Directive 2008/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the CouncilDangos y teitl llawn

Directive 2008/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council

of 20 February 2008

amending Directive 97/67/EC with regard to the full accomplishment of the internal market of Community postal services

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 47(2), Articles 55 and 95 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee(1),

Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions(2),

Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 251 of the Treaty(3),

Whereas:

(1) The Council in its Resolution of 7 February 1994 on the development of Community Postal Services(4) identified as one of the main objectives of Community postal policy the reconciling of the gradual, controlled opening to competition of the postal market with a sustainable guarantee of the provision of the universal service.

(2) Directive 97/67/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 1997 on common rules for the development of the internal market of Community postal services and the improvement of quality of service(5) established a regulatory framework for the postal sector at Community level, including measures to guarantee a universal service and the setting of maximum limits for the postal services which Member States may reserve to their universal service provider(s) with a view to the maintenance of the universal service, to be reduced in a gradual and progressive manner, and a timetable for decision-making on the further opening of the market to competition, for the purposes of creating an internal market in postal services.

(3) Article 16 of the Treaty highlights the place occupied by services of general economic interest in the shared values of the European Union as well as their role in promoting social and territorial cohesion. It states that care should be taken that such services operate on the basis of principles and conditions which enable them to fulfil their missions.

(4) The positive role played by services of general economic interest was emphasised by Special Eurobarometer 219 of October 2005 which indicated that postal services are the most appreciated services of general economic interest according to users throughout the EU, with 77 % of people questioned responding positively.

(5) Since they constitute an essential instrument for communication and information exchange, postal services fulfil a vital role which contributes to the objectives of social, economic and territorial cohesion in the Union. Postal networks have important territorial and social dimensions which make universal access to essential local services possible.

(6) The measures in the area of postal services should be designed in such a way that the tasks of the Community pursuant to Article 2 of the Treaty, namely, to promote throughout the Community a harmonious, balanced and sustainable development of economic activities, a high level of employment and of social protection, sustainable and non-inflationary growth, a high degree of competitiveness and convergence of economic performance, the raising of the standard of living and quality of life, and economic and social cohesion and solidarity among Member States, are achieved as objectives.

(7) European postal markets have undergone dramatic change in recent years, a development that has been driven by technological advancements and increased competition resulting from deregulation. Due to globalisation, it is essential to take a pro-active and pro-development stance so as not to deprive Union citizens of the benefits of such change.

(8) In its Conclusions concerning the mid-term review of the Lisbon Strategy the European Council of 22 and 23 March 2005 re-stated the importance of completing the internal market as an instrument to foster growth and create more and better jobs, and the important role that effective services of general economic interest have to play in a competitive and dynamic economy. These Conclusions remain applicable to postal services as an essential instrument of communication, trade, and social and territorial cohesion.

(9) The European Parliament Resolution of 2 February 2006 on the application of the Postal Directive(6) highlighted the social and economic importance of efficient postal services and their important role within the framework of the Lisbon Strategy, indicating that reform measures undertaken so far have brought about significant positive developments in the postal sector, along with increased quality, more efficiency and better user-orientation. In its Resolution, the European Parliament called on the Commission, in view of the sometimes perceptibly divergent developments in universal service obligations in the Member States, to concentrate in particular, when drawing up its prospective study, on the quality of the universal service provided and on its future funding and to propose, in the context of that study, a definition, scope and appropriate financing for the universal service.

(10) In accordance with Directive 97/67/EC, a prospective study assessing, for each Member State, the impact on universal service of the full accomplishment of the internal market of Community postal services in 2009 has been carried out. The Commission has also undertaken a thorough review of the Community postal sector, including the commissioning of studies on the economic, social and technological developments in the sector, and has consulted extensively with interested parties.

(11) The prospective study states that the basic aim of ensuring the sustainable provision of a universal service matching the standard of quality defined by the Member States in accordance with Directive 97/67/EC can be secured throughout the Community by 2009 without the need for a reserved area.

