(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)

Regulations (EC) No 1735/2005 (2), (EC) No 1740/2005 (3) and (EC) No 1750/2005 (4) establish the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables.

(2)

A check has revealed an error in the Annex to those Regulations. They should therefore be corrected.

(3)

Article 4(3) of Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 specifies that, where no standard import value is in force for a product for a given origin, the average of standard import values in force for that product shall apply. That average should therefore be recalculated if one of its component standard import values is corrected.

(4)

Application of the corrected standard import value must be requested by the party concerned so that they are not placed retroactively at a disadvantage,

(1)

In accordance with the provisions of Article 12 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2759/1999 of 22 December 1999 laying down rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1268/1999 on Community support for pre-accession measures for agriculture and rural development in the applicant countries of central and eastern Europe in the pre-accession period (1), ex-post evaluation of the Sapard programme must be carried out not later than three years after the end of the programming period.

(2)

It has to be ensured that these evaluations may still be carried out and financed after 2006, beyond the period of eligibility under Sapard in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 1268/1999 (2).

(3)

Article 3 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 447/2004 of 10 March 2004 laying down rules to facilitate the transition from support under Regulation (EC) No 1268/1999 to that provided for by Regulation (EC) Nos 1257/1999 and 1260/1999 for the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia and Slovakia (3) should, therefore, be amended to cover ex-post evaluations of the Sapard programme.

(4)

Regulation (EC) No 447/2004 should be amended accordingly.

(5)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Agricultural Structures and Rural Development,

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1422/95 of 23 June 1995 laying down detailed rules of application for imports of molasses in the sugar sector and amending Regulation (EEC) No 785/68 (2), stipulates that the cif import price for molasses established in accordance with Commission Regulation (EEC) No 785/68 (3), is to be considered the representative price. That price is fixed for the standard quality defined in Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 785/68.

(2)

For the purpose of fixing the representative prices, account must be taken of all the information provided for in Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 785/68, except in the cases provided for in Article 4 of that Regulation and those prices should be fixed, where appropriate, in accordance with the method provided for in Article 7 of that Regulation.

(3)

Prices not referring to the standard quality should be adjusted upwards or downwards, according to the quality of the molasses offered, in accordance with Article 6 of Regulation (EEC) No 785/68.

(4)

Where there is a difference between the trigger price for the product concerned and the representative price, additional import duties should be fixed under the terms laid down in Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1422/95. Should the import duties be suspended pursuant to Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1422/95, specific amounts for these duties should be fixed.

(5)

The representative prices and additional import duties for the products concerned should be fixed in accordance with Articles 1(2) and 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1422/95.

(6)

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

(1)

Article 27 of Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 provides that the difference between quotations or prices on the world market for the products listed in Article 1(1)(a) of that Regulation and prices for those products within the Community may be covered by an export refund.

(2)

Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 provides that when refunds on white and raw sugar, undenatured and exported in its unaltered state, are being fixed account must be taken of the situation on the Community and world markets in sugar and in particular of the price and cost factors set out in Article 28 of that Regulation. The same Article provides that the economic aspect of the proposed exports should also be taken into account.

(3)

The refund on raw sugar must be fixed in respect of the standard quality. The latter is defined in Annex I, point II, to Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001. Furthermore, this refund should be fixed in accordance with Article 28(4) of that Regulation. Candy sugar is defined in Commission Regulation (EC) No 2135/95 of 7 September 1995 laying down detailed rules of application for the grant of export refunds in the sugar sector (2). The refund thus calculated for sugar containing added flavouring or colouring matter must apply to their sucrose content and, accordingly, be fixed per 1 % of the said content.

(4)

In special cases, the amount of the refund may be fixed by other legal instruments.

(5)

The refund must be fixed every two weeks. It may be altered in the intervening period.

(6)

The first subparagraph of Article 27(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 provides that refunds on the products referred to in Article 1 of that Regulation may vary according to destination, where the world market situation or the specific requirements of certain markets make this necessary.

(7)

The significant and rapid increase in preferential imports of sugar from the western Balkan countries since the start of 2001 and in exports of sugar to those countries from the Community seems to be highly artificial.

(8)

To prevent any abuse through the re-import into the Community of sugar products in receipt of an export refund, no refund should be set for all the countries of the western Balkans for the products covered by this Regulation.

(9)

In view of the above and of the present situation on the market in sugar, and in particular of the quotations or prices for sugar within the Community and on the world market, refunds should be set at the appropriate amounts.

(10)

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

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1138/2005 of 15 July 2005 on a standing invitation to tender to determine levies and/or refunds on exports of white sugar (2), for the 2005/2006 marketing year, requires partial invitations to tender to be issued for the export of this sugar to certain third countries.

(2)

Pursuant to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1138/2005 a maximum export refund shall be fixed, as the case may be, account being taken in particular of the state and foreseeable development of the Community and world markets in sugar, for the partial invitation to tender in question.

