(1)

Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto.

(2)

In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation,

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 provides for the authorisation of additives for use in animal nutrition in the European Union.

(2)

Article 25 of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 lays down the transitional measures for applications for authorisation of feed additives submitted in accordance with Directive 70/524/EEC before the date of application of that Regulation.

(3)

The applications for authorisation of additives listed in the annexes to this Regulation were submitted before the date of application of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003.

(4)

Initial comments by Member States on these applications were issued under Article 4(4) of Directive 70/524/EEC and have been forwarded to the Commission before the date of application of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003. Such applications therefore shall continue to be treated in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 70/524/EEC.

(5)

The use of the enzyme preparation of alpha-amylase and endo-1,3(4)-beta-glucanase produced by Bacillus amyloliquefaciens (DSM 9553) was provisionally authorised, for the first time, for chickens for fattening, by Commission Regulation (EC) No 654/2000 (3).

(6)

New data were submitted in support of the application for authorisation without a time limit of this enzyme preparation.

(7)

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) delivered a favourable opinion on the toxin producing potential of the micro-organism producing this enzyme preparation dated 15 September 2004.

(8)

The assessment shows that the conditions laid down in Article 3a of Directive 70/524/EEC for such authorisation are satisfied.

(9)

The use of the enzyme preparation of endo-1,3(4)-beta-glucanase produced by Aspergillus aculeatus (CBS 589.94), endo-1,4-beta-glucanase produced by Trichoderma longibrachiatum (CBS 592.94), alpha-amylase produced by Bacillus amyloliquefaciens (DSM 9553), bacillolysin produced by Bacillus amyloliquefaciens (DSM 9554) and endo-1,4-beta-xylanase produced by Trichoderma viride (NIBH FERM BP 4842) was provisionally authorised, for chickens for fattening, by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2437/2000 (4).

(10)

New data were submitted in support of the application for authorisation without a time limit of this enzyme preparation.

(11)

The assessment shows that the conditions laid down in Article 3a of Directive 70/524/EEC for such authorisation are satisfied.

(12)

The use of the enzyme preparation of endo-1,3(4)-beta-glucanase produced by Aspergillus aculeatus (CBS 589.94), endo-1,4-beta-glucanase produced by Trichoderma longibrachiatum (CBS 592.94), alpha-amylase produced by Bacillus amyloliquefaciens (DSM 9553) and endo-1,4-beta-xylanase produced by Trichoderma viride (NIBH FERM BP 4842) was provisionally authorised, for chickens for fattening, by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2437/2000.

(13)

New data were submitted in support of the application for authorisation without a time limit of this enzyme preparation.

(14)

The assessment shows that the conditions laid down in Article 3a of Directive 70/524/EEC for such authorisation are satisfied.

(15)

The use of the enzyme preparation of endo-1,3(4)-beta-glucanase and endo-1,4-beta-xylanase produced by Trichoderma longibrachiatum (CBS 357.94) was provisionally authorised for the first time for chickens for fattening, by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1436/98 (5).

(16)

New data were submitted in support of the application for authorisation without a time limit of this enzyme preparation.

(17)

The assessment shows that the conditions laid down in Article 3a of Directive 70/524/EEC for such authorisation are satisfied.

(18)

Accordingly, the use of those four enzyme preparations as specified in Annex I, should be authorised without a time limit.

(19)

The use of the substance ‘tartrazine’ was provisionally authorised, as colourant for grain-eating ornamental birds and small rodents, by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2697/2000 (6).

(20)

New data were submitted in support of the application for authorisation without a time limit of this colourant.

(21)

The assessment shows that the conditions laid down in Article 3a of Directive 70/524/EEC for such authorisation are satisfied.

(22)

The use of the substance ‘sunset yellow FCF’, was provisionally authorised, as colourant, for grain-eating ornamental birds and small rodents, by Regulation (EC) No 2697/2000.

(23)

New data were submitted in support of the application for authorisation without a time limit of this colourant.