(12) The progressive and gradual opening of postal markets to competition has provided universal service providers with sufficient time to put in place the necessary modernisation and restructuring measures required to ensure their long-term viability under new market conditions, and enabled Member States to adapt their regulatory systems to a more open environment. Furthermore, Member States may avail themselves of the opportunity offered by the transposition period, and the substantial time necessary for the introduction of effective competition, in order to proceed with further modernisation and restructuring of the universal service providers as necessary.

(13) The prospective study shows that the reserved area should no longer be the preferred solution for the financing of the universal service. This assessment takes into account the interest of the Community and its Member States in the accomplishment of the internal market and its potential for delivering growth and employment, as well as ensuring the availability of an efficient service of general economic interest for all users. It is therefore appropriate to confirm the final date for the accomplishment of the internal market for postal services.

(14) There are a number of drivers of change within the postal sector, notably demand and changing user needs, organisational change, automation and the introduction of new technologies, substitution by electronic means of communication and the opening of the market. In order to meet competition, cope with new consumer requirements and secure new sources of funding, postal service providers may diversify their activities by providing electronic business services or other information society services.

(15) Postal service providers, including the designated universal service providers, are being spurred on to improve efficiency as a result of new competitive challenges (such as digitalisation and electronic communications) which differ from the traditional postal services and this will in itself contribute to a major increase in competitiveness.

(16) Complete market-opening will help to expand the overall size of the postal markets. It will further contribute to maintaining sustainable and quality employment within universal service providers as well as facilitate the creation of new jobs in other operators, new entrants and associated economic sectors. This Directive is without prejudice to the competence of Member States to regulate employment conditions in the postal services sector, which should not, however, lead to unfair competition. Social considerations should be taken into due account when preparing the opening up of the postal market.

(17) Transport alone should not be considered as a postal service. Direct mail consisting solely of advertising, marketing or publicity material and comprising an identical message, except for the addressee's name, address and identifying number, may be considered as an item of correspondence.

(18) Increased competitiveness should furthermore enable the postal sector to be integrated with alternative methods of communication and allow the quality of the service provided to evermore demanding users to be improved.

(19) Rural postal networks, in, inter alia, mountain and island regions, play an important role in integrating businesses into the national/global economy and in maintaining cohesion in social and employment terms. Furthermore, rural postal points in remote regions can provide an important infrastructure network for access to new electronic communications services.

(20) Developments in the neighbouring communications markets have had a varied impact in different regions of the Community and segments of the population and on the use of postal services. Territorial and social cohesion should be maintained, and taking into account that Member States may adapt some specific service features to accommodate local demand by making use of the flexibility provided for in Directive 97/67/EC, it is appropriate to fully maintain the universal service and the associated quality requirements set out in Directive 97/67/EC. It is appropriate to clarify, in line with existing practice, that Member States should provide clearance and delivery of mail only on the working days of the week that are not defined, by national legislation, as public holidays. In order to ensure that the opening of the market continues to benefit all users, in particular consumers and small and medium-sized enterprises, Member States should monitor and supervise market developments. They should take appropriate regulatory measures, available under Directive 97/67/EC, to ensure that accessibility to postal services continues to satisfy the needs of users, including, by ensuring, where appropriate, a minimum number of services at the same access point and, in particular, that there is an appropriate density of access points to postal services in rural and remote regions.

(21) The universal service guarantees, in principle, one clearance and one delivery to the home or premises of every natural or legal person every working day, even in remote or sparsely populated areas.

(22) The provision of high-quality postal services contributes significantly to attaining the objective of social and territorial cohesion. E-commerce, in particular, offers new opportunities for remote and sparsely populated areas to participate in economic life for which the provision of good postal services is an important precondition.

(23) Directive 97/67/EC established a preference for the provision of the universal service through the designation of universal service providers. Member States may require that the universal service be provided throughout the whole of the national territory. Greater competition and choice means that Member States should be given further flexibility to determine the most efficient and appropriate mechanism to guarantee the availability of the universal service, while respecting the principles of objectivity, transparency, non-discrimination, proportionality and least market distortion necessary to ensure the free provision of postal services in the internal market. Member States may apply one or a combination of the following: the provision of the universal service by market forces, the designation of one or several undertakings to provide different elements of the universal service or to cover different parts of the territory and public procurement of services. In the event that a Member State decides to designate one or more undertakings for the provision of the universal service, or for the provision of the various components of the universal service, it must be ensured that quality requirements pertaining to the universal service are imposed in a transparent and proportionate manner on the universal service providers. Where a Member State designates more than one undertaking, it should ensure that there is no overlap in the universal service obligations.

