9.5.2009

Official Journal of the European Union

C 107/1

Communication from the Commission — Beverage packaging, deposit systems and free movement of goods

2009/C 107/01

1. INTRODUCTION

Packaging has a vital social and economic function. It is an essential part of modern goods handling. Sooner or later packaging also becomes part of the waste stream. In 2006, around 81 million tonnes of packaging waste were generated in the EU. In order to limit its environmental impact and to reduce final disposal of packaging, Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste (1) lays down measures to prevent the production of packaging waste and, in addition measures intended at reusing, recycling and recovering such waste. This Directive requires Member States to ensure that management systems are put in place for the collection, reuse of used packaging and the recycling or recovery of packaging waste in order to channel it to the most appropriate waste management alternatives. To this end it envisages as a first priority measures aimed at preventing the production of packaging waste, it lists, as additional fundamental principles, reusing packaging, recycling and other forms of recovering packaging waste.

National reuse systems for packaging operate with regard to several types of packaging. Some of these systems work very well, particularly those for transport packaging, such as crates and pallets, but also for beverage packaging in the hotel, restaurant and catering sector. In other areas, however, public intervention may be needed to encourage reuse systems, regardless of their actual commercial viability. In this respect, most of the debate in the European Union is focused on consumer beverage packaging (which accounts for around 20 % of total packaging by weight) (2).

While regulatory steering measures taken at Member State level in order to introduce systems for the reuse of beverage packaging may serve environmental goals, they also have the potential to divide the internal market. For market operators engaged in activities in several Member States these systems often make it more difficult to take advantage of business opportunities within the internal market. Instead of selling the same product in the same packaging in different markets, they are required to adapt their packaging to the requirements of each individual Member State, which usually leads to additional costs.

The harmonising effect of Directive 94/62/EC, which is also aimed at ensuring the functioning of the internal market, remains limited in this area. Instead, the provisions of the Directive must be read in the light of the general principles of Community law and the obligations under the EC Treaty (especially Articles 28 to 30, 81, 82, 86 and 90 EC).

Directive 94/62/EC has brought about a significant degree of convergence between the recycling rates of the Member States, and the notification procedure of Directive 98/34/EC (3) has made it possible to resolve many internal market issues before the proposed legislation was adopted and would have created problems in practice. However, the goals of securing the functioning of the internal market and reducing trade barriers have not yet been fully achieved for all types of packaging. Past experience and ongoing cases show that the adoption of unilateral measures in different Member States still poses problems. In particular, infringement procedures in the beverage sector have shown that national measures can lead to distortions of competition and, in some cases, to the partitioning of the internal market, which runs counter to the internal market aim of Directive 94/62/EC.

In its 2006 report on the implementation of Directive 94/62/EC the Commission undertook to further evaluate the need for clarification in this field (4) This Communication is regarded as a non-regulatory step in this direction and is intended to lead to greater transparency in the applicable legal framework at Community level by describing some ‘do’s and don’ts’ from a Community point of view..

This Communication seeks, in particular, to support relevant economic operators and the Member States’ authorities that deal with beverage packaging and beverage packaging waste, by providing them with a comprehensive and up-to-date overview of the principles of EC law and secondary legislation. It reflects the Commission’s interpretation of the Directive, Treaty provisions and the case law of the Court of Justice.

The Commission will continue to closely monitor the correct implementation of the current principles and is committed to react to any measures which are liable to disrupt the functioning of the internal market and which are not justified for environmental protection reasons.

2. FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS AND BEVERAGE PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS

2.1. The problem of beverage packaging quotas

In past years, some Member States have set certain target figures (quotas) for the numbers of reusable containers for certain beverages. There is no objection to quotas of this kind as long as they define general policy goals. However, these quotas can be tied to certain specific obligations in the event of surpluses or shortfalls. These obligations could give rise to internal market concerns, one reason being that, given the additional costs linked to the organisation of reuse systems and the transport distances involved, importers of beverages normally use considerably more non-reusable packaging than do domestic producers.

If such quotas were to lead to quantitative restrictions, i.e. prohibiting the placing on the market of further products in a certain beverage packaging once the quota has been reached, this would amount to a barrier to trade contrary to Article 28 EC (5).

Moreover, the Commission believes that national provisions which construe a direct link between the proportion of reusable packaging used for specific beverages and the need to establish a deposit and return system for one-way packaging have to be seen with particular caution from an internal market perspective. A quasi-mathematical mechanism that depends on the current quota runs the risk of being biased by short-term developments, which do not mirror the general trend. In such circumstances a direct link to those figures in national provisions may not be flexible enough and fail to deliver the necessary reliability, especially in the planning of commercial decisions by the businesses concerned. Therefore, it may be more appropriate to keep developments in the packaging sector under regular review and, based on this assessment, to decide on any measure deemed necessary to encourage reuse systems or to influence the packaging split.

2.2. Ban on beverage packaging

Directive 94/62/EC lays down the essential requirements governing the composition of packaging. Under the terms of Article 18 of that Directive, Member States shall not impede the placing on the market of their territory of packaging which satisfies its provisions. It follows that Member States are not allowed to ban marketing of certain types of beverage packaging that comply with Community legislation (6). In this regard the Directive aims at the twin objectives of protecting the environment and ensuring the functioning of the internal market by, for example, establishing essential requirements for packaging and limiting values for heavy metals present in packaging.

National provisions that limit the quantity of products which may be imported in a certain type of beverage packaging would also be contrary to the clause on free movement in Article 18 of the Directive (7).

2.3. Prior authorisation of beverage packaging

National systems that subject the marketing of goods to prior authorisation restrict access to the market of the importing Member State, and must therefore be regarded as a measure having an effect equivalent to a quantitative restriction on imports within the meaning of Article 28 EC (8). Moreover, in the specific case of beverage packaging, any market access restrictions on beverage packaging that complies with the essential requirements of the Directive would contravene the Directive and Article 28 EC. This may be even true where the authorisation requirement is based on a voluntary agreement between the industry concerned and the Member State, given that by participating in or fostering such a covenant, the Member State endorses the result and risks infringing its responsibilities under Community law which disallows any market access barrier for beverage packaging complying with the Directive. Beverage packaging marketed in another Member State is deemed to satisfy the essential requirements of the Directive; dealing with them on the internal market cannot therefore be impeded.

3. FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS AND BEVERAGE PACKAGING MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

3.1. Reuse, recovery and recycling of beverage packaging

In the case of beverage packaging ‘reuse’ means that a specific container, which has been conceived and designed to accomplish within its life cycle a minimum number of rotations, is refilled for the same purpose for which it was first put on the market (9). Reused beverage packaging is often named ‘refillable’.

Directive 94/62/EC does not establish a clear hierarchy between the reuse of packaging and the recovery of packaging waste (10). The eighth recital in the preamble to the Directive states, however, that ‘until scientific and technological progress is made with regard to recovery processes, reuse and recycling should be considered preferable in terms of environmental impact’.

Apart from this, Article 5 of Directive 94/62/EC allows Member States to encourage, in conformity with the Treaty, systems for the reuse of packaging that can be reused in an environmentally sound manner. Thereby Article 5 highlights an option, which can be taken up by Member States subject to their own discretion. When making provision for such policy, Member States must comply not only with the requirements that flow from the Directive’s provisions, but also with obligations resulting from the provisions of the Treaty, in particular on the free movement of goods (11).

3.2. Global beverage packaging collection systems

The management of packaging and packaging waste requires Member States to set up systems for return, collection and recovery. These systems have a twofold purpose: first, the return and/or collection of used packaging and packaging waste and, second, the reuse of the packaging or the recovery of packaging waste collected (12). In the case of beverage packaging, the choice to be made between reuse and recovery is influenced by whether the containers are refillable or non-refillable.

