibly the L category. Category ‘S’ means a flat, bogie wagon of a specific construction, while category ‘L’ means a flat, two-axle wagon of a specific construction. Wagons in these categories are of a special design (specific construction), adapted exclusively for the carriage of intermodal transport units, which makes it impossible to use these wagons for carrying goods in the same way as other railway wagons. The load area of wagons in these categories comprises a frame-type structure with fixing pins or other special components or devices which are essential for attaching or handling intermodal transport units. They do not therefore have a full floor, side walls or stanchions or an end walls, and so it is not possible to attach to them any type of load other than intermodal transport units. There are around 100 types of wagons in these categories in Europe.

(24)

The purpose of the aid for the purchase of the wagons in question is to help secure the special railway wagons for the new combined transport routes, or railway wagons for ‘new’ combined transport systems, which have not been operated in the Czech Republic at all to date (e.g. transport of road semi-trailers) or have been operated on a small scale (e.g. transport of swap bodies).

(25)

The special railway wagons, the acquisition of which would be funded from public resources, could be used only in the context of a new combined transport route and on the conditions laid down in advance in the government resolution referred to in recital 9. The grant may amount to a maximum of 30 % of the overall acquisition costs. The evaluation committee will assess the number of wagons acquired, the amount of the grant, the fulfilment of the conditions of the programme and the quality of the business plan.

(26)

At regular three-monthly intervals over a prescribed period, the beneficiary will transmit to the Ministry of Transport, inter alia, information on the operation of a new route and the utilisation of the railway wagons acquired by means of the grant. In addition, monitoring by the Ministry of Transport will focus on accounting and inventory records and random physical checks on the wagons concerned.

(27)

Converting these wagons is difficult from a technical point of view and very costly. Conversion would, moreover, involve changing the marking of the wagons, which of course requires the approval of the Railway Administration Authority, a Czech State body. Wagon conversions would also show up in the wagon inventory records, which will be the subject of checks by the Ministry of Transport.

(28)

The Czech Republic believes that support for the purchase of S or L series railway wagons is compatible with the Treaty establishing the European Community, because the very design of these wagons makes it impossible for them to be used in ordinary rail transport and converting these wagons would be difficult from a technical point of view and would be very costly. Monitoring the use of financial resources will be based, first, on the information which the beneficiary is obliged to transmit to the Ministry of Transport, inter alia, concerning the operation of a new route and the utilisation of the railway wagons acquired by means of the grant and, second, on the verification of the beneficiary’s accounting and inventory records, including random physical checks on these wagons.

(29)

In their letter of 1 February 2007 the Czech authorities notified the Commission of a modification of the aid scheme as regards the intensity of the aid for the purchase of certain types of wagons for the use of combined transport in order to adapt them to the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 70/2001. However, by letter of 28 June 2007, the Czech authorities informed the Commission on new modifications introduced in the scheme as regards the purchase of certain types of wagons for combined transport in order to maintain the provisions of the original notification.

(30)

According to Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty, any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the provision of certain goods shall be incompatible with the common market, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, save as otherwise provided for in the Treaty.

(31)

As regards the condition of use of State resources, the measure envisaged establishes that the selected beneficiaries will receive a State contribution. The State is responsible for the provision of such financial contributions. The Commission concludes that the measure implies the use of State resources.

(32)

As regards the condition of selective economic advantage, the aid measure applies only to railway companies who operate combined transport within the Czech Republic. It therefore favours certain undertakings or the provision of certain goods.

(33)

As regards the condition of distortion of competition and trade between Member States being affected, when aid granted by a Member State strengthens the position of an undertaking compared with other undertakings competing in intra-Community trade, the latter must be regarded as affected by that aid (4).

(34)

Council Directive 92/106/EEC of 7 December 1992 on the establishment of common rules for certain types of combined transport of goods between Member States (5) has liberalised the combined transport operations referred to in its Article 1 from all quota systems and systems of authorisation since 1 July 1993. Since then, undertakings are progressively becoming active in several Member States, and intra-community trade has started to develop. Competition between economic entities active in combined transport of goods is thus developing beyond the boundaries of the different Member States. The geographical position of the Czech Republic makes the development of competition between operators of combined transport within and outside this Member State relatively stronger than in other parts of the Community. The intended measure will support combined transport operators which develop activity within the Czech Republic, in competition with other operators who develop their activity in the neighbouring Member States. As such, it is liable to distort competition and affects trade between Member States.

(35)

In view of those facts, the Commission finds that the notified aid scheme involves aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty and is hence, in principle, prohibited by virtue of that Article, unless it may be deemed compatible with the common market by virtue of any of the exemptions provided for in the Treaty or secondary legislation.

(36)

In the absence of a more specific provision, the notified scheme can only be assessed upon the basis of Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty.

