(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)

In accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 1898/2005 of 9 November 2005 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 as regards measures for the disposal of cream, butter and concentrated butter on the Community market (2), the intervention agencies may sell by standing invitation to tender certain quantities of butter from intervention stocks that they hold and may grant aid for cream, butter and concentrated butter. Article 25 of that Regulation lays down that in the light of the tenders received in response to each individual invitation to tender a minimum selling price shall be fixed for butter and maximum aid shall be fixed for cream, butter and concentrated butter. It is further laid down that the price or aid may vary according to the intended use of the butter, its fat content and the incorporation procedure. The amount of the processing security as referred to in Article 28 of Regulation (EC) No 1898/2005 should be fixed accordingly.

(2)

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

(1)

In accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 1898/2005 of 9 November 2005 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/99 as regards measures for the disposal of cream, butter and concentrated butter on the Community market (2), the intervention agencies may sell by standing invitation to tender certain quantities of butter of intervention stocks that they hold and may grant aid for cream, butter and concentrated butter. Article 25 of that Regulation lays down that in the light of the tenders received in response to each individual invitation to tender a minimum selling price shall be fixed for butter and maximum aid shall be fixed for cream, butter and concentrated butter. It is further laid down that the price or aid may vary according to the intended use of the butter, its fat content and the incorporation procedure. The amount of the processing security as referred to in Article 28 of Regulation (EC) No 1898/2005 should be fixed accordingly.

(2)

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

(1)

In accordance with Article 47 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1898/2005 of 9 November 2005 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 as regards measures for the disposal of cream, butter and concentrated butter on the Community market (2), the intervention agencies are opening a standing invitation to tender for the granting of aid for concentrated butter. Article 54 of that Regulation provides that in the light of the tenders received in response to each special invitation to tender, a maximum amount of aid is to be fixed for concentrated butter with a minimum fat content of 96 %.

(2)

An end-use security provided for in Article 53(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1898/2005 is to be lodged to ensure the taking over of the concentrated butter by the retail trade.

(3)

In the light of the tenders received, the maximum aid should be fixed at the appropriate level and the end-use security should be determined accordingly.

(4)

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

(1)

Pursuant to Article 21 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2771/1999 of 16 December 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 as regards intervention on the market in butter and cream (2), intervention agencies have put up for sale by standing invitation to tender certain quantities of butter held by them.

(2)

In the light of the tenders received in response to each individual invitation to tender a minimum selling price shall be fixed or a decision shall be taken to make no award, in accordance with Article 24a of Regulation (EC) No 2771/1999.

(3)

In the light of the tenders received, a minimum selling price should be fixed.

(4)

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

(1)

All pharmacologically active substances used in the Community in veterinary medicinal products intended for food-producing animals should be evaluated in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90.

(2)

The substance Ginseng is included in Annex II to Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 in the category of substances used in homeopathic veterinary medicinal products, for all food-producing species, for use only in homeopathic veterinary medicinal products prepared according to homeopathic pharmacopoeias at concentrations corresponding to the mother tincture, and dilutions thereof. Following the examination of an application, it is considered appropriate to include a new entry in Annex II, in the category of substances of vegetable origin, for Ginseng, standardised extracts and preparations thereof, for all food-producing species.

(3)

Regulation (EEC) No 2377/90 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(4)

An adequate period should be allowed before the applicability of this Regulation in order to enable Member States to make any adjustment which may be necessary in the light of this Regulation to the authorisations to place the veterinary medicinal products concerned on the market which have been granted in accordance with Directive 2001/82/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to veterinary medicinal products (2) to take account of the provisions of this Regulation.

(5)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Veterinary Medicinal Products,

(1)

Article 52(4) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1043/2005 of 30 June 2005 implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 3448/93 as regards the system of granting export refunds on certain agricultural products exported in the form of goods not covered by Annex I to the Treaty, and the criteria for fixing the amount of such refunds (1), provides that the granting of a refund on certain milk and egg based goods is conditional on them meeting the relevant requirements of Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs (2) and Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific rules on the hygiene of foodstuffs (3). In particular, the goods must, under Articles 4 and 5 of Regulation (EC) No 853/2004, be prepared in an approved establishment and comply with specific health marking requirements.

(2)

Commission Decision 2007/30/EC of 22 December 2006 laying down transitional measures for the marketing of certain products of animal origin obtained in Bulgaria and Romania (4) lays down measures to facilitate the transition from the existing regime in those States to that resulting from the application of Community veterinary legislation. According to Article 3 of that Decision, Member States are to authorise trade from 1 January to 31 December 2007 in products which are obtained in establishments in Bulgaria and Romania authorised to export milk or egg products to the Community before the date of accession, provided that the products bear the Community export health mark of the establishment concerned and are accompanied by a document which certifies that they were produced in conformity with Decision 2007/30/EC.

