title: 98/214/CE: Decisão da Comissão de 9 de Março de 1998 relativa ao processo de comprovação da conformidade de produtos de construção, nos termos do nº 2 do artigo 20º da Directiva 89/106/CEE do Conselho, no que respeita aos produtos metálicos para estruturas e produtos (Texto relevante para efeitos do EEE)

eurovoc_concepts:
Community certification
building materials
construction equipment
metal structure
product safety
quality control of industrial products
quality label

text: L 80/46 PT Jornal Oficial das Comunidades Europeias 18. 3. 98 DECIS(cid:212)O DA COMISS(cid:212)O de 9 de Mar(cid:135)o de 1998 relativa ao processo de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade de produtos de cons- tru(cid:135)(cid:209)o, nos termos do nº 2 do artigo 20º da Directiva 89/106/CEE do Conselho, no que respeita aos produtos met(cid:145)licos para estruturas e produtos (Texto relevante para efeitos do EEE) (98/214/CE) A COMISS(cid:212)O DAS COMUNIDADES EUROPEIAS, Tendo em conta o Tratado que institui a Comunidade Europeia, Tendo em conta a Directiva 89/106/CEE do Conselho, de 21 de Dezembro de 1988, relativa (cid:133) aproxima(cid:135)(cid:209)o das disposi(cid:135)(cid:210)es legislativas, regulamentares e administrativas dos Estados-membros no que respeita aos produtos de constru(cid:135)(cid:209)o (1), com a (cid:156)ltima redac(cid:135)(cid:209)o que lhe foi dada pela Directiva 93/68/CEE (2) e, nomeadamente, o nº 4 do seu artigo 13º, Considerando que a Comiss(cid:209)o deve seleccionar entre os dois processos para a comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade de um produto previstos no nº 3 do artigo 13º da Directiva 89/106/CEE «o processo menos oneroso que seja compa- t(cid:146)vel com a seguran(cid:135)a»; que isso significa que (cid:130) necess(cid:145)rio decidir se, para um determinado produto ou fam(cid:146)lia de produtos, a exist(cid:136)ncia de um sistema de controlo da produ(cid:135)(cid:209)o na f(cid:145)brica, sob a responsabilidade do fabricante, (cid:130) uma condi(cid:135)(cid:209)o necess(cid:145)ria e suficiente para a compro- va(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade ou se, por motivos relacionados com a satisfa(cid:135)(cid:209)o dos v(cid:145)rios crit(cid:130)rios referidos no nº 4 do artigo 13º supra, (cid:130) necess(cid:145)ria a interven(cid:135)(cid:209)o de um orga- nismo de certifica(cid:135)(cid:209)o aprovado; Considerando que o nº 4 do artigo 13º determina que o processo assim escolhido deve ser indicado nos mandatos e nas especifica(cid:135)(cid:210)es t(cid:130)cnicas; que, por conseguinte, (cid:130) aconselh(cid:145)vel definir o conceito de produtos ou fam(cid:146)lia de produtos utilizado nos mandatos ou nas especifica(cid:135)(cid:210)es t(cid:130)cnicas; Considerando que os dois processos referidos no nº 3 do artigo 13º s(cid:209)o descritos pormenorizadamente no anexo III da Directiva 89/106/CEE; que, por conseguinte, (cid:130) neces- s(cid:145)rio especificar claramente para cada produto ou fam(cid:146)lia de produtos os m(cid:130)todos segundo os quais se aplicar(cid:209)o os dois processos, em conjuga(cid:135)(cid:209)o com o anexo III, uma vez que este (cid:156)ltimo d(cid:145) prefer(cid:136)ncia a determinados sistemas; Considerando que o processo referido no nº 3, al(cid:146)nea a), do artigo 13º corresponde aos sistemas definidos no ponto 2, al(cid:146)nea ii), primeira possibilidade sem acompanhamento cont(cid:146)nuo, segunda e terceira possibilidades, do anexo III e que o processo descrito no nº 3, al(cid:146)nea b), do artigo 13º corresponde aos sistemas definidos no ponto 2, al(cid:146)nea i), e ponto 2, al(cid:146)nea ii), primeira possibilidade com acompa- nhamento cont(cid:146)nuo, do anexo III; Considerando que as medidas previstas na presente decis(cid:209)o est(cid:209)o em conformidade com o parecer emitido pelo Comit(cid:130) Permanente da Constru(cid:135)(cid:209)o, ADOPTOU A PRESENTE DECIS(cid:212)O: Artigo 1º referidos no anexo I s(cid:209)o considerados Os produtos conformes atrav(cid:130)s de um processo em que, para al(cid:130)m de um sistema de controlo de produ(cid:135)(cid:209)o na f(cid:145)brica assegurado pelo fabricante, se verifique a interven(cid:135)(cid:209)o de um orga- nismo de certifica(cid:135)(cid:209)o aprovado na avalia(cid:135)(cid:209)o e no acompa- nhamento do controlo de produ(cid:135)(cid:209)o ou do pr(cid:155)prio produto. Artigo 2º O processo de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade, nos termos do disposto no anexo II, (cid:130) indicado nos mandatos rela- tivos (cid:133)s normas harmonizadas. Artigo 3º Os Estados-membros s(cid:209)o os destinat(cid:145)rios da presente decis(cid:209)o. Feito em Bruxelas, em 9 de Mar(cid:135)o de 1998. Pela Comiss(cid:209)o Martin BANGEMANN Membro da Comiss(cid:209)o (1) JO L 40 de 11. 2. 1989, p. 12. (2) JO L 220 de 30. 8. 1993, p. 1. 18. 3. 98 PT Jornal Oficial das Comunidades Europeias L 80/47 ANEXO I Perfis met(cid:145)licos para estruturas Perfis laminados a quente, enformados a frio ou produzidos de outro modo, com diversas formas (em T, L, H, U, Z, I, cantoneiras, perfis com sec(cid:135)(cid:209)o oca, tubos), produtos planos (chapas, folhas, bandas), barras, produtos de fundi(cid:135)(cid:209)o e de forjagem de diversos materiais met(cid:145)licos, com ou sem protec(cid:135)(cid:209)o contra a corros(cid:209)o por revestimento superficial. Elementos met(cid:145)licos para a constru(cid:135)(cid:209)o de estruturas Produtos met(cid:145)licos acabados tais como estruturas para tectos falsos suportando cargas elevadas, asnas, vigas, pilares, escadas, estacas portantes e estacas-pranchas, perfis com dimens(cid:210)es adequadas a determinadas aplica(cid:135)(cid:210)es, bem como carris e travessas. Os produtos em causa podem dispor ou n(cid:209)o de protec(cid:135)(cid:209)o contra a corros(cid:209)o por revestimento superficial e podem ser soldados ou n(cid:209)o. Materiais de soldadura (cid:222)rg(cid:209)os de liga(cid:135)(cid:209)o para estruturas Rebites, parafusos de porca (porcas e anilhas) e parafusos de porca de alta resist(cid:136)ncia (para liga(cid:135)(cid:210)es resistentes ao escorregamento), pernos, parafusos, fixa(cid:135)(cid:210)es de carris. L 80/48 PT Jornal Oficial das Comunidades Europeias 18. 3. 98 ANEXE II FAM(cid:237)LIA DE PRODUTOS PRODUTOS MET(cid:214)LICOS PARA ESTRUTURAS E PRODUTOS CONNEXOS (1/4) 1. Sistemas de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade Para o(s) produto(s) e sua utiliza(cid:135)(cid:209)o prevista apresentado(s) infra, o CEN/Cenelec deve especificar o(s) seguinte(s) sistema(s) de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade na(s) norma(s) harmonizada(s) nesta mat(cid:130)ria: Produto(s) Utiliza(cid:135)(cid:209)o((cid:210)es) prevista(s) N(cid:146)vel(is) ou classe(s) de reac(cid:135)(cid:209)o ao fogo Sistema(s) de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade Perfis met(cid:145)licos para estruturas: Perfis laminados a quente, enformados a frio ou produzidos de outro modo, com diversas formas (em T, L, H, U, Z, I, cantoneiras, perfis com sec(cid:135)(cid:209)o oca, tubos), produtos planos (chapas, folhas, bandas), barras, produtos de fundi(cid:135)(cid:209)o e de forjagem de diversos materiais met(cid:145)licos, com ou sem protec(cid:135)(cid:209)o contra a corros(cid:209)o por reves- timento superficial Em estruturas met(cid:145)licas ou estruturas mistas de metal e bet(cid:209)o 2+ (1) (1) Sistema 2+: ver anexo III, ponto 2, al(cid:146)nea ii), primeira possibilidade, da Directiva 89/106/CEE, incluindo certifica(cid:135)(cid:209)o do controlo de produ(cid:135)(cid:209)o na f(cid:145)brica por um organismo aprovado com base no seu acompanhamento, aprecia(cid:135)(cid:209)o e aprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o cont(cid:146)nuos. 2. Condi(cid:135)(cid:210)es a aplicar pela EOTA no que respeita (cid:133)s especifica(cid:135)(cid:210)es do sistema de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade As especifica(cid:135)(cid:210)es do sistema devem permitir que este possa ser aplicado mesmo quando o comportamento n(cid:209)o necessita de ser determinado em rela(cid:135)(cid:209)o a determinada caracter(cid:146)stica devido ao facto de, pelo menos um Estado-membro n(cid:209)o impor qualquer requisito legal para essa caracter(cid:146)stica (ver nº 1 do artigo 2º da Directiva 89/106/CEE e, quando aplic(cid:145)vel, o ponto 1. 2. 3 dos documentos interpretativos). Nestes casos, a verifica(cid:135)(cid:209)o da referida caracter(cid:146)stica n(cid:209)o deve ser imposta ao fabricante quando este n(cid:209)o pretender declarar o comportamento do produto nesse (cid:131)mbito. FAM(cid:237)LIA DE PRODUTOS PRODUTOS MET(cid:214)LICOS PARA ESTRUTURAS E PRODUTOS CONNEXOS (2/4) 1. Sistemas de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade Para o(s) produto(s) e sua utiliza(cid:135)(cid:209)o prevista apresentado(s) infra, o CEN/Cenelec deve especificar o(s) seguinte(s) sistema(s) de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade na(s) norma(s) harmonizada(s) nesta mat(cid:130)ria: 18. 3. 98 PT Jornal Oficial das Comunidades Europeias L 80/49 Produto(s) Utiliza(cid:135)(cid:209)o((cid:210)es) prevista(s) N(cid:146)vel(is) ou classe(s) de reac(cid:135)(cid:209)o ao fogo Sistema(s) de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade Elementos met(cid:145)licos para a constru(cid:135)(cid:209)o de estruturas: adequadas estacas-pranchas, perfis tais como Produtos met(cid:145)licos acabados asnas, vigas, pilares, escadas, estacas por- tantes com e dimens(cid:210)es determinadas aplica(cid:135)(cid:210)es, bem como carris e travessas. Os produtos em causa podem dispor ou n(cid:209)o de corros(cid:209)o protec(cid:135)(cid:209)o por revestimento e podem ser soldados ou n(cid:209)o a superficial contra a Elementos met(cid:145)licos para a constru(cid:135)(cid:209)o de estruturas: Estruturas acabadas para tectos falsos supor- tando cargas elevadas. Os produtos em causa podem dispor ou n(cid:209)o corros(cid:209)o por de protec(cid:135)(cid:209)o revestimento e podem ser soldados ou n(cid:209)o contra superficial a Em funda(cid:135)(cid:210)es estruturas e (cid:190) 2+ (2) Em estruturas (A, B, C) (2) 1 (3) (A, B, C) (4), D, E, F, A (5) 2+ (1) (1) Sistema 2+: ver anexo III, ponto 2, al(cid:146)nea ii), primeira possibilidade, da Directiva 89/106/CEE, incluindo certifica(cid:135)(cid:209)o do controlo de produ(cid:135)(cid:209)o na f(cid:145)brica por um organismo aprovado com base no seu acompanhamento, aprecia(cid:135)(cid:209)o e aprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o cont(cid:146)nuos. (2) Materiais cuja reac(cid:135)(cid:209)o ao fogo seja suscept(cid:146)vel de altera(cid:135)(cid:209)o durante o processo de produ(cid:135)(cid:209)o (de modo geral, os materiais suscept(cid:146)veis de modifica(cid:135)(cid:209)o qu(cid:146)mica, tais como os retardadores de fogo, ou aqueles cujas altera(cid:135)(cid:210)es da composi(cid:135)(cid:209)o possam determinar altera(cid:135)(cid:210)es na reac(cid:135)(cid:209)o ao fogo). (3) Sistema 1: ver anexo III, ponto 2, al(cid:146)nea ii), da Directiva 89/106/CEE, sem ensaio aleat(cid:155)rio de amostras. (4) Materiais cuja reac(cid:135)(cid:209)o ao fogo n(cid:209)o seja suscept(cid:146)vel de altera(cid:135)(cid:209)o durante o processo de produ(cid:135)(cid:209)o. (5) Materiais classificados na classe A que, em conformidade com a Decis(cid:209)o 96/603/CEE, n(cid:209)o necessitam de ensaio de reac(cid:135)(cid:209)o ao fogo. 2. Condi(cid:135)(cid:210)es a aplicar pela EOTA no que respeita (cid:133)s especifica(cid:135)(cid:210)es do sistema de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade As especifica(cid:135)(cid:210)es do sistema devem permitir que este possa ser aplicado mesmo quando o comportamento n(cid:209)o necessita de ser determinado em rela(cid:135)(cid:209)o a determinada caracter(cid:146)stica devido ao facto de, pelo menos um Estado-membro n(cid:209)o impor qualquer requisito legal para essa caracter(cid:146)stica (ver nº 1 do artigo 2º da Directiva 89/106/CEE e, quando aplic(cid:145)vel, o ponto 1. 2. 3 dos documentos interpretativos). Nestes casos, a verifica(cid:135)(cid:209)o da referida caracter(cid:146)stica n(cid:209)o deve ser imposta ao fabricante quando este n(cid:209)o pretender declarar o comportamento do produto nesse (cid:131)mbito. FAM(cid:237)LIA DE PRODUTOS PRODUTOS MET(cid:214)LICOS PARA ESTRUTURAS E PRODUTOS CONNEXOS (3/4) 1. Sistemas de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade Para o(s) produto(s) e sua utiliza(cid:135)(cid:209)o prevista apresentado(s) infra, o CEN/Cenelec deve especificar o(s) seguinte(s) sistema(s) de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade na(s) norma(s) harmonizada(s) nesta mat(cid:130)ria: L 80/50 PT Jornal Oficial das Comunidades Europeias 18. 3. 98 Produto(s) Utiliza(cid:135)(cid:209)o((cid:210)es) prevista(s) N(cid:146)vel(is) ou classe(s) de reac(cid:135)(cid:209)o ao fogo Sistema(s) de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade Materiais de soldadura Em estruturas met(cid:145)licas 2+ (1) (1) Sistema 2+: ver anexo III, ponto 2, al(cid:146)nea ii), primeira possibilidade, da Directiva 89/106/CEE, incluindo certifica(cid:135)(cid:209)o do controlo de produ(cid:135)(cid:209)o na f(cid:145)brica por um organismo aprovado com base no seu acompanhamento, aprecia(cid:135)(cid:209)o e aprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o cont(cid:146)nuos. 2. Condi(cid:135)(cid:210)es a aplicar pela EOTA no que respeita (cid:133)s especifica(cid:135)(cid:210)es do sistema de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade As especifica(cid:135)(cid:210)es do sistema devem permitir que este possa ser aplicado mesmo quando o comportamento n(cid:209)o necessita de ser determinado em rela(cid:135)(cid:209)o a determinada caracter(cid:146)stica devido ao facto de, pelo menos um Estado-membro n(cid:209)o impor qualquer requisito legal para essa caracter(cid:146)stica (ver nº 1 do artigo 2º da Directiva 89/106/CEE e, quando aplic(cid:145)vel, o ponto 1. 2. 3 dos documentos interpretativos). Nestes casos, a verifica(cid:135)(cid:209)o da referida caracter(cid:146)stica n(cid:209)o deve ser imposta ao fabricante quando este n(cid:209)o pretender declarar o comportamento do produto nesse (cid:131)mbito. FAM(cid:237)LIA DE PRODUTOS PRODUTOS MET(cid:214)LICOS PARA ESTRUTURAS E PRODUTOS CONNEXOS (4/4) 1. Sistemas de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade Para o(s) produto(s) e sua utiliza(cid:135)(cid:209)o prevista apresentado(s) infra, o CEN/Cenelec deve especificar o(s) seguinte(s) sistema(s) de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade na(s) norma(s) harmonizada(s) nesta mat(cid:130)ria: Produto(s) Utiliza(cid:135)(cid:209)o((cid:210)es) prevista(s) N(cid:146)vel(is) ou classe(s) de reac(cid:135)(cid:209)o ao fogo Sistema(s) de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade (cid:222)rg(cid:209)os de liga(cid:135)(cid:209)o para estruturas: Rebites, parafusos de porca (porcas e ani- lhas) e parafusos de porca de alta resist(cid:136)ncia (para liga(cid:135)(cid:210)es resistentes ao escorregamen- to), pernos, parafusos, fixa(cid:135)(cid:210)es de carris Em estruturas met(cid:145)licas 2+ (1) (1) Sistema 2+: ver anexo III, ponto 2, al(cid:146)nea ii), primeira possibilidade, da Directiva 89/106/CEE, incluindo certifica(cid:135)(cid:209)o do controlo de produ(cid:135)(cid:209)o na f(cid:145)brica por um organismo aprovado com base no seu acompanhamento, aprecia(cid:135)(cid:209)o e aprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o cont(cid:146)nuos. 2. Condi(cid:135)(cid:210)es a aplicar pela EOTA no que respeita (cid:133)s especifica(cid:135)(cid:210)es do sistema de comprova(cid:135)(cid:209)o da conformidade As especifica(cid:135)(cid:210)es do sistema devem permitir que este possa ser aplicado mesmo quando o comportamento n(cid:209)o necessita de ser determinado em rela(cid:135)(cid:209)o a determinada caracter(cid:146)stica devido ao facto de, pelo menos um Estado-membro n(cid:209)o impor qualquer requisito legal para essa caracter(cid:146)stica (ver nº 1 do artigo 2º da Directiva 89/106/CEE e, quando aplic(cid:145)vel, o ponto 1. 2. 3 dos documentos interpretativos). Nestes casos, a verifica(cid:135)(cid:209)o da referida caracter(cid:146)stica n(cid:209)o deve ser imposta ao fabricante quando este n(cid:209)o pretender declarar o comportamento do produto nesse (cid:131)mbito


