ISSN 1725-5236

Úradný vestník

Európskej únie

C 243

European flag  

Slovenské vydanie

Informácie a oznámenia

Zväzok 50
17. októbra 2007


Číslo oznamu

Obsah

Strana

 

II   Oznámenia

 

OZNÁMENIA INŠTITÚCIÍ A ORGÁNOV EURÓPSKEJ ÚNIE

 

Komisia

2007/C 243/01

Nevznesenie námietky voči oznámenej koncentrácii (Prípad COMP/M.4748 – T-Mobile/Orange) ( 1 )

1

 

IV   Informácie

 

INFORMÁCIE INŠTITÚCIÍ A ORGÁNOV EURÓPSKEJ ÚNIE

 

Komisia

2007/C 243/02

Výmenný kurz eura

2

 

V   Oznamy

 

ADMINISTRATÍVNE POSTUPY

 

Európsky úrad pre výber pracovníkov (EPSO)

2007/C 243/03

Oznámenie o verejnom výberovom konaní EPSO/AST/43-44/07

3

 

KONANIA TÝKAJÚCE SA VYKONÁVANIA POLITIKY HOSPODÁRSKEJ SÚŤAŽE

 

Komisia

2007/C 243/04

Štátna pomoc – Spojené kráľovstvo — Štátna pomoc C 23/07 (ex N 118/07) – Vauxhall Motors Ltd – Pomoc na podporu vzdelávania pre Ellesmere Port — Výzva na predloženie pripomienok v súlade s článkom 88 ods. 2 Zmluvy o ES ( 1 )

4

 

INÉ AKTY

 

Komisia

2007/C 243/05

Uverejnenie žiadosti podľa článku 6 ods. 2 nariadenia Rady (ES) č. 510/2006 o ochrane zemepisných označení a označení pôvodu poľnohospodárskych výrobkov a potravín

11

 


 

(1)   Text s významom pre EHP

SK

 


II Oznámenia

OZNÁMENIA INŠTITÚCIÍ A ORGÁNOV EURÓPSKEJ ÚNIE

Komisia

17.10.2007   

SK

Úradný vestník Európskej únie

C 243/1


Nevznesenie námietky voči oznámenej koncentrácii

(Prípad COMP/M.4748 – T-Mobile/Orange)

(Text s významom pre EHP)

(2007/C 243/01)

Dňa 20. augusta 2007 sa Komisia rozhodla neoponovať voči vyššie spomínanej oznámenej koncentrácii a vyhlásiť ju za kompatibilnú so spoločným trhom. Toto rozhodnutie je založené na článku 6 odsek 1 písmeno b) nariadenia Rady (ES) č. 139/2004. Úplný text rozhodnutia je dostupný iba v angličtine a bude dostupný verejnosti po tom, ako budú odstránené akékoľvek obchodné tajomstvá, ktoré by mohol obsahovať. Prístupný bude na:

webovej stránke Europa competition (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). Táto webová stránka poskytuje rôzne možnosti pomoci na lokalizáciu individuálnych rozhodnutí o fúziách vrátane názvu spoločnosti, čísla prípadu, dátumu a sektorových indexov,

v elektronickej forme na webovej stránke EUR-Lex pod číslom dokumentu 32007M4748. EUR-Lex je počítačový dokumentačný systém práva Európskeho spoločenstva. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu)


IV Informácie

INFORMÁCIE INŠTITÚCIÍ A ORGÁNOV EURÓPSKEJ ÚNIE

Komisia

17.10.2007   

SK

Úradný vestník Európskej únie

C 243/2


Výmenný kurz eura (1)

16. októbra 2007

(2007/C 243/02)

1 euro=

 

Mena

Výmenný kurz

USD

Americký dolár

1,4150

JPY

Japonský jen

165,17

DKK

Dánska koruna

7,4528

GBP

Britská libra

0,69650

SEK

Švédska koruna

9,1538

CHF

Švajčiarsky frank

1,6753

ISK

Islandská koruna

86,25

NOK

Nórska koruna

7,6660

BGN

Bulharský lev

1,9558

CYP

Cyperská libra

0,5842

CZK

Česká koruna

27,526

EEK

Estónska koruna

15,6466

HUF

Maďarský forint

251,05

LTL

Litovský litas

3,4528

LVL

Lotyšský lats

0,7030

MTL

Maltská líra

0,4293

PLN

Poľský zlotý

3,7196

RON

Rumunský lei

3,3513

SKK

Slovenská koruna

33,687

TRY

Turecká líra

1,7314

AUD

Austrálsky dolár

1,5929

CAD

Kanadský dolár

1,3878

HKD

Hongkongský dolár

10,9724

NZD

Novozélandský dolár

1,8930

SGD

Singapurský dolár

2,0767

KRW

Juhokórejský won

1 297,84

ZAR

Juhoafrický rand

9,7399

CNY

Čínsky juan

10,6380

HRK

Chorvátska kuna

7,3235

IDR

Indonézska rupia

12 819,90

MYR

Malajzijský ringgit

4,7862

PHP

Filipínske peso

62,755

RUB

Ruský rubeľ

35,3050

THB

Thajský baht

44,424


(1)  

Zdroj: referenčný výmenný kurz publikovaný ECB.


