Category Archives: U

Use of sewage sludge in agriculture

Leave a reply

Use of sewage sludge in agriculture

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Use of sewage sludge in agriculture

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Agriculture > Environment

Use of sewage sludge in agriculture

Document or Iniciative

Council Directive 86/278/EEC of 12 June 1986 on the protection of the environment, and in particular of the soil, when sewage sludge is used in agriculture [See amending acts].

Summary

Sewage sludge has valuable agronomic properties in agriculture. In using sewage sludge account must be taken of the nutrient needs of the plants without, however, impairing neither the quality of the soil nor that of surface and ground water. Some heavy metals present in sewage sludge may be toxic to plants and humans.

Sewage sludge may be used in agriculture provided that the Member State concerned regulates its use.

The Directive lays down limit values for concentrations of heavy metals in the soil (Annex IA), in sludge (Annex IB) and for the maximum annual quantities of heavy metals which may be introduced into the soil (Annex IC).

The use of sewage sludge is prohibited if the concentration of one or more heavy metals in the soil exceeds the limit values laid down in accordance with Annex IA. The Member States must therefore take the necessary steps to ensure that those limit values are not exceeded as a result of using sludge.

Sludge must be treated before being used in agriculture but the Member States may authorise the use of untreated sludge if it is injected or worked into the soil.

The use of sludge is prohibited:

  • on grassland or forage crops if the grassland is to be grazed or the forage crops to be harvested before a certain period has elapsed (this period, fixed by the Member States, may not be less than three weeks);
  • on fruit and vegetable crops during the growing season, with the exception of fruit trees;
  • on ground intended for the cultivation of fruit and vegetable crops which are normally in direct contact with the soil and normally eaten raw, for a period of ten months preceding the harvest and during the harvest itself.

Sludge and soil on which it is used must be sampled and analysed.

Member States must keep records registering:

  • the quantities of sludge produced and the quantities supplied for use in agriculture;
  • the composition and properties of the sludge;
  • the type of treatment carried out;
  • the names and addresses of the recipients of the sludge and the places where the sludge is to be used.

Where conditions so demand, Member States may take more stringent measures than those provided for in this Directive.

Five years after notification of this Directive, and every four years thereafter, Member States must produce a consolidated report on the use of sludge in agriculture, specifying the quantities used, the criteria followed and any difficulties encountered. They must forward the report to the Commission, which will publish the information contained in it.

In the light of that report the Commission will, if necessary, submit appropriate proposals for increased protection of the soil and the environment.

References

Act Entry into force – Date of expiry Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Directive 86/278/EEC

18.6.1986

18.6.1989

OJ L 181 of 4.7.1986
Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Directive 91/692/EEC

23.12.1991

1.1.1993

OJ L 377 of 31.12.1991

Regulation (EC) No 807/2003

5.6.2003

–

OJ L 122 of 16.5.2003

Regulation (EC) No 219/2009

20.4.2009

OJ L 87 of 31.3.2009

The successive amendments and corrections to Directive 86/278/EEC have been incorporated in the original text. This consolidated versionis of documentary value only.

Related Acts

Report from the Commission of 20 November 2009 on implementation of the community waste legislation Directive 2006/12/EC on waste, Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste, Directive 75/439/EEC on waste oils, Directive 86/278/EEC on sewage sludge, Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste, Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste and Directive 2002/96/EC on waste electrical and electronic equipment for the period 2004-2006 [COM(2009) 633 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
Since the adoption of the Directive on sewage sludge more than 20 years ago, no implementation problems have been reported. However there are signals that the Directive may be too limited in scope and lack ambition. Several Member States have enacted and implemented stricter limit values for heavy metals and set requirements for other contaminants. The Commission impact assessment will evaluate whether more stringent measures should be put in place and look into a possibility of extending the scope of the Directive to other types of sludges and applications other than agriculture.

Report from the Commission of 19 July 2006 on implementation of the Community waste legislation: Directive 75/442/EEC, Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste, Directive 75/439/EEC on waste oils, Directive 86/278/EEC on sewage sludge, Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste and Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste for the period 2001-2003 [COM(2006) 406 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
According to this report, several Member States have set concentration limits at levels below those in the Directive. In addition, average concentrations of heavy metals in sludge used in agriculture are significantly lower than those specified in the Directive. Most EU-15 Member States registered an increase in sludge generation. Seven Member States report using at least 50% of the sludge they generate in agriculture. The Commission considers that using sewage sludge as fertiliser on agricultural soils remains one of the best environmental options, provided it poses no threat to the environment or to animal and human health.

Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 19 May 2003 on the implementation of Community waste legislation, in particular Directive 75/442/EEC on waste, Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste, Directive 75/439/EEC on waste oils, Directive 86/278/EEC on sewage sludge and Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste, for the period 1998-2000 [COM(2003) 250 final Not published in the Official Journal].

Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 10 January 2000 on the implementation of Community waste legislation for the period 1995-1997 (Directives 75/442/EEC, 91/689/EEC, 75/439/EEC and 86/278/EEC) [COM(1999) 752 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
The Commission notes in this report that there were no major problems in the formal transposition of Directive 86/278 on sewage sludge into national law. The Directive has been successful in preventing crop contamination by pathogens caused by the use of sludge on agricultural soils. However, few Member States have very high sludge reuse rates. As the Commission foresees an increase of about 40 % of sludge production by 2005, it seems appropriate to completely revise the provisions of the Directive.

Commission Communication to the Council and the European Parliament of 27 February 1997 concerning the application of Directives 75/439/EEC, 75/442/EEC, 78/319/EEC and 86/278/EEC on waste management [COM(97) 23 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
As Directive 86/278/EEC was published on 17 June 1986, the Member States had to draw up their first report by 17 June 1991. Only six Member States (Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Spain, France and the United Kingdom) sent their 1991/1992 report. A second report covering the years 1991-1994 should have been submitted by 17 June 1995.
The Commission’s analysis covers the period 1991-1994 on the basis of the reports submitted by five Member States (Belgium, Spain, France, the United Kingdom and Portugal).
The report notes that some Member States have failed to adopt all the national measures needed to transpose this Directive. As a result, Belgium in particular was sentenced by the Court of Justice (judgment of 3 May 1994, Case C-260/93) for failing to transpose the Directive.
Following the adoption of Directive 91/692/EEC standardising and rationalising reports on the implementation of certain Directives relating to the environment, the Commission adopted a standard questionnaire for drawing up these reports, first used for the 1991-1994 report. The report outlines the state of play regarding national laws and the minimum limit values set by the five Member States which submitted their report. The Commission feels that, under the current circumstances, it is difficult to draw final conclusions as the reports of several Member States are missing and some of the reports submitted were incomplete. However, it is of the view that the Directive was, on the whole, well implemented as regards the permitted concentration of heavy metals in sludge for use in agriculture, as the level is in general lower than the limit values laid down in Annex I B to the Directive.

Undesirable substances in animal feed

Leave a reply

Undesirable substances in animal feed

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Undesirable substances in animal feed

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Food safety > Animal nutrition

Undesirable substances in animal feed

Document or Iniciative

Directive 2002/32/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 May 2002 on undesirable substances in animal feed [See amending act(s)].

Summary

This Directive sets maximum levels to limit as far as possible the presence of undesirable substances and products in animal feed put into circulation within the European Union (EU).

Undesirable substances

“Undesirable substance” means any substance or product, with the exception of pathogenic agents, which is present in and/or on the product intended for animal feed and which presents a potential danger to animal or human health or to the environment or could adversely affect livestock production. The range of substances covered by the Directive comprises arsenic, lead, mercury, dioxin and certain mustards.

This Directive applies to all products intended for animal feed, including raw materials for feed, additives and complementary feedingstuffs.

List of undesirable substances

The Directive lays down a list of undesirable substances, for which it sets limit values above which their presence in animal feeds is forbidden (see Annex I to the Directive). This list is regularly updated in the light of technical progress.