(3)

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

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 936/97 provides in Articles 4 and 5 the conditions for applications and for the issue of import licences for meat referred to in Article 2(f).

(2)

Article 2(f) of Regulation (EC) No 936/97 fixes the amount of high-quality fresh, chilled or frozen beef and veal meeting the definition laid down therein which may be imported on special terms for the period 1 July 2005 to 30 June 2006 at 11 500 t.

(3)

It should be recalled that licences issued pursuant to this Regulation will, throughout the period of validity, be open for use only in so far as provisions on health protection in force permit,

(1)

An invitation to tender for the maximum reduction in the duty on maize imported into Portugal from third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1809/2005 (2).

(2)

Pursuant to Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 (3), the Commission, acting under the procedure laid down in Article 25 of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003, may decide to fix maximum reduction in the import duty. In fixing this maximum the criteria provided for in Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 must be taken into account. A contract is awarded to any tenderer whose tender is equal to or less than the maximum reduction in the duty.

(3)

The application of the abovementioned criteria to the current market situation for the cereal in question results in the maximum reduction in the import duty being fixed at the amount specified in Article 1.

(4)

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

(1)

Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 provides that the difference between quotations or prices on the world market for the products listed in Article 1 of that Regulation and prices for those products in the Community may be covered by an export refund.

(2)

The refunds must be fixed taking into account the factors referred to in Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules under Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (2).

(3)

As far as wheat and rye flour, groats and meal are concerned, when the refund on these products is being calculated, account must be taken of the quantities of cereals required for their manufacture. These quantities were fixed in Regulation (EC) No 1501/95.

(4)

The world market situation or the specific requirements of certain markets may make it necessary to vary the refund for certain products according to destination.

(5)

The refund must be fixed once a month. It may be altered in the intervening period.

(6)

It follows from applying the detailed rules set out above to the present situation on the market in cereals, and in particular to quotations or prices for these products within the Community and on the world market, that the refunds should be as set out in the Annex hereto.

(7)

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

(1)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of barley to certain third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1058/2005 (2).

(2)

In accordance with Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3), the Commission may, on the basis of the tenders notified, decide to fix a maximum export refund taking account of the criteria referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95. In that case a contract is awarded to any tenderer whose bid is equal to or lower than the maximum refund.

(3)

The application of the abovementioned criteria to the current market situation for the cereal in question results in the maximum export refund being fixed.

(4)

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

(1)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of oats produced in Finland and Sweden for export from Finland and Sweden to all third countries, with the exception of Bulgaria, Norway, Romania and Switzerland was opened pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1438/2005.

(2)

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95, a maximum refund should not be fixed.

(3)

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

(1)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of common wheat to certain third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1059/2005 (2).

(2)

In accordance with Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of 29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3), the Commission may, on the basis of the tenders notified, decide to fix a maximum export refund taking account of the criteria referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95. In that case a contract is awarded to any tenderer whose bid is equal to or lower than the maximum refund.

(3)

The application of the abovementioned criteria to the current market situation for the cereal in question results in the maximum export refund being fixed.

(4)

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

(1)

Pursuant to Article 28(3) of sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (2), hereinafter called ‘the sixth Directive’, the Member States may continue to exempt or tax certain transactions; these transactions must be taken into account for the determination of the VAT resources base.

(2)

For the application of the provisions in Article 28(3) of the sixth Directive, title 5, paragraph1 of Annex V (Taxation) to the Act of Accession of the Czech Republic to the European Communities (3) authorises the Czech Republic to exempt certain transactions listed in Annex F to the sixth Directive.

(3)

The Czech Republic is unable to make a precise calculation of the VAT own resources base for transactions listed in Annex F, point 17, to the sixth Directive; such calculation is likely to involve an unjustified administrative burden in relation to the effect of these transactions on the Czech Republic’s total VAT resources base; the Czech Republic is able to make a calculation using approximate estimates for this category of transaction listed in Annex F to the sixth Directive; the Czech Republic should therefore be authorised to calculate the VAT base using approximate estimates in accordance with the second indent of Article 6(3) of Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1553/89.

(4)

The Advisory Committee on Own Resources has approved the report recording the opinions of its members on this Decision,

1.

Passenger transport (Annex F, point 17).

(1)

Decision 90/424/EEC provides for the possibility of a financial contribution by the Community in the eradication and monitoring of animal diseases and for checks aimed at the prevention of zoonoses.

(2)

Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 laying down rules for the prevention, control and eradication of certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (2), provides for annual programmes for the eradication and monitoring of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) in bovine, ovine and caprine animals.

(3)

The Member States have submitted programmes for the eradication and monitoring of certain animal diseases, for the prevention of zoonoses and for the eradication and monitoring of TSEs in their territories.

(4)

After examination of those programmes they were found to comply with relevant Community veterinary legislation and in particular with the Community criteria relating to the eradication of those diseases, in accordance with Council Decision 90/638/EEC of 27 November 1990 laying down Community criteria for the eradication and monitoring of certain animal diseases (3).