V Oznamy

ADMINISTRATÍVNE POSTUPY

Európsky úrad pre výber pracovníkov (EPSO)

17.10.2007   

SK

Úradný vestník Európskej únie

C 243/3


OZNÁMENIE O VEREJNOM VÝBEROVOM KONANÍ EPSO/AST/43-44/07

(2007/C 243/03)

Európsky úrad pre výber pracovníkov (EPSO) organizuje nasledovné výberové konania: EPSO/AST/43/07 a EPSO/AST/44/07 – Asistenti (AST3) bulharskej a rumunskej štátnej príslušnosti v týchto oblastiach:

1.

Európska verejná správa

2.

Finančné riadenie

Oznámenie o výberovom konaní je uverejnené v Úradnom vestníku Európskej únie C 243 A zo 17. októbra 2007 výlučne v nemeckom, anglickom a francúzskom jazyku.

Úplné informácie sú k dispozícii na internetovej stránke úradu EPSO http://europa.eu/epso.


KONANIA TÝKAJÚCE SA VYKONÁVANIA POLITIKY HOSPODÁRSKEJ SÚŤAŽE

Komisia

17.10.2007   

SK

Úradný vestník Európskej únie

C 243/4


ŠTÁTNA POMOC – SPOJENÉ KRÁĽOVSTVO

Štátna pomoc C 23/07 (ex N 118/07) – Vauxhall Motors Ltd – Pomoc na podporu vzdelávania pre Ellesmere Port

Výzva na predloženie pripomienok v súlade s článkom 88 ods. 2 Zmluvy o ES

(Text s významom pre EHP)

(2007/C 243/04)

Listom z dňa 10. júla 2007, ktorý je uvedený v autentickom jazyku za týmto zhrnutím, Komisia oznámila Spojenému kráľovstvu svoje rozhodnutie začať konanie podľa článku 88 ods. 2 Zmluvy o ES, pokiaľ ide o časť uvedenej pomoci.

Zainteresované strany môžu predložiť svoje pripomienky k pomoci, vo veci ktorej Komisia začína konanie, v lehote jedného mesiaca odo dňa uverejnenia tohto zhrnutia a nasledujúceho listu, na adresu:

Commission européenne

Directorate-General Competition

Greffe des aides d'Etat

SPA -3 6/5

B-1049 Bruxelles

Fax. č.: (32-2) 296 12 42

Tieto pripomienky sa oznámia Spojenému kráľovstvu. Zainteresované strany môžu písomne s uvedením dôvodov požiadať o dôverné zaobchádzanie s údajmi o ich totožnosti.

ZHRNUTIE

Spojené kráľovstvo notifikovalo 5. marca 2007 Komisii svoj zámer poskytnúť pomoc podniku Vauxhall Motors Ltd v Ellesmere Port (ďalej len „Vauxhall“), ktorý je závodom na výrobu automobilov spoločnosti Vauxhall Motors Ltd a súčasťou General Motors Ltd. Opatrenie bolo notifikované podľa článku 5 nariadenia Komisie (ES) č. 68/2001 o pomoci na podporu vzdelávania, v ktorom sa vyžaduje individuálna notifikácia každej pomoci na podporu vzdelávania, ktorej výška presahuje 1 mil. EUR.

Táto pomoc má slúžiť na podporu vzdelávacieho programu určeného na zlepšenie produkcie Vauxhallu. Vzdelávací program sa bude realizovať počas obdobia šiestich rokov (2007 – 2012 vrátane). Celkové oprávnené náklady na vzdelávací program predstavujú 16 583 461 GBP. Pomoc poskytne North-West Development Agency ako priamy grant vo výške 8 584 767 GBP v splátkach počas obdobia šiestich rokov.