Traditionally, refill systems are combined with payment of a deposit in order to guarantee that a large proportion of containers are returned for refilling. These deposit and return systems are often operated on a voluntary basis by the fillers concerned. They either set up their own system for the products they distribute or pool resources with other producers by using common containers and crates. Voluntary schemes of this kind for refillables are rarely covered by legislation. Nevertheless, a few Member States have adopted regulatory provisions to set certain common parameters. These parameters are normally limited to general rules, such as a common deposit rate. From an internal market perspective, voluntary systems are unlikely to create any barriers to trade, given that they are based on voluntary decisions by the industry concerned. However, if Member States opt for a national legislative framework for such systems for refillables, they must observe at least the conditions set out in Article 7 of Directive 94/62/EC, which are:

—	The requirements set shall apply to imported products under non-discriminatory conditions, and

—	Distortion of competition must be avoided.

From a business perspective it has to be observed that refillable schemes are mostly used by domestic fillers, given that they require a certain turnover of containers and that costs normally increase with the distance between the filler and the points of sale.

For non-refillable containers, it is the global collection systems that continue to dominate. However, some Member States have also introduced mandatory deposit systems for non-reusable beverage packaging. Community law, as it stands, leaves it to each Member State to choose between a deposit and return system, on the one hand, and a global packaging-collection system on the other, or to opt for a combination of the two systems depending on the type of product; with the proviso that the systems chosen should be designed to channel packaging to the most appropriate waste management alternatives and form part of a policy covering all packaging and packaging waste (13).

However, this choice still has to comply with Article 7 of Directive 94/62/EC and the relevant provisions of the Treaty:

—	The system must be open to the participation of the economic operators of the sectors concerned and to the participation of the competent public authorities.

—

The system chosen must also apply to imported products under non-discriminatory conditions, including the detailed arrangements and any tariffs imposed for access to the system. As regards the latter, Member States should avoid arrangements that lead to the unjustified doubling of participation charges at different levels for the same service provided which would risk hampering specifically small businesses.

—	The system must not create unjustified trade barriers and thereby infringe Articles 28–30 EC.

—	The system must not distort competition as outlined in Articles 81, 82 and 86 EC.

3.3. Mandatory deposit systems as a barrier to trade

To make non-refillable beverage packaging subject to a mandatory deposit and return system creates barriers to trade, given that such systems make it impossible to sell the same product in the same packaging in more than one Member State. Instead, producers or distributors may have to alter the packaging or the labelling of the imported products and have to bear additional costs connected with the organisation of the take-back system, the refunding of sums paid by way of deposit and any balancing of those sums between distributors. In these cases, even if such systems do not actually prohibit imports of drinks in non-reusable packaging, they do require substantial modifications and investment and thereby hamper the access of imported beverages to the market (14).

The fact that they would qualify as a trade barrier, however, does not prevent these national provisions from being justified on grounds relating to the protection of the environment. According to the Court of Justice, a deposit and return system may increase the proportion of empty packaging returned, and at the same time lead to a more targeted sorting of packaging waste. Moreover, it may help prevent littering, as it gives consumers an incentive to return empty packaging (15). Finally, insofar as those national provisions encourage the producers or distributors concerned to have recourse to reusable packaging, they contribute towards a general reduction in the amount of waste disposed of, which is a general goal in environmental policy.

In practice, this means that Member States are allowed to introduce mandatory deposit systems if, on the basis of the individual Member State’s discretion, this is considered necessary for environmental reasons.

If a Member State opts for a mandatory deposit and return system, it must nevertheless observe certain requirements in order to ensure that a fair balance is struck between environmental objectives and internal market needs. In view of the additional burden on imported products, such systems must take note of the specific situation and must use means which do not go beyond what is necessary for the purpose envisaged.

On the basis of Directive 94/62/EC and the principle of proportionality under Articles 28–30 EC, the Court of Justice has identified several safeguards that have to be respected in relation to the design of the system.

3.3.1. Transitional period

A changeover from one waste management system to another demands good and thorough preparation by all key players involved, given that this phase is critical for market operators, since uncertainties about the legal and factual position can create instabilities in the market. The changeover to the new system must take place without interruption and without jeopardising the ability of businesses concerned to actually participate in the new system as soon as it becomes operational. This means that features of the system have to be developed and put in place, manufacturing lines and distribution chains have to be adapted and consumers have to be informed. This takes time and effort. Therefore, producers and distributors must be given a sufficiently long transitional period to enable them to adapt to the requirements of the new system before the deposit and return system enters into force. In the case of a complete changeover that requires a new system to be developed at the outset, a period of six months between the legal announcement and the entry into force was considered insufficient (16). In such circumstances, a period of at least one year seems necessary.

On the other hand, once a deposit and return system is established, future modifications may be subject to a shorter deadline than the one granted for the initial establishment. Overall, the specific time needs have to be evaluated by national authorities on a case-by-case basis when setting the specific transitional period.

3.3.2. Design of the system: fair, open and transparent

The operational conditions that must be fulfilled by a mandatory deposit system for non-refillables are another key feature. Some of these parameters flow from Article 7 of Directive 94/62/EC; others were developed by the Court of Justice in its caselaw on Article 28 EC.

(a)

A countrywide system should be provided which covers the whole territory affected by the mandatory deposit system. However, this does not assume the existence of only one system operator. Several providers would also be possible as long as the systems are compatible with each other and not exclusive. The purpose of a countrywide system is to make available a sufficient number of points of return so that consumers can recover the deposit independently of the initial place of purchase. This strengthens the acceptance of any such system by consumers, facilitates the return of empty packaging and undoubtedly increases the amount of collected material. Past experience has shown that the lack of a countrywide system leads to the proliferation of retailer-own solutions (so-called island solutions), which means a patchwork of different return systems that are not compatible with each other. Moreover, island solutions often allow retailers to require their suppliers to adapt the packaging to their own proprietary requirements, forcing additional costs on suppliers. This is likely to aggravate the negative effect on the internal market. Seen in this context, a countrywide system is of primary importance (17).

(b)

Any mandatory deposit and return system must be open to the participation of all economic operators in the sector concerned. It shall also apply to imported products under non-discriminatory conditions. This includes the detailed operational arrangements of a system as well as the fees or tariffs imposed by the organisation running the system. The purpose of these guarantees is to avoid creating any unjustified barrier to trade or distorting competition.

(c)

Member States must ensure that there is no discrimination between those products that are exempt and those that are subject to the deposit requirement and that any differentiation is based on objective criteria. Therefore the Commission is of the opinion that the differentiation should in principle be based on the material used for the containers and not on the content of the beverages, for reasons that the content in itself is not related to the environmental performance of the packaging.

Member States may choose between setting up such a system by themselves and leaving the task to the industry concerned (e.g. producers and distributors). Nevertheless, the latter option does not relieve the Member State of its obligation to ensure a proper workable system. In this respect, the Member State bears responsibility for the result. This demands an active approach on the part of national authorities. In order to discharge this guarantee function Member States may outline particular features of the system in regulatory provisions or may lay claim to certain monitoring or supervision tasks vis-à-vis the entity responsible for the system.

3.3.3. Best practice solutions

To address some of the issues mentioned above, Member States may consider making use of the following practical solutions:

(a)

Labelling: In order to make it easier for the consumer to identify beverages or beverage packaging that is covered by a deposit and return system, it may be considered useful to label the products concerned, e.g. with a common logo (18). However, the described benefit for the consumer may give rise to additional costs for the manufacturer or distributor as the label has to be adapted to the specific requirements of the national market. Any such obligation to alter packaging can potentially constitute a barrier to trade under Article 28 EC (19). To balance the competing interests involved — i.e. consumer information and easy market access — any such labelling requirement should be kept to the necessary minimum. In the case of a mandatory deposit mark, it would be useful to give producers easy access to the design features and printing specifications in order to facilitate its use. Moreover, stickers may be supplied to importers of small quantities; this would allow small-scale distributors to supplement the original labelling with such an additional sticker, instead of obliging them to change the whole labelling. Finally, it is recommended not to make any requirement to label beverage packaging with a logo exclusive, but to allow the use of other logos that are in use in other Member States. This would allow producers to use the same label for several Member States. Clearly, in specific circumstances parallel labelling of the packaging concerned with several deposit logos may be restricted due to anti-fraud considerations. For a further labelling feature, the European Article Number (EAN) codes used on products, similar considerations apply. The need for country-specific EAN-codes should be avoided as these codes could also make country-by-country packaging necessary which would risk again an impediment to cross-border trade.