Investigations

When these maximum levels are exceeded, Member States, in cooperation with the economic operators concerned, must carry out investigations to identify the sources of the substances concerned. They must then inform the Commission of the outcome of these investigations and the measures taken to reduce the level of the substances or eliminate them.

Mixtures

To prevent fraud, the Directive prohibits mixing a product containing undesirable substances with the same product or other products in order to dilute it.

Temporary provisions

There can be no derogations from the Directive. However, where a danger to human or animal health or to the environment becomes apparent, Member States may provisionally take more stringent measures, reducing the maximum level set in the Directive.

Context

Following the dioxin crisis in the late 1990s, the EU made many changes to European undesirable substances in order to improve food security and to better protect human and animal health and the environment.

Directive 2002/32/EC replaces Directive 1999/29/EC as from 1 August 2003.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Directive 2002/32/EC

30.5.2002

1.5.2003

OJ L 140, 30.5.2002
Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Regulation (EC) No 219/2009

20.4.2009

–

OJ L 87, 31.3.2009

The successive amendments and corrections to Directive 2002/32/EC have been incorporated into the original text. This consolidated versionis of documentary value only.

Related Acts

Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules.

In the context of the review of food hygiene legislation (“hygiene package”), this Regulation re-organises official controls of food and feed so as to integrate controls at all stages of production and in all sectors. The Regulation defines the European Union’s duties as regards the organisation of these controls, as well as the rules which must be respected by the national authorities responsible for carrying out the official controls, including coercive measures adopted in the event of failure to comply with Community law.

Use of additives in feedingstuffs

Leave a reply

Use of additives in feedingstuffs

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Use of additives in feedingstuffs

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Food safety > Animal nutrition

Use of additives in feedingstuffs

Document or Iniciative

Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on additives for use in animal nutrition [See amending act(s)].

Summary

The aim of this Regulation is to establish a standardised procedure for the authorisation and use of feed additives and to lay down rules for the labelling and supervision of these substances.

Scope

This Regulation applies to all feed additives * except:

  • processing aids *; and
  • veterinary medicinal products as defined by Directive 2001/82/EC.

Conditions for authorization

The applicant must prove that the additive for which it has submitted an application for authorisation for placing on the market complies with certain conditions, i.e.:

  • the additive must have a favourable influence on the characteristics of the feed into which it is incorporated or on animal production;
  • the additive must not have an adverse effect on animal health, human health or the environment;
  • the additive must not harm the consumer by impairing the distinctive features of animal products;
  • the presentation of the additive must not mislead the user.

Antibiotics, other than coccidiostats or histomonostats, may not be used as feed additives.

Authorisation procedure

Additives intended for use in animal feeds must receive a favourable opinion from the (EFSA) before obtaining an authorisation for their use and placing on the market.

Applications for authorisation are submitted to the Commission. The latter then ensures that the applications are notified to Member States before forwarding the applications to the EFSA. The applicant himself must send the EFSA the copy of the application and certain information (the name and address of the applicant, a description of the method of production, manufacturing and intended uses of the additive, proposed conditions for placing the additive on the market, the safety and efficacy studies, etc.). In addition, he must send samples to the Community Reference Laboratory for analysis. The EFSA may, if necessary, ask for further information.

Within six months of receipt of an application the EFSA gives an opinion based on the information provided by the applicant and on the evaluation report forwarded by the Community Reference Laboratory. If this opinion is favourable, it must include information on the specific conditions or restrictions relating to handling, monitoring requirements following placing on the market and use of the additive, including the animal species and categories of animals for which the additive is to be used, information on specific additional requirements for labelling of the additive, and, where appropriate, a proposal for the establishment of Maximum Residues Limits (MRLs) in the relevant foodstuffs of animal origin.

Based on the EFSA opinion, the Commission decides whether or not to authorise the additive. An authorisation is valid for ten years and may be renewed. An authorisation may be renewed by means of simplified provisions.

This Regulation contains provisions concerning the use of non-authorised additives for research purposes and provisions concerning the use of certain additives (in particular those produced from genetically modified organisms).

Persons using an authorised additive or placing it on the market are responsible for ensuring compliance with any conditions or restrictions imposed by the Commission.

Based on the opinion given by the EFSA, the Commission may decide to amend, suspend or revoke an authorisation.

Information on additives

The additives are entered in a register made available to the public. They are allocated to one or more of the following categories: technological additives; sensory additives; nutritional additives; zootechnical additives; coccidiostats and histomonostats. These categories are themselves divided into functional groups according to the additives’ principal functions.

Additives must be labelled clearly and indelibly and include certain information, including the specific name given to the additives upon authorisation and their identification number, the name and address of the person responsible for these particulars, the net weight or net volume of the additives, directions for use and any safety recommendations regarding use and, where applicable, the specific requirements mentioned in the authorisation.

Following the applicant’s request, certain information provided by the latter may remain confidential if the Commission considers that its disclosure is likely to compromise the rules on competition.

Background

Directives 70/524/EEC and 87/153/EEC are repealed but some of their provisions remain temporarily in force.

Key terms used in the act
  • Additives for animal feed: substances: micro-organisms or preparations, other than feed material and premixtures, which are intentionally added to feed or water in order to perform, in particular, one or more of the following functions: satisfy the nutritional needs of animals, favourably affect the characteristics of feed or animal products, the colour of ornamental fish and birds, the environmental consequences of animal production, animal production, performance or welfare, or have a coccidiostatic or histomonostatic effect.
  • Processing aid: a substance which is not consumed as a feedingstuff by itself, intentionally used in the processing of feedingstuffs or feed materials to fulfil a technological purpose during treatment or processing which may result in the unintentional but technologically unavoidable presence of residues of the substance or its derivatives in the final product.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Regulation (EC) 1831/2003

7.11.2003

–

OJ L 268 of 18.10.2003
Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Regulation (EC) No 378/2005

25.3.2005

–

OJ L 59 of 5.3.2005
Regulation (EC) No 596/2009

7.8.2009

–

OJ L 188 of 18.7.2009
Regulation (EC) No 767/2009

21.9.2009

–

OJ L 229 of 1.9.2009

Successive amendments and corrections to Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 have been incorporated into the basic text. This consolidated versionis for reference only.

Related Acts

Commission Regulation (EU) No 516/2010 of 15 June 2010 concerning the permanent authorisation of an additive in feedingstuffs [Official Journal L 150 of 16.6.2010].

Commission Regulation (EC) No 429/2008 of 25 April 2008 on detailed rules for the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the preparation and the presentation of applications and the assessment and the authorisation of feed additives [Official Journal L 133 of 22.5.2008].
Applications for authorisation of a feed additive are presented using the form in Appendix I of the Regulation. They are accompanied by a dossier which should enable the efficacy and safety of the feed additive for humans, animals and the environment to be evaluated. For applications submitted before 21June 2008, the Appendix to Directive 87/153/EEC is still valid.

Urban waste water treatment

Leave a reply

Urban waste water treatment

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Urban waste water treatment

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Environment > Water protection and management

Urban waste water treatment

Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste water treatment [See amending acts].

Summary

Directive 91/271/EEC

This Directive concerns the collection, treatment and discharge of urban waste water and the treatment and discharge of waste water from certain industrial sectors. Its aim is to protect the environment from any adverse effects caused by the discharge of such waters.

Industrial waste water entering collecting systems and the disposal of waste water and sludge from urban waste water treatment plants are subject to regulations and/or specific authorisation by the competent authorities.