Komisia sa domnieva, že predmetné opatrenie predstavuje štátnu pomoc v zmysle článku 87 Zmluvy o ES. Komisia posúdi zlučiteľnosť pomoci so spoločným trhom na základe článku 87 ods. 3 písm. c) Zmluvy o ES. Komisia pritom zohľadní hlavné zásady nariadenia o pomoci na podporu vzdelávania. Takisto posúdi, či pomoc predstavuje nevyhnutný stimul pre vzdelávací program, t. j. či by sa vzdelávací program nerealizoval aj bez poskytnutia pomoci. Kritérium „stimulačného efektu“ je základnou podmienkou zlučiteľnosti štátnej pomoci.

V súčasnosti má Komisia pochybnosti o zlučiteľnosti pomoci, a to z nasledujúcich dôvodov. Po prvé, Komisia spochybňuje stimulačný efekt pomoci v súvisosti s tromi časťami vzdelávacieho programu (pokiaľ ide o školenie o výrobnom systéme, školenie o globálnom výrobnom systéme General Motors a pracovné/štúdijné programy pre vysokoškolákov), ktoré by podľa jej názoru boli realizované aj bez pomoci.

Po druhé, Komisia spochybňuje názor Spojeného kráľovstva, že školenie, ktoré sa má realizovať v rámci štyroch oblastí programu (školenie o výrobnom systéme, globálny výrobný systém, kultúrne zmeny a zoštíhlená výroba) je všeobecným vzdelávaním v zmysle nariadenia o pomoci na podporu vzdelávania, t. j. školením, ktoré poskytuje taký druh vzdelania, ktorý umožňuje uplatnenie aj v iných firmách a sektoroch a na ktoré sa môže poskytnúť pomoc až do výšky 50 % oprávnených nákladov. Komisia zastáva názor, že tieto časti vzdelávacieho programu predstavujú špecifické vzdelávanie v zmysle nariadenia (maximálna intenzita pomoci 25 %).

TEXT LISTU

„The Commission wishes to inform the United Kingdom that, having examined the information supplied by the UK authorities on the measure referred to above, it has decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty.

1.   THE PROCEDURE

(1)

By letter dated 28 February 2007, registered with the Commission on 6 March 2007, the UK authorities notified the Commission of the above-mentioned measure for General Motor's Vauxhall assembly plant at Ellesmere Port. The Commission requested complementary information by letter of 4 April 2007 (ref. D/51586), to which the UK authorities replied on 22 May 2007.

2.   DESCRIPTION OF THE AID

2.1.   The beneficiary

(2)

The aid recipient is Vauxhall Motors Ltd, Ellesmere Port, UK (“Vauxhall”), a car manufacturing plant which is an operating unit of Vauxhall Motors Ltd and part of General Motors Inc. (“GM”). It manufactures cars from the Opel model range (which are sold in the UK under the Vauxhall badge), currently the Astra which will terminate in 2009. Vauxhall is located in Ellesmere Port in Cheshire in the North-West region of England (1) and employs close to 2 200 workers.

(3)

Vauxhall has suffered from a long record of underperformance. Initiatives taken since 2002 have considerably improved the plant's performance. However, according to the UK, the improvements represent only the changes needed to meet the basic standards for a GM plant. In order to survive in the long term, Vauxhall needs to implement a more comprehensive change and staff development programme in order to improve productivity and build quality and make Vauxhall a class leading plant.

(4)

On 17 April 2007, GM announced that Vauxhall was amongst the European GM sites that had been selected to produce the Global Compact Vehicle, the model that will replace the Astra.

2.2.   The training programme

(5)

Vauxhall intends to implement a wide-ranging training plan which breaks down into 8 individual training areas, 6 of which are considered by the UK to be eligible for training aid:

(a)

Production System Training: This concerns training in all elements of Vauxhall's production and quality control systems. The objective is to give staff a better understanding of the build process and thus generate better standard, reduce defects and improve problem solving.

(b)

Integrated Training Plan: This part of the training concerns the implementation of the “Global Manufacturing System” (GMS) which incorporates best practices and technologies into a common manufacturing system for GM operations. Through a series of objectives (“People Involvement”, “Standardisation”, “Built-in Quality”, “Short Lead Time”, “Continuous Improvement”) the training will allow the staff of Vauxhall to build future generations of cars in a better way.

(c)

Cultural Change: The objective of this training is to instil a sense of common purpose and collective responsibility in the workforce and to create a team culture based on excellence in production.

(d)

Dual Skilling: The purpose of this training is to develop a flexible workforce by allowing staff with a primary skill in mechanical engineering to develop electrical skills and, conversely, those with primary skills in electrical engineering to acquire mechanical skills.

(e)

Lean Manufacturing: This is a project to ensure that the principles and techniques of lean manufacturing are embedded in the workforce and that employees are fully aware of the benefits of applying these to the manufacturing process at Vauxhall. A central part of training under this heading will be the secondment of staff to another GM plant outside the UK.