(24)

The assessment shows that the conditions laid down in Article 3a of Directive 70/524/EEC for such authorisation are satisfied.

(25)

The use of the substance ‘patent blue V’, was provisionally authorised, as colourant, for grain-eating ornamental birds and small rodents, by Regulation (EC) No 2697/2000.

(26)

New data were submitted in support of the application for authorisation without a time limit of this colourant.

(27)

The assessment shows that the conditions laid down in Article 3a of Directive 70/524/EEC for such authorisation are satisfied.

(28)

The use of the substance chlorophyll copper complex was provisionally authorised as coulourant, for grain-eating ornamental birds and small rodents, by Regulation (EC) No 2697/2000.

(29)

New data were submitted in support of the application for authorisation without a time limit of this colourant.

(30)

The assessment shows that the conditions laid down in Article 3a of Directive 70/524/EEC for such authorisation are satisfied.

(31)

Accordingly, the use of those four colourants as specified in Annex II, should be authorised without a time limit.

(32)

The use of the enzyme preparation of endo-1(4)-beta- xylanase produced by Bacillus subtilis (LMG-15136) is authorised for chickens for fattening without a time limit by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1259/2004 (7), and provisionally for piglets by Commission Regulation (EC) No 937/2001 (8), for turkeys for fattening by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2188/2002 (9), and for pigs for fattening by Commission Regulation (EC) No 261/2003 (10).

(33)

New data were submitted in support of an application to extend the authorisation of the use of this enzyme preparation to laying hens.

(34)

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has delivered an opinion on the use of this preparation which concludes that it does not present a risk for this additional animal category, under the conditions set out in Annex III to this Regulation.

(35)

The assessment shows that the conditions laid down in Article 9e(1) of Directive 70/524/EEC for an authorisation of such preparation for that use have been satisfied.

(36)

The use of the enzyme preparation of 3-phytase produced by Trichoderma reesei (CBS 528.94) is authorised for chickens for fattening by Commission Regulation (EC) No 418/2001 (11).

(37)

New data were submitted in support of an application to extend the authorisation of the use of this enzyme preparation to turkeys for fattening and sows.

(38)

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has delivered an opinion on the use of this preparation which concludes that it do not present a risk for these additional animal categories, under the conditions set out in Annex III to this Regulation.

(39)

Accordingly, the use of these two enzyme preparations as specified in Annex III, should be provisionally authorised for four years.

(40)

The use of the micro-organism preparation of Enterococcus faecium is authorised for calves without a time limit by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1288/2004 (12) and provisionally until 30 June 2004, for chickens for fattening, piglets, pigs for fattening, sows, and cattle for fattening by Commission Regulation (EC) No 866/1999 (13).

(41)

New data were submitted in support of an application to extend the authorisation of the use of this micro-organism preparation to dogs and cats.

(42)

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has delivered an opinion on the use of this preparation which concludes that it does not present a risk for this additional animal category, under the conditions set out in Annex IV to this Regulation.

(43)

The assessment shows that the conditions laid down in Article 9e(1) of Directive 70/524/EEC for an authorisation of such preparation for that use have been satisfied.

(44)

Accordingly, the use of this micro-organism preparation as specified in Annex IV, should be provisionally authorised for four years.

(45)

The assessment of these applications shows that certain procedures should be required to protect workers from exposure to the additives set out in the Annexes. Such protection should be assured by the application of Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work (14).

(46)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health.

(1)

According to Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 2826/2000, in the absence of information programmes referred to in Article 2(c) of that Regulation presented by professional or inter-professional organisations, each interested Member State shall draw up its specification and select the implementation body for the programme it undertakes to part-finance.

(2)

The dates for the submission of programmes initiated by the Member States in accordance with Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 2826/2000 are laid down in Article 8 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 94/2002 (2). They should be brought into line with the dates set for the submission of programmes proposed by professional and inter-professional organisations, referred to in Article 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 94/2002.