(24) It is important that users be fully informed of the universal services provided and that postal service providers be informed of the rights and obligations of universal service provider(s). Member States should ensure that users remain fully informed of the features and accessibility of the specific services provided. Member States should ensure that all such information is made available. It is however appropriate, in line with the enhanced flexibility given in favour of Member States, to ensure the provision of the universal service in ways other than the designation of the universal service provider(s), in order to give Member States the flexibility to decide how such information is to be made available to the public.

(25) In the light of the studies carried out and with a view to unlocking the full potential of the internal market for postal services, it is appropriate to end the use of the reserved area and special rights as a means of ensuring that the universal service is financed.

(26) The external financing of the residual net costs of the universal service may still be necessary for some Member States. It is therefore appropriate to explicitly clarify the alternatives available in order to ensure the financing of the universal service, to the extent that this is needed and is adequately justified, while leaving Member States the choice of the financing mechanisms to be used. These alternatives include the use of public procurement procedures including, as provided for in the public procurement Directives, competitive dialogue or negotiated procedures with or without the publication of a contract notice and, whenever universal service obligations entail net costs of the universal service and represent an unfair burden on the designated universal service provider, public compensation and cost sharing between service providers and/or users in a transparent manner by means of contributions to a compensation fund. Member States may use other means of financing permitted by Community law, such as deciding, where and if necessary, that the profits accruing from other activities of the universal service provider(s) outside the scope of the universal service are to be assigned, in whole or in part, to the financing of the net costs of the universal service, as long as this is in line with the Treaty. Without prejudice to the obligation of Member States to uphold the Treaty rules on State aid, including specific notification requirements in this context, Member States may notify the Commission of the financing mechanisms used to cover any net costs of the universal service, which should be reflected in the regular reports that the Commission should present to the European Parliament and Council on the application of Directive 97/67/EC.

(27) Postal service providers may be required to contribute to the financing of the universal service in cases where provision is made for a compensation fund. In order to determine which undertakings may be required to contribute to a compensation fund, Member States should consider whether the services provided by such undertakings may, from a user's perspective, be regarded as services falling within the scope of the universal service, as they display inter-changeability to a sufficient degree with the universal service, taking into account the characteristics of the services, including added value features, as well as the intended use and the pricing. These services do not necessarily have to cover all the features of the universal service, such as daily delivery or complete national coverage.

(28) In order to comply with the principle of proportionality when determining the contribution to be made to the costs of the provision of the universal service in a Member State required from these undertakings, Member States should use transparent and non-discriminatory criteria such as the share of these undertakings in the activities falling within the scope of the universal service in this Member State. Member States may require those providers which are required to contribute to a compensation fund to introduce appropriate accounting separation in order to ensure the functioning of the fund.

(29) The principles of transparency, non-discrimination and proportionality, as presently provided for in Directive 97/67/EC, should continue to be applied to any financing mechanism and any decision in this area should be based on transparent, objective and verifiable criteria. In particular, the net cost of the universal service should be calculated, under the supervision of the national regulatory authority, as the difference between the net costs of a designated universal service provider operating under a universal service obligation and not operating under a universal service obligation. The calculation should take into account all other relevant elements, including any market benefits which accrue to a postal service provider designated to provide universal service, the entitlement to a reasonable profit and incentives for cost efficiency.

(30) In cases where Member States decide to make accessible to the public, on their national territory, additional or complementary services, with the exception of those relating to the universal service obligations, as defined in this Directive, such as pensions and postal orders delivery in rural areas, these services should not be subject to any compensation mechanisms requiring the contribution of specific undertakings. Where appropriate, Member States may grant financing for such additional or complementary services in accordance with the Treaty rules on State aid. Except in the case of universal service provider(s), the authorisations may not be made subject to the obligation to provide such additional services.