(f)

Undergraduates: This is a programme whereby Vauxhall organises 12-month courses for young University students. The various programmes (e.g. “Body Planning Engineer”, “Finance Analyst”, “General Assembly Planning Engineer”) combine learning and work experience under the supervision of a mentor. There is no contractual obligation on either party to maintain the working relationship at the end of the training.

(6)

Outside the training intended to benefit from the notified State aid are the training areas “Apprentices” (an apprenticeship scheme for young people), “Model Change” (the training needed to adapt to the production of the Global Model Vehicle) and activities related to “Training & Performance Appraisal”. In addition, the UK authorities have informed the Commission that Vauxhall undertakes “routine training” in the skills necessary to the plant's normal operations.

(7)

According to the information provided by the UK, the training would consist mainly in general training, with some elements of specific training (2). The training plan will be implemented over six years (2007 to 2012 included) and will concern all employees at Vauxhall.

2.3.   The aid

(8)

The aid would be given in the form of a direct grant of GBP 8 584 767 payable in six yearly instalments over the running time of the training programme. The aid would be implemented as an individual aid from the North West Development Agency.

(9)

According to the information provided by the UK, the eligible costs for the training and the aid break down as follows (the costs for the projects “Apprenticeships”, “Model Change” and “Routine Training Budget” are not considered eligible by the UK) (3)  (4):

Projects

General training Eligible costs in GBP

Specific training Eligible costs in GBP

Wage compensation in GBP

Total eligible costs in GBP

Aid in GBP

Intensity in %

Product System Training

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

Integrated Training Progr.

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

Cultural Change

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

Dual Skilling

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

Lean Manufacturing

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

Undergraduates

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

TOTAL

9 870 316

464 808

6 248 338

16 583 461

8 584 767

51,78

Apprenticeships

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

Model Changes

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

Routine Training Budge

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

[…]

(10)

According to the UK, the planned aid amounts respect the aid intensities of the Training Aid Regulation, i.e. 50 % for general training and 25 % for specific training, with an increase of 3,7 percentage points for training to disadvantaged workers within the meaning of Article 2(g) of the Training Aid Regulation (5).

3.   ASSESSMENT

3.1.   Qualification as State aid

(11)

According to Article 87 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 production of certain goods, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, constitutes incompatible State aid unless it can be justified under Article 87(2) or (3) of the EC Treaty.

(12)

The Commission considers that the measure constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty. The funding takes the form of a grant from the general budget of the North West region, and is thus funded from State resources. The measures are selective as they are limited to Vauxhall. They are likely to distort competition within the Community since, by relieving it of a significant part of the costs of the training, the measure will provide Vauxhall with an advantage over other competitors not receiving the aid. Finally, the market for motor vehicles is characterised by extensive trade between Member States.

3.2.   Legal basis for the assessment

(13)

The UK authorities have notified the aid as individual aid under Article 5 of the Training Aid Regulation which provides that when the amount of aid granted to one enterprise for a single training project exceeds EUR 1 million, the aid is not exempted from the notification requirement of Article 88(3) EC Treaty. The Commission notes that the proposed aid in this case amounts to GBP 8 584 767, i.e. about EUR 13 million, to be paid to one enterprise, and that the training project is a single project. The Commission therefore considers that the notification requirement applies to the proposed aid, and that it has been respected by the UK.

(14)

When assessing an individual training aid which does not qualify for the exemption laid down in the Training Aid Regulation, the Commission will, in line with previous decisions (6) make an individual assessment of the aid on the basis of Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty. However, for the purposes of this individual assessment the Commission will by analogy rely on the guiding principles of the Training Aid Regulation and in particular the exemption criteria laid down in its Article 4.

(15)

Moreover, the Commission will, in line with its established practice, assess whether the training aid measure is necessary to undertake the training in question. The necessity of the aid is a general condition for finding the aid compatible with the common market (7). If the aid does not lead to additional training, it cannot be considered to “promote” the economic development within the meaning of Article 87(3)(c) EC of the EC Treaty nor to correct the market imperfections that lead companies to underinvest in the training, as mentioned in recital 10 of the Training Aid Regulation.

3.3.   Compatibility with the common market

(16)

In view of the information submitted by the UK, the Commission has doubts on the compatibility of the aid with the common market for the reasons indicated below.

3.3.1.   Incentive effect of the aid

(17)

As indicated above, the Commission takes the view that training aid can be compatible with the common market only if it creates a necessary incentive for the funded training, in the absence of which the training would not take place. Training which is part of the normal operations of an undertaking and for which market forces alone should provide sufficient incentive will not qualify for training aid.