The Directive establishes a timetable, which Member States must adhere to, for the provision of collection and treatment systems for urban waste water in agglomerations corresponding to the categories laid down in the Directive. The main deadlines are as follows:

  • 31 December 1998: all agglomerations of more than 10 000 “population equivalent”* (p.e.) which discharge their effluent into sensitive areas must have a proper collection and treatment system;
  • 31 December 2000: all agglomerations of more than 15 000 p.e. which do not discharge their effluent into a sensitive area must have a collection and treatment system which enables them to satisfy the requirements in Table 1 of Annex I;
  • 31 December 2005: all agglomerations of between 2 000 and 10 000 p.e. which discharge their effluent into sensitive areas, and all agglomerations of between 2 000 and 15 000 p.e. which do not discharge into such areas must have a collection and treatment system.

Annex II requires Member States to draw up lists of sensitive and less sensitive areas which receive the treated waters. These lists must be updated regularly.

The treatment of urban water is to be varied according to the sensitivity of the receiving waters.

The Directive lays down specific requirements for discharges from certain industrial sectors of biodegradable industrial waste water not entering urban waste water treatment plants before discharge to receiving waters.

Member States are responsible for monitoring both discharges from treatment plants and the receiving waters. They must ensure that the competent national authorities publish a situation report every two years. This report must also be sent to the Commission.

Member States must set up national programmes for the implementation of this Directive and must present them to the Commission.

The Directive also provides for temporary derogations.

Directive 98/15/EC

This Directive clarifies the rules relating to discharges from urban waste water treatment plants in order to put an end to differences in interpretation by the Member States.

It specifies, among other things, that:

  • the option of using daily averages for the total nitrogen concentration applies both to agglomerations of 10 000-100 000 p.e. and to those of more than 100 000 p.e.;
  • the condition concerning the temperature of the effluent in the biological reactor and the limitation on the time of operation to take account of regional climatic conditions only apply to the “alternative” method using daily averages;
  • use of the “alternative” method must ensure the same level of environmental protection as the annual mean technique.

Key terms used in the act
  • urban waste water means waste water from residential settlements and services which originates predominantly from the human metabolism and from household activities (domestic waste water) or a mixture of domestic waste water with waste water which is discharged from premises used for carrying on any trade or industry (industrial waste water) and/or run-off rain water;
  • eutrophication means the enrichment of water by nutrients, especially compounds of nitrogen and/or phosphorus, causing an accelerated growth of algae and higher forms of plant life to produce an undesirable disturbance to the balance of organisms present in the water and to the quality of the water concerned;
  • population equivalent is a measure of pollution representing the average organic biodegradable load per person per day: it is defined in Directive 91/271/EEC as the organic biodegradable load having a five-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) of 60 g of oxygen per day.

References

Act

Entry into force

Deadline for transposition in the Member States

Official Journal

Directive 91/271/EEC

19.06.1991

30.06.1993

OJ L 135 of 30.05.1991

Amending act(s)

Entry into force

Deadline for transposition in the Member States

Official Journal

Directive 98/15/EC

27.03.1998

30.09.1998

OJ L 67 of 07.03.1998

Related Acts

Communication from the Commission of 22 March 2007 entitled: “Towards sustainable water management in the European Union – First stage in the implementation of the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC” [COM(2007) 128 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
In this report the Commission notes that in 2003 significant amounts of waste water were still not being treated adequately before being discharged into the surface waters of the Member States. The main problems singled out are the lack of appropriate treatment and the lack of designation of “sensitive areas”. In 2003, 17 cities with populations of over 150 000 did not have treatment systems. Significant financial investment is still needed in order for Member States to comply fully with the Directive.

Report from the Commission of 23 April 2004 on the implementation of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste water treatment, as amended by Commission Directive 98/15/EC of 27 February 1998 [COM(2004) 248 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
This report looks at the application of the Directive at 31 December 2000. The Commission notes that, since the previous report, considerable efforts have been undertaken by Member States and improvements in the waste water treatment sector have been achieved in many countries. Significant improvements have been achieved in terms of the identification of sensitive areas and waste water infrastructure in those areas, but the Commission considers that less than 50% of the waste water load impacting on sensitive areas is receiving the appropriate level of treatment. Meanwhile, the number of cities with populations of over 150 000 without proper waste water treatment has fallen from 37 in 1998 to 25. Despite improvements having taken place, however, the Commission is concerned about the considerable delays in implementing the Directive and stresses that implementation will be a particular challenge for the new Member States.

Report from the Commission of 21 November 2001 on the implementation of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste water treatment, as amended by Commission Directive 98/15/EC of 27 February 1998 [COM(2001) 685 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
This report looks at the application of the Directive at 31 December 1998. On that date, a total of 37 European cities with a population of more than 150 000 were discharging their waste water untreated into the natural environment. Another 57 were also discharging a large proportion of their effluent either untreated or without proper treatment.

Report from the Commission of 15 January 1999 on the implementation of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste water treatment, as amended by Commission Directive 98/15/EC of 27 February 1998 [COM(98) 775 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Urgent measures to be taken to combat doping in sport

Leave a reply

Urgent measures to be taken to combat doping in sport

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Urgent measures to be taken to combat doping in sport

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Education training youth sport > Sport

Urgent measures to be taken to combat doping in sport

Document or Iniciative

European Parliament Resolution of 14 April 2005 on combating doping in sport [Not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

Concerned by the ever increasing problem of doping in sport (in particular the use of ever more dangerous substances, such as growth hormones or Erythropoietin), the European Parliament would emphasise first of all that the use of chemicals to enhance performance is totally at odds with the values of sport as a social, cultural and education activity.

In order to combat doping more effectively, the European Parliament calls on the Commission to:

  • ensure that the Union’s external borders are effectively policed and combat the trade in illegal substances;
  • implement an effective, joined-up policy in all related fields (public health, prevention, education and pharmaceutical research);
  • support a sustained information campaign in order to establish an effective prevention policy;
  • together with the Member States, step up its collaboration with the World Anti-Doping Agency, the Council of Europe and the World Health Organisation;
  • involve all those concerned with sport in the decision-making process in this area, in order to tackle this problem effectively and promote a clean image of sport;
  • encourage cooperation between the Member States in order to develop common, effective methods for monitoring and certifying the use of chemical substances and compounds in gymnasia and sports centres frequented by young people in particular;
  • propose, in the Seventh Research Framework Programme, further research into different methods of doping detection and control.

Doping: a reality to be tackled

Doping is a real public health problem today. As the 2004 Athens Olympics showed, it has become worryingly prevalent in all areas of sport and at all competitive and amateur levels. Not only does it place athletes in danger, but it falsifies competition results, damages the image of sport, especially for young people, and tarnishes its ethical dimension.

Related Acts

Parliament Resolution of 17 December 1998 on urgent measures to be taken against doping in sport [Official Journal C98 of 09.04.1999]

 

Unique identifiers for GMOs

Leave a reply

Unique identifiers for GMOs

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Unique identifiers for GMOs

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Food safety > Specific themes

Unique identifiers for GMOs

Document or Iniciative

Commission Regulation (EC) No 65/2004 of 14 January 2004, establishing a system for the development and assignment of unique identifiers for genetically modified organisms.

Summary

Scope

The Regulation applies to all genetically modified organisms that will be imported into the Community for cultivation and for human food and animal feed, except medicinal products for human and veterinary use.

Authorisation to place on the market

Since the beginning of the 1990s, the placing on the market of genetically modified organisms has been regulated by Directive 90/220/EEC. Since 1997, the regulations on GMOs, limited to Directive 90/220/EEC (covering the import, processing and cultivation of GMOs and their use in animal feed) have been strengthened by a Regulation concerning novel foods and novel food ingredients intended for human food (Regulation 97/258/EC).

The regulatory framework for GMOs was amended and updated by the adoption of Directive 2001/18/EC repealing the above-mentioned Directive 90/220/EEC, and by the adoption of two Regulations, one relating to GMOs in human food and animal feed (Regulation 1829/2003/EC) and the other to the labelling and traceability of GMOs (Regulation 1830/2003/EC).