title: WRITTEN QUESTION No. 642/98 by Jorge HERNANDEZ MOLLAR to the Commission. Conditions for upgrading the Spanish 'Ingeniero Técnico' engineering qualification in comparison with others

eurovoc_concepts:
European official
Spain
administrator
competition (EU)
diploma
engineer
equal treatment
equivalence of diplomas
recognition of studies
recruitment

formats: html pdf print

text: C 354/12 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning 19. 11. 98 (98/C 354/19) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-0638/98 fr(cid:229)n Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) till kommissionen (9 mars 1998) A¤mne: Villkor fo¤r befordran fo¤r personer med den spanska examenstiteln Ingeniero Te·cnico, ja¤mfo¤rt med andra fall Varfo¤r ha¤vdar kommissionen att den spanska examen Ingeniero Te·cnico har samma status som en examen som tagits vid en Fachhochshule, trots att den sistna¤mnda examen godka¤nns vid de flesta allma¤nna uttagningsproven till tja¤nster inom kategorin A/LA? (98/C 354/20) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-0639/98 fr(cid:229)n Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) till kommissionen (9 mars 1998) A¤mne: Villkor fo¤r befordran fo¤r personer med den spanska examenstiteln Ingeniero Te·cnico, ja¤mfo¤rt med andra fall Examenstiteln Ingeniero Te·cnico ger beho¤righet till doktorandstudier i n(cid:229)gra medlemsstater. Varfo¤r p(cid:229)st(cid:229)r kommissionen a¤nd(cid:229) att personer med denna titel inte a¤r beho¤riga att studera p(cid:229) doktorandniv(cid:229)? (98/C 354/21) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-0640/98 fr(cid:229)n Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) till kommissionen (9 mars 1998) A¤mne: Villkor fo¤r befordran fo¤r personer med den spanska examenstiteln Ingeniero Te·cnico, ja¤mfo¤rt med andra fall A¤ r det sant att kommissionen har uttryckt sin oro hos de spanska myndigheterna ang(cid:229)ende spanska tekniska ingenjo¤rer med tre(cid:229)rig universitetsutbildning. Problemet a¤r att om dessa blir beho¤riga att so¤ka tja¤nster i kategorin A/LA, kan det leda till att andra personer med tre(cid:229)rig universitetsutbildning f(cid:229)r motsvarande beho¤righet. A¤ r detta ett relevant ska¤l till att avsl(cid:229) anso¤kningarna fr(cid:229)n spanska personer med titeln Ingeniero Te·cnico? (98/C 354/22) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-0641/98 fr(cid:229)n Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) till kommissionen (9 mars 1998) A¤mne: Villkor fo¤r befordran fo¤r personer med den spanska examenstiteln Ingeniero Te·cnico, ja¤mfo¤rt med andra fall Varfo¤r antas anso¤kningarna fr(cid:229)n personer med de brittiska titlarna Bachelor of Arts, Bachelor of Science och Bachelor of Engineering, som alla uppn(cid:229)s efter tre (cid:229)rs studier, medan de personer som har den spanska titeln Ingeniero Te·cnico inte godka¤nns som so¤kande? (98/C 354/23) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-0642/98 fr(cid:229)n Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) till kommissionen (9 mars 1998) A¤mne: Villkor fo¤r befordran fo¤r personer med den spanska examenstiteln Ingeniero Te·cnico, ja¤mfo¤rt med andra fall Anser kommissionen att de brittiska titlarna Bachelor of Arts, Bachelor of Science och Bachelor of Engineering ger ho¤gre kompetens a¤n titeln Ingeniero Te·cnico? Varfo¤r?


title: WRITTEN QUESTION No. 644/98 by Jorge HERNANDEZ MOLLAR to the Commission. Conditions for upgrading the Spanish 'Ingeniero Técnico' engineering qualification in comparison with others

text: 19. 11. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 354/13 (98/C 354/24) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0643/98 by Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) to the Commission (9 March 1998) Subject: Conditions for upgrading the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) engineering qualification in comparison with others Why, in the Spanish version of the notice of open competitions COM/A/720 and COM/A/721 (OJ C 52 A, 28. 2. 1991), did the Commission include the requirement that applicants be holders of a higher education qualification obtained after a five-year course, when that same requirement did not appear in any other language version of the said notice? (98/C 354/25) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0644/98 by Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) to the Commission (9 March 1998) Subject: Conditions for upgrading the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) engineering qualification in comparison with others What has led the Commission to require that Mr Vicente Alonso Morales, holder of the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) qualification and candidate for open competition COM/A/1047 (OJ C 145 A, 13. 5. 1997), should have successfully completed the equivalent of a full-length Spanish degree course, given that such a requirement does not appear in the text of the notice of competition? (98/C 354/26) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0645/98 by Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) to the Commission (9 March 1998) Subject: Conditions for upgrading the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) engineering qualification in comparison with others Why, in the Spanish version of the notice of open competition COM/A/1047 (OJ C 145 A, 13. 5. 1991), has the Commission included the requirement that applicants be holders of a (cid:145)university(cid:146) qualification, when that same requirement does not appear in the German version of the said notice? (98/C 354/27) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0669/98 by Antoni Gutie·rrez D(cid:14)·az (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (10 March 1998) Subject: Conditions for upgrading the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) engineering qualification in comparison with others Is it the case that applications from holders of a (cid:145)Fachhochschuldiplom(cid:146) are or have been accepted by the Commission for open competitions to fill category A/LA posts in the European civil service? (98/C 354/28) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0670/98 by Antoni Gutie·rrez D(cid:14)·az (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (10 March 1998) Subject: Conditions for upgrading the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) engineering qualification in comparison with others Which does the Commission consider the highest education qualification in Germany: the (cid:145)Fachhochschuldi- plom(cid:146), or the (cid:145)Hochschuldiplom(cid:146) (university-level degree)? (98/C 354/29) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0671/98 by Antoni Gutie·rrez D(cid:14)·az (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (10 March 1998) Subject: Conditions for upgrading the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) engineering qualification in comparison with others Does the Commission consider the (cid:145)Fachhochschuldiplom(cid:146) a higher qualification than that of (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146)? Why?