(18)

The UK has indicated that all training which is necessary for Vauxhall's normal operations is provided as part of “routine training”, the cost of which is not included in the eligible costs of the notified aid (the same is claimed for the training necessary to adapt to the production of the Global Concept Vehicle, covered by the heading “Model Change”).

(19)

According to the UK, the training covered by the notification is significantly in excess of the work required to maintain its current business and would, because of it prohibitive cost, not be undertaken by Vauxhall without the aid. The aid would thus be a necessary condition for the training.

(20)

The Commission nevertheless doubts the incentive effect of the aid on parts of the training programme:

Production System Training

(21)

In the Commission's view, this training appears to be necessary to ensure Vauxhall's normal operations. This should provide Vauxhall with sufficient incentive to undertake the training without aid.

(22)

The UK has indicated that the training in production systems which is indispensable to Vauxhall's operations is provided through “routine training” which is distinct from the Production System Training. However, the UK has not provided sufficient information to allow the Commission to verify the contents of the “routine training” and to compare it to the Production System Training to satisfy itself that the latter provides additional qualifications.

(23)

The Commission consequently doubts that the aid is necessary for Vauxhall to undertake the Production System Training.

(24)

Concerning a particular item of the Production System Training, namely lines A25.1.1 to A25.1.6 “Statutory Inspection Training”, the Commission observes that any training which is required by statute will necessarily be undertaken even in the absence of State aid. The Commission would require specific explanations regarding this point.

Integrated Training Plan

(25)

The Commission understands that GMS is an integrated manufacturing system which has been developed by GM and which is common to all GM car manufacturing facilities. Training the workforce in GMS would therefore appear indispensable to Vauxhall's normal operations and should be undertaken even in the absence of the notified State aid.

(26)

The UK has indicated that GMS training has been undertaken at Vauxhall before, but that the Integrated Training Plan aims at the refreshment and extension of the skills initially learnt and that this expenditure is discretionary and would not be brought about by the simple operation of market forces.

(27)

However, the Commission considers that training in the manufacturing systems applied at Vauxhall, including appropriate refreshment courses, are essential to operations. The Commission considers that the UK authorities have failed to provide concrete information to substantiate the claim that the Integrated Training Plan goes beyond what it is necessary for Vauxhall's normal operations and would not be undertaken in the absence of the aid. The Commission consequently doubts that the notified aid, in this respect, is compatible with the common market.

Undergraduates

(28)

The UK has indicated that the programme is nonessential to Vauxhall's operations and could be curtailed without business unduly suffering. The costs of the training cannot be considered part of operating costs. Expenditure on the Undergraduate programme is discretionary and up for review every year. It is liable to budget cuts. The State aid would guarantee its continuation.

(29)

At this stage, the Commission observes that the Undergraduate programme has been in place for a number of years without State aid, which would indicate that the aid is not necessary for this training. The UK, which has stated that the Undergraduate training brings new talent into the company and is a key element of the training to be undertaken by Vauxhall, has not provided any concrete evidence that the programme will be discontinued in the absence of aid. The Commission is consequently not satisfied that the aid is compatible with the common market in this respect.

3.3.2.   The distinction between general and specific training

(30)

The notions of general and specific training are defined in Article 2(e) of the Training Aid Regulation. Specific training is directly and principally applicable to the employee's present or future position in the assisted undertaking and provides qualifications which are not or only to a limited extent transferable to other firms or fields of work. General training, on the other hand, provides qualifications which are transferable to other firms or fields of work and therefore substantially improve the employability of the employee. The essential distinction between the two forms of training is thus the transferability of the acquired skills.

(31)

For the different parts of the Vauxhall training programme the UK authorities have indicated whether they consider the training to be general or specific (and, consequently, which maximum aid intensity should apply in accordance with Article 4 of the Training Aid Regulation). The Commission nevertheless questions the UK's qualifications as regards the following training projects:

Production System Training

(32)

As indicated above, this training concerns all manufacturing and quality control systems at Vauxhall. The UK has indicated that all training will be given by external trainers and concerns third party equipment which is used in other undertakings and sectors, thus providing trainees with transferable qualifications.

(33)

The Commission nevertheless considers that the UK has not provided it with sufficient information to allow it to ensure that all training provided under this heading is indeed transferable. The UK would need to provide the Commission with details on the basic “routine” training at Vauxhall so that the Commission can compare the nature of this training and assess to which extent it concerns skills which are specific to Vauxhall or GM.

Integrated Production System

(34)

As indicated above, this is, to the Commission's understanding, training in the Global Manufacturing System which was developed by GM and is applied at GM facilities.