All GMOs must be assessed before they can be sown or placed on the market. This risk assessment is carried out on a case-by-case basis and examines the expected or unexpected possible effects that the GMO is likely to have on health and on the environment. Therefore, effects linked to a GMO’s potential toxicity/allergenicity or its effects on non-target organisms for example are evaluated by national and Community scientific bodies (including the European Food Safety Authority).

Once GMO products have been authorised to be placed on the market (Directive 2001/18/EC or Regulation 1829/2003), the appropriate identifier unique to each GMO must be included on the labelling.

The identifier is made up of 9 characters, including letters and numbers, combined in a uniform way (see the Regulation’s annex). This format was approved within the framework of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The identifier for each specific GMO is therefore listed in the OECD’s BioTrack database.

The Commission or the authority that approved the product’s marketing must inform the Biosafety Clearing-House (set up under the Cartagena Biosafety Protocol) in writing of this unique identifier.

Context

The unique identifier is a GMO identification measure that is also linked to labelling and which facilitates the traceability of these products throughout the food chain, in application of Regulation 1830/2003.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Regulation (EC) No 65/2004 16/01/2004 – OJ L 10 of 16/01/2004

Related Acts

Regulation (EC) No 641/2004 of the Commission of 6 April 2004 on detailed rules for the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the application for the authorisation of new genetically modified food and feed, the notification of existing products and adventitious or technically unavoidable presence of genetically modified material which has benefited from a favourable risk evaluation (Official Journal L 102 of 07/04/2004).


Regulation (EC) No 1830

of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 concerning the traceability and labelling of genetically modified organisms and the traceability of food and feed products produced from genetically modified organisms and amending Directive 2001/18/EC (Official Journal L 268 of 18/10/2003).

 

Unfair terms

Leave a reply

Unfair terms

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Unfair terms

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Internal market > Single market for capital

Unfair terms

Document or Iniciative

Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts [See amending act(s)].

Summary

This Directive does not apply to contractual terms reflecting:

  • mandatory provisions or regulations;
  • provisions arising from international agreements to which the Member States or the Community are signatories.

A non-negotiated term is unfair when it establishes a significant imbalance, to the consumer’s detriment, between the rights and obligations of the contracting parties.

A list of terms which may be deemed unfair is annexed to the Directive.

Assessing the unfair nature of a contractual term takes into account:

  • the nature of the goods or services covered by the contract;
  • the circumstances surrounding the drawing up of the contract;
  • the other terms in the contract or in another contract to which it relates.

Neither the definition of the main aim of the contract nor the relationship between the price and the service or goods to be provided may be taken into account in assessing the unfair nature of clearly worded contractual terms.

Where there is doubt as to the meaning of a term, the interpretation most favourable to the consumer will prevail.

Consumers are not bound by unfair terms in a contract signed with a professional.

The Member States are to implement the appropriate measures to end the use of unfair terms.

The Commission is to report to the European Parliament and the Council by 31 December 1999 on the application of this Directive.

REFERENCES

Act Entry into force Deadline for implementation in the Member States Official Journal

Directive 93/13/EEC

11.5.1993

31.12.1994

OJ L 95, 21.4.1993
Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for implementation in the Member States Official Journal

Directive 2002/995/EC

9.12.2002

1.1.2003

OJ L 353, 30.12.2002

Related Acts

Report from the Commission on the implementation of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts [COM (2000) 248 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
The purpose of this report is not only to appraise Directive 93/13/EEC, five years after the deadline for its transposition, but also to raise a number of questions with a view to improving the existing situation.
According to the Commission, its work since 1993 has had a significant effect: infringement procedures, market studies, subsidies granted with a view to eliminating unfair terms in certain economic sectors, the dialogue between consumers and professionals, information campaigns, the conference organised in Brussels in 1999, and the Clab database.
Drawing on the experience gained in implementing the Directive in the Member States, the report suggests a number of improvements. The suggestions mainly concern the scope of the Directive and its limitations, the notion of unfair terms, the list in the annex to the Directive, the failure to supervise pre-contractual terms and conditions, the principle of transparency and the right to information, penalties, existing national arrangements for eliminating unfair terms, the problems posed by certain economic sectors, and the future of the Clab database.

Use of mobile phones on aircraft

Leave a reply

Use of mobile phones on aircraft

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Use of mobile phones on aircraft

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Information society > Radiofrequencies

Use of mobile phones on aircraft

Document or Iniciative

Commission Decision 2008/294/EC of 7 April 2008 on harmonised conditions of spectrum use for the operation of mobile communication services on aircraft (MCA services) in the Community

Summary

The mobile communication services on aircraft (MCA services) offer passengers the opportunity to use their mobile phones on board to make calls and send and receive messages while they are flying over Europe.

The general framework for the use of mobile phones on aircraft depends on two factors:

  • the harmonisation of the technical parameters of the equipment taken on board for use of the radio spectrum in European air space;
  • a coordinated approach to national authorisation conditions and procedures relating to the use of the radio spectrum for MCA services.

The airline will be able to apply in the country in which it is registered for a mobile telephony licence valid for the European Union (EU) as a whole. In this way, a plane registered in Spain, when flying over the Czech Republic, for example, will be able to offer MCA services to passengers without additional licence formalities.

This Decision does not cover either the commercial aspects, such as the charges for the use of MCA services, or the terms and conditions of use. It is for the airlines and mobile telephony operators to establish the conditions necessary on board for those wishing to use the MCA services not to disturb the other passengers.

Some airlines are considering introducing this type of service during 2008. No later than six months after the entry into force of this Decision and the corresponding Recommendation, Member States should be able to authorise provision of MCA services in aircraft registered within their jurisdiction

Operation

Passengers’ telephones are linked to an on-board cellular network (aircraft base transceiver station), which in turn is in communication with the Earth by satellite, to avoid the phones connecting to the mobile networks of the countries flown over and impeding the normal operation of the terrestrial mobile networks.

This arrangement also enables the transmit power to be kept at a fairly low level to ensure the safety of the on-board systems.

Cost

The MCA services charges are not limited by the roaming rates, which depend exclusively on the terrestrial network. The service providers will set the charges for the MCA services. The Commission will nevertheless keep a close eye on the level and transparency of the prices invoiced to consumers.

Safety

The provision of MCA services goes hand in hand with the fundamental observance of air safety requirements. The application of common rules in the field of the safety of civilian aviation will be guaranteed by an airworthiness certificate valid for the whole of the EU. This certification is issued by the European Aviation Safety Agency.

The use of mobile phones on aircraft will be prohibited during take-off and landing and will be accessible only when the aircraft reaches cruising speed.

Background

Demand for pan-European services is increasing with the technological and economic development of the EU. The Commission already supports the use of mobile services by satellite in the frequency band 2 GHz (EN).

The Commission proposed revising the European framework for electronic communications in 2007 to be in step with these developments and to allow the launch of transnational services of this kind throughout the EU.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Decision 2008/294/EC [adoption: co-decision COD/2000/0183] 7.4.2008 – OJ L 98 of 10.4.2008

Related Acts

Commission Recommendation 2008/295/EC of 7 April 2008 on authorisation of mobile communication services on aircraft (MCA services) in the European Community [Official Journal L 98 of 10.4.2008]
This Recommendation goes hand in hand with the Decision on harmonised conditions of spectrum use for the operation of MCA services. It aims to coordinate national authorisation conditions for the provision of MCA services and promotes mutual recognition of national authorisations.