(b)

Clearing system: A clearing system would help to guarantee a levelling out of the different amounts of the deposit collected and returned between the players involved. It is advisable to make the system easily accessible, irrespective of the Member State in which the producer or distributor concerned has its seat.

(c)

Exemptions for small businesses: Member States may reduce some of the operational obligations concerning deposit systems for participating small businesses, based e.g. on de minimis considerations. To give an example: Small kiosks may not have the storage space necessary for meeting their take-back obligations. Therefore, it might be considered reasonable to grant them certain exemptions. However, it is advisable to assess whether any such exemption would not affect the overall quality and functioning of the deposit and return system as such, or would lead to discriminatory application of its conditions.

(d)

Easy import/export: Mandatory deposit and return systems make the market access for imported products more difficult as they require a regular reconditioning of the product concerned. At the same time they may impede exports, given that it might prove difficult to market such products in another Member State once they have been specifically designed for the deposit and return system in the Member State in which they were first placed on the market. Some of these trading difficulties are certainly the unavoidable consequence of such systems, as they are related to the situation in a specific Member State and not to the situation in the whole of the EU. However, Member States should avoid any regulatory provisions which would make exports, re-imports or parallel imports of beverages virtually impossible due to particular handling requirements for packaging.

3.4. No distortion of competition

Article 7 of Directive 94/62/EC requires that Member States avoid any distortion of competition when establishing return, collection or recovery systems. Where the task of setting up such systems is given to private entities, national authorities should avoid these systems potentially being used to inhibit the market entry of new competitors. Appropriate safeguards should be provided in the legislative setting. It should be emphasized that, above all, the private entity takes responsibility for any abuse of a dominant position or anticompetitive behaviour under Articles 81 and 82 EC. Nevertheless, Member States are called upon to screen the design and operation of the deposit and return system for any potential risk that could facilitate such abuse.

4. ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES

4.1. Tax-based systems

Article 15 of Directive 94/62/EC highlights the power of Member States to adopt in the absence of harmonised provisions economic instruments to promote objectives of environmental policy. Such instruments should respect, inter alia, the polluter-pays principle as well as the obligations arising from the Treaty.

Member States may consider national tax-based systems as one form of such economic instruments and as an alternative way to achieve a certain steering towards sustainable packaging. The costs of complying with national environment-driven tax systems are often lower than the additional costs linked to mandatory deposit systems as described above. Nevertheless, packaging taxation is not neutral as to its internal market effects. Such taxes, if they are related to the specific material used, could cause material switching, given that in beverage packaging the various materials are normally effective substitutes. Moreover, as such taxes are often passed on they increase the retail price and thus may influence consumer choice.

Against this background, Member States must ensure that national taxation complies with Article 90 EC Treaty. The purpose of this provision is to guarantee the complete neutrality of internal taxes in respect of the competitive situation of domestic products and products imported from another Member State (20). It prevents Member States from applying national taxation that favours domestic economic operators at the expense of their competitors in other Member States who are producing similar or competing products. This principle of non-discrimination must be respected both in law and in fact. The Commission will evaluate possible incompatibilities of national systems of taxation with Article 90 EC on a case-by-case basis.

Against this provision, a differentiation between similar products is allowed if it pursues objectives of economic, social or environmental policy which are themselves compatible with the requirements of the EC Treaty and the Community’s secondary legislation, and if the detailed rules are such as to avoid any form of discrimination (21). It follows from this criterion that Member States may adopt tax arrangements which differentiate between similar products, on the basis of objective criteria such as the nature of the raw materials used or the production processes employed (22).

In the present context, differentiation criteria may be considered objective if they reflect the environmental impact of the material used. Such environmental criteria need to be applied in a consistent manner. Where taxes are levied on account of the non-reusable character of the packaging, differentiations according to its content, a factor which in itself is independent from the environmental impact of the packaging, have to be seen with particular caution.

The above considerations apply to the whole system of taxation, including tax reductions. Any preferential treatment must be extended without discrimination to products from other Member States that satisfy the same conditions.

4.2. Voluntary systems

Voluntary or manufacturers’ own return systems are often applied in the case of reusable containers, because in these situations it is greatly in the producers’ interest to collect a large proportion of the packaging used so that the ‘refill cycle’ can work. From an internal market viewpoint, such systems do not amount to barriers to trade. Member States may nevertheless set certain parameters with a view to ensuring interoperability, access and consumer protection.

5. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR MEMBER STATES

Directive 98/34/EC (23) provides a notification procedure in the field of technical standards and regulations in order to prevent the adoption of national standards and technical regulations which create new barriers to trade within the internal market. According to this Directive, Member States are obliged to notify technical regulations at a draft stage to the Commission. This procedure gives the Commission and Member States the possibility to analyse the draft technical regulations of (other) Member States before they are adopted, which enables them to eliminate at source any barriers to the free movement of goods.

The notification obligation applies to draft technical regulations. According to Article 1 point 11 of the Directive a technical regulation comprises technical specifications and other requirements or rules on services, including the relevant administrative provisions, the observance of which is compulsory.

According to Article 1 point 3 of the Directive a technical specification is a specification contained in a document which lays down the characteristics required of a product such as levels of quality, performance, safety or dimensions, including the requirements applicable to the product as regards the name under which the products is sold, terminology, symbols, testing and test methods, packaging, marking or labelling and conformity assessment procedures. The term ‘technical specification’ also covers production methods and processes used in respect of agricultural products and products intended for human consumption.

According to Article 1 point 4 of the Directive, an ‘other requirement’ is a requirement, other than a technical specification, imposed on a product for the purpose of protecting, in particular, consumers or the environment, and which affects its life cycle after it has been placed on the market, such as conditions of use, recycling, reuse or disposal, where such conditions can significantly influence the composition or nature of the product or its marketing.

National regulation relating to the management of packaging waste or seeking to impose a return or reuse system for packaging, or even the separate collection of certain products can be expected to contain provisions which fall into the category of ‘other requirements’ and have therefore to be notified to the Commission under the notification procedure of Directive 98/34/EC.

Thereby the notification obligation applies to technical regulations which are compulsory, de jure or de facto, including voluntary agreements to which a public authority is a contracting party.

In addition, Article 16 of Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste provides that Member States should notify the Commission of drafts of any measures they intend to adopt in the framework of Directive 94/62/EC prior to its adoption, so that it can be established whether or not they comply with Directive 94/62/EC.

Therefore, Article 16 extends the notification obligation, since measures which are not technical regulations in the sense of Directive 98/34/EC, but fall within the framework of Directive 94/62/EC shall also be notified by the Member States to the Commission. Measures that contain technical regulations need to be notified under both, Directive 94/62/EC and Directive 98/34/EC.

In order to ensure the smooth operation of these notification procedures, a ‘one-stop shop’ was set up for these draft measures. They shall be notified through the 98/34 procedure and will be analysed following this procedure.

Indeed, Member States regularly notify their draft legislation, and in particular draft legislation concerning deposit, return and collection systems, under Directive 98/34/EC. This has provided the Commission with an insight into national regulatory initiatives and has led to the creation of a genuine discussion forum (including participation from industry) and prevented problems beforehand, thus avoiding costly and controversial infringement proceedings which can only be launched after the measure has entered into force.