(35)

The UK argues that GMS is based on a set of principles applicable to any business situation which involves a regular process. The underlying principles are applied both within and outside the automotive sector. The employees would thus acquire a set of skills which will make them capable of performing more efficiently with any employer. In addition, some specific elements of training have been identified and notified as specific training.

(36)

The Commission nevertheless questions whether training into a proprietary manufacturing system can be considered to provide transferable qualifications. Although certain underlying notions may be widely shared, the Commission considers that the training, insofar as it concerns the application of these notions to a concrete production process, is likely to be specific. The Commission would therefore require more detailed information on this training and how closely linked it is to practical applications in the GM manufacturing process.

Cultural Change

(37)

The Commission notes that the UK authorities have not submitted any details on the content and expected output of the training under this heading as, on their own account, this information is not yet available. In spite of this, the UK authorities claim that all training provided under this heading is general training within the meaning of the Training Aid Regulation.

(38)

However, the Commission has doubts about the transferability of skills acquired as part of a “cultural change” which — in the words of the UK authorities — is specifically focused on “jointly improving the key production metrics of the plant relating to cost and quality”. In view of this objective and the notification's statements that “individual cultures widely vary between different organisations” and that “there is no optimal culture which can be easily and quickly adopted” the Commission doubts that this part of the training programme provides skills which are transferable by individual employees to other firms or fields of work. The Commission consequently doubts that training fitting the description given by the UK authorities constitutes general training.

Lean Manufacturing

(39)

The UK has argued that the principles of lean manufacturing are generally applied across the manufacturing industry and that, once acquired by the trainee, provide qualifications which are widely transferable.

(40)

Although the notion of lean manufacturing may rest on a body of generally applicable principles and techniques, the Commission nevertheless doubts whether this training can be dissociated from its practical application at Vauxhall or within the GM group at large, and thus whether the qualifications it provides are largely transferable by individual employees to other firms or fields of work. The Commission consequently doubts that this constitutes general training (8).

4.   CONCLUSION

In the light of the foregoing considerations, the Commission, acting under the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty, requests the United Kingdom to submit its comments and to provide all such information as may help to assess the aid, within one month of the date of receipt of this letter.

It requests your authorities to forward a copy of this letter to the potential recipient of the aid immediately.

The Commission wishes to remind the United Kingdom that Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty has suspensory effect, and would draw your attention to Article 14 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, which provides that all unlawful aid may be recovered from the recipient.

The Commission warns the United Kingdom that it will inform interested parties by publishing this letter and a meaningful summary of it in the Official Journal of the European Union. It will also inform the EFTA Surveillance Authority by sending a copy of this letter. All such interested parties will be invited to submit their comments within one month of the date of such publication.“


(1)  Vauxhall is located in an area which until 31 December 2006 qualified for regional aid under Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty. Since 1 January 2007, the region is an unassisted area.

(2)  The notions of general and specific training are used as defined in Commission Regulation (EC) No 68/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to training aid (OJ L 10, 13.1.2001, p. 20), referred to in this decision as “the Training Aid Regulation”.

(3)  These amounts in the table are those indicated in the UK's letter of 22 May 2007. However, the Commission notes a discrepancy as regards the figures provided in the notification, at least as concerns the eligible costs for the Integrated Training Programme. The Commission expects the UK authorities to clarify this issue and provide definitive amounts for the eligible costs and the aid.

(4)  […]: Confidential information.

(5)  At present, 37 % of workers of the company are considered to be disadvantaged. They fall mainly into the category of persons older than 45 who have not attained an upper secondary education. However, as the training will run over 6 years and as the exact number of disadvantaged workers benefiting from the training will be known only at the time the training is delivered, the UK authorities intend to apply a general increase of aid intensity of 3,7 % across the board. The UK authorities have committed to verifying the actual number of disadvantaged workers in each training project ex post and to correct the applied aid intensities accordingly.

(6)  See Commission Decision 2006/938/EC of 4 July 2006 on State aid C 40/2005 … Ford Genk (OJ C 366, 21.12.2006, p. 32) and Commission Decision of 4 April 2007 on State aid C 14/06 … General Motors Belgium, not yet published. This follows also from paragraph 16 of the preamble of the Training Aid Regulation.

(7)  This is reiterated in point 11 of the Regulation which clarifies that it must be “ensure[d] that State aid is limited to the minimum necessary to obtain the Community objective which market forces alone would not make possible […]”.

(8)  The Commission points out that in the above-mentioned decision in Ford Genk, training on “Lean organisation” was considered to be specific training.