eurovoc_concepts: International Civil Aviation Organisation

text: COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 09. 03. 1998 COM(1998) 98 final 98/0070 (SYN) Proposal for a COUNCIL DIRECTIVE on the registration and use within the Community of certain types of civil subsonic jet aeroplanes which have been modified and recertificated as meeting the standards of Volume I, Part II, Chapter 3 of Annex 16 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, third edition (July 1993) (presented by the Commission) EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM I. Introduction 1. One of the common transport policy the key objectives of is "sustainable mobility"1. This type of mobility aims at ensuring both the effective functioning of the Community's transport system and the protection of the environment. Technical measures, such as noise standards for aeroplanes, contribute to sustainable mobility by ensuring a reduction in the noise produced by individual aeroplanes. In addition, a further reduction in noise emissions from aeroplanes the is Community programme of policy and action in relation to the environment and sustainable development2. specifically mentioned 2000 year the by in 2. The Community started to legislate on noise from aeroplanes almost 20 years ago. The latest Community initiative is Council Directive 92/14/EEC3 of 2 March 1992. This Directive provided for the gradual phase-out between 1 April 1995 and 1 April 2002 of the operation of all civil subsonic jet aeroplanes not complying with the most stringent international noise standards (Chapter 3 of Annex 16 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation). Article 5 of this Directive exempted from the phase-out rules effective from 1995 those aeroplanes which, although not complying with the most stringent standards, could be modified to meet those standards, through so-called "hushkitting", provided that the equipment was ordered by 1 April 1994 and that the earliest delivery date for the modifications was accepted. 3. Directive 92/14/EEC did not, however, mention the subsequent fitting of hushkits to noisier aeroplanes to comply with these phase-out rules. Currently, hushkits permitting noisy aeroplanes to meet Chapter 3 noise standards already exist for the following aeroplanes types: Boeing 727 - 100 and 200 series Boeing 737-200 non ADV and ADV series Douglas DC-8 - 62 and 63 series Douglas DC-9 - 10 and 30 series and hushkits are being developed for the following aeroplanes types: Boeing 707 - 100 and 200 series BAC 1 -11 400 and 500 series Douglas DC-8 - 50 série Douglas DC-9 - 50 série Through the purchase of hushkits air carriers can extend the life of aeroplanes which are more than 25 years old and avoid investment in new aeroplanes. 1 COM(92) 494 final, 2. 12. 1992 and COM(95) 302 final, 12. 7. 1995. 2 OJC 138, 17. 5. 1993, p. 5. 3 OJL 76, 23. 3. 4992, p. 21. II. Community action 4. In the Community, aeroplanes on Member States' registers which have been hushkitted to meet the Chapter 3 standards currently represent only a very small percentage of the total commercial civil jet fleet, namely 36 aeroplanes out of a total of2 3524, or 1. 5%. In the United States the situation is somewhat different. As opposed to the Community, the US adopted legislation on the "stage 2" (the US equivalent to Chapter 2) which anticipated and does, therefore, not follow Appendix D to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Resolution A 31-11 on possible operating restrictions on subsonic jet aircraft which exceed the noise levels in Volume I, Chapter 3 of Annex 16. This Appendix urged states not to begin the phase-out before 1 April 1995 and to allow for a gradual phase-out over a period of not less than seven years. This date and period are an integral part of Directive 92/14/EEC. In the US, however, the airport noise and capacity Act of 1990 required the complete phase-out of large Stage 2 aircraft by 31 December 1999. Moreover, this Act imposed three interim compliance dates, namely 31 December 1994, 31 December 1996 and 31 December 1998, by which a minimum percentage of the fleet had to be Stage 3 (55% in 1994, 65% in 1996 and 75%) in 1998) or by which the Stage 2 fleet had to be reduced by a certain percentage (25% in 1994, 50%> in 1996, 75% in 1998). The only economically feasible way to meet these interim compliance requirements was by using hushkits on existing Stage 2 aircraft. This explains why by the end of 1996, to meet the US national Stage 2 phase-out programme around 650 aeroplanes had been hushkitted to meet the most stringent noise standards. As part of an economic analysis carried out by ICAO, the Air Transport Association (the US air carriers association) in conjunction with the International Air Transport Association (the international air carriers association) reported that they expected about 1 500 aeroplanes to be hushkitted by 2000. The international noise certification standards as specified in the various Chapters of the aforementioned Annex 16 lay down maximum noise levels at the three measurement points used for certification, namely the lateral, approach and flyover noise measurement point. However, the certification procedure allows to offset any excesses at one of the measurement points by corresponding reductions at the other point or points. Since the standards are defined as noise levels not be exceeded, most aeroplanes remain well below these maximum levels and have a "margin". Although the noise level of hushkitted aeroplanes formally complies with Chapter 3 noise standards, it is significantly worse, mass for mass, than for current production Chapter 3 aeroplanes. In addition, the majority of hushkitted aeroplanes do not actually meet Chapter 3 at all measurement points, being allowed to offset their debit at one measurement point against a benefit at another measurement point. The use of this so-called "traded margin" together with operational restrictions such as weight and flap limitations allows aeroplanes that would normally have been retired under Directive 92/14/EEC to continue flying beyond their 25 years' life provided for in this Directive. The margins in relation to Chapter 3 noise limits for Chapter 2 aeroplanes hushkitted to meet Chapter 3 noise requirements currently vary between -0. 1 and 4. 6 EPNdB, whereas for current technology Chapter 3 aeroplanes these margins vary between 6. 6 and 26. 8 EPNdB. 5. 4 Source, Airclaims Ltd, September 1996. This implies that the use of hushkittcd aeroplanes will make a disproportionate contribution to the noise impact around airports where they are introduced. 6. Moreover, the environmental performance of hushkitted or similarly modified aeroplanes, in terms of fuel burn and atmospheric pollutants is in general worse than that of current production aeroplanes due to the weight and performance penalties resulting from the hushkit, and the older, less fuel efficient original engines, most of which date back to the 1960s. The specific fuel consumption at maximum take-off rating for hushkitted Chapter 2 aeroplanes can be 50% higher compared to current technology Chapter 3 aeroplanes. The emissions of hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides during the landing and take-off cycle for hushkitted Chapter 2 aeroplanes are about 30% higher compared to current technology Chapter 3 aeroplanes. 7. In order to avoid a further deterioration of the noise situation around Community airports and to limit other environmental damage as well as to prevent between April 1999 and 2002 a transfer of hushkitted aircraft from US, to Member States' registers as a result of the anticipated application by the US of the ICAO Chapter 2 phase-out rules, it is justified to prevent Member States from adding acoustically modified older aeroplanes to their registers through a so-called "non-addition" rule. As has been shown, this type of aeroplane is not yet a problem in relation to aeroplanes on Member States' registers, the aim of this non-addition rule is to ensure that in the future they do not become one and that the environmental benefits of the technical progress achieved since the adoption of the Chapter 3 standards are preserved. In this context it should be highlighted that as far as Community registers are concerned: this proposal is for a non-addition rule; and a clear distinction has to be made between a non-addition rule and a non- operation rule. A non-addition rule, such as the one presented in the present Directive for Community registers , prevents the addition of non-complying aeroplanes to Member, States' registers but does not affect the aeroplanes which are already on these registers nor does it limit the possibilities to operate those aeroplanes at Community airports. A non-operation rule, on the contrary, directly affects the use of a non-complying aeroplane, since it prohibits such an aeroplane to land or take-off at Community airports. 8. However, for aeroplanes on the register of a third country it is not possible for the Community to impose a non-addition rule. For such aeroplanes the same objective can be achieved through a non-operation rule which will only affect aeroplanes that have not been operated into the Community and are not on the register of the third country concerned when the non-addition rule comes into effect for aeroplanes registered in the Community. The introduction of equivalent requirements applicable to aeroplanes registered in third countries aims at maintaining the effectiveness of the present initiative and at preventing distortions of competition. In order to be consistent with the phase-out arrangements and the final cut-off date as provided for in Council Directive 92/14/EEC for Chapter 2 aeroplanes, whose overall noise level is in excess of Chapter 2 aeroplanes fitted with hushkits, the non-operation rule for non-complying aeroplanes on third country registers should only come into effect at that final cut-off date. In addition, the provisions, applicable to aeroplanes on third country registers, should also take into account the scope of the non-addition rule for Chapter 2 aeroplanes, as laid down in Council Directive 89/629/EEC, which applied only to aeroplanes added to Member States' registers. 9. In making its proposal, the Commission has also considered its compatibility with the principle of subsidiarity by addressing the following questions (a) What are the objectives of the proposal in relation to the obligations of the Community and what is the Community dimension of the problem? As part of the common transport policy, the Community has, under Article 84(2) of the Treaty enacted the third-aviation package which has created an internal market for air transport services where the rules for the operation of such services have been largely harmonized. This harmonization also covers technical standards for noise from civil subsonic aeroplanes. These standards have contributed to the gradual improvement of the noise climate around Community airports. However, high annual growth rates in air transport have to some extent eroded the environmental benefits resulting from the gradual introduction of more stringent noise standards. As set out before, the purpose of the present proposal is to prevent a further deterioration of the noise situation around airports. (b) Does competence for the planned activities lie solely with the Community or is it shared with the Member States? The Commission has prevented the addition of non-noise certificated aeroplanes to Member States' registers by virtue of Council Directive 80/51/EEC and of Chapter 2 aeroplanes by virtue of Council Directive 89/629/EEC. Moreover, the Community has, by virtue of Council Directive 92/14/EEC, fully harmonized the noise standards which aeroplanes from Member States and third countries must fulfill in order to operate at Community airports. The envisaged strengthening of those standards by the exclusion of acoustically modified Chapter 2 aeroplanes implies modifications to that latter Directive and can, therefore, only be implemented at Community level. In conformity with the proportionality principle, a Directive is considered sufficient in this case. It leaves each Member State the right to decide on the best implementation tools which fit its internal system. 10. Given the international character of air transport, it would be preferable that any measure aimed at limiting aeroplane noise nuisance should be taken at international rather than at regional or national level. However, since it has so far not been possible to agree on such measures within the framework of ICAO, the Commission feels that some action should now be initiated at Community level. The measures contained in the present proposal are consistent with the obligatory provisions of the Convention on International Civil Aviation. 11. Finally, the measure was part of a number of possible solutions to the noise problem put forward in the Consultation Paper on the limitation of the impact of noise from air transport which has been presented in preparation of the present proposal to all Member States and stakeholders - airport, air carriers, air transport users, aeronautical manufacturing industry, transport workers organizations, international aviation bodies, environmental protection groups as well as local and regional authorities. In addition, in order to produce the widest possible effect, the Commission services are cooperating with the European Civil Aviation Conference (EC AC) with a view to ensuring a harmonized approach beyond the frontiers of the Community. In this context, the triennial session of ECAC which took place in Strasbourg in July 1997, agreed "that action should be taken at European level to prevent the addition of those aircraft which had been "hushkitted" so that they could only just meet higher-(Chapter 3) noise standards. The measure complies with the ECAC policy objective to reduce the level of noise emissions from aircraft. III. Contents of the Directive 12. Article 1 lays down the general objective of the Directive. Article 2 contains the definitions which are necessary for the proper interpretation of the Directive. 13. Article 3 is the core of the Directive. In its Paragraph 1, it lays down the non-addition rule for modified aeroplanes. These modifications include hushkits, engine modifications, redesigned nacelles or other technical measures which do not permit full compliance at all measurement points used for Chapter 3 certification, as well as the use of operational restrictions with a view to improving the acoustic performance. Paragraph 3 aims at ensuring a level playing field between aeroplanes registered in the Community and those registered in third countries by limiting the use of non-complying third-country aeroplanes at Community airports. 14. Article 4 provides for a limited number of exemptions. Amongst these exemptions are aeroplanes operated exclusively outside the Community and "exceptional cases" of a temporary nature. 15. The objective of Article 5 is to ensure that Member States provide for the appropriate measures to guarantee the effective operation of the common rules. 16. Articles 6, 7 and 8 are standard Articles dealing mainly with the incorporation of the Directive into national law. Proposal for a COUNCIL DIRECTIVE on the registration and use within the Community of certain types of civil subsonic jet aeroplanes which have been modified and recertificated as meeting the standards of Volume I, Part II, Chapter 3 of Annex 16 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, third edition (July 1993) (Text with EEA relevance) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 84(2) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission5, Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee6, Acting in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 189c of the Treaty in cooperation with the European Parliament7, Whereas one of the key objectives of the common transport policy is sustainable mobility; whereas such a policy can be defined as a global approach which aims at ensuring both the effective functioning of the Community's transport systems and the protection of the environment; whereas it is appropriate to take technical measures which contribute to the achievement of sustainable mobility; Whereas the Commission Communication on the future development of the common transport policy: a global framework to the construction of a Community framework for sustainable mobility8 explicitly refers to the introduction of a non-addition rule for the noisiest aeroplanes; Whereas the fifth action programme of 1992 on the environment, the general approach of which was endorsed by the Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, in their Resolution of 1 February 19939 envisages further Jegislative measures aimed at reducing noise emissions from aeroplanes; whereas the said programme lays down the objective that no person should be exposed to noise levels which endanger health and quality of life; Whereas the growth in air transport activities at Community airports is increasingly determined by environmental constraints; whereas the operation of less noisy aeroplanes at these airports can contribute to a better use of available airport capacity; 5 OJC 6 OJC 7 Opinion of the European Parliament of. (OJ C of European Parliament of. (OJ C. ) COM(92)494 final, 2. 12. 1992. 8 9 OJC 138, 17. 5. 1993, p. 1. ), Council Common Position of (OJ C ) and Decision of the 7 Whereas older types of aeroplanes modified to improve their noise certification level, have a noise performance which is significantly worse, mass for mass, than that of modern types of aeroplanes originally certificated to meet the standards of Volume 1, Part II, Chapter 3 of Annex 16 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, third edition (July 1993); whereas those modifications prolong the life of an aeroplane that would normally have been retired; whereas those modifications tend to worsen the gaseous emissions performance and fuel burn of earlier technology aero engines; Whereas a rule which prohibits the addition of those older modified types of aeroplanes to Member States' registers as from 1 April 1999 can be considered as a protective measure aimed at preventing a further deterioration of the noise situation around Community airports as well as improving the situation regarding fuel burn and gaseous emissions; Whereas in a Community without internal frontiers, it is appropriate to exclude from this non-addition rule aeroplanes entered in any Member State's register prior to 1 April 1999; Whereas in view of existing Community legislation on aeroplane noise, the present initiative needs to be taken at Community level by binding Community rules and, thus, is compatible with the subsidiarity principle by leaving to each Member State the right to decide the best implementation tools that fit its internal system; Whereas a non-addition rule combines technical feasibility with environmental benefits without imposing an undue economic burden; Whereas it is necessary to minimize possible distortions of competition by establishing equivalent requirements applicable to aeroplanes registered in third countries; whereas since the Community has no competence over third-country registers, that objective can only be achieved by restricting the operation of non-complying aeroplanes registered as from 1 April 1999 in third countries; whereas the date for introducing such restrictions should take account of the final cut-off date for the operation of Chapter 2 aeroplanes as provided for in Council Directive 92/14/EEC of 2 March 1992 on the limitation of the operation of aeroplanes covered by Part II, Chapter 2, Volume 1 of Annex 16 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, second edition 1988)10, as well as the extent of the non-addition provisions for Chapter 2 aeroplanes as laid down in Council Directive 89/629/EEC of 4 December 1989 on the limitation of noise emission from civil subsonic jet aeroplanes11; Whereas the main objective of the measure is to limit noise at Community airports, aeroplanes may be exempted from the non-addition rule when they are not operated in the Community territory; whereas exemptions may also apply for aeroplanes operated in the French overseas departments in view of their geographical location, as well as temporary exemptions, in order for the rules to produce their full environmental benefits, for operations of exceptional nature; Whereas it is important to ensure that infringements of Community law are penalized under conditions which make the penalty effective, proportionate and dissuasive, 10 OJL 76, 23. 3. 1992, p. 21. 11 OJL 363, 13. 12. 1989, p. 27. HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE: Article 1 Objective The objective of this Directive is to lay down rules to prevent future deterioration in the overall noise impact in the Community of rccertificated civil subsonic jet aeroplanes while at the same time limiting other environmental damage. Article 2 Definitions For the puqjoses of this Directive, the following definitions shall apply: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. "civil subsonic jet aeroplane": a civil subsonic jet aeroplane with a maximum certificated take off mass of 34 000 kg or more, or with a certified maximum internal accommodation for the aeroplane type in question consisting of more than 19-passenger seats, excluding any seats for crew only and powered by engines with a by pass ratio of less than three; "recertificated civil subsonic jet aeroplane''': a civil subsonic jet aeroplane initially certificated to Chapter 2 or equivalent standards, or initially not noise certificated which has been modified to meet Chapter 3 standards either directly through technical measures or indirectly through operational restrictions; "Chapter 2" and "Chapter 3": the noise standards as defined in Volume I, Part II, Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 respectively, of Annex 16 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, third edition (July 1993); "operational restrictions": weight restrictions imposed on the aeroplane and/or operational limitations within the control of the pilot or the operator, such as reduced flap setting; "to register an aeroplane": the formal act whereby the nationality of an aeroplane is established through its entry on the national register of a Member State or a third country; "the territory of the Community": the territory subject to the provisions of the Treaty. Article 3 Non-complying aeroplanes 1. Member States shall ensure that recertificated civil subsonic jet aeroplanes cannot be registered in their territory as from 1 April 1999. 2. The provisions of paragraph 1 shall not affect civil subsonic jet aeroplanes which were already on the register of any Member State before 1 April 1999. 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of Directive 92/14/EEC and in particular Article 2(2) thereof, as from 1 April 2002 Member States shall not allow the operation at airports in their territories of recertificated civil subsonic jet aeroplanes registered in a third country unless they were on the register of that third country before 1 April 1999 and prior to that dale have been operated into the territory of the Community. Article 4 Exemptions 1. Member States may grant temporary exemptions from the provisions of Article 3 for civil subsonic jet aeroplanes whose operations are of such an exceptional nature that it would be unreasonable to withhold a temporary exemption, such as for emergencies or for humanitarian aid. 2. Member States may grant exemptions from the provisions of Article 3 for civil subsonic jet aeroplanes which are exclusively operated outside the territory of the Community and for those exclusively operated in the overseas departments of France. Article 5 Penalties Member States shall lay down the system of penalties applicable to infringement of the national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive and shall take all the measures necessary to ensure that those penalities are applied. The penalties thus provided for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Member States shall notify the relevant provisions to the Commission not later than the date specified in Article 6(1), first subparagraph and shall notify any subsequent changes as soon as possible. Article 6 Implementation 1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by [. ]. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof. When Member States adopt these provisions, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such reference at the time of their official publication. The procedure for such reference shall be adopted by Member States. 2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the texts of the provisions of domestic law which they adopt in the field governed by this Directive. Article 7 Entry into force This Directive shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. 10 Article 8 Addressees This Directive is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, For the Council The President 11 IMPACT ASSESSMENT Impact of the proposal on businesses with special reference to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) Title of the proposal: Proposal for a Council Directive on the registration and use within the Community of certain types of civil subsonic jet aeroplanes which have been modified and recertificated as meeting the standards of Volume I, Part II, Chapter 3 of Annex 16 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, third edition (July 1993) Reference number: The proposal: The impact on business 1. Who will be affected by the proposal? Which sectors of business? Air carriers (Community carriers initially and carriers from third countries afterwards) Which sizes of business (what medium-sized firms) is the concentration of small and The European air carrier market essentially consists of big companies, which account for 65. 4% of the market. Charter companies represent 27. 6% and small and medium-sized firms only in the order of 5%. Are there particular geographical areas of the Community where these businesses are found? No 2. What will business have to do to comply with the proposal? As from 1 April 1999 it will no longer be possible for community air carriers to add to their fleet older aircraft which have been modified (equipped with hush-kits) to meet more stringent noise standards, namely Chapter 3 standards. 12 3. What economic effects is the proposal likely to have? It should be noted that the general approach to fleet planning and extension adopted by Community air carriers is not to modify older aircraft through htishkitting, but rather to invest in new less noisy aircraft. In addition, there are no manufacturers of hushkits established in the Community. Therefore, the impact on employment; on investment and the creation of new businesses; on the competitive position of business will not be significant. 4. Does the proposal contain measures to take account of the specific situation of small and medium-sized firms? Indirectly, since aircraft of less than 34 000 kg or with less than 20 passenger seats are not affected by the proposal. Consultation List of the organizations which have been consulted and outline of their views 5. The issue has been addressed in the context of a consultation paper on the limitation of aircraft noise which has been sent last November to the various parties concerned: Member States, airport operators, air carriers, workers organizations, local and regional authorities, international bodies, consumer organizations and environmental protection groups. A majority of the parties consulted support the initiative contained in the present proposal. 13 ISSN 0254-1475 COM(98) 98 final DOCUMENTS EN 07 11 Catalogue number : CB-CO-98-116-EN-C ISBN 92-78-31409-9 Office for Official Publications of the European Communities L-2985 Luxembourg 14