(3)

The dates laid down for the Commission’s decision on programmes referred to in Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 2826/2000 should be aligned with the dates set for the Commission’s decisions on programmes proposed by professional and inter-professional organisations, referred to in Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 94/2002. Those decisions should be adopted in accordance with Article 6(4) of Regulation (EC) No 2826/2000.

(4)

Regulation (EC) No 94/2002 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(5)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion delivered at the meeting of the joint management committee for the promotion of agricultural products,

1.

Article 7(3) is amended as follows:

2.

Article 8 is replaced by the following:

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1623/2000 of 25 July 2000 laying down detailed rules for implementing Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 on the common organisation of the market in wine with regard to market mechanisms (2), lays down, among other things, detailed rules for disposing of stocks of alcohol obtained from distillation pursuant to Articles 27, 28 and 30 of Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 and held by the intervention agencies.

(2)

Public sales of wine alcohol for use in the fuel sector in the Community should be organised in accordance with Articles 92 and 93 of Regulation (EC) No 1623/2000 with a view to reducing Community stocks of wine alcohol and to some extent ensuring supplies to firms approved in accordance with Article 92 of Regulation (EC) No 1623/2000. The wine alcohol of Community origin in storage in the Member States consists of quantities produced from distillation in accordance with Articles 35, 36 and 39 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 of 16 March 1987 on the common organisation of the market in wine (3), and in accordance with Articles 27, 28 and 30 of Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999.

(3)

Since 1 January 1999, in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 2799/98 of 15 December 1998 establishing agrimonetary arrangements for the euro (4), the selling price and securities must be expressed, and payments made, in euro.

(4)

Given that there are risks of fraud by substitution of alcohol, checks on the final destination of the alcohol should be reinforced and the intervention agencies should be allowed to call on the help of international control agencies and to check the alcohol sold by means of nuclear magnetic resonance analyses.

(5)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Wine,

Commission of the European Communities

Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, Unit D-2

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 200

B-1049 Brussels

Fax (32-2) 298 55 28

E-mail: agri-d2@cec.eu.int

(a)

apply Article 102 of Regulation (EC) No 1623/2000, mutatis mutandis;

(b)

carry out checks on samples using nuclear magnetic resonance analysis to verify the nature of the alcohol at the time of end-use.

(1)

Directive 2000/29/EC provides for certain measures against the introduction into the Member States from other Member States or third countries of organisms which are harmful to plants or plant products. It also provides for certain zones to be designed as protection zones.

(2)

Due to a clerical error in the 2003 Act of Accession, the list of counties in Sweden recognised as a protected zone in respect of Leptinotarsa decemlineata Say was incorrect and needs to be rectified.

(3)

From information supplied by Denmark, that Member State should no longer be recognised as a protected zone in respect of Beet necrotic yellow vein virus as it appears that that harmful organism is now established in Denmark.

(4)

From information supplied by the United Kingdom, it appears that Dendroctonus micans Kugelan is now established in some parts of the United Kingdom. Accordingly, the protected zone in respect of Dendroctonus micans Kugelan should be restricted to Northern Ireland. In addition, the protected zone in respect of that organism should also be restricted to the Isle of Man and Jersey.

(5)

From information supplied by Estonia, it appears that Erwinia amylovora (Burr.) Winsl. et al. is not present in that Member State. Estonia may therefore be recognised as a protected zone for that organism.

(6)

From information supplied by Italy and from additional information collected by the Food and Veterinary Office during a mission in Italy in May 2004, it appears that Citrus tristeza virus is now established in that Member State. Italy should therefore no longer be recognised as a protected zone in respect of Citrus tristeza virus.

(7)

From the Swiss legislation on plant protection, it appears that the Canton of Ticino is no longer recognised as a protected zone for Erwinia amylovora (Burr.) Winsl. et al. in Switzerland. The rules on imports to the Community should be adjusted to remove special treatment given to plants originating in Ticino.