INÉ AKTY

Komisia

17.10.2007   

SK

Úradný vestník Európskej únie

C 243/11


Uverejnenie žiadosti podľa článku 6 ods. 2 nariadenia Rady (ES) č. 510/2006 o ochrane zemepisných označení a označení pôvodu poľnohospodárskych výrobkov a potravín

(2007/C 243/05)

Týmto uverejnením sa poskytuje právo vzniesť námietky proti žiadosti o zápis podľa článku 7 nariadenia Rady (ES) č. 510/2006 (1). Vznesené námietky sa musia Komisii doručiť do šiestich mesiacov po uverejnení tejto žiadosti.

ZHRNUTIE

NARIADENIE RADY (ES) č. 510/2006

„CHAMOMILLA BOHEMICA“

ES č.: CZ/PDO/005/0411/28.10.2004

CHOP ( X ) CHZO ( )

Tento prehľad obsahuje hlavné body špecifikácie výrobku na informačné účely.

1.   Príslušný orgán v členskom štáte:

Názov:

Úřad průmyslového vlastnictví

Adresa:

Antonína Čermáka 2a

CZ-160 68 Praha 6

Telefón:

(420) 220 383 111

Fax:

(420) 224 324 718

E-mail:

posta@upv.cz

2.   Skupina:

Názov:

LEROS, s.r.o., zastupující skupinu producentů

Adresa:

U Národní galerie 470

CZ-150 00 Praha 5-Zbraslav

Telefón:

(420) 257 898 111

Fax:

(420) 257 921 328

E-mail:

leros@leros.cz

Zloženie:

výrobcovia/spracovatelia ( X ) iní ( )

3.   Druh výrobku:

Trieda 1.8: Iné výrobky prílohy I k Zmluve

4.   Špecifikácia:

(prehľad požiadaviek podľa článku 4 ods. 2 nariadenia (ES) č. 510/2006)

4.1   Meno: „Chamomilla Bohemica

Označenie Chamomilla Bohemica je tradičný názov pre kvet harmančeka pravého z oblastí Čiech.

4.2   Opis: Sušený kvet harmančeka pravého (flos Chamomilla vulgaris) – Matricariae flos, Matricaria recutita (L.) Rauschert, Chamomilla recutita (L.) Rauschert.

Chamomilla Bohemica sa vyznačuje prítomnosťou až 1 % silice, v ktorej je hlavnou účinnou zložkou chamazulen, obsiahnutý v droge v priemerných hodnotách 0,06-0,07 %. Týmito znakmi prevyšuje Chamomilla Bohemica drogy iných geografických proveniencií a prevyšuje aj akostné požiadavky kladené na kvet harmančeka pravého Českým liekopisom 1997, Českým liekopisom 2002. Podľa Českého liekopisu 2002, doplnok 2004 obsahuje „najmenej 4 ml modro sfarbenej silice na kilogram sušenej drogy a najmenej 0,25 % celkového apigeninu-7-glukosidu vo vysušenej droge. Hlavnými zložkami silice sú seskviterpeny (cca 50 % silice, (-)-a-bisabolol, bisabolol oxid A,B, (-)-bisabolonoxid A). Ďalšou zložkou silice je chamazulen (minimálny obsah je 0,035 %). Okrem silice obsahuje droga kumariny (umbelliferon, herniarin), flavonoidy (apigenin-7-glukozid a jeho deriváty, luteolin kvercetin, izorhamnetin) v minimálnom množstve 0,01 % a ďalej azulény s minimálnym obsahom 0,02 %. Flavonoidy majú spazmolytické účinky a sú v droge zastúpené 0,015 %. Spiroethery majú bakteriostatické a fungicidné účinky, ich obsah je 0,03 %.“ Nesmú vykazovať znaky silice, ktorá má hnedú farbu na tenkovrstevnej chromatografii a musia mať obsah chamazulenu priemerne 0,06-0,07 %. Na trhu sa vyskytuje vo forme čaju v nálevových vreckách a voľne sypaný v balení po 50 g alebo vo veľkoobchode v balení po 14 kg.

4.3   Zemepisná oblasť: Čechy, to znamená kraje Praha, Stredočeský, Juhočeský, Plzenský, Karlovarský, Ústecký, Liberecký, Královohradocký a Pardubický celé, z kraja Vysočina okresy Havlíčkův Brod, Jihlava a Pelhřimov, podľa ústavného zákona č. 347/1997 Zb. o vytvorení vyšších územných samosprávnych celkov a o zmene ústavného zákona Českej národnej rady č. 1/1993 Zb., ústava Českej republiky, v platnom znení.

Lokality na pestovanie harmančeka Chamomilla Bohemica na území Čiech sú vymedzené týmito pôdnymi a klimatickými podmienkami: pôdy hlinito-piesčité (podľa klasifikácie pôd černozeme, hnedozeme a pôdy illimerizované), pH faktor 7,3 až 8,1. Klimatické podmienky – ročné zrážky v priemernej výške 500 – 700 mm/m2, nadmorská výška 230 – 480 m.n.m.