6. CONCLUSION

This Communication presents different legal aspects through which regulatory measures in the field of beverage packaging may have repercussions on a truly internal market. Being aware of these, Member States, acting in the interests of better regulation, are called upon to notify and preventively scrutinise national measures on these aspects in order to facilitate the free flow of goods and guarantee interoperability of national systems as much as possible.

For its part the Commission will continue to monitor developments in the sector of beverage packaging and if necessary verify to what extent further steps on a regulatory or non-regulatory level, including a review of this Communication, should be taken.

(1) Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 1994 on packaging and packaging waste (OJ L 365, 31.12.1994), as last amended by Directive 2005/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2005 (OJ L 70, 16.3.2005).

(2) Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the implementation of Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste and its impact on the environment, as well as on the functioning of the internal market, 6 December 2006, COM(2006) 767 final, p. 8.

(3) Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations and of rules on Information Society services (OJ L 204, 21.7.1998), as last amended by Council Directive 2006/96/EC of 20 November 2006 (OJ L 363, 20.12.2006).

(4) Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the implementation of Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste and its impact on the environment, as well as on the functioning of the internal market, 6 December 2006, COM(2006) 767 final.

(5) Case C-309/02 Radlberger Spitz (2004) ECR I-11763, para. 62; cf. also Case 302/86 Commission v Denmark ECR (1988)4607.

(6) See Opinion of Advocate General Colomer in Case C-246/99 Commission v Denmark, para. 40 as well as his opinion in Case C-233/99, para. 24 (both cases were removed from the Court’s register without judgment). This is without prejudice to the Member State’s right to submit a derogation request under Article 95(5) EC on grounds of a problem specific to that Member State arising after the adoption of the harmonisation measure.

(7) Case C-309/02 Radlberger Spitz (2004) ECR I-11763, para. 62.

(8) See for instance Case C-432/03 Commission v Portugal (2005) ECR I-9665, para. 41.

(9) Cf. Article 3(5) Directive 94/62/EC ‘Definitions’.

(10) Case C-309/02 Radlberger Spitz (2004) ECR I-11763, para. 33; Case C-463/01 Commission v Germany (2004) ECR I-11705, para. 40. The recently revised Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC), to which the Packaging Directive is lex specialis, enumerates a priority order in waste prevention, management legislation and policy (prevention, preparing for reuse, recycling, other recovery like energy recovery and disposal), where and insofar as this order delivers the best overall environmental outcome. This may require specific waste streams departing from this order where this is justified by life-cycle thinking on the overall impacts of the generation and management of waste taking into account, inter alia, technical feasibility, economic viability and environmental protection.

(11) Case C-309/02 Radlberger Spitz (2004) ECR I-11763, para. 36.

(12) Article 7(1) Directive 94/62/EC.

(13) Case C-309/02 Radlberger Spitz (2004) ECR I-11763, para. 42.

(14) Case C-463/01 Commission v Germany (2004) ECR I-11705, para. 61 and 62.

(15) Case C-309/02 Radlberger Spitz (2004) ECR I-11763, para. 77.

(16) Case C-463/01 Commission v Germany (2004) ECR I-11705, para. 81.

(17) Cf. Case C-309/02 Radlberger Spitz (2004) ECR I-11763, para. 46.

(18) The marking and identifications systems provided for by Article 8 of Directive 94/62/EC are currently limited to Decision 97/129/EC of 28 January 1997 establishing the identification system for packaging materials pursuant to European Parliament and Council Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste, which concerns packaging materials. Labelling of packaging that falls under a deposit and return system is instead not covered by harmonised Community legislation.

(19) Case C-315/92 Clinique Laboratoires (1994) ECR I-317, para. 19.

(20) Cf. Case C-167/05 Commission v Sweden, para. 40.

(21) Cf. Case C-221/06 Stadtgemeinde Frohnleiten (2007) ECR I-9643, para. 56; Case C-213/96 Outokumpu Oy (1998) ECR I-1777, para. 30.

(22) Case C-90/94 Haahr Petroleum (1997) ECR I-4085, para. 29.

(23) Cited in footnote 3.

9.5.2009

Official Journal of the European Union

C 107/12

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products and amending Regulation (EC) No 70/2001

2009/C 107/04

Aid No: XA 2/09

Member State: Denmark

Region: Denmark

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving individual aid: Tilskud til certificerede partier af sædekorn og markfrø

Legal basis: Bekendtgørelsen nr. 1360 af 19. december 2008 om tilskud til certificerede partier af sædekorn og markfrø udstedt med hjemmel i Finansloven for finansåret 2009

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: DKR 10 000 000

Maximum aid intensity: 50 %

Date of implementation: Bekendtgørelse om tilskud til certificerede partier af sædekorn og markfrø træder (Order concerning grants for certified lots of cereal seed and other seed for sowing) enters into force on 1 January 2009, from which date aid may be paid under this scheme.

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: The scheme is financed by means of an appropriation under the Finance Act for 2009. Accordingly, aid under this scheme can be paid only in the period 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2009.

Objective of aid: The objective of the aid is to make grants to agricultural holdings (farms) active in the primary production of agricultural products to cover part of the costs of compulsory control measures related to the certification of cereal seed and other seed for sowing. The aid is to be granted in accordance with Article 14(2)(e) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006.

Sector(s) concerned: The agricultural sector, in relation to cereal seed and other seed for sowing.

Name and address of the granting authority:

Plantedirektoratet

Skovbrynet 20

2800 Kgs. Lyngby

DANMARK

Website: https://www.lovtidende.dk/Forms/L0700.aspx?s31=10&s19=1360&s32=2008

Other information: —

Aid No: XA 19/09

Member State: The Netherlands

Region: Provincie Fryslân (Friesland)

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving individual aid: Subsidie agrarische bedrijfsverplaatsing en daaraan gerelateerde investeringskosten

Legal basis:

—	Kadersubsidieverordening pMJP Fryslân 2009

—	Subsidieverordening pMJP Fryslân 2009, Hoofdstuk 1.1.3. Subsidie agrarische bedrijfsverplaatsing en daaraan gerelateerde investeringskosten

—	Wet inkomstenbelasting 2001, art. 3.54

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: Estimated annual expenditure: EUR 600 000

Estimated expenditure 2009-2013: EUR 3 million

Maximum aid intensity: In accordance with Articles 4 and 6 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006, aid is to be granted to small and medium-sized farmers as follows:

Such investment is aimed in particular at:

—	reducing production costs,

—	improving and redeploying production,

—	improving quality,

—	preserving and improving the natural environment or improving hygiene conditions and animal welfare standards.

Eligible expenditure includes:

—	the construction, acquisition or improvement of immovable property,

—	the purchase or lease-purchase of machinery and equipment, including computer software, up to the market value of the asset,

—	general costs linked to the above mentioned expenditure, such as architects’, engineers’ and consultants’ fees, feasibility studies and the acquisition of patents and licences.

All small and medium-sized agricultural holdings in the area concerned which meet the conditions of the scheme are eligible for subsidy and may apply for subsidy.

No aid is to be granted to agricultural holdings which are in difficulty.

No aid is to be granted in breach of any prohibitions or restrictions laid down in Council regulations establishing common organisations of the market, even where such prohibitions and restrictions refer only to Community support.

No aid is to be granted in respect of:

—	the purchase of production rights, animals and annual plants,

—	the planting of annual plants,

—	drainage works or irrigation equipment and irrigation works, unless such investment leads to a reduction of previous water use of at least 25 %,

—	simple replacement investments.

No aid is to granted for the purchase of land.

The combined amount of the aid referred to in points 1-4 above does not exceed EUR 400 000.

Date of implementation: Implementation will begin after publication in the Official Journal of the European Union, as specified in Article 18(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006, but not before approval by the provincial council or before publication of a decree on the entry into force of the Decree of 3 September 2007 amending the 2001 Income Tax Implementing Decree (Uitvoeringsbesluit inkomstenbelasting 2001), Stb. 2007, 328.