title: WRITTEN QUESTION No. 626/98 by Raimo ILASKIVI to the Commission. Charge levied by Russia on motorists crossing the border

eurovoc_concepts:
Finland
Russia
customs
customs formalities
frontier region
transit charge
vehicle tax

text: C 310/106 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning 9. 10. 98 Inom ramen fo¤r sistna¤mnda (cid:229)tga¤rd har projektet, fo¤r att fo¤rba¤ttra barnens skydd mot o¤vergrepp, sto¤tt inra¤ttandet av ett (cid:148)kontor i kampen mot o¤vergrepp p(cid:229) barn(cid:148) som skall underso¤ka och fo¤lja upp o¤vergreppsfall i domstolarna. Kommissionen kommer a¤ven i fortsa¤ttningen, med bibeh(cid:229)llen respekt fo¤r den nationella suvera¤niteten, att genom samarbete sto¤dja regeringens insatser fo¤r att skydda barnens ra¤ttigheter. Ett projekt fo¤r att sto¤dja en reform av ra¤ttsva¤sendet i Guatemala borde genomfo¤ras fo¤r att bland annat fo¤rba¤ttra de institutioner som svarar fo¤r tilla¤mpningen av lagstiftningen och i synnerhet barnlagstiftningen. (98/C 310/142) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-0626/98 fr(cid:229)n Raimo Ilaskivi (PPE) till kommissionen (9 mars 1998) A¤mne: Ryska avgifter fo¤r bilister som passerar gra¤nsen Enligt uppgifter i pressen (Helsingin Sanomat 17 februari 1998) har den ryska tullen info¤rt en avgift fo¤r personbilar vid de finsk-ryska gra¤nsstationerna. Avgiften p(cid:229) 25 FIM skall betalas av alla utla¤nningar som passerar gra¤nsen. Vilka (cid:229)tga¤rder a¤mnar kommissionen vidta fo¤r att avskaffa den senaste gra¤nsavgift som den ryska tullen har p(cid:229)lagt Europeiska unionens medborgare? Man bo¤r dessutom betona att Europeiska unionens medlemsstater inte uppba¤r motsvarande avgifter av ryska bilister. Svar fr(cid:229)n Hans van den Broek p(cid:229) kommissionens va¤gnar (17 april 1998) Kommissionen har underso¤kt den fr(cid:229)ga som parlamentsledamoten tar upp. Avgiften tas ut som betalning fo¤r hja¤lp med att sko¤ta tullformaliteterna vid passeringen av den finsk-ryska gra¤nsen; tja¤nsten tillhandah(cid:229)lls av ett tja¤nstefo¤retag kopplat till den ryska tullen p(cid:229) bega¤ran av fo¤rare som passerar gra¤nsen. Enligt den ryska tullagstiftningen m(cid:229)ste utla¤nningar som passerar gra¤nsen i privatbil go¤ra ett (cid:229)tagande om att (cid:229)terva¤nda med bil inom en m(cid:229)nad. Sedan ryska tullen info¤rde datorbaserat system vid gra¤nsstationerna go¤rs (cid:229)tagandet i elektronisk form direkt p(cid:229) dator i sta¤llet fo¤r skriftligen p(cid:229) papper. Fo¤rarna har fo¤r na¤rvarande tv(cid:229) mo¤jligheter: de kan antingen g(cid:229) direkt till den ryska tullen och fylla i den elektroniska blanketten utan kostnad, eller va¤nda sig till fo¤retaget och fo¤r 25 finska mark f(cid:229) hja¤lp. Fo¤rdelen med den senare mo¤jligheten a¤r att det normalt garanterar att tullformaliteterna g(cid:229)r snabbare. Avgiften a¤r allts(cid:229) betalning fo¤r en frivilligt inko¤pt tja¤nst och inte en sa¤rskild avgift som la¤ggs p(cid:229) utla¤ndska fo¤rare som passerar gra¤nsen. (98/C 310/143) SKRIFTLIG FR¯GA E-0629/98 fr(cid:229)n Yves Verwaerde (PPE) till kommissionen (9 mars 1998) A¤mne: Ekonomiskt sto¤d till en informationskampanj om Natura 2000 Europeiska kommissionen ka¤nner till att vissa yrkesgrupper (jordbrukare, industriidkare, ja¤gare, osv. ) i hela Europeiska unionen har uttryckt stark beta¤nksamhet o¤ver inra¤ttandet av na¤tverket Natura 2000 och att denna beta¤nksamhet framfo¤r allt beror p(cid:229) bristen p(cid:229) insyn och kommunikation betra¤ffande m(cid:229)lsa¤ttningarna med detta na¤tverk


title: Κανονισμός (ΕΚ) αριθ. 539/98 της Επιτροπής της 9ης Μαρτίου 1998 για τροποποίηση του κανονισμού (ΕΟΚ) αριθ. 3077/78 σχετικά με τη διαπίστωση της ισοδυναμίας των βεβαιώσεων που συνοδεύουν το λυκίσκο που εισάγεται από τρίτες χώρες με τα κοινοτικά πιστοποιητικά

eurovoc_concepts:
health certificate
hops
import
marketing standard
plant health control
third country