(37)

Article 87(3)(c) states that aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas may be considered to be compatible with the common market where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest.

(38)

The Community has for some time pursued a policy of achieving a balanced intermodal transport system and the fostering of the competitiveness of combined transport vis-à-vis road is part and parcel of this policy. The aim of EC combined transport policy is to achieve a modal shift from road to other modes of transport.

(39)

Community instruments such as Directive 92/106/EEC aim explicitly at fostering the development of combined transport, as confirmed in the fourth recital of that Directive. The White Paper on Transport Policy (6) encourages the use of rail and other environmentally friendly modes of transport in order to become competitive alternatives to road haulage.

(40)

Intermodal policy is an initiative to take the pressure off the road freight sector, and is in line with the conclusions of the European Council of Gothenburg of June 2001 which has declared that measures helping modal shift from road transport to more environmentally friendly modes are at the heart of the policy for sustainable transport (7).

(41)

Furthermore, today, Europe’s industry maintains or increases the competitiveness of its Europe-based production largely by advanced logistics, optimising production and distribution, and creating value in the process. These sophisticated supply chains are increasingly vulnerable to the decreasing reliability and increasing costs of road freight. Intermodal logistics will thus have to become a prime occupation for Europe’s production industry, in order to maintain productive assets and processes in Europe.

(42)

Intermodal transport is a complex transport option, involving various actors with various business models, in a fragmented and small-scale environment, often still separated by modal cultures and along national lines. The Commission recognises that it is in the first place the task of market operators to improve intermodal transport within markets, whose access is free and where the rules of free competition and supply and demand prevail. However, in order to fully unleash the potential of intermodal transport, the willingness to take risks inherent in switching from road to the alternative modes, needs to be stimulated.

(43)

Many transport companies are operating today in markets in full restructuring. Their margins are low, planning is difficult, and the future uncertain. Therefore, practical and market-oriented support programmes need to be devised to help the intermodal sector take risks and respond to the challenge of achieving a sustained and large modal shift, in line with the targets set in the Commission White Paper of 2001.

(44)

The proposed aid is intended for the purchase of special railway wagons intended for use only in combined transport, which cannot be used for other rail-transport purposes on account of their special design.

(45)

The Commission considers that the explanations provided by the Czech authorities in their letter dated 9 May 2006, referred to in recitals 20 to 27 of this Decision, clearly indicate that the special wagons are exclusively dedicated to combined transport operations due to their special design (specific construction), adapted exclusively for the carriage of intermodal transport units, which makes it difficult to use these wagons for carrying goods in the same way as other railway wagons.

(46)

The Commission in its practice has considered State aid for the acquisition of equipment designed exclusively for combined transport (8), in particular wagons of such specific conditions (9), compatible with Treaty rules. In addition, the Commission considers that (10) to modernise or renew rolling stock in the field of rail transport is necessary in order to avoid further fall in rail transport’s market share compared with other, less sustainable and more environmentally damaging, transport modes.

(47)

The Commission considers that in the line with established practice (11), the limitation of the planned aid’s intensity to 30 % will ensure that trading conditions are not affected contrary to the common interest.

(48)

The Commission therefore concludes that the aid for the purchase of certain types of wagons to be used in combined transport at issue in the present case can be considered compatible with the EC Treaty in accordance with Article 87(3)(c) of the Treaty in as much as they will not distort trade in a manner contrary to the common interest,

13.3.2009   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 68/14

(1)

The Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation entered into force on 1 January 2007 and contains Annex A concerning legal acts in the field of statistics.

(2)

New legal acts in the field of statistics have been adopted and should be added to the Annex A. Consequently, Annex A should be revised,

13.3.2009   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 68/28

(1)

On 28 October 2005, Bayer CropScience AG submitted to the competent authority of the United Kingdom an application, in accordance with Articles 5 and 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, for the placing on the market of foods, food ingredients, and feed containing or produced from T45 oilseed rape.

(2)

The application also covers the placing on the market of other products containing T45 oilseed rape for the same uses as any other oilseed rape with the exception of cultivation. Therefore, in accordance with Articles 5(5) and 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, it includes the data and information required by Annexes III and IV to Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EEC (2) and information and conclusions about the risk assessment carried out in accordance with the principles set out in Annex II to Directive 2001/18/EC.

(3)

On 17 April 2007, Bayer CropScience AG submitted to the Commission an application, in accordance with Articles 8(4) and 20(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, for the authorisation of existing products produced from T45 oilseed rape (food additives and feed materials produced from T45 oilseed rape).

(4)

The applicant indicated in its applications and in communications to the Commission that the commercialisation of T45 oilseed rape seeds was stopped after the 2005 planting season.

(5)

Therefore, the only purpose of these applications is to cover the presence of T45 oilseed rape resulting from its past cultivation in third countries.