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: Until 31 December 2013

Objective of aid: Relocation of farms in the public interest, namely improvement of spatial or agricultural structures, improvement of the countryside, the landscape, water or the environment, and associated investment.

Agricultural undertakings sell their premises and all related farmland at the ‘old’ location to the Agricultural Land Management Office (Bureau Beheer Landbouwgronden — BBL) or to a regional authority for the price they would fetch on the open market (representative market value) and buy new premises and farmland to continue farming operations elsewhere. Eligible costs are as follows:

100 % of the actual relocation costs incurred where these relate to the dismantling, removal and re-erection of existing facilities, as well as the cost of advice, planning and searches for the purposes of relocation and tax payments in connection with relocation. The cost of advice, planning and searches includes: notary fees, land registry fees and consultancy fees in connection with relocation, such as estate agents’, accountants’ and architects’ fees, etc. However, the relocation of business premises also has fiscal consequences for the farmers concerned. Farmers who wind up their business for tax purposes in order to relocate their holding are obliged to pay tax on the hidden reserves and similar assets of their (old) farm. For farmers, this is an expense that is directly and inextricably linked to the relocation of their holding. Consequently, relocation is often not affordable for these farmers and agricultural holdings therefore remain in their old location (e.g. near vulnerable natural areas). This measure provides aid at a rate of up to 100 % of the costs incurred, in accordance with Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006.

40 % of the increase in the value of the facilities concerned after relocation, where relocation results in the farmer benefiting from more modern facilities, on condition that the farmer contributes at least 60 % of the related expenditure, in accordance with Article 6(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006.

40 % of the expenditure incurred to increase production capacity, where relocation leads to such an increase, on condition that the farmer contributes at least 60 % of the related expenditure, in accordance with Article 6(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006.

40 % of the investment connected with the relocation, subject to an application being submitted within two years following the execution of the relevant instrument, in accordance with Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006.

The amount of aid never exceeds EUR 400 000 per holding.

Sector(s) concerned: All small and medium-sized primary agricultural holdings that produce products listed in Annex I to the EC Treaty.

Name and address of the granting authority:

Provincie Fryslân (Friesland)

Sneekertrekweg 1

Leeuwarden

Postbus 20120

8900 HM Leeuwarden

NEDERLAND

Website: http://www.fryslan.nl/regelgevingeuropa

gebruikersnaam: europa

wachtwoord: regelgeving

Other information: —

Aid No: XA 22/09

Member State: Italy

Region: Commissariato di Governo per l’Emergenza brucellosi negli allevamenti bufalini in provincia di Caserta e zone limitrofe (Government Office for the brucellosis emergency on buffalo farms in the Province of Caserta and surrounding areas)

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving an individual aid award: Indennizzi connessi con l’attuazione del Piano Operativo per fronteggiare il rischio sanitario connesso alla diffusione della brucellosi negli allevamenti bufalini nel territorio della provincia di Caserta e zone limitrofe

Legal basis: Decreto del Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri 3 agosto 2007 e successivo Decreto del Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri 4 luglio 2008

Ordinanza del Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri 21 Dicembre 2007 n. 3634 modificata con Ordinanza del Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri 28 maggio 2008 n. 3675

Decreto Commissariale n. 4 del 6 maggio 2008 e Decreto Commissariale n. 10 del 31 luglio 2008

Decreto Commissariale n. 21 del 22 ottobre 2008

Decreto Commissariale n. 49 del 28 novembre 2008

Decreto ministeriale 27 dicembre 2007

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company:

—	Compensation in the form of one-off payments totalling EUR 37 million, as provided for in Article 3(1)(a) and (b) of Prime Ministerial Order (OPCM) No 3634/2007;

—	Compensation in the form of one-off payments totalling EUR 4 600 000, as provided for in Article 3(1)(c) of Prime Ministerial Order (OPCM) No 3634/2007.

Maximum aid intensity: 100 % of the losses incurred.

Date of implementation: From the date of publication of the registration number of the request for exemption on the website of the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development.

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: Until the end of the state of emergency referred to in the Prime Ministerial Decree (DPCM) of 3 August 2007, as subsequently amended, the date set being 31 December 2008; compensation may however be granted after that date if it relates to the slaughter of infected animals or actual restocking on a holding. Aid will in no case be granted more than four years after the event.

Objective of aid: Article 10(2):

Compensation under Law No 615 of 9 June 1964, as subsequently amended and supplemented, granted to eligible parties in respect of animals slaughtered under the Order of the Minister for of Health of 14 November 2006, net of any proceeds from the sale of the meat;

Further compensation in respect of market value on the date when the Order was issued (21 December 2007), as derived from the ISMEA bulletin, net of the value of any compensation granted under Law No 615 of 9 June 1964, as subsequently amended and supplemented, and of any proceeds from the sale of the meat;

losses of income due to quarantine obligations and difficulties in restocking;

The aid is granted subject to the farmer submitting an application and to the checks carried out by the Government Office being successful. Recipients are in each case given a clear statement of the amount of compensation to be granted and the calculation methods used. Aid may be granted until the funds set aside under OPCM No 3634/2007 have been exhausted.

Sector(s) concerned: Livestock sector

Name and address of the granting authority — Website: Commissariato di Governo per l’Emergenza brucellosi negli allevamenti bufalini in provincia di Caserta e zone limitrofe (Government Office for the brucellosis emergency on buffalo farms in the Province of Caserta and surrounding areas)

The integral text and related documentation may be consulted online (http://www.sito.regione.campania.it/agricoltura/brucellosi/brucellosi.html).

Other information: If circumstances require, the duration of the socio-economic state of emergency in the Province of Caserta and surrounding areas may be extended by Prime Ministerial Decree (DPCM) in order to deal with the animal health risks associated with the high incidence of brucellosis on buffalo holdings.

Aid No: XA 28/09

Member State: France

Region: Bourgogne

Title of aid scheme: Aide Régionale Jeune Agriculteur HCF (Hors Cadre Familial)

Legal basis: Code Général des collectivités territoriales, notamment son article L 1511-2

Circulaire DGFAR/SDEA/C2008-5002 (16.1.08)

Délibération du Conseil régional de Bourgogne.

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme: EUR 400 000

Maximum aid intensity: Aid ranging from EUR 3 375 to EUR 13 500 per farmer

Date of implementation: 2009

Duration of scheme: Until 2013

Objective of aid: This aid scheme complies with Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 of 15 December 2006.

The aim of the aid is to encourage and assist the setting up of farmers other than those taking over their family farm and who meet the following eligibility criteria:

they are below 40 years of age and are setting up for the first time on a farm as the head of the holding,

they possess sufficient skills and vocational qualifications, in accordance with European rules,

they submit an agricultural activity development plan,

they provide proof of membership of an agricultural insurance scheme (MSA — mutualité sociale agricole — mutual agricultural fund).

Aid is paid directly to the farmer.

This aid is distinct from the aid granted under the XA 25/07 scheme (programme for the establishment and development of local PIDIL initiatives (Programmes pour l'installation des jeunes en agriculture et le development des initiatives locales — Programmes to set up young farmers and develop local initiatives)).

Sector(s) concerned: Agriculture

Name and address of the granting authority:

Conseil régional de Bourgogne

Direction de l’agriculture et du développement rural

17 boulevard de la Trémouille

BP 1602

21035 Dijon cedex

FRANCE

Website: http://www.cr-bourgogne.fr/documents/gda/2008-12/jeune_agriculteur.doc

Aid No: XA 32/09

Member State: France

Region: Bourgogne

Title of aid scheme: Conseil aux Agriculteurs

Legal basis: Code Général des collectivités territoriales, notamment son article L 1511-2

Délibération du Conseil régional de Bourgogne.

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme: EUR 600 000

Maximum aid intensity: 80 % of the sum of eligible expenses (engineering expenses, documentation, communication) for consultancy activities in the following areas:

Energy, agricultural waste, integrated production methods, optimising production in the context of territorial projects,

Agricultural equipment,

Diversification of activities,

Collective action to improve production methods in a particular sector (health and hygiene, genetics, input reduction).