text: 10. 3. 98 ‹ EL ‹ Ep˜isglg Evgleq˜ida tym Euqypaˇij ˜ym Joimot ˜gtym L 70/3 JAMOMISLOS (EJ) aqih. 539/98 TGS EPITQOPGS tgr 9gr Laqt˜iou 1998 cia tqopopo˜igsg tou jamomislo ˜u (EOJ) aqih. 3077/78 swetij ˜a le tg diap˜istysg tgr isodumal˜iar tym bebai ˜yseym pou sumode ˜uoum to kuj˜isjo pou eis ˜acetai ap ˜o tq˜iter w ˜yqer le ta joimotij ˜a pistopoigtij ˜a G EPITQOPG TYM EUQYPA˘IJYM JOIMOTGTYM, ˜Ewomtar up ˜oxg: tg sumh ˜gjg cia tgm ˜idqusg tgr Euqypaˇij ˜gr Joim ˜otgtar, tom jamomisl ˜o (EOJ) aqih. 1696/71 tou Sulbouk˜iou, tgr 26gr Iouk˜iou 1971, peq˜i joim ˜gr oqcam ˜yseyr tgr acoq ˜ar stom tol ˜ea tou kuj˜isjou (1), ˜opyr tqopopoi ˜ghgje tekeuta˜ia ap ˜o tom jamomisl ˜o (EJ) aqih. 1554/97 (2), jai id˜iyr to ˜aqhqo 5 paq ˜acqavor 2, Ejtil ˜ymtar: ˜oti o jamomisl ˜or (EOJ) aqih. 3077/78 tgr Epitqop ˜gr (3), ˜opyr tqopopoi ˜ghgje tekeuta˜ia ap ˜o tom jamomisl ˜o (EJ) aqih. 2132/95 (4), ˜ewei amacmyq˜isei tgm isodumal˜ia tym joimotij ˜ym pistopoigtij ˜ym le tir bebai ˜yseir pou sumo- de ˜uoum to kuj˜isjo pou eis ˜acetai ap ˜o tq˜iter w ˜yqer jai ˜ewei hesp˜isei tom jat ˜akoco tym upgqesi ˜ym tgr Pokym˜iar pou e˜imai enousiodotgl ˜emer ma ejd˜idoum tir bebai ˜yseir isoduma- ˜oti, let ˜a ap ˜o ta l˜iar jah ˜yr jai ta jakupt ˜olema pqoˇi ˜omta· sulpkgqylatij ˜a stoiwe˜ia pou ap ˜esteikam oi w ˜yqer aut ˜er, pq ˜epei ma tqopopoighe˜i to paq ˜aqtgla tou jamomislo ˜u (EOJ) aqih. 3077/78· ˜oti ta l ˜etqa pou pqobk ˜epomtai stom paq ˜omta jamomisl ˜o e˜imai s ˜ulvyma le tg cm ˜ylg tgr epitqop ˜gr diawe˜iqisgr kuj˜i- sjou, ENEDYSE TOM PAQOMTA JAMOMISLO: ˜Aqhqo 1 To paq ˜aqtgla tou jamomislo ˜u (EOJ) aqih. 3077/78 amti- jah˜istatai ap ˜o to paq ˜aqtgla tou paq ˜omtor jamomislo ˜u. ˜Aqhqo 2 O paq ˜ym jamomisl ˜or aqw˜ifei ma isw ˜uei tgm ˜ebdolg gl ˜eqa ap ˜o tg dglos˜ieus ˜g tou stgm Ep˜isglg Evgleq˜ida tym Euqypaˇij˜ym Joimot˜gtym. O paq ˜ym jamomisl ˜or e˜imai desleutij ˜or yr pqor ˜oka ta l ˜eqg tou jai isw ˜uei ˜alesa se j ˜ahe jq ˜ator l ˜ekor. Bqun ˜ekker, 9 Laqt˜iou 1998. Cia tgm Epitqop˜g Franz FISCHLER L˜ekor tgr Epitqop˜gr (1) EE L 175 tgr 4. 8. 1971, s. 1. (2) EE L 208 tgr 2. 8. 1997, s. 1. (3) EE L 367 tgr 28. 12. 1978, s. 28. (4) EE L 214 tgr 8. 9. 1995, s. 7. L 70/4 ‹ EL ‹ Ep˜isglg Evgleq˜ida tym Euqypaˇij ˜ym Joimot ˜gtym 10. 3. 98 PAQAQTGLA UPGQESIES POU EIMAI ENOUSIODOTGLEMES MA EJDIDOUM BEBAIYSEIS CIA: J ˜ymour kuj˜isjou Akesl ˜emo kuj˜isjo Wulo ˜ur jai ejwuk˜islata kuj˜isjou Jydij ˜or SO: ex 1210 Jydij ˜or SO: ex 1210 Jydij ˜or SO: 1302 13 00 W ˜yqa jatacyc ˜gr Austqak˜ia Enousiodotgl ˜emg upgqes˜ia Die ˜uhumsg Jydij ˜or Tgk ˜evymo T ˜ekevan Quarantine and Quality Assurance Branch Department of Primary Industry and Fisheries GPO Box 192B Hobart TAS 7001 +. 61. 02. 33-8011 34-6785 Ovens Research Station Department of Agriculture Boukcaq˜ia Institute of Brewing and Hop Production Jamad ˜ar Plant Protection Division Animal and Plant Health Directorate Food Production and Inspection Branch Agriculture and Agri-food Canada Kaˇij ˜g Dglojqat˜ia tgr J˜imar China Tianjin Import & Export Commodity Inspection Bureau China Xinjiang Import & Export Commodity Inspection Bureau China Neimenggu Import & Export Commodity Inspection Bureau Ouccaq˜ia Budapest/F(cid:148)v ´arosi/ (cid:1)Allateg(cid:130)szs(cid:130)g(cid:129)gyi (cid:130)s (cid:144)lelmiszerellen(cid:148)rz(cid:148) (cid:1)Allom ´as M ˜ea Fgkamd˜ia Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Cawthorn Institute Pokym˜ia Agricultural and Food Quality Inspection Qoulam˜ia Cluj-Napoca University of Agricultural Sciences Bucharest Institute of Food Chemistry Olospomdiaj ˜g Dglojqat˜ia tgr Cioucjoskab˜iar (Seqb˜ia jai Lauqobo ˜umio) Institut za Ratarstvo I Povrtlarstvo/Zavod sa Hmelj PO Box 235 Myrtleford, Victoria 3737 Gorubljane Sofia 1738 Floor 2, West Wing 59 Camelot Drive Napean, Ontario, Canada K1A OY9 33, Youyi Road Tianjin 300201 Fu 6, Beijing Nan Lu Wulumuqi 830011 Zhaowuda Road Huhehaote 010010 Lehel u. 43-47 1135 Budapest PO Box 2526 Wellington Private Bag Nelson ul. Zurawia 32/34 skr. poczt. 25 00-950 Warszawa Strada Manastur no. 3 Cluj-Napoca Strada Garlei no. 1 Sector 1 Bucharest +. 61. 57. 51-1311 51-1702 +. 359. 2. 75-4153 75-6194 +. 1. 613 952-8000 991-5612 +. 86. 22. 432-4143 832-0842 +. 86. 991. 484-2708 484-0050 +. 86. 471. 45-1156 45-1163 +. 36. 1. 129-7012 140-9394 +. 64. 4. 472-0367 474-4240 472-9071 +. 64. 3. 548-2319 546-9464 +. 48. 2. 621-6421 621-4858 +. 406. 419-8792 419-3792 +. 40. 1. 679-5090 212-0305 Yu-21470 Backi Petrovac +. 381. 21. 780-365 621-212 10. 3. 98 ‹ EL ‹ Ep˜isglg Evgleq˜ida tym Euqypaˇij ˜ym Joimot ˜gtym L 70/5 W ˜yqa jatacyc ˜gr Skobajij ˜g Dglojqat˜ia Skobem˜ia Enousiodotgl ˜emg upgqes˜ia Die ˜uhumsg Jydij ˜or Tgk ˜evymo T ˜ekevan (cid:1)Ustredn ´y kontroln ´y a sk ´usobn ´y ´ustav polnohospod ´arsky Mat ´uskova 21 833 16 Bratislava +. 42. 7. 37-5666 37-7436 Institut za hmeljarstvo in pivovarstvo Zalec M ˜otior Avqij ˜g CSIR Food Science and Technology Ekbet˜ia Versuchsstation Schweizerischer Brauereien (VSB) Ul. Zalskega tabora 2 63310 Zalec PO Box 395 0001 Pretoria Engimattstrasse 11 8059 Z(cid:129)rich +. 386. 63 715-214 712-163 +. 27. 12 841-3172 841-3594 +. 41. 1. 201-4244 201-4249 Tsewij ˜g Dglojqat˜ia Oujqam˜ia Gmyl ˜emer Pokite˜ier tgr Aleqij ˜gr St ´atn(cid:146) kontroln(cid:146) a zkusebn(cid:146) zemedelsk ´y Brno odbor chmele Zatec ´ustav Chmelarsk(cid:130) n ´amest(cid:146) 1612 438 43 Zatec +. 42. 397. 2-751 2-752 4-003 Productional-Technical Centre (PTZ) Ukrhmel Hlebnaja 27 262028 Zhitomir +. 7. 0412 37-2111 36-7331 Washington Department of Agriculture State Chemical and Hop Lab 2017 South First Street Yakima, WA +. 1. 509. 575-2759 454-7699 Idaho Department of Agriculture Hop Inspection Lab Oregon Department of Agriculture Commodity Inspection Division USDA, GIPSA, FGIS USDA, GIPSA, FGIS Commodity Testing Laboratory Filp ˜alpoue Standards Association of Zimbabwe 2270 Old Penitentiary Road PO Box 790 Boise, ID 83701 635 Capital Street NE Salem, OR 97310 1100 NW Front Avenue PO Box 3837 Portland, OR 97208 Building 306, Room 209 BARC-East Beltsville, MD 20705-2325 Northern Close Northbridge Park PO Box 2259-Borrowdale Harare +. 1. 208 334-2623 334-2170 +. 1. 503. 986-4620 373-1479 +. 1. 503. 231-2056 231-6199 +. 1. 301 504-9328 504-9200 +. 263. 4. 88-2021/2 88-2020


title: WRITTEN QUESTION No. 640/98 by Jorge HERNANDEZ MOLLAR to the Commission. Conditions for upgrading the Spanish 'Ingeniero Técnico' engineering qualification in comparison with others

text: C 354/12 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 19. 11. 98 (98/C 354/19) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0638/98 by Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) to the Commission (9 March 1998) Subject: Conditions for upgrading the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) engineering qualification in comparison with others Why does the Commission assert that the situation vis-a‘-vis the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) diploma is similar to that of the diploma obtained at a (cid:145)Fachhochschule(cid:146), when the latter is accepted for the majority of category A/LA open competitions? (98/C 354/20) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0639/98 by Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) to the Commission (9 March 1998) Subject: Conditions for upgrading the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) engineering qualification in comparison with others Why does the Commission assert that holders of the (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) qualification are not eligible to study for doctorates, when some Member States allow them to do so? (98/C 354/21) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0640/98 by Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) to the Commission (9 March 1998) Subject: Conditions for upgrading the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) engineering qualification in comparison with others Is it true that the Commission has expressed its concern to the Spanish authorities that making holders of the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) qualification eligible for A/LA category posts will mean having to do the same for holders of qualifications obtained from three-year courses in other Member States? Does that justify rejecting applications from holders of the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) qualification? (98/C 354/22) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0641/98 by Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) to the Commission (9 March 1998) Subject: Conditions for upgrading the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) engineering qualification in comparison with others Why are applications accepted from holders of the British (cid:145)Bachelor of Arts(cid:146), (cid:145)Bachelor of Science(cid:146) and (cid:145)Bachelor of Engineering(cid:146) qualifications › all of which are obtained after three years › but not from holders of the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) qualification? (98/C 354/23) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0642/98 by Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) to the Commission (9 March 1998) Subject: Conditions for upgrading the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146) engineering qualification in comparison with others Does the Commission take the view that the British (cid:145)Bachelor of Arts(cid:146), (cid:145)Bachelor of Science(cid:146) and (cid:145)Bachelor of Engineering(cid:146) qualifications rank higher than that of the Spanish (cid:145)Ingeniero Te·cnico(cid:146)? Why?