(8)

Due to a clerical error in the preparation of Commission Directive 2004/31/EC (2), the special requirements for the introduction and movement of Vitis plants in Cyprus as laid down in point 21.1 of Part B of Annex IV to Directive 2000/29/EC were erroneously deleted. Accordingly, that Annex should be amended.

(9)

In order to enhance the phytosanitary protection of the Community seeds of Medicago sativa L. and the Community certified seeds of Helianthus annuus L., Lycopersicon lycopersicum (L.) Karsten ex Farw. and Phaseolus L., those seeds need to be accompanied by a plant passport when moving, other than locally, within the Community.

(10)

The relevant Annexes to Directive 2000/29/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.

(11)

The measures provided for in this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plant Health,

(1)

Under Commission Directive 92/105/EEC of 3 December 1992 establishing a degree of standardisation for plant passports to be used for the movement of certain plants, plant products or other objects within the Community, and establishing the detailed procedures related to the issuing of such plant passports and the conditions and detailed procedures for their replacement (2), certain detailed procedures relating to the issuing of plant passports have been established.

(2)

New provisions should be introduced considering the labels issued in accordance with Community provisions applicable to the marketing of some officially certified seed meeting the relevant requirements of Directive 2000/29/EC, to be plant passports.

(3)

It appeared that many Member States already use labels without the indication ‘EC-plant passport’ for the coming season 2004 to 2005. It is appropriate to lay down rules for the use of labels during a transitional period.

(4)

Directive 92/105/EEC provides that the plant passports are to contain certain information including the wording ‘EEC plant passport’. Since the adoption of the Treaty on European Union, the Community is now known as the ‘European Community’, with the corresponding abbreviation ‘EC’, so that wording should be amended to ‘EC plant passport’.

(5)

Directive 92/105/EEC should therefore be amended accordingly.

(6)

The system using the above labels should be reviewed by 31 December 2006 to take into account the experiences gained.

(7)

The measures provided for in this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plant Health,

1.

Article 1(2) is amended as follows:

2.

Article 4 is deleted.

3.

In the Annex, point 1 is replaced by the following:

(1)

From information supplied by the Czech Republic, Denmark, Greece (as far as Crete and Lesvos are concerned), Ireland, Sweden and the United Kingdom (including the Channel Islands but not the Isle of Man), it appears that Cryphonectria parasitica (Murrill) Barr. is not present in the territory of these countries. Therefore these countries should be recognised as protected zones for Cryphonectria parasitica (Murrill) Barr.

(2)

From information supplied by Denmark based on updated surveys, Denmark should no longer be recognised as a protected zone in respect of Beet necrotic yellow vein virus as it appears that this harmful organism is now established in Denmark.

(3)

From information supplied by Estonia based on updated surveys, it appears that Erwinia amylovora (Burr.) Winsl. et al. is not present in the territory of Estonia. Therefore, Estonia should be recognised temporarily as a protected zone for this organism.

(4)

From information supplied by the United Kingdom based on updated surveys for the presence of Dendroctonus micans Kugelan, it appears that this harmful organism is now established in some parts of the United Kingdom but not in Northern Ireland, nor in the Isle of Man or Jersey. The protected zone should therefore be modified and restricted to Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man and Jersey.

(5)

From information supplied by Italy based on updated surveys and from additional information collected by the Food and Veterinary Office during a mission in Italy in May 2004, it appears that this harmful organism is now established in this country. Italy should therefore no longer be recognised as a protected zone in respect of Citrus tristeza virus (CTV).

(6)

From information supplied by Sweden, it appears that some names of counties in Sweden recognised as protected zone for Leptinotarsa decemlineata may need to be corrected typographically.

(7)

Directive 2001/32/EC (2) should therefore be amended accordingly.

(8)

The measures provided for in this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plant Health,

1.

at the end of Article 1 the following paragraph is added:

‘In the case of point (b)(2) of the Annex, the said zone in Estonia is recognised until 31 March 2007.’;

2.

the Annex is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Directive.