4.4   Dôkaz o pôvode: Spracovatelia majú register dodávateľov, ktorí sú kontrolovaní v priebehu získavania kvetu harmančeka, a to v jednotlivých procesoch: siatia, priebehu vegetácie, zberu, sušenia, skladovania, spracovania. Takisto sa vedú registre odberateľov hotového výrobku.

Kontrolu dodržiavania špecifikácie na mieste vykonáva príslušný inšpektorát Štátnej poľnohospodárskej a potravinárskej inšpekcie.

4.5   Spôsob výroby: Harmanček je veľmi prispôsobivá plodina, ale obsahové látky reagujú intenzívne na podmienky prostredia pod vplyvom špecifických podmienok, medzi ktoré tiež patrí:

Príprava na siatie – harmanček nie je náročný na predplodinu, stredná orba, pole posmykovať do roviny, vyžaduje bezburinový pozemok.

Siatie – použitie presných sejacích strojov, po zasiatí pozemok povalcovať, výsevok 20 g na 1 ár.

Priebeh vegetácie – v priebehu vegetácie prihnojovať komplexnými priemyslovými hnojivami (napr. NPK alebo Cereritom).

Zber a pozberová úprava – kvety sa zberajú ihneď po rozkvitnutí, ručne alebo špeciálnymi samopojazdnými strojmi Neset a Unag, na sušenie sa odporúča teplota do 40 °C, ďalej sa upravujú na pozberových linkách, ktoré tvoria sústavu sitových a valcových triedičiek.

Pri vyššie uvedených činnostiach je nutné dodržať stanovenú oblasť pestovania, aby sa zaručili špecifické vlastnosti suroviny, ktoré sú uvedené v bode 4.2.

Skladovanie, balenie – v suchých, tmavých a dobre vetrateľných skladoch, harmanček sa balí do papierových vriec s jednotnou hmotnosťou, ktoré sú označené štítkom; tieto činnosti vrátane konečného spotrebiteľského balenia nemusia prebiehať vo vymedzenej oblasti, ale musia byť dodržané platné normy a nariadenia.

4.6   Spojenie: V českých zemiach sa harmanček výnimočnej kvality pestoval už dávnejšie, ale najmä v päťdesiatych rokoch minulého storočia v súvislosti s veľkým nárastom dopytu zo zahraničia, keď bolo potrebné túto plodinu odlíšiť od ostatnej produkcie harmančeka, sa vžil názov Chamomilla Bohemica. Ten sa stal symbolom pre produkciu tohto harmančeka s typickými vlastnosťami (pozri 4.2), ktoré sú zaručené špecifickými prírodnými podmienkami. Táto jedinečnosť je daná spojením faktorov, ktoré sú v oblastiach pestovania, ako podnebie, pôda a spôsoby zberu (priemer zrážok 500 – 700 mm/m2, pH pôdy 7,3 – 8,1, typ pôdy hlinito-piesčitá). Kvalita výnosu je ovplyvnená predovšetkým vhodne zvoleným pôdnym typom a množstvom zrážok. Ďalej tiež nadmorskou výškou a dobou slnečného svitu – tieto faktory výrazne ovplyvňujú obsah silice a chamazulenu. Vďaka svojej kvalite uspel harmanček Chamomilla Bohemica na rôznych veľtrhoch a výstavách, ako napr. SALIMA a Zem živiteľka, kde v danom čase dostal ocenenie „Kvalitný výrobok“. Za účelom šetrnejšieho zberu porastu harmančeka boli vyvinuté špeciálne zberové stroje značky Neset a Unag.

V ČR je od 21. januára 1975 zaregistrované označenie pôvodu Chamomilla Bohemica pod č. 84, ochrana mu bola poskytnutá aj v rámci dvojstrannej zmluvy s Portugalskom.

4.7   Kontrolný orgán:

Názov:

Státní zemědělská a potravinářská inspekce — inspektorát v Praze

Adresa:

Za opravnou 4

CZ-150 00 Praha 5

Telefón:

(420) 257 199 511

Fax:

(420) 257 199 529

E-mail:

praha@szpi.gov.cz

a ďalšie miestne príslušné inšpektoráty podľa oblasti produkcie a spracovania.

4.8   Označenie: Označenie Chamomilla Bohemica musí byť uvedené výrazným písmom na prednej strane obalu (veľkými písmenami).


(1)  Ú. v. EÚ L 93, 31.3.2006, s. 12.