Resources

Further Reading

  • CARRASCO PERERA, A./CORDERO LOBATO, E./MARTÍNEZ ESPÍN, P., “Transposición de la Directiva Comunitaria sobre venta y garantías de los bienes de consumo”, EC, 2000, nº 52, pp. 125 y ss.
  • CASTILLA BAREA, M., “La determinación de la “falta de conformidad” del bien con el contrato a tenor del art. 2 de la Directiva 1999/44/C.E., del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 25 de mayo, sobre determinados aspectos de la venta y las garantías de los bienes de consumo”, Anuario de la Facultad de Derecho de Extremadura, 2003, n.º 21, pp. 275 y ss.
  • CASTILLA BAREA, M., “La determinación de la «falta de conformidad» del bien con el contrato a tenor del art. 3.1 del Proyecto de Ley de Garantías en la venta de bienes de consumo (I Parte)”, AC, 2002-III, pp. 2504 y ss.; y Parte II en AC¸ 2002-III, pp. 2621 y ss
  • CILLERO DE CABO, P., “Consideraciones en torno a la armonización europea en materia de venta y garantías de bienes de consumo y su futura incorporación al ordenamiento jurídico español”, EC, 2001, n.º 57, pp. 147 y ss.
  • ALPA, G., “Autonomia privata e «garanzie» commerciali”, en AAVV, L´attuazione della Direttiva 99/44/CE in Italia e in Europa, Milano, Cedam, 2002, pp. 109 y ss.
  • ALPA, G./DE NOVA, G., y otros, L´acquisto di beni de consumo, Milano, 2002.
  • AMADIO, G., “La conformità al contrato tra garanzia e responsabilità”, Contr. Impr./Eur., 2001, pp. 2 y ss.
  • AMADIO, G., “Difetto di conformità e tutele sinallagmatiche”, Riv. dir. civ., 2001, I, pp. 863 y ss.
  • AMADIO, G., “Conformità al contratto e tutele satisfattorie”, en AAVV, L´attuazione della Direttiva 99/44/CE in Italia e in Europa, Milano, Cedam, 2002, pp. 151 y ss.
  • AMATO, C., Per un diritto europeo dei contratti con i consumatori, Milano, Giuffrè, 2003.
  • AMTENBRINK, F./SCHNEIDER, C., “Die europaweite Vereinheitlichung von Verbrauchsgüterkauf und –garantien”, VuR, 1996, pp. 367 y ss.
  • AMTENBRINK, F./SCHNEIDER, C., “Europäische Vorgaben für ein neues Kaufrecht und deutsche Schuldrechtsrecofr”, VuR, 1999, pp. 293 y ss.
  • ANDERS, “Zur Reform des Kaufrechts”, ZRP, 2000, pp. 293 y ss.
  • ARNOLD, S./Hannes UNBERATH, H., “Die Umsetzung der Richtlinie über den Verbrauchsgüterkauf in England”, ZEuP, 2004, n.º 2, pp. 366 y ss.
  • BALDUS, C., Binnenkonkurrenz kaufrechtlicher Sachmängelansprüche nach Europarecht, Baden-Baden, Nomos Verlag, 1999.
  • BALL, “Neues Gewährleistungsrecht beim Kauf ”, ZGS, 2002, pp. 49 y ss.
  • BAMBERGER, H. G./ROTH, H., Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch, Band 1, München, Beck, 2003.
  • BÄRENZ, “Die Auslegung der überschießenden Umsetzung von Richtlinien am Beispiel des Gesetzes zur Modernisierung des Schuldrechts”, DB, 2003, pp. 375 y ss.
  • CORRAL GARCÍA, E., “La Directiva 1999/44/CE, de 25 de mayo, sobre determinados aspectos de la venta y las garantías de los bienes de consumo: un nuevo régimen de saneamiento en la compraventa de bienes muebles”, RdP, 2000, n.º 5, pp. 521 y ss.
  • CORSO, E., “La tutela del consumatore dopo il decreto legislativo di attuazione della direttiva 99/44/CE”, Contr. Impr., 2002, n.º 3, pp. 1317 y ss.
  • COSTAS RODAL, L., “El régimen de la falta de conformidad con el contrato en la compraventa de bienes de consumo”, AC, 2004-I, pp. 2045 y ss.
  • DE LA IGLESIA MONJE, M. I., El principio de conformidad del contrato en la compraventa internacional de mercaderías, Madrid, Centro de Estudios Registrales, 2002.
  • DE VERDA Y BEAMONTE, J. R., “Algunas reflexiones sobre la incidencia de la Directiva 1999/44/CE, del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 25 de mayo de 1999, sobre determinados aspectos de la venta y las garantías de los bienes de consumo, en el Derecho civil español”, NUE, 2002, nº 211, pp. 135 y ss.
  • DE VERDA Y BEAMONTE, J. R., “La falta de armonía entre la tipificación del vicio redhibitorio y los remedios jurídicos con que cuenta el comprador de una cosa defectuosa”, ADC, 2002, II, pp. 641 y ss.
  • DIEZ-PICAZO, L. (Dir.), La compraventa internacional de mercaderías. Comentario de la Convención de Viena, Madrid, Civitas, 1998.
  • DIEZ-PICAZO, L./ROCA TRÍAS, E./MORALES, A. M., Los principios del derecho europeo de los contratos, Madrid, Civitas, 2002.
  • EBERS, M., “La nueva regulación del incumplimiento contractual en el BGB, tras la Ley de modernización del Derecho de obligaciones de 2002”, ADC, 2003, IV, pp. 1575 y ss.
  • ESPINA FERNANDEZ, S., “Los derechos de los consumidores ante la falta de conformidad con el contrato de compraventa. Comentario a la Ley 23/2003, de 10 de julio, de Garantías en la Venta de Bienes de Consumo”. TSJyAP, 2004, nº 4, pp. 11 y ss.
  • BEMMANN, “Der Pferdekauf im Jahr nach der Schuldrechtsreform”, AUR, 2003, pp. 233 y ss.
  • BERESKA, “Der neue Lieferantenregress nach §§ 478, 479 BGB. Eine Arbeitshilfe”, ZGS, 2002, pp. 59 y ss.
  • BERGMANN, N., “Die Umsetzung der Verbrauchersgüterkaufrichtlinie 1999/44/EG in Italien: ein neuen Paragrapg im Codice civile”, en Jahrbuch für italienisches Recht, 2003, pp. 261 y ss.
  • BERNARDEAU, L., “Harmonisation minimale et droit applicable”, en J.
  • BERTI, C., La vendita dei beni di consumo Commentario breve agli artt. 1519-bis ss.cc. (Artt. 1519-bis – 1519-nonies c.c.), Milano, Giuffrè, 2004.
  • BIANCA, C. M., “Consegna di aliud pro alio e decadenza dai rimedi por omessa denunzia nella direttiva 1999/44/CE”, Contr. Impr./Eur., 2001, pp. 16 y ss.
  • BIANCA, C. M., “L´attuazione della directtiva 99/44/CE in Italia e in Europa”, en AAVV, L´attuazione della Direttiva 99/44/CE in Italia e in Europa, Milano, Cedam, 2002, pp. 103 y ss.
  • BIN, M., “Per un dialogo con il futuro legislatore dell´attuazione: ripensare l´intera disciplina della non conformità dei beni nella vendita alla luce della direttiva comunitaria”, Contr. Impr./Eur., 2000, pp. 403 y ss.
  • ESTRUCH ESTRUCH, J./VERDERA SERVER, R., “Las garantías en la venta de bienes de consumo”, en REYES LÓPEZ, M. J. (Coord.), Derecho privado de consumo, Valencia, Tirant lo blanch, 2004, pp. 324 y ss.
  • EVANGELIO LLORCA, R., “La garantía del artículo 11 LGDCU y la Directiva 99/44/CE, del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 25 de mayo de 1999, sobre determinados aspectos de la venta y las garantías de los bienes de consumo”, RCDI, 2002, n.º 672, pp. 1301 y ss.
  • FENOY PICÓN, N., Falta de conformidad e incumplimiento en la compraventa. (Evolución del ordenamiento español), Madrid, Colegio de Registradores de la Propiedad y Mercantiles de España, 1996.

    • URBAN II

    Leave a reply

    URBAN II

    Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about URBAN II

    Topics

    These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

    Employment and social policy > Social inclusion and the fight against poverty

    URBAN II

    1) Objective

    To lay down Commission guidelines on the economic and social regeneration of cities and neighbourhoods in crisis in order to promote sustainable urban development.