title: SKRIFTLIG FORESPØRGSEL nr. 637/98 af Jorge HERNANDEZ MOLLAR til Kommissionen. Forfremmelsesvilkår for spanske "Ingenieros Técnicos" i forhold til andre kategorier

text: 19. 11. 98 DA De Europ(cid:230)iske F(cid:230)llesskabers Tidende C 354/11 Som led i MEDA-programmet har de tyrkiske myndigheder forelagt Kommissionen et projekt vedrłrende evaluering og overv(cid:229)gning af hav-, jord- og luftforureningen langs hele Tyrkiets middelhavskyst. P(cid:229) grund af situationen i forbindelse med det finansielle samarbejde med Tyrkiet er det ikke muligt at vurdere, om et s(cid:229)dant projekt vil kunne finansieres i den n(cid:230)rmeste fremtid. I Kommissionens meddelelse af 15. juli 1997 om de fremtidige forbindelser med Tyrkiet (1) blev det ligeledes foresl(cid:229)et at l(cid:230)gge s(cid:230)rlig v(cid:230)gt p(cid:229) samarbejdet p(cid:229) miljłomr(cid:229)det, s(cid:229)ledes at der igangs(cid:230)ttes en b(cid:230)redygtig udvikling i landet, og at denne sektor integreres i de andre łkonomiske politikker. Et s(cid:229)dant samarbejde vil kr(cid:230)ve tilskud fra f(cid:230)llesskabsbudgettet. Det Europ(cid:230)iske R(cid:229)d i Luxembourg i december 1997 godkendte disse retningslinjer og opfordrede Kommissionen til at frems(cid:230)tte passende forslag. Disse forslag blev vedtaget af Kommissionen den 4. marts 1998 i meddelelsen med titlen »En Europ(cid:230)isk strategi for Tyrkiet › de fłrste operationelle forslag fra Kommissionen« (2). I dette dokument foresl(cid:229)s det navnlig at styrke de tyrkiske institutioner p(cid:229) miljłomr(cid:229)det og at udvikle de menneskelige ressourcer i denne sektor. I meddelelsen omtales ligeledes en uddannelse inden for evaluering af miljłforureningsfarer og forebyggelse heraf. Iv(cid:230)rks(cid:230)ttelsen af disse aktioner vil kr(cid:230)ve tilskud fra f(cid:230)llesskabsbudgettet og navnlig fra MEDA-programmet. Kommissionen understreger desuden, at Tyrkiet har underskrevet visse internationale konventioner om beskyttelse af miljłet, herunder Barcelona-konventionen om beskyttelse af Middelhavet og Basel-konventionen om kontrol med gr(cid:230)nseoverskridende transport af farligt affald og dets bortskaffelse. Sekretariaterne for hver af disse konventioner skal informeres i tilf(cid:230)lde af overtr(cid:230)delse. Tyrkiet skal endvidere efterleve beslutningen om kontrol med gr(cid:230)nseoverskridende transport af affald beregnet til nyttiggłrelsesaktiviteter, der den 30. marts 1992 blev taget af Organisationen for (cid:216)konomisk Samarbejde og Udvikling (OECD). (1) KOM(97) 394 endelig udgave. (2) KOM(98) 124 endelig udgave. (98/C 354/16) SKRIFTLIG FORESP(cid:216)RGSEL E-0635/98 af Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) til Kommissionen (9. marts 1998) Om: Forfremmelsesvilk(cid:229)r for spanske »Ingenieros Te·cnicos« i forhold til andre kategorier Er det rigtigt, at Kommissionen godkender eller har godkendt ansłgninger fra indehavere af et »Fachhochs- chuldiplom« om deltagelse i almindelige udv(cid:230)lgelsesprłver til bes(cid:230)ttelse af stillinger som EU-tjenestem(cid:230)nd i kategorien A/LA? (98/C 354/17) SKRIFTLIG FORESP(cid:216)RGSEL E-0636/98 af Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) til Kommissionen (9. marts 1998) Om: Forfremmelsesvilk(cid:229)r for spanske »Ingenieros Te·cnicos« i forhold til andre kategorier Finder Kommissionen, at uddannelsen med »Fachhochschuldiplom« er den hłjeste uddannelse i Tyskland, eller mener den, at universitetsuddannelsen med »Hochschuldiplom« er den hłjeste uddannelse i den p(cid:229)g(cid:230)ldende medlemsstat? (98/C 354/18) SKRIFTLIG FORESP(cid:216)RGSEL E-0637/98 af Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) til Kommissionen (9. marts 1998) Om: Forfremmelsesvilk(cid:229)r for spanske »Ingenieros Te·cnicos« i forhold til andre kategorier Er Kommissionen af den opfattelse, at eksamensbeviset »Fachhochschuldiplom« er udtryk for bedre kvalifikationer end uddannelsen til »Ingeniero Te·cnico«? I bekr(cid:230)ftende fald, hvorfor?


title: QUESTION ECRITE no 610/98 de Esko SEPPÄNEN à la Commission. Centrale nucléaire de Tchernobyl et financement de nouvelles centrales nucléaires en Ukraine

eurovoc_concepts:
Community loan
EBRD
Ukraine
decommissioning of power stations
nuclear accident
nuclear power station
nuclear reactor
nuclear safety
protocol to an agreement

text: C 323/54 FR Journal officiel des Communaute·s europe·ennes 21. 10. 98 D(cid:146)autre part, les funiculaires ne sont pas mentionne·s parmi les projets dont une e·valuation de leurs incidences sur l(cid:146)environnement est obligatoire selon la directive 85/337/CEE qui concerne l(cid:146)e·valuation des incidences sur l(cid:146)environnement de certains projets publics et prive·s. La Commission s(cid:146)est adresse·e aux autorite·s espagnoles afin de leur demander de s(cid:146)assurer que ce projet ne porte pas pre·judice a‘ l(cid:146)environnement. (1) JO C 102 du 3. 4. 1998, p. 51. (2) De·bats du Parlement (mars 1997). (3) JO L 103 du 25. 4. 1979. (98/C 323/72) QUESTION E· CRITE E-0610/98 pose·e par Esko Seppa¤nen (GUE/NGL) a‘ la Commission (9 mars 1998) Objet: Centrale nucle·aire de Tchernobyl et financement de nouvelles centrales nucle·aires en Ukraine La centrale nucle·aire de Tchernobyl constitue un risque pour l(cid:146)ensemble de l(cid:146)Europe. Elle demeure pourtant en service, car l(cid:146)Union europe·enne et la BERD n(cid:146)ont pas rempli tous leurs engagements en ce qui concerne le financement de modes de production e·nerge·tique de substitution en Ukraine. Que compte faire la Commission dans ce domaine? Est-elle dispose·e a‘ financer l(cid:146)ache‘vement des nouvelles centrales nucle·aires en cours de construction en Ukraine, afin de permettre la fermeture de Tchernobyl? Re·ponse donne·e par M. Van den Broek au nom de la Commission (30 mars 1998) La Commission partage le point de vue de l(cid:146)Honorable membre concernant le risque lie· a‘ la poursuite de l(cid:146)exploitation des re·acteurs de Tchernobyl. La fermeture de Tchernobyl d(cid:146)ici l(cid:146)an 2000 reve(cid:136)t une importance capitale. A‘ cet e·gard, la Commission appuie pleinement la mise en (cid:156)uvre du protocole d(cid:146)accord concernant la fermeture de Tchernobyl d(cid:146)ici l(cid:146)an 2000, signe· par le G7 et l(cid:146)Ukraine en de·cembre 1995. La mise en (cid:156)uvre de ce protocole a de·ja‘ bien progresse·. Un milliard de dollars US (925 millions d(cid:146)e·cus) ont e·te· mobilise·s, ge·ne·ralement sous forme de pre(cid:136)ts, pour la fourniture de combustible, pour la re·habilitation de la centrale et pour l(cid:146)adoption de mesures destine·es a‘ ame·liorer le rendement e·nerge·tique. Cinq cent millions de dollars (465 millions d(cid:146)e·cus) sont mobilise·s sous forme de pre(cid:136)ts pour le de·classement de la centrale de Tchernobyl et pour le sarcophage. Une proposition de la Commission de de·cision du Conseil visant a‘ contribuer a‘ hauteur de 100 millions d(cid:146)e·cus au nouveau «Chernobyl shelter fund» (1) est examine·e par le Parlement. A‘ l(cid:146)occasion du sommet Communaute·-Ukraine du 5 septembre 1997, le pre·sident Kuchma a une nouvelle fois confirme· le lien e·troit existant entre la fermeture de Tchernobyl et l(cid:146)ache‘vement des deux re·acteurs a‘ Rovno et Khmelnitsky. La Commission est en principe d(cid:146)accord de financer a‘ concurrence de 50 % le projet Rovno 4 et Khmelnitsky 2 dans le cadre du me·canisme de pre(cid:136)t Euratom a‘ condition que: › le niveau de su(cid:136)rete· des re·acteurs acheve·s corresponde aux normes internationales; › › les sources de financement comple·mentaires ne·cessaires, telles que celles de la Banque europe·enne de reconstruction et de de·veloppement (BERD), soient disponibles; l(cid:146)Ukraine satisfasse aux modalite·s techniques, financie‘res et autres qui seront fixe·es dans l(cid:146)accord de pre(cid:136)t a‘ ne·gocier. (1) JO C 364 du 2. 12. 1997


title: PREGUNTA ESCRITA n. 633/98 del Maartje van PUTTEN a la Comisión. Prevención del VIH/SIDA en los países ACP y en la Europa central y oriental

eurovoc_concepts:
ACP countries
AIDS
Central and Eastern European Countries
EU financing
disease prevention
epidemic
health policy
non-governmental organisation
public health
social security

formats: html print


title: SCHRIFTLICHE ANFRAGE Nr. 642/98 von Jorge HERNANDEZ MOLLAR an die Kommission. Einstellungsvoraussetzungen für spanische graduierte Ingenieure im Vergleich zu anderen Fällen

text: C 354/12 DE Amtsblatt der Europa¤ischen Gemeinschaften 19. 11. 98 (98/C 354/19) SCHRIFTLICHE ANFRAGE E-0638/98 von Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) an die Kommission (9. Ma¤rz 1998) Betrifft: Einstellungsvoraussetzungen fu¤r spanische graduierte Ingenieure im Vergleich zu anderen Fa¤llen Warum behauptet die Kommission, da(cid:223) das Diplom spanischer graduierter Ingenieure in etwa dem Fachhoch- schul-Diplom gleichgestellt ist, wenn letzteres beim Gro(cid:223)teil der allgemeinen Auswahlverfahren fu¤r die Laufbahngruppe A/LA zugelassen ist? (98/C 354/20) SCHRIFTLICHE ANFRAGE E-0639/98 von Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) an die Kommission (9. Ma¤rz 1998) Betrifft: Laufbahn spanischer Ingenieure im Vergleich zu anderen Fa¤llen Warum behauptet die Kommission, da(cid:223) graduierte Ingenieure keine Doktoratskurse absolvieren ko¤nnen, wenn dieser Titel in einigen Mitgliedstaaten doch den Zugang zu Doktoratskursen ermo¤glicht? (98/C 354/21) SCHRIFTLICHE ANFRAGE E-0640/98 von Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) an die Kommission (9. Ma¤rz 1998) Betrifft: Einstellungsvoraussetzungen fu¤r spanische graduierte Ingenieure im Vergleich zu anderen Fa¤llen Stimmt es, da(cid:223) die Kommission gegenu¤ber den spanischen Beho¤rden die Befu¤rchtung gea¤u(cid:223)ert hat, da(cid:223) der Zugang von spanischen graduierten Ingenieuren zur Laufbahngruppe A/LA zu einer O¤ ffnung fu¤r Inhaber eines Diploms fu¤hren ko¤nnte, das man in anderen Mitgliedstaaten nach dreija¤hriger Ausbildung erwirbt? Ist dies ein relevanter Grund fu¤r die Ablehnung der Bewerbungen spanischer Ingenieure? (98/C 354/22) SCHRIFTLICHE ANFRAGE E-0641/98 von Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) an die Kommission (9. Ma¤rz 1998) Betrifft: Einstellungsvoraussetzungen fu¤r spanische graduierte Ingenieure im Vergleich zu anderen Fa¤llen Warum werden die Bewerbungen von Inhabern der britischen Titel (cid:132)Bachelor of Arts(cid:147), (cid:132)Bachelor of Science(cid:147) und (cid:132)Bachelor of Engineering(cid:147), die alle nach einer dreija¤hrigen Ausbildung verliehen werden, im Gegensatz zu den Bewerbungen von Inhabern des spanischen Titels eines graduierten Ingenieurs zugelassen? (98/C 354/23) SCHRIFTLICHE ANFRAGE E-0642/98 von Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) an die Kommission (9. Ma¤rz 1998) Betrifft: Einstellungsvoraussetzungen fu¤r spanische graduierte Ingenieure im Vergleich zu anderen Fa¤llen Ist die Kommission der Auffassung, da(cid:223) die britischen Titel (cid:132)Bachelor of Arts(cid:147), (cid:132)Bachelor of Science(cid:147) und (cid:132)Bachelor of Engineering(cid:147) eine ho¤here Qualifikation beinhalten als der Titel eines Ingenieurs? Warum?


