(1)

According to Article 3 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 606/2009 (2), the authorised oenological practices are laid down in Annex I to that Regulation. The International Organisation of Vine and Wine (OIV) has adopted new oenological practices. In order to meet the international standards in this field and to provide EU producers with the new possibilities available to third country producers, these new oenological practices should be authorised in the EU under the conditions of use defined by the OIV.

(2)

Regulation (EC) No 606/2009 authorises clarification by means of pectolytic enzymes and enzymatic preparations of beta-glucanase. These enzymes and other enzymatic preparations are also used for maceration, clarification, stabilisation, filtration and for revealing the aromatic precursors of grapes present in the must and the wine. These oenological practices have been adopted by the OIV and they should be authorised under the conditions of use defined by the OIV.

(3)

Wines entitled to the protected designations of origin ‘Malta’ and ‘Gozo’ have a sugar content greater than 45 g/l and are produced in small quantities. Likewise, certain French white wines with a protected geographical indication may have a total alcoholic strength by volume greater than 15 % vol. and a sugar content greater than 45 g/l. In order to ensure the preservation of these wines, the Member States concerned, i.e., Malta and France, respectively, requested a derogation to the maximum sulphur dioxide contents given in Annex I B to Regulation (EC) No 606/2009. These wines should be mentioned in the list of wines having a maximum sulphur dioxide content of 300 milligrams per litre.

(4)

Wines entitled to the traditional expression ‘Késői szüretelésű bor’ have a very high sugar content and are produced in small quantities. In order to ensure the preservation of these wines, Hungary requested a derogation to the maximum sulphur dioxide content. A maximum sulphur dioxide content of 350 milligrams per litre should be authorised for these wines.

(5)

Wines entitled to the protected designation of origin ‘Douro’ followed by the statement ‘colheita tardia’ derogate from the maximum sulphur dioxide content. Wines entitled to the protected designation of origin ‘Duriense’ have the same characteristics as these wines. On the basis of this, Portugal requested a derogation from the maximum sulphur dioxide content. A maximum sulphur dioxide content of 400 milligrams per litre should be authorised for these wines.

(6)

In order to render the names of vine varieties clearer, the names of the varieties should be given in the different languages of the countries where these varieties are used.

(7)

Certain provisions concerning certain liqueur wines differ from the requirements laid down in the specifications for these wines. These provisions should be amended in accordance with the requirements in question.

(8)

Regulation (EC) No 606/2009 should be amended accordingly.

(9)

The making of wine from grapes harvested during the 2010 wine-growing year has already begun. In order not to distort competition between wine producers, the new oenological practices should be authorised for all these producers starting at the beginning of the 2010 wine-growing year. This regulation should apply retroactively from 1 August 2010, which marks the start of the 2010 wine-growing year.

(10)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Regulatory Committee established by Article 195(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007,

(a)

Annex I A is amended in accordance with Annex I to this Regulation;

(b)

Annex I B is amended in accordance with Annex II to this Regulation;

(c)

Annex II is amended in accordance with Annex III to this Regulation;

(d)

Annex III is amended in accordance with Annex IV to this Regulation.

(1)

Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EU) No 447/2010 of 21 May 2010 (2) lays down that intervention skimmed milk powder placed on sale should have entered into storage before 1 May 2009.

(2)

Given the current situation on the skimmed milk powder market in terms of demand and prices and the level of intervention stocks, it is appropriate that skimmed milk powder entered into storage before 1 November 2009 is made available for sale.

(3)

Regulation (EU) No 447/2010 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(4)

In order to make the skimmed milk powder available for sale without delay, this regulation should enter into force immediately after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

(5)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets,

(1)

Article 3(1) and (2) of Protocol No 1 (3) to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Tunisia, of the other part (4), opens a tariff quota at a zero rate of duty for imports of untreated olive oil falling within CN codes 1509 10 10 and 1509 10 90, wholly obtained in Tunisia and transported direct from that country to the European Union, up to the limit laid down for each year.