Date of implementation: 2009

Duration of scheme: Until 2013

Objective of aid: This aid scheme complies with Article 15 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 of 15 December 2006.

These consultancy activities are temporary and unrelated to the normal running of the farms.

This aid scheme will fund the specific costs of the various actions carried out by collective structures in the agricultural sector. In accordance with points 3 and 4 of Article 15 of the Agricultural Exemption Regulation, no aid will be paid to farmers and anyone who is eligible will be able to have access to the actions carried out by the collective structures without being obliged to be a member of these structures.

Sector(s) concerned: All sectors of agricultural production.

Name and address of the granting authority:

Conseil régional de Bourgogne

Direction de l’agriculture et du développement rural

17 boulevard de la Trémouille

BP 1602

21035 Dijon cedex

FRANCE

Website: http://www.cr-bourgogne.fr/documents/gda/2008-12/conseils_agriculteurs_agroequipt.doc

http://www.cr-bourgogne.fr/documents/gda/2008-12/conseils_agriculteurs_amelioration_modes_production.doc

http://www.cr-bourgogne.fr/documents/gda/2008-12/conseils_agriculteurs_diversification.doc

http://www.cr-bourgogne.fr/documents/gda/2008-12/conseils_agriculteurs.doc

9.5.2009

Official Journal of the European Union

C 107/18

2009/C 107/05

Aid No: XA 34/09

Member State: France

Region: Département de Saône-et-Loire

Title of aid scheme: Aide Relative Aux Pertes Entrainées Par la fièvre catarrhale ovine (FCO) dans les élevages ovins et caprins de Saône-et-Loire

Legal bases:

—	Art L 1511-2-3-5 du Code général des collectivités territoriales,

—	Arrêté du ministre de l'agriculture et de la pêche du 15 décembre 2008 modifiant l'arrêté du 1er avril 2008 définissant les zones réglementées relatives à la fièvre catarrhale ovine,

—	Délibération du Conseil général de Saône et Loire du 20 novembre 2008.

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme: EUR 200 000

Maximum aid intensity: 100 %

The amount of aid from the Department of Saône et Loire is EUR 25 to EUR 75 per animal, depending on the animal's characteristics (male, female, registered or unregistered), which dies or slaughtered as a result of bluetongue.

The maximum aid intensity is 100 %.

Amounts received under insurance schemes will be taken into account when compliance with the aid intensity is checked.

This aid will be paid to farmers if they meet all the following conditions:

the aid is for outbreaks of bluetongue declared in 2007 and 2008,

they receive the ewe and goat premium,

they have obtained health compensation from the French Government for the dead or slaughtered animals,

they undertake to replace their livestock. The period of validity of purchases was 1 July 2007 to 30 June 2009.

Date of implementation: From receipt of the acknowledgement from the European Commission, not before 16 February 2009.

Duration of scheme: Until 2009, subject to changes in European rules and the availability of budget appropriations.

Objective of aid: The aid is intended to compensate sheep and goat farmers whose flocks and herds have been severely affected by bluetongue by facilitating the purchase or replacement of animals to restore the breeding population to the number of animals which existed before the outbreak of the disease.

The aid will be strictly limited to losses caused by bluetongue for which outbreaks have been formally recognised by the French public health authorities and will form part of the public regional programme drawn up.

The expenditure eligible for department level aid, as described above, is eligible for aid in accordance with Article 10(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 of 15 December 2006.

Sector concerned: Sheep and goats

Name and address of the granting authority:

Monsieur le Président du Conseil Général de Saône-et-Loire

Direction de l’Equipement rural et de l’agriculture

Service des Affaires Agricoles

Espace Duhesme — 18 rue de Flacé

71026 Macon Cedex 9

FRANCE

Website: http://www.cg71.fr/jahia/webdav/site/internet_cg71/shared/Missions/Agriculture/Aides%20exemptees%20CE/Texte_integral_FCO.pdf

Aid No: XA 43/09

Member State: Spain

Region: Principado de Asturias

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving an individual aid: Asociación de Criadores de Oveya Xalda de Asturias (ACOXA)

Legal basis: Convenio de colaboración entre el Gobierno del Principado de Asturias y la Asociación de Criadores de Oveya Xalda de Asturias (ACOXA) para el desarrollo del programa de conservación de la raza autóctona asturiana Oveya Xalda durante el trienio 2009-2011.

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: The maximum amount of aid to be granted in each year under the agreement will be:

Maximum aid intensity: The maximum aid intensity to be granted for each of the headings of the action programme to be implemented by the beneficiary of the aid will be:

Date of implementation: From the date of publication of the registration number for the request for exemption on the website of the Commission's Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development.

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: Until 31 December 2011.

Objective of the aid: Implementation of the programme for the conservation of the indigenous breed of Xalda sheep.

The following Articles of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 apply:

Article 15 Provision of technical support in the agricultural sector. Eligible costs: cost of organising training programmes for breeders, cost of consultancy services provided by third parties, cost of organising knowledge-sharing forums, competitions and exhibitions, cost of publications.

Article 16 Support for the livestock sector. Eligible costs: cost of maintaining a herd book.

Sector(s) concerned: Sheep

Name and address of the granting authority:

Consejería de Medio Rural y Pesca del Principado de Asturias

C/Coronel Aranda, s/n, 4a planta

33071 Oviedo (Asturias)

ESPAÑA

Web address: the text of the cooperation agreement is available from www.asturias.es at the URL:

http://www.asturias.es/Asturias/descargas/CONVENIOS%20GANADERIA/ACOXA%2009%20convenio.pdf

Other information: —

Luis Miguel ALVAREZ MORALES

El director general de ganadería y agroalimentación

Aid No: XA 48/09

Member State: Estonia

Region: Eesti

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving individual aid: Põllumajandusloomade aretustoetus

Legal basis:

1.	Maaelu ja põllumajandusturu korraldamise seaduse § 3 lg 2 p 2, § 7 lg 1 p 3, § 11 (RTI, 18.7.2008, 33, 202);

2.	Põllumajandusministri 18.01.2005.a määrus nr 6 „Põllumajandusloomade aretustoetuse saamiseks esitatavad nõuded ning toetuse taotlemise ja taotluse menetlemise kord”.

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: EEK 20 000 000 per year

Maximum aid intensity: up to 70 %

Date of implementation:

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: 15 February 2009-31 December 2011

Objective of aid: Livestock sector.

The aid is granted in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006.

The eligible expenditure is that for keeping herd books or pedigree records and carrying out performance tests or assessing genetic value.

The aid is granted in the form of subsidised services and does not involve direct payments to producers.

Sector(s) concerned: Raising of bovine animals, horses, sheep and poultry (NACE code A104)

Name and address of the granting authority:

Põllumajanduse Registrite ja Informatsiooni Amet

Narva mnt 3

Tartu 51009

EESTI/ESTONIA

Website: http://www.agri.ee/siseriiklikud-toetused

Other information: This notice amends notice XA 93/08

Aid No: XA 58/09

Member State: Spain

Region: Principado de Asturias

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving an individual aid: Laboratorio Interprofesional Lechero y Agroalimentario de Asturias (L.I.L.A.)

Legal basis: Convenio de colaboración entre el Principado de Asturias y el Laboratorio Interprofesional Lechero y Agroalimentario de Asturias (L.I.L.A.) suscrito el 7 de abril de 2008 para la realización de los análisis de control lechero oficial. Adenda al citado Convenio de colaboración de 27 de enero de 2009.