(3)

It is therefore appropriate to derogate from Article 52(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1043/2005, without prejudice to the application of the other provisions of that Regulation, and provide that goods which comply with Article 3 of Decision 2007/30/EC and are authorised to be traded for the period from 1 January to 31 December 2007 should be eligible for an export refund.

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee on horizontal questions concerning trade in processed agricultural products not listed in Annex I to the Treaty,

(1)

Annexes II and III to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006 (1) provide for entries in all the languages of the Community as constituted at 31 December 2006. Those provisions should include the entries in Bulgarian and Romanian.

(2)

Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006 should therefore be amended accordingly,

1.

Annex II is replaced by the text in Annex I to this Regulation.

2.

Annex III is replaced by the text in Annex II to this Regulation.

(1)

Article 19(1) of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 lays down that a percentage, common to all Member States, of sugar and isoglucose may be withdrawn from the market in order to preserve the structural balance of the market at a price level which is close to the reference price.

(2)

The forecast supply balance for the 2007/2008 marketing year indicates a surplus on the Community market, resulting in particular from a smaller than expected abandonment of quotas under Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 of 20 February 2006 establishing a temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry in the Community and amending Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (2). This surplus, which may amount to almost four million tonnes of sugar and isoglucose, is likely to cause a significant decrease in the Community market price during the 2007/2008 marketing year.

(3)

Consequently, a withdrawal percentage should be established in application of Article 19(1) of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 in order to preserve the structural balance of the market.

(4)

However, applying the withdrawal as laid down by Article 19 of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 does not provide an incentive to producers to reduce production, as the withdrawal percentage is applied in a linear fashion to all quantities produced under quota, without taking into account attempts by some undertakings to adapt their production. The withdrawal instrument may therefore be considered insufficient insofar as it does not make it possible to prevent the creation of a surplus on the market. Article 19 does not prevent surplus production; it simply makes it possible to withdraw the surplus sugar already produced. This results in costs that could be avoided if the surplus production were to be prevented at an earlier stage.

(5)

In order to make the withdrawal instrument more effective by creating an incentive for producers to reduce production, the Commission intends to propose to the Council an amendment to Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 that would introduce a threshold above which quantities produced under quota by each undertaking would be withdrawn. In other words, undertakings whose production is below the threshold will be exempt from the withdrawal requirement, reflecting the fact that they contributed less to the surplus. In this way, undertakings would be able to adapt their production and decide whether or not to produce in excess of the threshold.

(6)

For the threshold for applying the withdrawal percentage to have a real effect on production, the scope of the obligation provided for in Article 6(5) of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 should be limited to avoid sugar undertakings being obliged to pay the minimum price for quantities of beet corresponding to their entire quota, including the quantities for which no delivery contracts have been concluded.

(7)

However, it will not be possible to adjust the withdrawal instrument in time for it to have a preventative effect on production during the 2007/2008 marketing year. Given that the forecasts are indicating a particularly large surplus for this marketing year on account of the poor functioning of the instrument for the restructuring of the sugar industry, it is considered necessary to resort to Article 42 of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 in order to introduce, as a matter of urgency, a preventative measure consisting in the introduction of a threshold for applying the withdrawal percentage and consequently limiting the withdrawal requirement for those undertakings that do not contribute to the surplus. The threshold should be fixed at a level that makes it possible to prevent a significant quantity of sugar from being produced, in other words a quantity comparable to that which would otherwise have been withdrawn under Article 19 of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006.

(8)

In the same context, account should be taken of the fact that the constraints associated with the preventative measure could have serious economic consequences for undertakings in Member States which have made particular efforts under the restructuring scheme established by Regulation (EC) No 320/2006. This effect would be contrary to the very objective of this scheme and of the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector, which is to guarantee the viability and competitiveness of this sector. It is therefore necessary to provide for an exemption from applying the withdrawal percentage for the Member States in proportion to the percentage of the national quota which has been released under the above restructuring scheme.

(9)

In order for it to be fully effective, the measure must be adopted before beet sowing gets into full swing, thereby enabling producers and manufacturers to plan and manage production for the 2007/2008 marketing year as best as possible.

(10)

At the same time, in order to make allowances for the uncertainty of the forecasts concerning production in particular, provision should be made for the withdrawal percentage to be adapted if necessary when final figures are available for the 2007/2008 marketing year. If the adapted percentage is greater than the percentage initially established by this Regulation, the difference must be applied to the entire production under quota, since the aim of the measure at that stage will no longer be to obtain a preventative effect but to manage the market according to a surplus that has occurred.

(11)

In order to facilitate the supply of sugar and/or isoglucose for the manufacture of the products referred to in Article 13(2) of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006, the quantity withdrawn should be regarded as surplus sugar or isoglucose for the 2007/2008 marketing year available to become industrial sugar or isoglucose.