    2) Document or Iniciative

    Commission Communication of 28 April 2000 to the Member States laying down guidelines for a Community initiative concerning economic and social regeneration of cities and of neighbourhoods in crisis in order to promote sustainable urban development Urban II [C(2000) 1100 – Official Journal C 141 of 19.05.2000].

    3) Summary

    Almost 80 % of the European Community’s citizens today live in cities. As centres of cultural, political, social and economic exchange and development, towns and cities play a crucial role in Europe. Accordingly, urban issues are at the heart of the Community’s policies. This can be clearly seen in the Commission’s guidelines on the programming of mainstream Structural Fund assistance (Objective 1, Objective 2, Objective 3)

    The Urban Community Initiative, first launched in 1994, encourages urban areas and neighbourhoods in crisis to design innovative, integrated urban development measures. The fruits of these measures are now beginning to be seen in the areas concerned: the quality of life is improving and local stakeholders agree on the importance of the integrated Urban approach. Thus, during the 1994-99 programming period, the Urban Community Initiative provided funding for 118 urban areas, amounting to EUR 900 million and directly benefiting 3.2 million people.

    Between 1989 and 1999, the innovative actions of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) encouraged urban development and experimentation with new forms of economic, social and environmental development, with encouraging results. EUR 164 million funded 59 urban pilot projects (UPP).

    Encouraged by these positive experiences, the Commission decided to continue this approach. Broadly speaking, it wished to see greater account taken of urban issues in all the Community’s policies. In particular, it introduced Urban II, the new Community initiative for sustainable urban development, in the general regulation on the Structural Funds.

    Urban II is jointly financed by the Commission and the Member States. For 2000-06, the Community’s contribution to the initiative amounts to EUR 730 million, exclusively from the ERDF, for a total investment of EUR 1.6 billion, covering a population of some 2.2 million. Community financing can fund up to 75 % of the total eligible cost in urban areas covered by Objective 1 and 50 % elsewhere.

    Objectives

    The Urban II Community initiative offers added value to mainstream programmes. It is important to stress the innovative nature of the operations involved, which start life as demonstrative, flagship actions before gradually being incorporated into the mainstream programmes.

    The objectives of the new Community initiative are:

    • to formulate and implement innovative strategies for sustainable economic and social regeneration of small and medium-sized towns and cites or of distressed urban neighbourhoods in larger cities;
    • to enhance and exchange knowledge and experience in relation to sustainable urban regeneration and development in the areas concerned.

    In order to fulfil these objectives, the urban regeneration strategies must adhere to the following principles:

    • sufficient critical mass of population and associated support structures to facilitate the formulation and implementation of innovative urban development programmes;
    • strong local partnership to define challenges, strategy and priorities, allocate resources and monitor and evaluate the strategy. Partnerships are wide and include economic and social partners, non-governmental organisations and residents’ groupings;
    • an integrated territorial approach linked to development strategies for the wider urban area or region;
    • integration of the economic, social and environmental, security and transport aspects, including equality of access to education and training opportunities;
    • promotion of equal opportunities between men and women;
    • complementarity with the main forms of assistance under the Structural Funds and other Community initiatives (Interreg III, Leader+, Equal).

    Eligible areas

    Urban II is providing support for 70 urban areas. The population in each area should be around 20 000 people, but may be as few as 10 000 in some cases.

    To be eligible, each city, town or urban neighbourhood must be a coherent geographical or socio-economic entity. These areas are in a situation of urban crisis or in need of economic and social regeneration. Located either within or outside areas eligible for support under Objectives 1 and 2 of the Structural Funds, they must meet at least three of the following conditions:

    • a low level of economic activity and a specific need for conversion due to local economic and social difficulties;
    • a high level of long-term unemployment, poverty and exclusion;
    • a low level of education, significant skills deficiencies and high drop-out-rates from school;
    • a high number of immigrants, ethnic and minority groups, or refugees;
    • a high level of criminality and delinquency;
    • precarious demographic trends;
    • a particularly degraded environment.

    On the basis of indicative financial allocations, and an indicative number of urban areas per Member State and a minimum level of expenditure (EUR 500 per inhabitant), the Member States identify the urban areas wishing to participate in Urban II. Each area selected defines a development strategy which it works out in a Community Initiative Programme (CIP). This document becomes the basis for negotiating financial assistance from the Commission and serves to implement the innovative urban development strategy on the ground.

    Priority activities

    The strategies develop high impact operations which must maximise the visibility of the selected areas both within Member States and at Community level. They also show commitment to organisational change in urban governance by means of increased delegation of powers and participation by all stakeholders. Strategies also have the following priorities:

    • mixed use redevelopment of brownfield sites: protection and restoration of buildings and public spaces, reclamation of derelict sites and contaminated land; preservation and enhancement of historic, cultural and environmental heritage; creation of lasting jobs; integration of local communities and ethnic minorities; reintegration of excluded persons; improved security and prevention of delinquency; improved street lighting, closed circuit TV surveillance; reduced pressures on greenfield sites.
      The ERDF cannot finance housing. However, the CIPs can still help, with support from national and/or local authorities for housing improvement when housing is part of the urban crisis;
    • entrepreneurship, employment pacts and local employment initiatives: support and services for small and medium-sized enterprises, commerce, cooperatives and mutual associations; creation of business centres, technology transfer facilities; training for new technologies; encouraging entrepreneurship; environmental protection; provision of cultural, leisure and sports amenities; nursery and crèche facilities; alternative care facilities and other services namely for elderly people and children; promotion of equal opportunities between men and women;
    • the development of an anti-exclusion and anti-discrimination strategy through actions furthering equal opportunities and targeting notably women, immigrants and refugees: counselling, training schemes and language training oriented to the specific needs of minorities and disadvantaged and marginalised people; mobile units for employment and training advice; improved health services and drug rehabilitation centres; investment in education and health facilities;
    • development of more effective, economically efficient and environmentally friendly integrated public transport systems: safer, more integrated and more intelligent public transport; public transport links to concentrations of activity and jobs; telematic services for travel information, reservation and payment; clean and energy-efficient vehicles; provision for cycling and walking; training for transport staff;
    • environmental measures: minimising and treatment of waste, total recycling, selective collecting and treatment; air quality analysis; efficient water management; noise reduction; reduction in consumption of fossil fuels through use of renewable energy sources; training in environmental management and protection;
    • development of the potential of information society technologies targeting small and medium-sized enterprises and citizens: better access to services of public interest, education, culture and other telematic neighbourhood services; training and installation of facilities to allow teleworking; information systems for the management of human resources and health services; assistance to adapt to the labour market; supporting local authorities for the transfer of know-how and technology;
    • promoting the notion of “urban governance”: studies and expertise on the reorganisation and improvement of public services; design and introduction of new urban management structures; introduction of indicators for evaluating the sustainability of local management; information campaigns and improved access to information for citizens; measures to involve citizens in the political decision-making process; exchanges of experiences and good practice; development of the European Union database on good practice in urban management.

    Exchanging experience and good practice with regard to urban development and the economic and social regeneration of urban areas is a key component of the Urban II Community Initiative. This exchange of information will be facilitated by developing methods for quantification and appropriate performance indicators, which could be inspired by the Urban Audit. A maximum amount of EUR 15 million is earmarked for developing networks to this end. Other technical assistance measures can be planned at the initiative of the Commission or the Member States. The funds committed for exchange of experience and good practice and technical assistance may amount to no more than 2 % of the total ERDF contribution.

    Community Initiative programmes

    The local authorities of the eligible areas, where necessary in collaboration with the regional and national authorities, draw up a Community Initiative programme (CIP) to implement an innovative urban development strategy. Each programme concerns a coherent geographical and socio-economic urban area. In some cases, it may even concern several urban areas, each of which covers at least 10 000 hectares and belongs to the same territorial context.

