(1)

Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 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 616/2007 opened tariff quotas for imports of products in the poultrymeat sector.

(2)

The applications for import licences lodged during the first seven days of January 2008 for the subperiod 1 April to 30 June 2008 relate, for some quotas, to quantities exceeding those available. The extent to which licences may be issued should therefore be determined and an allocation coefficient laid down to be applied to the quantities applied for,

(1)

Article 3a of Regulation (EC) No 824/2000 lays down rules for awarding the quantities of maize eligible for intervention for the 2007/2008 and 2008/2009 marketing years. Quantities are awarded in two stages, referred to as ‘period 1’ and ‘period 2’.

(2)

The total quantity of maize offered for intervention in period 1, which ran from 1 August to 31 December 2007, did not exceed the limit laid down in Article 5(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003. As a result, the quantity of maize that may be offered for intervention in period 2 of the 2007/2008 marketing year should be published.

(3)

In accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 3a(1), period 2 starts on the day following publication by the Commission in the Official Journal of the European Union of the quantity which remains available for intervention in that period. That day is the first day for the submission of offers in all the Member States and that period ends not later than 30 April in Greece, Spain, Italy and Portugal, 30 June in Sweden and 31 May in the other Member States. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union,

(1)

During the accession negotiations, Estonia invoked the specific characteristics of its electricity sector to request a transitional period for the application of Directive 96/92/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 1996 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity (3).

(2)

In Annex VI to the 2003 Act of Accession, Estonia was granted a transitional period until 31 December 2008 for the application of Article 19(2) of Directive 96/92/EC, relating to the gradual opening of the market.

(3)

Declaration No 8 annexed to the Final Act to the 2003 Treaty of Accession recognised moreover that the specific situation relating to the restructuring of the oil shale sector in Estonia was going to require particular efforts until the end of 2012.

(4)

Directive 96/92/EC was replaced by Directive 2003/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive 96/92/EC (4), which had to be implemented by 1 July 2004 and which had the effect of speeding up the opening of the electricity market.

(5)

By letter of 17 September 2003, Estonia transmitted a request aimed at not applying Article 21(1)(b) of Directive 2003/54/EC, on the opening of the market to non-household customers, until 31 December 2012. In a further letter of 5 December 2003, Estonia indicated that it was planning to achieve the complete opening of the market provided for in Article 21(1)(c) of that Directive by 31 December 2015.

(6)

The request by Estonia was based on a credible restructuring plan for the oil shale sector extending until 31 December 2012.

(7)

Oil shale is the only real indigenous energy resource in Estonia and national production represents almost 84 % of world production. 90 % of the electricity produced in Estonia is from this solid fuel. It is therefore of great strategic importance for security of supply in Estonia.

(8)

The granting of a further derogation for the period 2009 to 2012 appeared necessary to guarantee security of investments in generating plants and security of supply in Estonia while allowing the serious environmental problems created by those plants to be resolved.

(9)

On 28 June 2004 the Council adopted Directive 2004/85/EC amending Directive 2003/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the application of certain provisions to Estonia (5), which granted the requested derogation.

(10)

By judgment of 28 November 2006 in Case C-413/04, Parliament v. Council (6), the Court of Justice annulled Directive 2004/85/EC, in so far as it granted Estonia a derogation from the application of Article 21(1)(b) and (c) of Directive 2003/54/EC going beyond 31 December 2008 and imposed a corresponding obligation to ensure only a partial opening of the market representing 35 % of consumption on 1 January 2009 and an obligation to communicate annually the consumption thresholds extending eligibility to final customers.

(11)

That partial annulment was not founded on reasons concerning the substance of Directive 2004/85/EC, but was due to the wrong choice of legal basis.

(12)

Since the reasons for granting Estonia a derogation from the application of Article 21(1)(b) and (c) of Directive 2003/54/EC going beyond 31 December 2008 remain valid, that Directive should be amended accordingly, with the same wording as in Directive 2004/85/EC but on the correct legal basis,

(1)

Following recent outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease in Cyprus, Commission Decision 2007/718/EC of 6 November 2007 concerning certain protection measures against foot-and-mouth disease in Cyprus (3) was adopted to reinforce the control measures against foot-and-mouth disease taken by that Member State in the framework of Council Directive 2003/85/EC of 29 September 2003 on Community measures for the control of foot-and-mouth disease repealing Directive 85/511/EEC and Decisions 84/531/EEC and 91/665/EEC and amending Directive 92/46/EEC, repealing Directive 85/511/EEC and Decisions 84/531/EEC and 91/665/EEC and amending Directive 92/46/EEC (4).