(31) It is appropriate to provide Member States that have acceded to the Union after the entry into force of Directive 2002/39/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 June 2002 amending Directive 97/67/EC with regard to the further opening to competition of Community postal services(7) and may have faced particular difficulties regarding the smooth adaptation of their postal markets because they joined the postal reform process at a late stage, and certain Member States with a small population and a limited geographical size having specific characteristics that are particular to postal services or with a particularly difficult topography, with a huge number of islands with the possibility to postpone the implementation of this Directive for a limited period of time, in order to continue to reserve services to their universal service provider(s), subject to notification to the Commission. Taking into account the exceptional nature of such a possibility, it is also appropriate, within this limited period of time and for a limited number of services, to allow those Member States that have completely opened up their markets to refuse monopolies operating in another Member State authorisation to operate in their own territory.

(32) The Commission should provide assistance to the Member States on the different aspects of the implementation of this Directive, including on the calculation of any net cost. Moreover, cooperation between national regulatory authorities in continuing to develop benchmarks and guidance in this area should contribute to the harmonised application of this Directive.

(33) Member States should be allowed to use general authorisations and individual licences whenever justified and proportionate to the objective pursued. However, as highlighted by the Third report on the application of Directive 97/67/EC, further harmonisation of the conditions that may be introduced appears necessary in order to reduce unjustified barriers to the provision of services in the internal market. In this context, Member States may for example allow postal service providers to choose between the obligation to provide a service or to contribute financially to the costs of this service provided by another provider, but should no longer be allowed to impose concurrently a requirement to contribute to a sharing mechanism and universal service or quality obligations that are intended to serve the same purpose. It is also appropriate to clarify that some of the provisions on general authorisations and licensing should not apply to designated universal service providers.

(34) In an environment where several postal undertakings provide services within the universal service area, it is appropriate to require all Member States to assess whether some elements of the postal infrastructure or certain services generally provided by universal service providers should be made accessible to other operators providing similar services, in order to promote effective competition, and/or protect all users by ensuring the overall quality of the postal service. Where several universal service providers with regional postal networks exist, Member States should also assess and, where necessary, ensure their interoperability in order to prevent impediments to the prompt transport of postal items. As the legal and market situation of these elements or services is different among the Member States it is appropriate to only require Member States to adopt an informed decision on the need, extent and choice of the regulatory instrument, including where appropriate on cost sharing. This provision is without prejudice to the right of Member States to adopt measures to ensure access to the postal network under conditions of transparency and non-discrimination.

(35) Member States should ensure that postal service providers, when processing personal data pursuant to Directive 97/67/EC, apply Community and national provisions on the protection of personal data, in particular those laid down by Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data(8).

(36) The provisions of this Directive should be without prejudice to national provisions governing the expropriation conditions for organising the universal service provision.

(37) Given the importance of postal services for blind and partially-sighted persons, it is appropriate to confirm that the opening of the market should not prevent the continuing provision by the universal service provider(s) of certain free services for blind and partially-sighted persons introduced by the Member States in accordance with applicable international obligations.

(38) In a fully competitive environment, it is important, both for the financial equilibrium of the universal service as well as for limiting market distortions, that the principle that prices reflect normal commercial conditions and costs is only departed from in order to protect public interests. This objective should be achieved by continuing to allow Member States to maintain uniform tariffs for single piece tariff mail, the service most frequently used by consumers, including small and medium-sized enterprises. Member States may also maintain uniform tariffs for some other mail items, such as, for example, newspapers and books, to protect general public interests, such as access to culture, ensuring participation in a democratic society (freedom of press) or regional and social cohesion.

(39) For the provision of services for all users, including businesses, bulk mailers and consolidators of mail from different users, universal service providers may enjoy more price flexibility in line with the cost-orientation principle. Tariffs should take account of the avoided costs, as compared to the standard service covering the complete range of features offered for the clearance, sorting, transport and distribution of individual postal items.

(40) In view of the national specificities involved in the regulation of the conditions under which the incumbent universal service provider must operate in a fully competitive environment, it is appropriate to leave Member States the freedom to decide how best to monitor cross-subsidies.