    All the general rules laid down in the general Regulation on the Structural Funds apply to CIPs. Their content is similar to that of the single programming documents (SPDs) and includes:

    • an ex ante evaluation analysing the strengths and weaknesses of the area concerned;
    • a description of the programming process and the arrangements made to consult the partners;
    • a statement of the strategy and priorities for the development of the urban area in accordance with the general Community guidelines;
    • a summary description of the measures planned to implement the priorities and required to prepare, monitor and evaluate the CIP;
    • an indicative financing plan for each priority and each year;
    • the provisions for implementing the CIP: the authorities and structures set up (managing authority, monitoring committee and, where applicable, paying authority and steering committee); arrangements for managing the CIP (calls for proposals, selection of operations); arrangements for financial control, monitoring, checks and evaluation.

    The selected authorities must present their Community Initiative programmes to the Commission within six months following the publication of the Communication. Within three months of the approval of the programmes, a programming complement must be sent to the Commission, unless the Member State opts to apply for a global Community grant.

    Monitoring, implementation and evaluation of interventions

    The managing authority is responsible for organising the preparation of decisions to be taken by the monitoring committee and, where the steering committee. In particular, it accepts, considers and gives a preliminary assessment of operations proposed for financing or coordinates such tasks.

    The monitoring committee, which meets at least once each year, is made up of representatives of the local, and possibly also the national and regional, authorities, the economic and social partners and non-governmental organisations. The committee is responsible, in particular, for monitoring and evaluating the programme and making changes to it.

    For more information, please see the specific page dedicated to the Urban II Community Initiative on the Internet site of the Directorate-General for Regional Policy.

    4) Implementing Measures

    Initially, the Commission had planned to support some 50 urban areas, but in the end 70 were selected. For more information, please see the press releases covering the approvals of all the programmes.

    5) Follow-Up Work

    Commission Communication of 14.06.2002 to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on “The programming of the Structural Funds 2000-2006: An initial assessment of the Urban Initiative” [COM(2002)308 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

    Urban issues are assuming increasing political importance in the European Union. The Urban approach teaches a number of lessons for the future of European policy: an integrated approach, focusing on relatively small areas, with some flexibility in the selection of areas according to national requirements and priorities, with simplified and flexible administration and local partnership.

    Another Normative about URBAN II

    Topics

    These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic

    Regional policy > Provisions and instruments of regional policy

    URBAN II

    1) Objective

    To lay down Commission guidelines on the economic and social regeneration of cities and neighbourhoods in crisis in order to promote sustainable urban development.

    2) Document or Iniciative

    Commission Communication of 28 April 2000 to the Member States laying down guidelines for a Community initiative concerning economic and social regeneration of cities and of neighbourhoods in crisis in order to promote sustainable urban development Urban II [C(2000) 1100 – Official Journal C 141 of 19.05.2000].

    3) Summary

    Almost 80 % of the European Community’s citizens today live in cities. As centres of cultural, political, social and economic exchange and development, towns and cities play a crucial role in Europe. Accordingly, urban issues are at the heart of the Community’s policies. This can be clearly seen in the Commission’s guidelines on the programming of mainstream Structural Fund assistance (Objective 1, Objective 2, Objective 3)

    The Urban Community Initiative, first launched in 1994, encourages urban areas and neighbourhoods in crisis to design innovative, integrated urban development measures. The fruits of these measures are now beginning to be seen in the areas concerned: the quality of life is improving and local stakeholders agree on the importance of the integrated Urban approach. Thus, during the 1994-99 programming period, the Urban Community Initiative provided funding for 118 urban areas, amounting to EUR 900 million and directly benefiting 3.2 million people.

    Between 1989 and 1999, the innovative actions of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) encouraged urban development and experimentation with new forms of economic, social and environmental development, with encouraging results. EUR 164 million funded 59 urban pilot projects (UPP).

    Encouraged by these positive experiences, the Commission decided to continue this approach. Broadly speaking, it wished to see greater account taken of urban issues in all the Community’s policies. In particular, it introduced Urban II, the new Community initiative for sustainable urban development, in the general regulation on the Structural Funds.

    Urban II is jointly financed by the Commission and the Member States. For 2000-06, the Community’s contribution to the initiative amounts to EUR 730 million, exclusively from the ERDF, for a total investment of EUR 1.6 billion, covering a population of some 2.2 million. Community financing can fund up to 75 % of the total eligible cost in urban areas covered by Objective 1 and 50 % elsewhere.

    Objectives

    The Urban II Community initiative offers added value to mainstream programmes. It is important to stress the innovative nature of the operations involved, which start life as demonstrative, flagship actions before gradually being incorporated into the mainstream programmes.

    The objectives of the new Community initiative are:

    • to formulate and implement innovative strategies for sustainable economic and social regeneration of small and medium-sized towns and cites or of distressed urban neighbourhoods in larger cities;
    • to enhance and exchange knowledge and experience in relation to sustainable urban regeneration and development in the areas concerned.

    In order to fulfil these objectives, the urban regeneration strategies must adhere to the following principles:

    • sufficient critical mass of population and associated support structures to facilitate the formulation and implementation of innovative urban development programmes;
    • strong local partnership to define challenges, strategy and priorities, allocate resources and monitor and evaluate the strategy. Partnerships are wide and include economic and social partners, non-governmental organisations and residents’ groupings;
    • an integrated territorial approach linked to development strategies for the wider urban area or region;
    • integration of the economic, social and environmental, security and transport aspects, including equality of access to education and training opportunities;
    • promotion of equal opportunities between men and women;
    • complementarity with the main forms of assistance under the Structural Funds and other Community initiatives (Interreg III, Leader+, Equal).

    Eligible areas

    Urban II is providing support for 70 urban areas. The population in each area should be around 20 000 people, but may be as few as 10 000 in some cases.

    To be eligible, each city, town or urban neighbourhood must be a coherent geographical or socio-economic entity. These areas are in a situation of urban crisis or in need of economic and social regeneration. Located either within or outside areas eligible for support under Objectives 1 and 2 of the Structural Funds, they must meet at least three of the following conditions:

    • a low level of economic activity and a specific need for conversion due to local economic and social difficulties;
    • a high level of long-term unemployment, poverty and exclusion;
    • a low level of education, significant skills deficiencies and high drop-out-rates from school;
    • a high number of immigrants, ethnic and minority groups, or refugees;
    • a high level of criminality and delinquency;
    • precarious demographic trends;
    • a particularly degraded environment.

    On the basis of indicative financial allocations, and an indicative number of urban areas per Member State and a minimum level of expenditure (EUR 500 per inhabitant), the Member States identify the urban areas wishing to participate in Urban II. Each area selected defines a development strategy which it works out in a Community Initiative Programme (CIP). This document becomes the basis for negotiating financial assistance from the Commission and serves to implement the innovative urban development strategy on the ground.