(2)

In Decision 2007/718/EC, the Commission laid down rules for the dispatch of certain categories of meat from certain areas listed in Annex III to that Decision that have not recorded any outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease for a period of at least 90 days prior to slaughter and which comply with certain specified conditions. At present only the dispatch of pig meat from defined areas is allowed.

(3)

On the basis of the evolution of the animal health situation in Cyprus, and in particular the favourable results of the ongoing surveillance, it is now possible to define those areas that should be included, with regard to beef, in Annex III to Decision 2007/718/EC.

(4)

Decision 2007/718/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.

(5)

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)

Directive 2000/29/EC provides for a Community financial contribution to be granted to Member States in order to strengthen inspection infrastructures for plant-health checks on plants and plant products coming from third countries.

(2)

By a letter dated 21 May 2007 (ref. DGPC 070521 000604), Portugal introduced a programme to strengthen in 2008 its inspection infrastructures for checks on plants and plant products coming from third countries (2). It has applied for the allocation of a Community financial contribution for 2008 for that programme in accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 998/2002 of 11 June 2002 establishing detailed rules for the implementation of the provisions relating to the allocation of a Community financial contribution for Member States in order to strengthen inspection infrastructures for plant-health checks on plants and plant products coming from third countries (3).

(3)

The technical information provided by Portugal has enabled the Commission to analyse the situation accurately and comprehensively. The Commission has prepared a list of eligible inspection posts strengthening programmes, which give details of the amount of the proposed Community financial contribution to each programme. The information has also been examined by the Standing Committee on Plant Health.

(4)

After assessment of the programme, the Commission has concluded that the conditions and criteria set out in Directive 2000/29/EC and Regulation (EC) No 998/2002 for the grant of a Community financial contribution have been met.

(5)

Accordingly, it is appropriate to allocate a Community financial contribution to cover the expenditure of that programme for 2008 by Portugal.

(6)

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

(a)

evidence of the purchase and/or improvement of the equipment and/or facilities listed in the programme has been given by the Member State concerned to the Commission by appropriate documentation; and

(b)

a request for payment of the Community financial contribution has been submitted by the Member State concerned to the Commission, in accordance with the rules provided for in Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 998/2002.

(1)

Outbreaks of avian influenza occurred in Germany in 2003. The emergence of this disease presented a serious risk for the Community’s livestock population.

(2)

In order to prevent the spread of the disease and to help eradicate it as quickly as possible, the Community must contribute financially towards the eligible expenditure incurred by the Member State under the emergency measures taken to combat the disease, as provided for in Decision 90/424/EEC.

(3)

Commission Decision 2004/51/EC of 23 December 2003 on the financial contribution from the Community towards the eligible costs of the eradication of avian influenza in Germany in 2003 (2) granted a financial contribution from the Community to Germany towards the expenditure incurred under the emergency measures taken to combat avian influenza in 2003.

(4)

In accordance with that Decision, a first instalment of EUR 135 000 was paid.

(5)

Pursuant to that Decision, the balance of the Community contribution is to be based on the claim submitted by Germany on 25 February 2004, documentary evidence of the expenditure referred to in that claim, and the results of on-the-spot checks carried out by the Commission. The amount set out in the claim submitted for the 2003 expenditure was EUR 514 392,42, for which the Community financial contribution may not be higher than 50 % of the total eligible expenditure.

(6)

In view of the above considerations, the total amount of the Community’s financial contribution to the expenditure incurred associated with the eradication of avian influenza in Germany in 2003 should now be fixed.

(7)

The results of the checks carried out by the Commission in compliance with the Community veterinary rules and the conditions for granting Community financial support mean the entire amount of the expenditure submitted cannot be recognised as eligible.

(8)

The Commission’s observations and method of calculating the eligible expenditure were communicated to Germany by letter dated 21 November 2007.

(9)

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