title: 98/214/EZ: Odluka Komisije od 9. ožujka 1998. o postupku potvrđivanja sukladnosti građevnih proizvoda prema članku 20. stavku 2. Direktive Vijeća 89/106/EEZ vezano uz konstrukcijske metalne proizvode i pomoćne elemente  Tekst značajan za EGP

text: L_1998080HR. 01004601. xml 13/Sv. 064 HR Službeni list Europske unije 41 31998D0214 L 080/46 SLUŽBENI LIST EUROPSKE UNIJE 09. 03. 1998. ODLUKA KOMISIJE od 9. ožujka 1998. o postupku potvrđivanja sukladnosti građevnih proizvoda prema članku 20. stavku 2. Direktive Vijeća 89/106/EEZ vezano uz konstrukcijske metalne proizvode i pomoćne elemente (Tekst značajan za EGP) (98/214/EZ) KOMISIJA EUROPSKIH ZAJEDNICA, uzimajući u obzir Ugovor o osnivanju Europske zajednice, uzimajući u obzir Direktivu Vijeća 89/106/EEZ od 21. prosinca 1988. o usklađivanju zakona i drugih propisa država članica koji se odnose na građevne proizvode (1), kako je izmijenjena Direktivom 93/68/EEZ (2), a posebno njezin članak 13. stavak 4. , budući da Komisija mora između dva postupka iz članka 13. stavka 3. Direktive 89/106/EEZ za potvrđivanje sukladnosti proizvoda, odabrati „najmanje zahtjevan postupak koji ispunjava zahtjeve sigurnosti”; budući da to znači da je potrebno odlučiti je li postojanje tvorničkog sustava kontrole proizvodnje u okviru odgovornosti proizvođača nužan i dovoljan uvjet za potvrđivanje sukladnosti određenog proizvoda ili skupine proizvoda, ili je, iz razloga vezanih uz poštivanje kriterija iz članka 13. stavka 4. , u tu svrhu potrebno uključivanje ovlaštenog tijela za potvrđivanje; budući da se člankom 13. stavkom 4. zahtijeva da tako utvrđeni postupak mora biti naznačen u mandatima i tehničkim specifikacijama; budući da je stoga poželjno odrediti pojam proizvoda ili skupine proizvoda kako je utvrđen u mandatima i tehničkim specifikacijama; budući da su oba postupka predviđena člankom 13. stavkom 3. podrobno opisana u Prilogu III. Direktivi 89/106/EEZ; budući da je stoga potrebno točno odrediti metode kojima se navedena dva postupka moraju provesti, sukladno Prilogu III. , za svaki proizvod ili skupinu proizvoda, budući da Prilog III. daje prednost određenim sustavima; budući da postupak iz članka 13. stavka 3. točke (a) odgovara sustavima koji su utvrđeni u Prilogu III. odjeljku 2. točki ii. mogućnosti prvoj, bez stalnog nadzora, te mogućnosti drugoj i trećoj, i budući da postupak iz članka 13. stavka 3. točke (b) odgovara sustavima koji su utvrđeni u Prilogu III. odjeljku 2. točki i. , te u Prilogu III. odjeljku 2. točki ii. , u mogućnosti prvoj, sa stalnim nadzorom; budući da su mjere predviđene ovom Odlukom u skladu s mišljenjem Stalnog odbora za graditeljstvo, DONIJELA JE OVU ODLUKU: Članak 1. Sukladnost proizvoda koji su navedeni u Prilogu I. potvrđuje se postupkom prema kojem je, uz tvornički sustav kontrole proizvodnje kojim upravlja proizvođač, u ocjenu i nadzor kontrole proizvodnje ili samog proizvoda uključeno i ovlašteno tijelo za potvrđivanje. Članak 2. Postupak potvrđivanja sukladnosti, kako je naveden u Prilogu II. , naznačuje se u mandatima za europske tehničke specifikacije. Članak 3. Ova je Odluka upućena državama članicama. Sastavljeno u Bruxellesu 9. ožujka 1998. Za Komisiju Martin BANGEMANN Član Komisije (1)  SL L 40, 11. 2. 1989. , str. 12. (2)  SL L 220, 30. 8. 1993. , str. 1. PRILOG I. Konstrukcijski metalni dijelovi/profili Toplo valjani, hladno obrađeni ili na drugi način izrađeni elementi/profili različitih oblika (T, L, H U, Z, I, kanalice, kutni i šuplji profili, cijevi), plosnati proizvodi (ploče, listovi, trake), šipke, odljevi, kovani elementi iz različitih metalnih materijala koji su zaštićeni protiv korozije s prevlakom ili nisu zaštićeni. Konstrukcijski metalni građevni elementi Gotovi metalni proizvodi kao što su metalni okviri za viseće stropove (za velika opterećenja), rešetke, nosači, stupci, stepenice, temeljni piloti, nosivi piloti i čelične talpe, dijelovi rezani na mjeru za različite namjene te tračnice i željeznički pragovi. Mogu biti zaštićeni protiv korozije s prevlakom ili ne, vareni ili ne. Vareni materijali Konstrukcijska vezna sredstva Metalne zakovice, vijci (matice i podloške) i visokovrijedni prenapregnuti vijci, čepovi, vijci, pričvršćivači za tračnice. PRILOG II. SKUPINA PROIZVODA KONSTRUKCIJSKI METALNI PROIZVODI I POMOĆNI ELEMENTI (1/4) 1. Sustavi potvrđivanja sukladnosti Za dolje navedene proizvode i njihovu predviđenu uporabu, CEN/Cenelec mora točno odrediti specifikaciju sljedećih sustava potvrđivanja sukladnosti u odgovarajućim usklađenim normama: Proizvod(i) Predviđena(-e) uporaba(-e) Razina(-e) ili razred(i) Sustav(i) potvrđivanja sukladnosti Konstrukcijski metalni dijelovi/profili Toplo valjani, hladno obrađeni ili na drugi način izrađeni elementi/profili različitih oblika (T, L, H U, Z, I, kanalice, kutni i šuplji profili, cijevi), plosnati proizvodi (ploče, listovi, trake), šipke, odljevi, kovani elementi iz različitih metalnih materijala koji su zaštićeni protiv korozije s premazom ili nisu zaštićeni. Za uporabu u metalnim konstrukcijama ili u spregnutim metalnim i betonskim konstrukcijama   2 + (1) 2. Uvjeti koje CEN mora poštivati u specifikacijama sustava za potvrđivanje sukladnosti Specifikacija sustava mora biti izvediva i u slučaju da se djelovanje ne mora utvrditi za određeno svojstvo, budući da barem jedna država članica nema nikakve pravne zahtjeve za takvo svojstvo (vidjeti članak 2. stavak 1. CPD-ai, po potrebi, klauzulu 1. 2. 3. interpretacijskih dokumenata). U tom se slučaju provjera takvog svojstva ne smije nametnuti proizvođaču ako on ne želi označiti djelovanje proizvoda u tom pogledu. SKUPINA PROIZVODA KONSTRUKCIJSKI METALNI PROIZVODI I POMOĆNI ELEMENTI (2/4) 1. Sustavi potvrđivanja sukladnosti Za dolje navedene proizvode i njihovu predviđenu uporabu, CEN/Cenelec mora točno odrediti specifikaciju sljedećih sustava potvrđivanja sukladnosti u odgovarajućim usklađenim normama: Proizvod(i) Predviđena(-e) uporaba(-e) Razina(-e) ili razred(i) (otpornost na požar) Sustav(i) potvrđivanja sukladnosti Konstrukcijski metalni građevni elementi Gotovi metalni proizvodi kao što su rešetke, nosači, stupci, stepenice, temeljni piloti, nosivi piloti i čelične talpe, dijelovi rezani na mjeru za različite namjene te tračnice i željeznički pragovi. Za uporabu u okvirima i temeljima građevine — 2 + (2) Mogu biti zaštićeni protiv korozije s prevlakom ili ne, vareni ili ne. Konstrukcijski metalni građevni elementi Gotovi metalni okviri za viseće stropove (za velika opterećenja). Za uporabu u okvirima građevine (A, B, C) (3) 1 (4) Mogu biti zaštićeni protiv korozije s prevlakom ili ne, vareni ili ne. (A, B, C) (5), D, E, F, A (6) 2 + (2) 2. Uvjeti koje CEN mora poštivati u specifikacijama sustava za potvrđivanje sukladnosti Specifikacija sustava mora biti izvediva i u slučaju da se djelovanje ne mora utvrditi za određeno svojstvo, budući da barem jedna država članica nema nikakve pravne zahtjeve za takvo svojstvo (vidjeti članak 2. stavak 1. CPD-a i, po potrebi, klauzulu 1. 2. 3. interpretacijskih dokumenata). U tom se slučaju provjera takvog svojstva ne smije nametnuti proizvođaču ako on ne želi označiti djelovanje proizvoda u tom pogledu. SKUPINA PROIZVODA KONSTRUKCIJSKI METALNI PROIZVODI I POMOĆNI ELEMENTI (3/4) 1. Sustavi potvrđivanja sukladnosti Za dolje navedene proizvode i njihovu predviđenu uporabu, CEN/Cenelec mora točno odrediti specifikaciju sljedećih sustava potvrđivanja sukladnosti u odgovarajućim usklađenim normama: Proizvod(i) Predviđena(-e) uporaba(-e) Razina(-e) ili razred(i) Sustav(i) potvrđivanja sukladnosti Vareni materijali Za uporabu u konstrukcijskim metalnim građevinama — 2 + (7) 2. Uvjeti koje CEN mora poštivati u specifikacijama sustava za potvrđivanje sukladnosti Specifikacija sustava mora biti izvediva i u slučaju da se djelovanje ne mora utvrditi za određeno svojstvo, budući da barem jedna država članica nema nikakve pravne zahtjeve za takvo svojstvo (vidjeti članak 2. stavak 1. CPD-a i, po potrebi, klauzulu 1. 2. 3. interpretacijskih dokumenata). U tom se slučaju provjera takvoga svojstva ne smije nametnuti proizvođaču ako on ne želi označiti djelovanje proizvoda u tom pogledu. SKUPINA PROIZVODA KONSTRUKCIJSKI METALNI PROIZVODI I POMOĆNI ELEMENTI (4/4) 1. Sustavi potvrđivanja sukladnosti Za dolje navedene proizvode i njihovu predviđenu uporabu, CEN/Cenelec mora točno odrediti specifikaciju sljedećih sustava potvrđivanja sukladnosti u odgovarajućim usklađenim normama: Proizvod(i) Predviđena(-e) uporaba(-e) Razina(-e) ili razred(-i) Sustav(i) potvrđivanja sukladnosti Konstrukcijska vezna sredstva Metalne zakovice, vijci (matice i podloške) i visokovrijedni prenapregnuti vijci, čepovi, vijci, pričvršćivači za tračnice. Za uporabu u konstrukcijskim metalnim građevinama   2 + (8) 2. Uvjeti koje CEN mora poštivati u specifikacijama sustava za potvrđivanje sukladnosti Specifikacija sustava mora biti izvediva i u slučaju da se djelovanje ne mora utvrditi za određeno svojstvo, budući da barem jedna država članica nema nikakve pravne zahtjeve za takvo svojstvo (vidjeti članak 2. stavak 1. CPD-a i, po potrebi, klauzulu 1. 2. 3. interpretacijskih dokumenata). U tom se slučaju provjera takvog svojstva ne smije nametnuti proizvođaču ako on ne želi označiti djelovanje proizvoda u tom pogledu. (1)   Sustav 2+: Vidjeti Prilog III. odjeljak 2. točku ii. Direktive 89/106/EEZ, mogućnost prvu, koja uključuje potvrdu kontrole tvorničke proizvodnje koju izdaje ovlašteno tijelo na osnovi stalnoga nadzora, ocjene i odobravanja tvorničke kontrole proizvodnje (2)   Sustav 2+: Vidjeti Prilog III. odjeljak 2. točku ii. Direktive 89/106/EEZ, mogućnost prvu, koja uključuje potvrdu kontrole tvorničke proizvodnje koju izdaje ovlašteno tijelo na osnovi stalnog nadzora, ocjene i odobravanja tvorničke kontrole proizvodnje. (3)  Materijali čija se otpornost na požar mijenja tijekom proizvodnje (uglavnom oni materijali koji su podložni kemijskim promjenama, npr. materijali koji usporavaju gorenje, ili kod kojih promjena sastava može utjecati na promjenu otpornosti na požar). (4)   Sustav 1: Vidjeti Prilog III. odjeljak 2. točku i. Direktive 89/106/EEZ bez revizijskog ispitivanja uzoraka. (5)  Materijali čija se otpornost na požar ne mijenja tijekom postupka proizvodnje. (6)  Materijali razreda A čija se otpornost na požar, sukladno Odluci 96/603/EZ, ne mora ispitivati. (7)   Sustav 2+: Vidjeti Prilog III. odjeljak 2. točku ii. Direktive 89/106/EEZ, mogućnost prvu, koja uključuje potvrdu kontrole tvorničke proizvodnje koju izdaje ovlašteno tijelo na osnovi stalnog nadzora, ocjene i odobravanja tvorničke kontrole proizvodnje. (8)   Sustav 2 +: Vidjeti Prilog III. odjeljak 2. točku ii. Direktive 89/106/EEZ, mogućnost prvu, koja uključuje potvrdu kontrole tvorničke proizvodnje koju izdaje ovlašteno tijelo na osnovi stalnoga nadzora, ocjene i odobravanja tvorničke kontrole proizvodnje


title: SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG nr. 612/98 van Fernando MONIZ aan de Commissie. Seladam - een aanslag op het milieu

eurovoc_concepts:
Northern Portugal
application of EU law
climate change
engineering structure
environmental impact
environmental protection
impact study
lake
protection of animal life
protection of plant life