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: the maximum amount of aid to be granted will be EUR 420 000 for 2009

Maximum aid intensity: up to 70 % of the cost of the activity to be developed by the recipient

Date of implementation: from the date of publication of the registration number for the request for exemption on the website of the Commission's Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: until December 2009

Objective of aid: carrying out official milk testing in the Principality of Asturias, as a basic tool for the genetic evaluation of breeding animals of dairy species and breeds and, therefore, a basic element of any livestock improvement programme

The applicable Article of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 is:

Article 16 — Support for the livestock sector. Eligible costs: expenditure connected with carrying out tests to determine the genetic quality and yield of livestock.

Sector(s) concerned: The breeding of dairy cattle

Name and address of the granting authority:

Consejería de Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo Rural del Principado de Asturias

C/Coronel Aranda, s/n, 4a planta

E-33071 Oviedo (Asturias)

ESPAÑA

Website: the text of the cooperation agreement can be consulted on the www.asturias.es website at the following page:

http://www.asturias.es/portal/site/Asturias/menuitem.fe57bf7c5fd38046e44f5310bb30a0a0/?vgnextoid=959f4749be187110VgnVCM10000097030a0aRCRD&vgnextchannel=d2907989c258f010VgnVCM100000b0030a0aRCRD&i18n.http.lang=es

Other information: —

Luis Miguel ALVAREZ MORALES

El Director General de Ganadería y Agroalimentación

Aid No: XA 59/09

Member State: United Kingdom

Region: England — Cornwall

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving an individual aid: Caradon Hill Area Heritage Project

Legal basis: The National Heritage Act 1980 set up a fund called the National Heritage Memorial Fund (NHMF) as amended by the National Heritage Act 1997 and the National Lottery Act 1993 and 1998.

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company:

(GBP)
Date	Amount
Year 1 — March 2009-February 2010	184 845,00
Year 2 — March 2010-February 2011	87 828,00
Year 3 — March 2011-February 2012	90 177,00
Total sum	362 850,00

Maximum aid intensity: The maximum aid intensity for the technical support measure will be up to 100 % in accordance with Article 15 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006.

The maximum aid intensity for the measures to conserve traditional landscapes will be up to 100 % where a grant is awarded for the conservation of non-productive heritage features in accordance with Article 5.2 of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006. The maximum rate of grant will be reduced in line with the rates set out in Article 5.3 of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 where the aid is productive.

Date of implementation: The scheme will start on 18th March 2009

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: The scheme will start on 18th March 2009 and run for three years. It will close to new applicants on the 1st March 2012, with final works completed on 17th March 2012. The last payment will be made on 1st September 2012.

Objective of aid: Conserve and enhance important wildlife, historical and geological/ mineralogical sites, and help facilitate their long term management. This measure is in accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006. The maximum aid intensity of the grant will be reduced in line with the rates set out in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 where the aid is productive.

Programme 2 — Historic Environment Programme

All of the measures within this programme take place on agricultural land, are covered by this notification and comply with Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006. This programme consists of the following measures:

Carry out works and/or facilitate works to improve the condition and presentation of these key historic sites and landscape features.

These proposals includes bracken control and repair to historical boundary features which occur on agricultural land.

Programme 4 — Land Management & Access Programme

This programme takes place on both agricultural and non-agricultural land. The only elements of the scheme that take place on agricultural land, covered by this notification, are listed below and comply with Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006.

Restoration of historic Cornish hedges/walls as important landscape character features.

Consolidation of archaeological monuments.

Scrub management around archaeological sites.

The scheme also encourages relevant skills training, especially formal training in specific conservation management skills, a programme of workshops to enable skills-sharing, advice and feedback, and bespoke professional development for landowners, farmers, commoners, and contractors within the project area. This measure is in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006.

Programme 1 — Natural Environment Programme

The Natural Environment projects will work with landowners and farmers to facilitate and support best practice in conservation of habitats and species. This will involve a range of advisory and training events which will be open to all farmers and landowners within the Project area.

All of this programme covers schemes taking place on agricultural land and complies with Article 15.

Programme 5 — Interpretation, Education & Training Programme

This programme takes place on both agricultural and non-agricultural land. The only elements of the scheme that take place on agricultural land and are covered by this notification are listed below and comply with Article 15.

Invasive weed control.

Archaeological Awareness training

Programme 3 — Mining heritage project

This project takes place on non-agricultural land and falls within the remit of NN 11/2002.

Sector(s) concerned: The scheme applies to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products.

Name and address of the granting authority:

Cornwall County Council County Hall

Treyew Road

Truro

Cornwall

TR1 3AY

UNITED KINGDOM

The statutory body responsible for the scheme is:

Cornwall County Council

County Hall

Treyew Road

Truro

Cornwall

TR1 3AY

UNITED KINGDOM

The organisation operating the scheme is:

Caradon Hill Area Heritage Project

Luxstowe House

Liskeard

Cornwall

PL14 3DZ

UNITED KINGDOM

Web address: http://www.cornwall.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=6835

Other information: The non-agricultural measures that are part of this scheme fall within the terms of NN 11/2002 and therefore are State aid compliant.

Further and more detailed information relating to eligibility and rules for the scheme can be found in the web links above.

9.5.2009

Official Journal of the European Union

C 107/23

Publication of an application pursuant to Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs

2009/C 107/06

This publication confers the right to object to the application pursuant to Article 7 of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 (1). Statements of objection must reach the Commission within six months of the date of this publication.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 510/2006

‘MARRONE DI COMBAI’

EC No: IT-PGI-0005-0565-08.11.2006

PGI ( X ) PDO ( )

1. Name:

‘Marrone di Combai’

2. Member State or Third Country:

Italy

3. Description of the agricultural product or foodstuff:

3.1. Type of product (Annex II):

Class 1.6.:

Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed

3.2. Description of the product to which the name in 1 applies:

‘Marrone di Combai’ is a chestnut ecotype that has developed in the typical environment of the Treviso foothills of the Alps. The chestnuts have the following morphological and commercial characteristics when they are released for consumption:

Ellipsoidal shape, flattened apex. The hilum has a regular, tomentose outline and a clearly visible star pattern. The colour of the pericarp varies from light to dark brown but is never dull. The pericarp itself has evident streaks and must be easily removable from the episperm. The episperm, which is light brown, covers the edible part, with some shallow, infrequent intrusions, meaning that, when peeled, it can be easily separated from the flesh. The seed — normally one per fruit, with a low polyembryon percentage — is a single body with superficial grooves. The flesh has a floury texture and whitish colour. When cooked, it becomes crunchy and flavoursome.

When placed on the market, the fruit must be in optimal health and must comply with the following requirements:

‘Extra’ class:

large fruit size:

50-80 fruit per kilogram;

maximum 4 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects;

maximum 3 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp.

Class I:

81-105 fruit per kilogram;

maximum 6 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects;

maximum 5 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp.

3.3. Raw materials (for processed products only):

—

3.4. Feed (for products of animal origin only):

—

3.5. Specific steps in production that must take place in the identified geographical area:

The production steps must take place in the production area referred to under 4, in order to guarantee the origin and inspection of the product.

3.6. Specific rules concerning slicing, grating, packaging, etc.:

The curatura soaking process which the product undergoes may take place outside the geographical area described under 4, but, so as not to adversely affect the quality of the product, must be carried out within 24 hours of harvesting.

Alternatively, the product must be kept in a cold store for a maximum of three days, at a temperature of between 0,5 °C and 2 °C and a humidity level of between 95 % and 98 %, followed by curatura.

Curatura is a process which consists in immersing the chestnuts in water at room temperature for a period of between five and seven days, with the water being changed at the half-way stage. Alternatively, the chestnuts can be immersed in water at a temperature of 45 °C to 48 °C for 45 minutes, after which they are quickly immersed in cold water until they cool down completely. Subsequently, the chestnuts are dried using a hot-air drying machine and ventilators. Alternatively, they are laid out on wooden lattices and repositioned every day until they have completely dried.