(2)

Article 2(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1918/2006 of 20 December 2006 opening and providing for the administration of tariff quota for olive oil originating in Tunisia (5) lays down monthly quantitative limits for the issue of import licences.

(3)

Import licence applications have been submitted to the competent authorities under Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1918/2006 in respect of a total quantity exceeding the limit laid down for the month of January in Article 2(2) of that Regulation.

(4)

In these circumstances, the Commission must set an allocation coefficient allowing import licences to be issued in proportion to the quantity available.

(5)

Since the limit for the month of January has been reached, no more import licences can be issued for that month,

(1)

In a letter registered by the Commission’s Secretariat-General on 22 July 2010, the United Kingdom requested authorisation to extend a derogating measure in order to continue to restrict the right of deduction of VAT by the hirer or lessee on charges for the hire or lease of a passenger car where the car is not used entirely for business purposes.

(2)

The Commission informed the other Member States of the request made by the United Kingdom by letter dated 12 October 2010. By letter dated 15 October 2010, the Commission notified the United Kingdom that it had all the information necessary to consider the request.

(3)

Council Decision 2007/884/EC of 20 December 2007 authorising the United Kingdom to continue to apply a measure derogating from Articles 26(1)(a), 168 and 169 of Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax (2), authorised the United Kingdom to restrict to 50 % the right of the hirer or lessee to deduct input VAT on charges for the hire or lease of a passenger car where the car is not used entirely for business purposes. The United Kingdom was also allowed not to treat as supplies of services for consideration the private use of a car hired or leased by a taxable person for his business purposes. This simplification measure removed the need for the hirer or the lessee to keep records of private mileage travelled in business cars and to account for tax on the actual private mileage of each car.

(4)

According to the information provided by the United Kingdom, the restriction to 50 % still corresponds to the actual circumstances as regards the business and the non-business use by the hirer or lessee of the vehicles concerned. It is therefore appropriate that the United Kingdom be authorised to apply the measure for a further limited period, until 31 December 2013.

(5)

Where the United Kingdom considers a further extension beyond 2013 is necessary, a report which includes a review of the percentage applied should be submitted to the Commission together with the extension request no later than 1 April 2013.

(6)

On 29 October 2004, the Commission adopted a proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 77/388/EEC, now Directive 2006/112/EC, that includes the harmonisation of the categories of expenses for which exclusions of the right of deduction may apply. Under this proposal, exclusions on the right to deduct may be applied to motorised road vehicles. The derogating measures provided for in this Decision should expire on the date of the entry into force of such amending Directive, if that date is earlier than the date of expiry provided for in this Decision.

(7)

The derogation has no impact on the Union’s own resources accruing from value added tax.

(8)

Decision 2007/884/EC should therefore be amended accordingly,

(1)

Council Decision 2005/767/EC (2) authorises France to apply, for a period of 3 years, differentiated levels of taxation to gas oil and unleaded petrol. France had requested the authorisation in the context of an administrative reform involving the decentralisation of certain specific powers previously exercised by central government. Decision 2005/767/EC expired on 31 December 2009.

(2)

By letter dated 12 August 2009, France requested authorisation to continue to apply differentiated rates of taxation under the same conditions for a further 6 years after 31 December 2009.

(3)

Decision 2005/767/EC was adopted on the basis that the measure requested by France met the requirements set out in Article 19 of Directive 2003/96/EC. In particular, it was considered that that measure would not hinder the proper functioning of the internal market. It was also considered that it was in conformity with the relevant Community policies.

(4)

The national measure is part of a policy designed to increase administrative effectiveness by improving the quality and reducing the cost of public services, as well as a policy of subsidiarity. It offers regions an additional incentive to improve the quality of their administration in a transparent fashion. In this respect, Decision 2005/767/EC requires that the reductions be linked to the socioeconomic circumstances of the regions in which they are applied. Overall, the national measure is based on specific policy considerations.

(5)

The tight limits set for the differentiation of rates on a regional basis as well as the exclusion of gas oil used for commercial purposes from the measure imply that the risk of competitive distortions in the internal market is very low. Moreover, the application of the measure so far has shown a strong tendency on behalf of regions to levy the maximum rate allowable, which has further decreased any potential for competitive distortions.