text: C 310/102 NL Publicatieblad van de Europese Gemeenschappen 9. 10. 98 (98/C 310/136) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG E-0612/98 van Fernando Moniz (PSE) aan de Commissie (9 maart 1998) Betreft: Seladam › een aanslag op het milieu De milieubescherming is een van de grote zorgen van de EU. Er worden verschillende initiatieven en besluiten genomen met het oog op het lanceren van een permanente bewustmakingscampagne, naast nieuwe voorschriften en verordeningen die in de lidstaten van kracht moeten worden. Gedurende de vergaderperiode van februari 1998 te Straatsburg bogen de Raad, de Commissie en het Europees Parlement zich over dit thema en met name over de klimaatverandering. In 1968 werd een overeenkomst gesloten over de aanleg van de waterkrachtcentrale van Sela in de rivier de Minho in Noord-Portugal, dichtbij Mon(cid:231)ao en Melga(cid:231)o, door de Portugese onderneming EDP en de Spaanse onderneming Union Fenosa. Hierbij zal een kunstmatig meer met een lengte van 22 km ontstaan, waarbij honderden visgronden worden overstroomd en de natuurlijke habitats van verschillende soorten fauna (elft, lamprei en zalm) worden verwoest. De aanwezigheid van dit meer zal tot een klimaatverandering leiden, met verhoging van de vochtigheid en de insolatie en verandering van het microklimaat dat onontbeerlijk is voor de productie van een wijn van grote traditie en kwaliteit, de (cid:132)vinho alvarinho(cid:148), die het enige werkelijk rendabele product en een bron van inkomsten is voor twee van de meest authentieke en traditionele, maar tegelijk ook armste gemeenten van Portugal. De gemeentebesturen, de representatieve regionale organisaties en de bevolking in het algemeen die bevreesd zijn voor de gevolgen van het project voor de waterkrachtcentrale zijn hier duidelijk tegen en willen voorkomen dat economische redenen en invloeden de overhand krijgen over de milieubescherming en een sociaal- economische organisatie met sterke plattelandstradities die absoluut moeten worden behouden. Kan de Commissie mededelen of zij, met het oog op de eventuele ontwikkeling van genoemd project dat in strijd is met de principes die de EU verdedigt, en wanneer zij over alle gegevens terzake beschikt, overweegt haar invloed uit te oefenen en de rechtmatige belangen hierbij te beschermen En zo ja, welke concrete maatregelen zij denkt te treffen? Antwoord van mevrouw Bjerregaard namens de Commissie (21 april 1998) Voor het desbetreffende project is geen aanvraag ingediend voor cofinanciering door de Gemeenschap. Volgens de informatie waarover de Commissie beschikt, vindt momenteel de raadpleging van het publiek plaats zoals voorgeschreven bij de milieueffectbeoordelingsprocedure ingevolge Richtlijn 85/337/EEG van de Raad van 27 juni 1985 betreffende de milieueffectbeoordeling van bepaalde openbare en particuliere projecten (1). De Commissie zal erop toezien dat de nationale instanties het Gemeenschapsrecht respecteren, met name wat de natuurbescherming betreft. (1) PB L 175 van 5. 7. 1985. (98/C 310/137) SCHRIFTELIJKE VRAAG E-0613/98 van Tommy Waidelich (PSE) aan de Commissie (9 maart 1998) Betreft: Begrotingsposten voor EU-steun aan op drugsgebied werkzame organisaties Mij hebben berichten bereikt dat er zowel in 1996 als 1997 EU-steun werd uitbetaald aan organisaties als de European Cities on Drug Policy (ECDP), die zich onder meer inzetten voor de legalisatie van verdovende middelen, het opzetten van zogenoemde coffeeshops en het wettelijk toestaan van het voorschrijven van hero(cid:14)¤ne. Kan de Commissie aantonen welke begrotingsposten worden gebruik voor de uitbetaling van deze steun?


title: ΓΡΑΠΤΗ ΕΡΩΤΗΣΗ αρ θ. 623/98 του Angela BILLINGHAM προς την Επ τροπή. Κώδικας για παιδιά και νέους στη Γουατεμάλα

eurovoc_concepts:
Guatemala
abandoned child
child
child protection
children's rights
juvenile court
right to justice
young person

text: 9. 10. 98 EL Epi·shmh Efhmeri·da tvn Eyrvpai¤kv· n Koinoth·tvn C 310/105 (98/C 310/140) GRAPTH ERVTHSH E-0623/98 ypobolh· : Angela Billingham (PSE) prow thn Epitroph· (9 Marti·oy 1998) Ue·ma: Kv· dikaw gia paidia· kai ne·oyw sth Goyatema·la Gnvri·zei h Epitroph· o·ti sy·mfvna me ton isxy·onta kv· dika gia ta paidia· sthn Goyatema·la poy eish·xuh to 1969, ta paidia· mporoy·n na kratoy·ntai ep(cid:146) ao·riston «gia to kalo· toyw» se epiki·ndyna, katastaltika· kai kakoejoplisme·na kratika· ke·ntra egkleismoy· anhli·kvn sta opoi·a ypa·rxoyn apodei·jeiw o·ti xrhsimopoioy·ntai basanisth·ria kai jylodarmoi·. Ta paidia· ayta· den e·xoyn dikai·vma na prosfy·goyn se dikhgo·ro oy·te se aneja·rthtew arxe·w e·kklhshw. Ua mporoy·se h Eyrvpai¤kh· Epitroph· na askh·sei pi·esh sthn kybe·rnhsh thw Goyatema·law prokeime·noy na efarmo·sei grh·gora ton ne·o kv· dika gia paidia· kai ne·oyw sy·mfvna me ton opoi·o to paidi· uevrei·tai «ypokei·menon dikai·oy», e·xei dikai·vma ypera·spishw sto dikasth·rio kai symmetoxh·w se nomike·w diadikasi·ew poy to aforoy·n; (98/C 310/141) GRAPTH ERVTHSH E-0624/98 ypobolh· : Angela Billingham (PSE) prow thn Epitroph· (9 Marti·oy 1998) Ue·ma: Episfalh·w ue·sh tvn paidiv· n toy dro·moy sth Goyatema· la Gnvri·zei h Epitroph· o·ti sth Goyatema·la synexi·zontai oi dolofoni·ew paidiv· n poy zoyn stoyw dro·moyw; Gia para·deigma, to perasme·no fuino·pvro se dyo me·rew foney·uhkan stoyw dro·moyw dekatri·a paidia·. (cid:211)la ayta· ta paidia· pyrobolh·uhkan sto kefa·li. Ua mporoy·se h Eyrvpai¤kh· Epitroph· na zhth·sei apo· thn kybe·rnhsh thw Goyatema·law na kinh·sei epi·shmh ana·krish gia toyw fo·noyw tvn paidiv· n aytv· n kauv· w kai ekei·nvn poy foney·uhkan ypo· paro·moiew perista·seiw; Koinh· apa· nthsh toy k. Marin ej ono· matow thw Epitroph· w stiw grapte·w ervth· seiw E-0623/98 kai E-0624/98 (17 Aprili·oy 1998) H Epitroph· eyxaristei· to Ajio·timo Me·low toy Koinoboyli·oy gia to endiafe·ron poy prosdi·dei sto pro·blhma tvn paidiv· n toy dro·moy kai, idiai·tera, sto pro·blhma poy dhmioyrgei· o euniko·w kv· dikaw gia ta paidia· kai toyw ne·oyw poy isxy·ei tv· ra sth Goyatema·la. (cid:211)son afora· to ue·ma toy kv· dika gia ta paidia· kai toyw ne·oyw kai thw prosexoy·w e·narjhw isxy·ow toy ne·oy kv· dika, h Epitroph· uevrei· aparai·thto na la·bei ypo·ch thw tiw prospa· ueiew poy kate·bale h kybe·rnhsh gia thn apotelesmatikh· efarmogh· toy. Pra·gmati, h kybe·rnhsh thw Goyatema· law, gia na eynoh·sei thn oruh· efarmogh· toy ne·oy kv· dika kai thn th·rhsh· toy apo· ta o·rgana poy ei·nai epifortisme·na me thn efarmogh· toy, a·rxise, prin apo· thn e·narjh thw isxy·ow toy, polle·w ene·rgeiew dia·doshw, kata·rtishw toy prosvpikoy· kai proetoimasi·aw tvn sxetikv· n orga·nvn (nomiko· sv· ma, euniko· symboy·lio gia ta paidia· kai toyw ne·oyw kai grammatei·a koinvnikh·w pro·noiaw). (cid:211)son afora· to pro·blhma tvn paidiv· n toy dro·moy, h Epitroph· gnvri·zei plh·rvw thn kata·stash kauv· w kai tiw kataxrh·seiw kai ta peristatika· poy e·xoyn uy·mata ta teleytai·a. To faino·meno tvn paidiv· n toy dro·moy toy opoi·oy oi aiti·ew poy ei·nai gnvste·w ei·nai sygxro·nvw koinvnike·w kai oikonomike·w (mazikh· metana·steysh prow thn prvtey·oysa, katastrofh· toy oikogeneiakoy· kytta·roy, apv· leia thw politistikh·w tayto·thtaw kai apoysi·a prooptikv· n) ei·nai sy·nueto. H Epitroph· prospa·uhse na prosfe·rei mia ly·sh sto pro·blhma me th dhmioyrgi·a eno·w progra·mmatow, poy ei·nai plh·rvw leitoyrgiko· apo· tiw arxe·w toy e·toyw, gia poso· y·coyw 2,5 ekat. ECU. To pro·gramma ayto·, ta apotele·smata toy opoi·oy ei·nai idiai·tera uetika·, e·xei sto·xo na prosfe·rei prostasi·a kai a·mesh boh·ueia sta paidia· toy dro·moy gia na eynoh·sei thn koinvnikh· toyw ensvma·tvsh• na provuh·sei ene·rgeiew pro·lhchw toy fainome·noy «paidi· toy dro·moy»• na enisxy·sei ta dhmo·sia o·rgana poy ei·nai armo·dia gia thn prostasi·a toy paidioy· («secretariat de bienestar social», dikasth·rio anhli·kvn, eisaggele·aw tvn dikaivma·tvn toy anurv· poy)


title: Council Regulation (EC) No 542/98 of 9 March 1998 on conclusion of the Protocol establishing the fishing rights and financial compensation provided for in the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Government of the Republic of Senegal on fishing off the coast of Senegal for the period from 1 May 1997 to 30 April 2001

eurovoc_concepts:
Senegal
agreement (EU)
deep-sea fishing
financial compensation of an agreement
fishing agreement

text: 11. 3. 98 ‹ EN ‹ Official Journal of the European Communities L 72/1 I (Acts whose publication is obligatory) COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 542/98 of 9 March 1998 on conclusion of the Protocol establishing the fishing rights and financial compensation provided for in the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Government of the Republic of Senegal on fishing off the coast of Senegal for the period from 1 May 1997 to 30 April 2001 THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, requirement needs to be clarified by setting a formula for apportioning direct landings by freezer tuna seiners, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 43 in conjunction with Article 228(2), first sentence and the first subpara- graph of Article 228(3) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1), Having regard to the opinion of liament (2), the European Par- Whereas, pursuant to the Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Senegal and the European Economic Community on fishing off the coast of Senegal (3), the two parties conducted negotiations to determine the amendments or additions to be made to the Agreement at the end of the period of application of the Protocol; Whereas, as a result of those negotiations, a new Protocol establishing the fishing rights and financial compensation provided for in the abovementioned Agreement for the period from 1 May 1997 to 30 April 2001 was initialled on 26 March 1997; Whereas it is in the Community’s interest to approve the new Protocol; HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Article 1 The Protocol establishing the fishing rights and financial compensation provided for in the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Government of the Republic of Senegal on fishing off the coast of Senegal for the period from 1 May 1997 to 30 April 2001 (4) is hereby approved on behalf of the Community. Article 2 The trawler and tuna fishing rights laid down in Article 1 of the Protocol shall be apportioned between the Member States as follows: Category 1: 331 grt Greece; Category 2: 3 750 grt Spain; Category 3: 1 800 grt, of which: Whereas the formula for apportioning trawler and tuna fishing opportunities between the Member States should be established on the basis of the traditional allocation under the fisheries agreement; Category 4: 800 Italy and 1 000 Spain; 4 119 grt, of which: 3 749 Spain and 370 Portugal; Whereas point C of Annex I appearing in the Annex to the Protocol requires Community shipowners to land tuna catches in Senegal at their own expense; whereas this Category 5: 5 Spain, 7 France; Category 6: 23 Spain, 18 France; (1) OJ C 267, 3. 9. 1997, p. 20. (2) OJ C 286, 22. 9. 1997, p. 39. (3) OJ L 226, 29. 8. 1980, p. 17. Category 7: 20 Spain, 3 Portugal. (4) OJ L 302, 5. 11. 1997, p. 4. L 72/2 ‹ EN ‹ Official Journal of the European Communities 11. 3. 98 Article 3 Article 4 The percentage of the catch that owners of Community freezer tuna trawlers are obliged to land directly in ac- cordance with point C of Annex I appearing in the Annex to the Protocol shall be apportioned as follows: The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the persons empowered to sign the Protocol in order to bind the Community. Article 5 — vessels flying the French flag: — vessels flying the Spanish flag: 44 % 56 %. This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. Done at Brussels, 9 March 1998. For the Council The President G. BROWN


title: SCHRIFTLICHE ANFRAGE Nr. 634/98 von Angela SIERRA GONZÁLEZ an die Kommission. Anlagen der Firma Parlevilet im Hafen von Las Palmas

eurovoc_concepts:
Canary Islands
FIFG
Netherlands
building subsidy
cold store
fishing agreement
fishing fleet
fishing industry
fishing regulations
harbour installation


title: PERGUNTA ESCRITA n. 633/98 do Deputado Maartje van PUTTEN à Comissão. Prevenção do VIH/SIDA nos Estados ACP e nos países da Europa Central e Oriental