All the produce is made available for consumption in the following types of packaging: jute bags containing 1 kg, 2 kg, 3 kg, 5 kg or 25 kg; plastic nets containing 1 kg, 2 kg, 3 kg, 5 kg or 25 kg; and baskets or wooden boxes from a minimum of 1 kg to a maximum of 5 kg. The packages are closed mechanically by means of metal clips, nylon threading or twine bearing a lead seal. Sealing is carried out in such a way as to fix the label with the logo onto the package. In the case of the baskets and boxes the packaging features cellophane, twine bearing a lead seal and a clearly visible logo.

3.7. Specific rules concerning labelling:

The inspection body will verify that the product is identified through the affixing of a label with a logo bearing the words ‘Marrone di Combai’, which must be significantly larger than any other wording. The label or containers must provide the following information: the name and brand of the producer or the packaging firm; the net weight as sold and the category; nutritional and dietary information; the year of production; instructions on the correct storage and use of the product. The logo is made up of a stylised chestnut surrounded by stylised light brown chestnut husk, framed in a dark brown square (light brown — Pantone 465U, dark brown — Pantone 4625U). Dimensions: the logo may have the following dimensions: 65 mm x 102 mm; 33 mm x 51 mm; 17 mm x 25 mm; 8 mm x 12 mm.

4. Concise definition of the geographical area:

The geographical production area for ‘Marrone di Combai’ is made up of the territory of the following municipalities in Treviso province: Cison di Valmarino, Cordignano, Follina, Fregona, Miane, Revine Lago, Sarmede, Segusino, Tarzo, Valdobbiadene and Vittorio Veneto.

5. Link with the geographical area:

5.1. Specificity of the geographical area:

The area described in point 4 lies entirely on the foothills of the Alps.

The typically mountainous (Alpine foothill) territory on which the ‘Marrone di Combai’ is produced is formed, from a strictly geological viewpoint, from a complex of calcareous/flint rocks of karst morphology and a complex of hills characterised by deep ravines, steep slopes and widespread processes of soil degradation resulting from the overlaying of hard, resistant rocks. This type of orography is very important in terms of the climate: the distribution of the chain of Alpine foothills and the ‘lines of hills’ creates a barrier effect against east winds, while giving free run to currents from the north, thereby reducing the temperature range as compared to the lowlands. The abundant precipitation, which is distributed according to an equinoctial rainfall pattern, and the total absence of fog, which is a feature of all other localities in the Po/Veneto Valley, help to characterise the environment, making it particularly well suited to the production of ‘Marrone di Combai’ PGI.

5.2. Specificity of the product:

Sensory analyses using panel tests have shown a positive correlation between the characteristics of the flesh, in particular its pastiness, and the overall enjoyment of the chestnuts. Besides the factors that influence tactile perception, there is a special aroma that is appreciated for the distinctiveness of the spiced, floral and herbaceous sensations present with marked intensity in the product when consumed. The quantitative values expressed by descriptors specifically identified for the sensorial analysis have revealed high intensity levels for aroma, aroma durability, sweetness and, by contrast, very low levels for attributes negatively correlated with the overall enjoyment of the fruit, related to astringency and bitterness. The distinctiveness of the aromas of ‘Marrone di Combai’ is linked to the characteristics of the soils in the area of cultivation and are an expression of the close relationship between plant, soil and cultivation environment.

5.3. Causal link between the geographical area and the quality or characteristics of the product (for PDO) or a specific quality, the reputation or other characteristic of the product (for PGI):

The request for registration of the ‘Marrone di Combai’ PGI is based on the distinctive characteristics of the products and also, essentially, on its reputation.

The presence and the particular quality characteristics of chestnuts in the ‘Marrone di Combai’ area are confirmed by numerous historical references dating back to the 12th century. These demonstrate that, in characterising this product, both environmental factors and human factors are important, since the chestnut has always had a fundamental role in sustaining the inhabitants of these hills. Indeed, among the various historical references, one dated 18 September 1665 emphasises the social and participatory factors linked to harvesting of the chestnuts: the entire population, including women and children, took part in this activity, which was regulated by assigning shares based on family composition.

More recently, the fame and renown of ‘Marrone di Combai’ has spread from the Veneto to consumers throughout Italy, thanks partly to festivals and country fairs such as the ‘Festa dei Marroni di Combai’, which, since 1945, has been an important event both locally and nationally.

The distinctive nature of this product is closely linked to the geographical environment in which it is produced.

The geological characteristics of the production area, and in particular the presence of calcareous/flint rocks of karst morphology, together with the steep slopes of the hilly territories, prevent the build-up of stagnant water and allow excellent drainage of the cultivation land. This leads to a good level of pastiness and sweetness in the flesh, as well as a strong and long-lasting flavour and an absence of astringency and bitterness.

Moreover, the barrier formed by the hills against east winds and the presence of currents from the north, which reduce the annual temperature range as compared to the lowlands and prevent the formation of fog, have a positive influence on the health and development of the plants, thereby making it possible to obtain a healthy, high-quality product.

Reference to publication of the specification:

The Government launched the national objection procedure with the publication of the proposal for recognising ‘Marrone di Combai’ in Official Gazette of the Italian Republic No 273 of 23 November 2005.

The full text of the product specification is available:

—	at the following site www.politicheagricole.it/DocumentiPubblicazioni/Search_Documenti_Elenco.htm?txtTipoDocumento=Disciplinare%20in%20esame%20UE&txtDocArgomento=Prodotti%20di%20Qualit%E0>Prodotti%20Dop%20Igp%20e%20Stg or

—	by going directly to the home page of the Ministry (www.politicheagricole.it) and clicking on ‘Prodotti di Qualità’ (on the left of the screen) and then on ‘Disciplinari di Produzione all’esame dell’UE (Reg CE 510/2006)’.

(1) OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

		ISSN 1725-2423 doi:10.3000/17252423.C_2009.107.eng
Official Journal of the European Union		C 107

English edition	Information and Notices	Volume 52 9 May 2009

Notice No	Contents	page
	II Information
	INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES
	Commission
2009/C 107/01	Communication from the Commission — Beverage packaging, deposit systems and free movement of goods	1

2009/C 107/02	Non-opposition to a notified concentration — (Case COMP/M.5347 — Mapfre/Salvador Caetano/JV'S) ( 1 )	10

	Currency	Exchange rate
USD	US dollar	1,3425
JPY	Japanese yen	133,36
DKK	Danish krone	7,4486
GBP	Pound sterling	0,89070
SEK	Swedish krona	10,5120
CHF	Swiss franc	1,5142
ISK	Iceland króna
NOK	Norwegian krone	8,6415
BGN	Bulgarian lev	1,9558
CZK	Czech koruna	26,650
EEK	Estonian kroon	15,6466
HUF	Hungarian forint	277,75
LTL	Lithuanian litas	3,4528
LVL	Latvian lats	0,7091
PLN	Polish zloty	4,3510
RON	Romanian leu	4,1335
TRY	Turkish lira	2,0833
AUD	Australian dollar	1,7702
CAD	Canadian dollar	1,5582
HKD	Hong Kong dollar	10,4044
NZD	New Zealand dollar	2,2531
SGD	Singapore dollar	1,9676
KRW	South Korean won	1 668,53
ZAR	South African rand	11,2542
CNY	Chinese yuan renminbi	9,1583
HRK	Croatian kuna	7,3582
IDR	Indonesian rupiah	13 915,01
MYR	Malaysian ringgit	4,7216
PHP	Philippine peso	63,185
RUB	Russian rouble	43,5980
THB	Thai baht	46,800
BRL	Brazilian real	2,8066
MXN	Mexican peso	17,5465
INR	Indian rupee	66,1620

	IV Notices
	NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES
	Commission
2009/C 107/03	Euro exchange rates	11

	NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES
2009/C 107/04	Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products and amending Regulation (EC) No 70/2001	12

2009/C 107/05	Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products and amending Regulation (EC) No 70/2001	18

	V Announcements
	Commission
	ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
2009/C 107/06	Publication of an application pursuant to Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs	23


	(1) Text with EEA relevance