(6)

No obstacles to the proper functioning of the internal market have been reported as regards, more particularly, the circulation of the products in question in their capacity as products subject to excise duty.

(7)

When originally requested, the national measure had been preceded by a tax increase equal to the margin for regional reductions. Against this background and in light of the conditions of the authorisation as well as experience gathered, the national measure does not, at this stage, appear to be in conflict with Union energy and climate policies.

(8)

It follows from Article 19(2) of Directive 2003/96/EC that each authorisation granted under that Article must be strictly limited in time. Due to the possible future developments of the Union framework on energy taxation, this authorisation should be limited to a period of 3 years. It is furthermore appropriate to avoid any time gap with respect to the application of the authorisation,

(1)

On 22 December 2009 and 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU and 2010/29/EU appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015 (1).

(2)

A member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Franz VOVES.

(3)

Two alternate members’ seats have become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Hermann SCHÜTZENHÖFER and Mr Walter PRIOR,

(a)

as a member:

and

(b)

as alternate members:

(1)

On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU and 2010/29/EU appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015 (1).

(2)

An alternate member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Pavol FREŠO,

—

Mr Juraj BLANÁR

(1)

On 22 December 2009 and 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU and 2010/29/EU appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015 (1).

(2)

Three members’ seats on the Committee of the Regions have become vacant following the end of the term of office of Ms Annemarie JORRITSMA-LEBBINK, Ms Luzette WAGENAAR-KROON and Mr Rob BATS.

(3)

Four alternate members’ seats have become vacant following the end of the term of office of Ms Ellie FRANSSEN, Mr Job COHEN, Ms Rinda DEN BESTEN and Mr Hendrikus DE LANGE.

(4)

Two alternate members’ seats will become vacant following the appointment of Mr Hans KOK and Mr Henk KOOL as members of the Committee of the Regions,

(a)

as members:

and

(b)

as alternate members:

(1)

On 22 December 2009 and 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU and 2010/29/EU appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015 (1).

(2)

A member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Jerzy KROPIWNICKI.

(3)

An alternate member’s seat will become vacant following the appointment of Mr Tadeusz TRUSKOLASKI as a member of the Committee of the Regions,

(a)

as a member:

and

(b)

as alternate member:

(1)

Commission Decision 2010/468/EU (2) authorises, until 31 December 2010, the marketing in the Union of seed of varieties of Avena strigosa Schreb. (hereinafter ‘A. strigosa’) not included in the common catalogues of varieties of agricultural plant species or in the national catalogues of varieties of the Member States.

(2)

The temporary difficulties in the general supply of A. strigosa which were the reason for the adoption of Decision 2010/468/EU, continue. It is therefore necessary to extend the period of application of the authorisation provided for in that Decision.

(3)

It appears from the information provided to the Commission by the Member States that, for 2011, an additional total quantity of 5 130 tonnes is necessary to resolve these supply difficulties, as Belgium has indicated to the Commission that it needs for that period a quantity of 300 tonnes, France a quantity of 3 700 tonnes, Germany a quantity of 300 tonnes, Italy a quantity of 280 tonnes, Spain a quantity of 300 tonnes and Portugal a quantity of 250 tonnes.

(4)

Decision 2010/468/EU should therefore be amended accordingly.

(5)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Seeds and Propagating Material for Agriculture, Horticulture and Forestry,

1.

Article 1 is amended as follows:

2.

in the second paragraph of Article 3 the words ‘31 December 2010’ are replaced by ‘31 December 2011’.

(1)

On 5 January 2011 Bulgaria reported a case of foot-and-mouth disease in a wild boar shot in Burgas region in the South-East of Bulgaria within a zone of reinforced surveillance along the border with Turkey. The Commission therefore adopted Decision 2011/8/EU of 6 January 2011 concerning certain interim protection measures against foot-and-mouth disease in Bulgaria (3).