(5)

Those programmes appear on the list of programmes established by Commission Decision 2005/723/EC of 14 October 2005 on programmes for the eradication and monitoring of animal diseases, of certain TSEs, and for the prevention of zoonoses, which qualify for a Community financial contribution in 2006 (4).

(6)

In the light of the importance of those programmes for the achievement of Community objectives in the field of animal and public health, as well as the obligatory application in all Member States in the case of the TSE programmes, it is appropriate to fix the appropriate rate of financial contribution of the Community to reimburse the costs to be incurred by the Member States concerned for the measures referred to in this Decision up to a maximum amount for each programme. For the sake of better management, more efficient use of Community funds and improved transparency it is necessary to fix also maximum amounts to be reimbursed to the Member States for the different tests, vaccines and compensation to owners for their losses due to the slaughter or culling of animals for each programme, where appropriate.

(7)

Pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No 1258/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (5), programmes for the monitoring and eradication of animal diseases are to be financed under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund; for financial control purposes, Articles 8 and 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1258/1999 apply.

(8)

The financial contribution from the Community should be granted subject to the condition that the actions planned are efficiently carried out and that the competent authorities supply all the necessary information within the time limits laid down in this Decision.

(9)

There is a need to clarify the rate to be used for the conversion of the payment applications submitted in national currency as defined in Article 1(d) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2799/98 of 15 December 1998 establishing agrimonetary arrangements for the euro (6).

(10)

The approval of some of the programmes should not prejudge a decision of the Commission on rules for eradication of those diseases based on scientific advice.

(11)

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

(1)

According to Article 29 of the Treaty on European Union, the European Union has set itself the objective to provide citizens with a high level of safety within an area of freedom, security and justice. This objective presupposes the exchange of information concerning criminal convictions of persons who reside in the territory of the Member States between the competent authorities of the Member States.

(2)

On 29 November 2000, the Council, in accordance with the conclusions of the Tampere European Council of 15 and 16 October 1999, adopted a programme of measures to implement the principle of mutual recognition in criminal matters (3). This Decision contributes to achieving the goals provided for by Measure 3 of the programme, which calls for the establishment of a standard form like that drawn up for the Schengen bodies, translated into all the official Union languages, for criminal records applications.

(3)

Articles 13 and 22 of the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters of 20 April 1959 (4) provide for systems for the transmission of information on convictions between the Contracting Parties, but they are too slow to meet the demands of judicial cooperation in an area such as that of the European Union.

(4)

The Final Report on the first evaluation exercise — mutual legal assistance in criminal matters (5), called on Member States to simplify the procedures for transferring documents between States, using, if necessary, standard forms to facilitate mutual judicial assistance.

(5)

On 25 March 2004, the European Council instructed the Council to examine measures on the exchange of information on convictions for terrorist offences and the possibility of a European register on convictions and disqualifications, and the Commission in its communication on measures to be taken to combat terrorism and other forms of serious crime, in particular to improve exchanges of information, stressed the importance of an effective mechanism for transmission of information on convictions and disqualifications.

(6)

This Decision respects the principle of subsidiarity referred to in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union and Article 5 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, since the improvement of systems for the transmission of information on convictions between Member States cannot be carried out adequately by the Member States unilaterally and requires coordinated action in the European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in the said Article 5, this Decision does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.

(7)

The improvement of systems for the transmission of information on convictions implies that convictions pronounced in a Member State against nationals of another Member State are known about by the latter Member State as soon as possible and that each Member State may obtain information which it needs from criminal records from other Member States within a very short time.

(8)

This Decision supplements and facilitates the existing mechanisms for the transmission of information on convictions based on existing conventions. In particular, the provisions concerning requests for information extracted from the criminal record do not replace the possibility available to the judicial authorities of transmitting information concerning criminal records direct to each other under Article 6(1) of the Convention on mutual assistance in criminal matters between the Member States of the European Union established by Council Act of 29 May 2000 (6). It provides, however, for a specific right for the central authority of a Member State to send a request for information extracted from the criminal record to the central authority of another Member State, in the circumstances determined by national law.

(9)

The personal data processed under this Decision will be protected in accordance with the principles enacted in the Council of Europe Convention of 28 January 1981 for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data.

(10)

Under Council of Europe Recommendation No R (84) 10 on the criminal record and rehabilitation of convicted persons, the main aim of establishment of the criminal record is to inform the authorities responsible for the criminal justice system of the background of a person subject to legal proceedings with a view to adapting the decision to be taken to the individual situation. Since all other use of the criminal record that might compromise the chances of social rehabilitation of the convicted person must be as limited as possible, the use of information transmitted under this Decision for use otherwise than in the course of criminal proceedings can be limited in accordance with the national legislation of the requested State and the requesting State.

(11)

This Decision respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union and restated by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

(12)

This Decision does not have the effect of obliging Member States to register convictions or information in criminal matters in their criminal record other than those which they are obliged to register according to national law.

(13)

This Decision does not apply to the transmission of rulings or copies thereof,