(41) In view of the transition towards a fully competitive market, and in order to prevent cross-subsidies from adversely affecting competition, it is appropriate to continue to require Member States to maintain the obligation on universal service providers of keeping separate and transparent accounts, subject to necessary adaptations. This obligation should provide national regulatory authorities, competition authorities and the Commission with the information necessary to adopt decisions related to the universal service and to monitor fair market conditions until competition becomes effective. Cooperation between national regulatory authorities in continuing to develop benchmarks and guidelines in this area should contribute to the harmonised application of these rules. Keeping separate and transparent accounts should provide Member States and their national regulatory authorities with accounting information of sufficient detail to:

• adopt decisions related to the universal service,

• be used as an input when determining whether the universal service obligations imposed entail a net cost and represent an unfair financial burden on the universal service provider,

• ensure that the tariffs applied to the universal service comply with the principles on tariffs as set out in this Directive,

• ensure compliance with the principles on terminal dues as set out in this Directive; and,

• monitor fair market conditions until competition becomes effective.

(42) In line with existing rules in other service areas and in order to increase consumer protection, it is appropriate to extend the application of minimum principles concerning complaint procedures beyond universal service providers. With a view to increasing the effectiveness of complaint handling procedures, it is appropriate to encourage the use of out-of-court settlement procedures as set out in Commission Recommendation 98/257/EC of 30 March 1998 on the principles applicable to the bodies responsible for out-of-court settlement of consumer disputes(9) and Commission Recommendation 2001/310/EC of 4 April 2001 on the principle for out-of-court bodies involved in the consensual resolution of consumer disputes(10). Consumer interests would also be furthered through the enhanced inter-operability between operators resulting from access to certain elements of infrastructure and services, and the requirement for cooperation between national regulatory authorities and consumer protection bodies. In order to protect the interests of users in the event of theft or loss of, or damage to, postal items, Member States should introduce, where warranted, a system of reimbursement and/or compensation.

(43) Directive 97/67/EC provides that certain measures are to be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission(11).

(44) Decision 1999/468/EC has been amended by Decision 2006/512/EC, which introduced the regulatory procedure with scrutiny for the adoption of measures of general scope designed to amend non-essential elements of a basic instrument adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 of the Treaty, inter alia, by deleting some of those elements or by supplementing the instrument with new non-essential elements.

(45) In particular, the Commission should be empowered to adopt measures as regards future adjustment of quality-of-service standards to technical progress or market developments as well as of standardised conditions for independent performance monitoring by external bodies. Since those measures are of general scope and are designed to amend non-essential elements of Directive 97/67/EC, inter alia, by supplementing it with new non-essential elements, they must be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny provided for in Article 5a of Decision 1999/468/EC.

(46) The Committee assisting the Commission in accordance with Directive 97/67/EC should follow developments in the provision of the universal service in Member States.

(47) The role of national regulatory authorities is likely to remain crucial, in particular in those Member States where the transition to competition still needs to be completed. In accordance with the principle of separation of regulatory and operational functions, Member States should guarantee the independence of the national regulatory authorities, thereby ensuring the impartiality of their decisions. This requirement of independence is without prejudice to the institutional autonomy and constitutional obligations of the Member States and to the principle of neutrality with regard to the rules in Member States governing the system of property ownership laid down in Article 295 of the Treaty. National regulatory authorities should be provided with all necessary resources, in terms of staffing, expertise and financial means, for the performance of their tasks.

(48) Due to the frequent involvement of different national bodies in the exercise of regulatory functions, it is appropriate to introduce transparency in the allocation of tasks and require the different relevant bodies charged with sector regulation, the application of competition rules and with dealing with consumer issues to cooperate in order to ensure the effective accomplishment of their tasks.

(49) Any party which is the subject of a decision by a national regulatory authority should have the right to appeal to a body that is independent of that authority. This body may be a court. This appeal procedure is without prejudice to the division of competences within national judicial systems and to the rights of legal entities or natural persons under national law. Pending the conclusion of these procedures there is a need to ensure the temporary validity of national regulatory authorities' decisions in order to guarantee legal certainty and market security.