(2)

On 9 January 2011 Bulgaria reported outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease in livestock in the same area. The new epidemiological situation requires to review the measures previously adopted, also in the light of the information provided by Bulgaria and the discussions with Member States at the meeting of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health of 12 January 2011.

(3)

The foot-and-mouth disease situation in Bulgaria is liable to endanger the herds of other Member States in view of trade in live biungulate animals and the placing on the market of certain of their products.

(4)

Bulgaria has taken measures in the framework of Council Directive 2003/85/EC of 29 September 2003 on Community measures for the control of foot-and-mouth disease (4), in particular the measures provided for in Section 3 of Chapter II and in Article 85(4) thereof.

(5)

The whole territory of Bulgaria is subject to the restrictions of Articles 2, 4, 5, 6, 8b and 11 of Commission Decision 2008/855/EC of 3 November 2008 concerning animal health control measures relating to classical swine fever in certain Member States (5). However, being listed in Part II of the Annex to that Decision allows Bulgaria to dispatch under certain health conditions fresh pig meat and meat preparations and products produced from such meat.

(6)

The disease situation in Bulgaria makes it necessary to reinforce the control measures for foot-and-mouth disease taken by the competent authorities in Bulgaria.

(7)

It is appropriate to define as a permanent measure the high and low risk areas in the affected Member State and to provide for a prohibition on the dispatch of susceptible animals from the high and low risk areas and on the dispatch of products derived from susceptible animals from the high risk area. The Decision should also provide for the rules applicable to the dispatch from those areas of safe products that either had been produced before the restrictions, from raw material sourced from outside the restricted areas or that had undergone a treatment proven effective in inactivating possible foot-and-mouth disease virus.

(8)

The size of the defined risk areas is a direct function of the outcome of tracing of possible contacts to the infected holding and takes into account the possibility to implement sufficient controls on the movement of animals and products. At this point of time and based on information provided by Bulgaria, the whole of Burgas region should currently remain a high risk area.

(9)

The prohibition of dispatch should only cover products derived from animals of susceptible species coming from or obtained from animals originating in the high risk areas listed in Annex I and should not affect transit through these areas of such products coming from or obtained from animals originating in other areas.

(10)

Council Directive 64/432/EEC (6) concerns animal health problems affecting intra-Community trade in bovine animals and swine.

(11)

Council Directive 91/68/EEC (7) concerns animal health conditions governing intra-Community trade in ovine and caprine animals.

(12)

Council Directive 92/65/EEC of 13 July 1992 laying down animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of animals, semen, ova and embryos not subject to animal health requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A(I) to Directive 90/425/EEC (8) concerns, amongst others, trade in other biungulates and in semen, ova and embryos of sheep and goats, and in embryos of porcine animals.

(13)

Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin (9) concerns, amongst others, the health conditions for the production and marketing of fresh meat, minced meat, mechanically separated meat, meat preparations, farmed game meat, meat products, including treated stomachs, bladders and intestines, and dairy products.

(14)

Regulation (EC) No 854/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific rules for the organisation of official controls on products of animal origin intended for human consumption (10) concerns, amongst others, the health marking of food of animal origin.

(15)

Council Directive 2002/99/EC of 16 December 2002 laying down the animal health rules governing the production, processing, distribution and introduction of products of animal origin for human consumption (11) provides for specific treatment of meat products that ensure inactivation of the foot-and-mouth disease virus in products of animal origin.

(16)

Commission Decision 2001/304/EC of 11 April 2001 on marking and use of certain animal products in relation to Decision 2001/172/EC concerning certain protection measures with regard to foot-and-mouth disease in the United Kingdom (12) concerns a specific health mark to be applied to certain products of animal origin that shall be restricted to the national market. It is appropriate to lay down in a separate Annex a similar marking in the case of foot-and-mouth disease in Bulgaria.

(17)

Council Directive 92/118/EEC (13) lays down animal health and public health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of products not subject to the said requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A(I) to Directive 89/662/EEC and, as regards pathogens, to Directive 90/425/EEC.