    Priority activities

    The strategies develop high impact operations which must maximise the visibility of the selected areas both within Member States and at Community level. They also show commitment to organisational change in urban governance by means of increased delegation of powers and participation by all stakeholders. Strategies also have the following priorities:

    • mixed use redevelopment of brownfield sites: protection and restoration of buildings and public spaces, reclamation of derelict sites and contaminated land; preservation and enhancement of historic, cultural and environmental heritage; creation of lasting jobs; integration of local communities and ethnic minorities; reintegration of excluded persons; improved security and prevention of delinquency; improved street lighting, closed circuit TV surveillance; reduced pressures on greenfield sites.
      The ERDF cannot finance housing. However, the CIPs can still help, with support from national and/or local authorities for housing improvement when housing is part of the urban crisis;
    • entrepreneurship, employment pacts and local employment initiatives: support and services for small and medium-sized enterprises, commerce, cooperatives and mutual associations; creation of business centres, technology transfer facilities; training for new technologies; encouraging entrepreneurship; environmental protection; provision of cultural, leisure and sports amenities; nursery and crèche facilities; alternative care facilities and other services namely for elderly people and children; promotion of equal opportunities between men and women;
    • the development of an anti-exclusion and anti-discrimination strategy through actions furthering equal opportunities and targeting notably women, immigrants and refugees: counselling, training schemes and language training oriented to the specific needs of minorities and disadvantaged and marginalised people; mobile units for employment and training advice; improved health services and drug rehabilitation centres; investment in education and health facilities;
    • development of more effective, economically efficient and environmentally friendly integrated public transport systems: safer, more integrated and more intelligent public transport; public transport links to concentrations of activity and jobs; telematic services for travel information, reservation and payment; clean and energy-efficient vehicles; provision for cycling and walking; training for transport staff;
    • environmental measures: minimising and treatment of waste, total recycling, selective collecting and treatment; air quality analysis; efficient water management; noise reduction; reduction in consumption of fossil fuels through use of renewable energy sources; training in environmental management and protection;
    • development of the potential of information society technologies targeting small and medium-sized enterprises and citizens: better access to services of public interest, education, culture and other telematic neighbourhood services; training and installation of facilities to allow teleworking; information systems for the management of human resources and health services; assistance to adapt to the labour market; supporting local authorities for the transfer of know-how and technology;
    • promoting the notion of “urban governance”: studies and expertise on the reorganisation and improvement of public services; design and introduction of new urban management structures; introduction of indicators for evaluating the sustainability of local management; information campaigns and improved access to information for citizens; measures to involve citizens in the political decision-making process; exchanges of experiences and good practice; development of the European Union database on good practice in urban management.

    Exchanging experience and good practice with regard to urban development and the economic and social regeneration of urban areas is a key component of the Urban II Community Initiative. This exchange of information will be facilitated by developing methods for quantification and appropriate performance indicators, which could be inspired by the Urban Audit. A maximum amount of EUR 15 million is earmarked for developing networks to this end. Other technical assistance measures can be planned at the initiative of the Commission or the Member States. The funds committed for exchange of experience and good practice and technical assistance may amount to no more than 2 % of the total ERDF contribution.

    Community Initiative programmes

    The local authorities of the eligible areas, where necessary in collaboration with the regional and national authorities, draw up a Community Initiative programme (CIP) to implement an innovative urban development strategy. Each programme concerns a coherent geographical and socio-economic urban area. In some cases, it may even concern several urban areas, each of which covers at least 10 000 hectares and belongs to the same territorial context.

    All the general rules laid down in the general Regulation on the Structural Funds apply to CIPs. Their content is similar to that of the single programming documents (SPDs) and includes:

    • an ex ante evaluation analysing the strengths and weaknesses of the area concerned;
    • a description of the programming process and the arrangements made to consult the partners;
    • a statement of the strategy and priorities for the development of the urban area in accordance with the general Community guidelines;
    • a summary description of the measures planned to implement the priorities and required to prepare, monitor and evaluate the CIP;
    • an indicative financing plan for each priority and each year;
    • the provisions for implementing the CIP: the authorities and structures set up (managing authority, monitoring committee and, where applicable, paying authority and steering committee); arrangements for managing the CIP (calls for proposals, selection of operations); arrangements for financial control, monitoring, checks and evaluation.

    The selected authorities must present their Community Initiative programmes to the Commission within six months following the publication of the Communication. Within three months of the approval of the programmes, a programming complement must be sent to the Commission, unless the Member State opts to apply for a global Community grant.

    Monitoring, implementation and evaluation of interventions

    The managing authority is responsible for organising the preparation of decisions to be taken by the monitoring committee and, where the steering committee. In particular, it accepts, considers and gives a preliminary assessment of operations proposed for financing or coordinates such tasks.

    The monitoring committee, which meets at least once each year, is made up of representatives of the local, and possibly also the national and regional, authorities, the economic and social partners and non-governmental organisations. The committee is responsible, in particular, for monitoring and evaluating the programme and making changes to it.

    For more information, please see the specific page dedicated to the Urban II Community Initiative on the Internet site of the Directorate-General for Regional Policy.

    4) Implementing Measures

    Initially, the Commission had planned to support some 50 urban areas, but in the end 70 were selected. For more information, please see the press releases covering the approvals of all the programmes.

    5) Follow-Up Work

    Commission Communication of 14.06.2002 to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on “The programming of the Structural Funds 2000-2006: An initial assessment of the Urban Initiative” [COM(2002)308 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

    Urban issues are assuming increasing political importance in the European Union. The Urban approach teaches a number of lessons for the future of European policy: an integrated approach, focusing on relatively small areas, with some flexibility in the selection of areas according to national requirements and priorities, with simplified and flexible administration and local partnership.

    Unaccompanied minors who are nationals of third countries

    Leave a reply

    Unaccompanied minors who are nationals of third countries

    Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Unaccompanied minors who are nationals of third countries

    Topics

    These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

    Other

    Unaccompanied minors who are nationals of third countries

    1) Objective

    To establish guidelines for the treatment of unaccompanied minors, with regard to matters such as the conditions for their reception, stay and return and, in the case of asylum seekers, the handling of applicable procedures.

    2) Community Measure

    Council Resolution 97/C 221/03 of 26 June 1997 on unaccompanied minors who are nationals of third countries.

    3) Content

    1. This Resolution concerns third-country nationals below the age of eighteen, who arrive on the territory of the Member States unaccompanied by an adult responsible for them whether by law or custom, and for as long as they are not effectively in the care of such a person.

    2. This Resolution does not apply to third-country nationals who are members of the family of nationals of a Member State of the European Union, nor to nationals of a Member State of the European Free Trade Association party to the Agreement on the European Economic Area and the members of their family, whatever the latter’s nationality may be, where, pursuant to the Treaty establishing the European Community or the Agreement on the European Economic Area respectively, rights to freedom of movement are being exercised.

    3. Member States may, in accordance with their national legislation and practice, refuse admission at the frontier to unaccompanied minors in particular if they are without the required documentation and authorizations. However, in the case of unaccompanied minors who apply for asylum, the Resolution on Minimum Guarantees for Asylum Procedures is applicable, in particular the principles set out in paragraphs 23 to 25 thereof.

    4. In this connection, Member States should take appropriate measures, in accordance with their national legislation, to prevent the unauthorized entry of unaccompanied minors and should cooperate to prevent illegal entry and illegal residence of unaccompanied minors on their territory.

    5. Unaccompanied minors who, pursuant to national provisions, must remain at the border until a decision has been taken on their admission to the territory or on their return, should receive all necessary material support and care to satisfy their basic needs, such as food, accommodation suitable for their age, sanitary facilities and medical care.

    6. Member States should endeavour to establish a minor’s identity as soon as possible after arrival, and also the fact that he or she is unaccompanied. Information on the minor’s identity and situation can be obtained by various means, in particular by means of an appropriate interview, which should be conducted as soon as possible and in a manner in keeping with his age.

    7. Every unaccompanied minor should have the right to apply for asylum. However, Member States may reserve the right to require that a minor under a certain age, to be determined by the Member State concerned, cannot apply for asylum until he has the assistance of a legal guardian, a specifically appointed adult representative or institution.

    8. Where a minor is not allowed to prolong his stay in a Member State, the Member State concerned may only return the minor to his country of origin or a third country prepared to accept him, if on arrival therein – depending on his needs in the light of age and degree of independence – adequate reception and care are available. This can be provided by parents or other adults who take care of the child, or by governmental or non-governmental bodies.

    9. Member States should take account of these guidelines in the case of all proposals for changes to their national legislations. In addition, Member States should strive to bring their national legislations into line with these guidelines before 1 January 1999.

    4) Deadline For The Implementation Of The Legislation In The Member States

    5) Date Of Entry Into Force

    6) References

    Official Journal C 221 of 19.7.1997

    7) Follow-Up Work

    8) Commission Implementing Measures