(6)

On 5 March 2008, the European Food Safety Authority (‘EFSA’) gave a single comprehensive favourable opinion for both applications in accordance with Articles 6 and 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 and concluded that it is unlikely that the placing on the market of the products containing or produced from T45 oilseed rape as described in the applications (‘the products’) will have any adverse effects on human or animal health or the environment in the context of their intended uses (3). In its opinion, EFSA considered all the specific questions and concerns raised by the Member States in the context of the consultation of the national competent authorities as provided for by Articles 6(4) and 18(4) of that Regulation.

(7)

In particular, EFSA concluded that as no indication of biologically relevant compositional and agronomical changes was identified for seeds from T45 oilseed rape except the presence of the PAT protein, no further animal safety studies with the whole food/feed (e.g. a 90-day toxicity study in rats) are needed.

(8)

In its opinion, EFSA also concluded that the environmental monitoring plan, consisting of a general surveillance plan, submitted by the applicant is in line with the intended use of the products. However, due to the physical characteristics of oilseed rape seeds and methods of transportation, EFSA recommended that appropriate management systems should be in place to minimise accidental loss and spillage of transgenic oilseed rape during transportation, storage, handling and processing. The monitoring plan submitted by the applicant has been modified to take into account this EFSA recommendation.

(9)

In order to monitor the phasing out of T45 oilseed rape, its presence in imported products should be regularly reported.

(10)

Taking into account those considerations, it is appropriate to grant an authorisation to cover the presence in products of T45 oilseed rape resulting from the commercialisation of T45 oilseed rape seeds in third countries until 2005.

(11)

A unique identifier should be assigned to each GMO as provided for in Commission Regulation (EC) No 65/2004 of 14 January 2004 establishing a system for the development and assignment of unique identifiers for genetically modified organisms (4).

(12)

On the basis of the EFSA opinion, no specific labelling requirements other than those provided for in Articles 13(1) and 25(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, appear to be necessary for foods, food ingredients and feed containing, or produced from T45 oilseed rape. However, in order to ensure the use of the products within the limits of the authorisation provided for by this Decision, the labelling of feed containing the GMO and other products than food and feed containing the GMO for which authorisation is requested should be complemented by a clear indication that the products in question must not be used for cultivation.

(13)

Similarly, the EFSA opinion does not justify the imposition of specific conditions or restrictions for the placing on the market and/or specific conditions or restrictions for the use and handling, including post-market monitoring requirements, or of specific conditions for the protection of particular ecosystems/environment and/or geographical areas, as provided for in point (e) of Articles 6(5) and 18(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003.

(14)

All relevant information on the authorisation of the products should be entered in the Community register of genetically modified food and feed, as provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003.

(15)

Article 4(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1830/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 concerning the traceability and labelling of genetically modified organisms and the traceability of food and feed products produced from genetically modified organisms and amending Directive 2001/18/EC (5), lays down labelling requirements for products consisting or containing GMOs.

(16)

This Decision is to be notified through the Biosafety Clearing-House to the Parties to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity pursuant to Articles 9(1) and 15(2)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 1946/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2003 on transboundary movements of genetically modified organisms (6).

(17)

The applicant has been consulted on the measures provided for in this Decision.

(18)

The Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health has not delivered an opinion within the time limit laid down by its Chairman; the Commission has therefore submitted a proposal to the Council on 30 October 2008 in accordance with Article 5 of the Council Decision 1999/468/EC (7), the Council being required to act within three months.

(19)

However, the Council has not acted within the required time limit; a Decision should now be adopted by the Commission,

(a)

foods and food ingredients containing or produced from ACS-BNØØ8-2 oilseed rape;

(b)

feed containing or produced from ACS-BNØØ8-2 oilseed rape;

(c)

products other than food and feed containing ACS-BNØØ8-2 oilseed rape for the same uses as any other oilseed rape with the exception of cultivation.

13.3.2009   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 68/33

‘A12

In this case, CU750,000 would be classified as equity and CU150,000 would be classified as financial liabilities. In addition to the paragraphs already cited, paragraph 18(b) of IAS 32 states in part:

… a financial instrument that gives the holder the right to put it back to the issuer for cash or another financial asset (a ‘puttable instrument’) is a financial liability, except for those instruments classified as equity instruments in accordance with paragraphs 16A and 16B or paragraphs 16C and 16D. The financial instrument is a financial liability even when the amount of cash or other financial assets is determined on the basis of an index or other item that has the potential to increase or decrease. The existence of an option for the holder to put the instrument back to the issuer for cash or another financial asset means that the puttable instrument meets the definition of a financial liability, except for those instruments classified as equity instruments in accordance with paragraphs 16A and 16B or paragraphs 16C and 16D.’