(50) National regulatory authorities should, where necessary, cooperate with other regulatory bodies of Member States and with the Commission in carrying out their tasks under Directive 97/67/EC. This would promote the development of the internal market for postal services and help to ensure the consistent application, in all Member States, of the provisions laid down by the Directive, in particular in areas where national law implementing Community law gives national regulatory authorities considerable discretionary powers in the application of the relevant rules. This cooperation could take place, inter alia, within the Committee assisting the Commission in accordance with the Directive or within a group comprising European regulators. Member States should decide which bodies are national regulatory authorities for the purposes of the Directive.

(51) National regulatory authorities need to gather information from market players in order to carry out their tasks effectively. Requests for information should be proportionate and not impose an undue burden on undertakings. Such information may also need to be gathered by the Commission in order to allow it to fulfil its obligations under Community law. The recipient of information should ensure confidentiality in accordance with the rules in force.

(52) In order to keep the European Parliament and the Council informed of developments in the internal market for postal services, the Commission should regularly submit reports to those institutions on the application of Directive 97/67/EC.

(53) This Directive does not affect labour law, that is any legal or contractual provision concerning employment conditions, working conditions, including health and safety at work and the relationship between employers and workers, which Member States apply in accordance with national law which is in conformity with Community law. Equally, this Directive does not affect the social security legislation of the Member States. Where necessary, Member States may reflect working conditions in their authorisation procedures in line with the principles of transparency and proportionality.

(54) Member States should ensure that sufficient access points are established that take account of the needs of users in rural and sparsely populated areas. Member States should ensure an appropriate density of access points in these areas in order to satisfy the universal service obligation.

(55) In order to maintain the framework for the regulation of the postal sector, the date of expiry of Directive 97/67/EC should be deleted. The provisions that have not been amended by this Directive continue to apply. The services that Member States may continue to reserve, during the implementation period, are those specified in Directive 97/67/EC.

(56) Since the objectives of this Directive, namely achieving an internal market of Community postal services, ensuring a common level of universal services for all users and setting harmonised principles for the regulation of postal services, cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale and effects, be better achieved at Community level, the Community may adopt measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.

(57) Directive 97/67/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.

(58) This Directive is consistent with other Community instruments concerning services. In the event of conflict between a provision of this Directive and a provision of another Community instrument, in particular Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market(12), the provisions of this Directive will prevail and will apply in full to the postal sector.

(59) This Directive is without prejudice to the application of the Treaty rules on competition and on the freedom to provide services. Insofar as mechanisms for the financing of the universal service involve aid granted by a Member State or through state aid resources in any form whatsoever within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty, this Directive is without prejudice to Member States' obligation to respect the Treaty rules on State aid.

(60) In accordance with point 34 of the Interinstitutional agreement on better law-making(13), Member States are encouraged to draw up, for themselves and in the interests of the Community, their own tables illustrating, as far as possible, the correlation between this Directive and the transposition measures, and to make them public,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:

(1)

OJ C 168, 20.7.2007, p. 74.

(2)

OJ C 197, 24.8.2007, p. 37. Opinion delivered following non-compulsory consultation.

(3)

Opinion of the European Parliament of 11 July 2007 (not yet published in the Official Journal), Council Common Position of 8 November 2007 (OJ C 307 E, 18.12.2007, p. 22) and Position of the European Parliament of 31 January 2008.

(4)

OJ C 48, 16.2.1994, p. 3.

(5)

OJ L 15, 21.1.1998, p. 14. Directive as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1882/2003 (OJ L 284, 31.10.2003, p. 1).

(6)

OJ C 288 E, 25.11.2006, p. 77.

(7)

OJ L 176, 5.7.2002, p. 21.

(8)

OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31. Directive as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1882/2003.

(9)

OJ L 115, 17.4.1998, p. 31.

(10)

OJ L 109, 19.4.2001, p. 56.

(11)

OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23. Decision as amended by Decision 2006/512/EC (OJ L 200, 22.7.2006, p. 11).

(12)

OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 36.

(13)

OJ C 321, 31.12.2003, p. 1.