(18)

Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 October 2002 laying down health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for human consumption (14) provides for a range of treatments of animal by-products suitable to inactivate the foot-and-mouth disease virus.

(19)

Council Directive 88/407/EEC (15) lays down the animal health requirements applicable to intra-Community trade in and imports of deep-frozen semen of domestic animals of the bovine species.

(20)

Council Directive 89/556/EEC (16) concerns the animal health conditions governing intra-Community trade in and imports from third countries of embryos of domestic animals of the bovine species.

(21)

Council Directive 90/429/EEC (17) lays down the animal health requirements applicable to intra-Community trade in and imports of semen of domestic animals of the porcine species.

(22)

The model health certificates for trade within the Union in semen, ova and embryos of animals of the ovine and caprine species and in ova and embryos of animals of the porcine species are laid down in Commission Decision 2010/470/EU of 26 August 2010 laying down model health certificates for trade within the Union in semen, ova and embryos of animals of the equine, ovine and caprine species and in ova and embryos of animals of the porcine species (18).

(23)

In so far as medicinal products defined in 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 (19), Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use (20), and Directive 2001/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to the implementation of good clinical practice in the conduct of clinical trials on medicinal products for human use (21) no longer fall under the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 they should be excluded from animal health related restrictions set up by this Decision.

(24)

Article 6 of Commission Decision 2007/275/EC of 17 April 2007 concerning lists of animals and products to be subject to controls at border inspection posts under Council Directives 91/496/EEC and 97/78/EC (22) provides for a derogation from the veterinary checks for certain products containing animal products. It is appropriate to allow dispatch from the high risk areas of such products under a simplified certification regime.

(25)

The possible risk of spread of foot-and-mouth disease within the European Union through the movements of consignments of products of animal origin of a non-commercial character should be considered in view of the foot-and-mouth disease situation in Bulgaria. Therefore such movements should be prevented in order to avoid further spread of the disease. Bulgaria should ensure that compliance with the restrictions imposed by this Decision on certain products derived from animals of species susceptible to foot-and-mouth disease is also ensured as regards the non-commercial movement of these products. Member States should cooperate in monitoring personal luggage of passengers travelling in particular from the high risk areas and in information campaigns carried out to prevent introduction of products of animal origin into the territory of Member States other than Bulgaria.

(26)

Member States other than Bulgaria should support the disease control measures carried out in the affected areas by ensuring that live susceptible animals are not dispatched to those areas.

(27)

Council Decision 2009/470/EC of 25 May 2009 on expenditure in the veterinary field (23) provides for a mechanism to compensate affected holdings for losses incurred as a result of disease control measures.

(28)

The foot-and-mouth disease situation has been reviewed at the meeting of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health of 12 January 2011 and the measures provided for in Decision 2011/8/EU were adapted in the light of the information received from Bulgaria on the development of the epidemiological situation. Decision 2011/8/EU should therefore be repealed and replaced by this Decision.

(29)

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

(a)

not produced in Bulgaria and remained in their original packaging indicating the country of origin of the products; or

(b)

produced in an approved establishment situated in the areas listed in Annex I from pre-processed products not originating from those areas, which:

(1)

The first indent of Article 52(4) of the Agreement provides for the Joint Committee to adopt decisions revising Annex 1.

(2)

Annex 1 has been amended last by Decision 1/2009 of the Joint Committee of 17 June 2009.

(3)

New legal acts of the European Union have been adopted in the areas covered by the Agreement. Annex 1 must therefore be reworded to bring it into line with the changes in the relevant legislation of the European Union,

(1)

For the implementation of Protocol 2 to the Agreement, domestic reference prices have been fixed for the Contracting Parties.

(2)

Actual prices have changed on the domestic markets of the Contracting Parties as regards raw materials for which price compensation measures are applied.

(3)

It is therefore necessary to update the reference prices and amounts listed in Tables III and IV(b) of Protocol 2 accordingly,

(a)

Table III is replaced by the text set out in Annex I to this Decision;

(b)

in Table IV, point (b) is replaced by the text set out in Annex II to this Decision.