(12)

In accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006, the traditional supply need for refining as white sugar should be reduced by the same percentage as that established for the withdrawal. In the event that the withdrawal percentage is adapted, the reduction of the traditional supply need must also be adjusted.

(13)

The Management Committee for Sugar has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chairman,

(1)

The import duties in the cereals sector applicable from 16 March 2007 were fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 272/2007 (3).

(2)

As the average of the import duties calculated differs by more than EUR 5 a tonne from that fixed, a corresponding adjustment must be made to the import duties fixed by Regulation (EC) No 272/2007.

(3)

Regulation (EC) No 272/2007 should therefore be amended accordingly,

(1)

Article 30 of Directive 2004/17/EC provides that contracts intended to enable the performance of one of the activities to which the Directive applies shall not be subject to the Directive if, in the Member State in which it is carried out, the activity is directly exposed to competition on markets to which access is not restricted. Direct exposure to competition is assessed on the basis of objective criteria, taking account of the specific characteristics of the sector concerned. Access is deemed to be unrestricted if the Member State has implemented and applied the relevant Community legislation opening a given sector or a part of it.

(2)

This legislation is listed in Annex XI of Directive 2004/17/EC, which, in the case of postal services, refers to 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 (2).

(3)

Under Article 62(2) of Directive 2004/17/EC, Title III of that Directive setting out the rules on service design contests does not apply to contests organised for the pursuit, in the Member State concerned, of an activity to which the applicability of Article 30(1) of the Directive has been established by a Commission decision or has been deemed applicable under the second or third subparagraph of Article 30(4) or the fourth subparagraph of Article 30(5).

(4)

The request submitted by the Kingdom of Denmark concerns certain courier and parcel services in Denmark. More precisely, the services concerned can be described as Business to Business (BtB) parcel services, domestic and international; light goods/pallet goods services, domestic and international; as well as courier and express services, domestic and international. In line with previous Commission decisions (3), a distinction can be made between the above services and therefore each of these services can be considered to constitute a separate market. The Danish request thus concerns six different markets. Pursuant to Article 6 of Directive 2004/17/EC, logistics services, such as courier and express services, are covered by the Directive to the extent that such services are provided by entities which also provide postal services within the meaning of its Article 6(2)(b).

(5)

As a public enterprise within the meaning of Article 2(1)(b) of Directive 2004/17/EC exercising several of the activities mentioned in Article 6 of that Directive, Post Danmark, on whose behalf the request has been introduced, is a contracting entity for the purposes of Directive 2004/17/EC. According to the available information, it would seem to be the sole contracting entity operating in the markets concerned by the present decision, the other operators being private companies not operating on the basis of special or exclusive rights.

(6)

These assessments, and any other contained in this Decision, are made solely for the purposes of Directive 2004/17/EC and are without prejudice to the application of the rules on competition.

(7)

Denmark has implemented and applied Directive 97/67/EC. Consequently, and in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 30(3), access to the market should be deemed not to be restricted.

(8)

Direct exposure to competition should be evaluated on the basis of various indicators, none of which are, per se, decisive.

(9)

One parameter to take into account is the market shares of the main players on a given market and another is the degree of concentration. Whether measured in terms of turnover or in terms of number of dispatches, Post Danmark’s market share on any of the six markets concerned varies, according to the information given, between less than 1 % (4) up to 35-40 % (5), which are acceptable levels, considering also the degree of concentration on these markets. Post Danmark is the largest single operator on just two of these markets, respectively that for domestic parcel services and the one for domestic courier and express services (6). On both of these markets, the combined market share of Post Danmark’s two biggest competitors is comparable to or greater than that of Post Danmark (7). On those markets on which Post Danmark does not have the largest market share, the aggregate market shares of its two biggest competitors are several times greater (8) than Post Danmark’s market share. These factors should therefore be taken as an indication of direct exposure to competition.

(10)

In view of the abovementioned indicators, the condition of direct exposure to competition laid down in Article 30(1) of Directive 2004/17/EC should be considered to be met in respect of the parcel and courier services in Denmark which are specified in Recital 4 (9). As noted above in recital 7, the further condition of free access to the activity must be deemed to be met. Consequently, Directive 2004/17/EC should not apply when contracting entities award contracts intended to enable the parcel and courier services concerned by this request to be carried out in Denmark nor when they organise design contests for the pursuit of such an activity there.

(11)

This Decision is based on the legal and factual situation as of November and December 2006 as it appears from the information submitted by the Kingdom of Denmark. It may be revised, should significant changes in the legal or factual situation mean that the conditions for the applicability of Article 30(1) of Directive 2004/17/EC are no longer met.

(12)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Advisory Committee for Public Contracts,

(a)

Domestic Business to Business (BtB) parcel services;

(b)

International Business to Business (BtB) parcel services;

(c)

Domestic light goods/pallet goods services;

(d)

International light goods/pallet goods services;

(e)

Domestic courier and express services; and

(f)

International courier and express services.