<s>[INST] The next text is a question of a member of the European parliament:"With reference to MrByrne's answer to Written Question E-3071/01(1), it is true to say that microfiltration is an advanced technology when practised in dairies, as it is used there for special purposes, e.g. to separate certain milk fractions.  It is not true, however, to say that microfiltration is used only by industry and requires expensive equipment. It is possible to buy all the technology needed to separate the somatic cells in raw milk on a producer's holding for as little as EUR 1 500. Simple technology requiring no specialist know-how suffices, and a wide selection is available via the internet. The technology quickly pays for itself in the case of suppliers producing as little as 100 litres of milk per day, and even more quickly in the case of those who produce large quantities of milk. If technology is used to reduce the cell count of raw milk before it is delivered to dairies, suppliers get more money for their milk than is warranted by its actual quality. This is because they remove the measurable parameter for the cell count before the raw milk is sampled. And they are doing so to the detriment of honest suppliers.  Such suppliers are also circumventing the rules on limit values for raw milk which may be supplied pursuant to Directive 92/46/EEC(2) (Annex A, Chapter IV). They can avoid a possible supply ban, which would mean financial losses for suppliers.  It is extremely difficult to prove that microfiltration has been carried out on the farm, as small devices are used which can be used when needed and are easily removed. Milk suppliers mostly use microfiltration equipment only during a milking period. Otherwise, the cell count would be too low, as microfiltration can reduce the cell count by up to 80 %. However, even if it is possible to prove that microfiltration is being used, dairies have scarcely any grounds for action if its use is not expressly prohibited by law.  The issue is not microfiltration at milk-processing establishments, where its use is of course justified and is often required to ensure high-quality products.  The issue here is the introduction of an explicit ban on the use of microfiltration on production holdings, so that milk must be delivered in an unaltered state to milk-processing establishments.  Will the Commission provide an answer regarding this matter and do its utmost to stop the use of microfiltration on production holdings?    (1)See page 1.  (2)OJ L 268, 14.9.1992, p. 1."
Analyze carefully the text and assign it to the most relevant policy area among those listed below. Do not explain your answer and return only a number.
Policy area numbers: 1 = Macroeconomics
2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties
3 = Health
4 = Agriculture and Fisheries
5 = Labour, employment and pensions
6 = Education
7 = Environment
8 = Energy
9 = Immigration
10 = Transportation
12 = Law and Crime
13 = Social welfare
14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning
15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues
16 = Defence
17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues
18 = Foreign trade
19 = International affairs and foreign aid
20 = Governance and government
21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues
23 = Culture and media
[/INST]. Answer = [4]. </s>
With reference to MrByrne's answer to Written Question E-3071/01(1), it is true to say that microfiltration is an advanced technology when practised in dairies, as it is used there for special purposes, e.g. to separate certain milk fractions.  It is not true, however, to say that microfiltration is used only by industry and requires expensive equipment. It is possible to buy all the technology needed to separate the somatic cells in raw milk on a producer's holding for as little as EUR 1 500. Simple technology requiring no specialist know-how suffices, and a wide selection is available via the internet. The technology quickly pays for itself in the case of suppliers producing as little as 100 litres of milk per day, and even more quickly in the case of those who produce large quantities of milk. If technology is used to reduce the cell count of raw milk before it is delivered to dairies, suppliers get more money for their milk than is warranted by its actual quality. This is because they remove the measurable parameter for the cell count before the raw milk is sampled. And they are doing so to the detriment of honest suppliers.  Such suppliers are also circumventing the rules on limit values for raw milk which may be supplied pursuant to Directive 92/46/EEC(2) (Annex A, Chapter IV). They can avoid a possible supply ban, which would mean financial losses for suppliers.  It is extremely difficult to prove that microfiltration has been carried out on the farm, as small devices are used which can be used when needed and are easily removed. Milk suppliers mostly use microfiltration equipment only during a milking period. Otherwise, the cell count would be too low, as microfiltration can reduce the cell count by up to 80 %. However, even if it is possible to prove that microfiltration is being used, dairies have scarcely any grounds for action if its use is not expressly prohibited by law.  The issue is not microfiltration at milk-processing establishments, where its use is of course justified and is often required to ensure high-quality products.  The issue here is the introduction of an explicit ban on the use of microfiltration on production holdings, so that milk must be delivered in an unaltered state to milk-processing establishments.  Will the Commission provide an answer regarding this matter and do its utmost to stop the use of microfiltration on production holdings?    (1)See page 1.  (2)OJ L 268, 14.9.1992, p. 1.