(1)

The Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Moldova on protection of geographical indications of agricultural products and foodstuffs (1) (‘the Agreement’) entered into force on 1 April 2013.

(2)

Article 11 of the Agreement establishes a Joint Committee which is to, inter alia, ensure that the Agreement operates properly.

(3)

According to Article 11(2) of the Agreement, the Joint Committee determines its own rules of procedure.

(4)

The position of the Union within the Joint Committee, as regards the adoption of the rules of procedure of that Joint Committee, should be based on the attached draft Decision,

(1)

HS subheading 852851 in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 (1) comprises monitors, other than cathode-ray tube (CRT) monitors, of a kind solely or principally used in an automatic data-processing system of heading 8471 . Monitors other than those of a kind solely or principally used in an automatic data-processing system of heading 8471 are classified under HS subheading 852859.

(2)

In accordance with established case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (2), the classification of monitors under either HS subheading 852851 or 852859 has to be based on an overall assessment of the objective characteristics and properties of each particular monitor.

(3)

Due to the convergence of digital technologies, it has become very difficult to determine, by reference to mere technical characteristics, whether or not a particular monitor is of a kind solely or principally used in an automatic data-processing system of heading 8471 . In particular, ensuring the correct and uniform classification of flat panel displays which can display, with an acceptable level of functionality, signals from both automatic data-processing systems and other sources, has become technically impossible.

(4)

In order to ensure a rational development of production and an expansion of consumption within the territory of the Union and to promote trade between Member States and third countries, it is in the interest of both Union consumers and Union industry to provide for a duty-free treatment for the above-mentioned monitors.

(5)

Annex I to Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 should therefore be amended accordingly,

(1)

There is an error in the Czech and Polish language versions of Commission Regulation (EC) No 828/2009 (4), more precisely in Article 11(1) thereof.

(2)

There is another error in the Polish language version of that Regulation, more precisely in Part II of Annex I thereof.

(3)

These errors should be corrected with effect from the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 828/2009. The obligation imposed by Article 11(1) of the Czech and Polish language versions of that Regulation on each holder of an import licence for sugar should be withdrawn retroactively because it should be limited only to its original holder.

(4)

Regulation (EC) No 828/2009 should therefore be corrected accordingly.

(5)

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

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007 of 4 December 2007 on the second phase of the 10-year work programme referred to in Article 16(2) of Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of biocidal products on the market (2) establishes a list of active substances to be assessed, with a view to their possible inclusion in Annex I, IA or IB to Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (3). That list includes propiconazole.

(2)

Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007, propiconazole has been evaluated in accordance with Article 11(2) of Directive 98/8/EC for use in product-type 9, fibre, leather, rubber and polymerised materials preservatives, as defined in Annex V to that Directive, which corresponds to product-type 9 as defined in Annex V to Regulation (EU) No 528/2012.

(3)

Finland was designated as Rapporteur Member State and submitted the competent authority report, together with a recommendation, to the Commission on 11 February 2011 in accordance with Article 14(4) and (6) of Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007.

(4)

The competent authority report was reviewed by the Member States and the Commission. In accordance with Article 15(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1451/2007, the findings of the review were incorporated, within the Standing Committee on Biocidal Products on 12 July 2013, in an assessment report.

(5)

It appears from the assessment report that biocidal products used for product-type 9 and containing propiconazole may be expected to satisfy the requirements laid down in Article 5 of Directive 98/8/EC.

(6)

It is therefore appropriate to approve propiconazole for use in biocidal products for product-type 9.

(7)

Since the evaluation did not address nanomaterials, the approval should not cover such materials pursuant to Article 4(4) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012.

(8)

A reasonable period should be allowed to elapse before an active substance is approved, in order to permit Member States, interested parties, and the Commission where appropriate, to prepare themselves to meet the new requirements entailed.

(9)

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

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 (2) provide for Union financial assistance to producer organisations for fruit and vegetables.

(2)

The General Court by judgment of 30 May 2013 in joined cases T-454/10 and T-482/11 (3) annulled the second subparagraph of Article 52(2a) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1580/2007 (4) and the equivalent Article 50(3) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 as regards the calculation of the value of marketed production of fruit and vegetables intended for processing. The General Court annulled also Article 60(7) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 on eligibility of actions under operational programmes, as regards investments and actions related to the transformation of fruit and vegetables into processed fruit and vegetables.

(3)

The General Court’s judgment maintained the effects of the provision on the calculation of the value of marketed production to the extent only that the relevant payments have already been executed until the date of delivery of the judgment. Consequently, Member States may have suspended or delayed payments pending either the adoption of new rules replacing the annulled ones or the suspensory effects of an appeal.

(4)

The Commission decided to bring an appeal against the decision of the General Court in the above mentioned cases. The appeal was filed with the Court of the European Union on the 12 August 2013. Pending the decision of the Court in the appeal, and unless otherwise provided by the Court the effects of the judgment of the General Court are suspended.

(5)

Article 70 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 provides that the aid to producer organisations has to be paid by 15 October of the year following the year of implementation of the operational programme. If the aid is paid after this date, the reductions provided for in Article 9 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 883/2006 (5) should apply.

(6)

It is therefore appropriate to extend the time limit for Member States to pay the Union financial assistance for the operational programmes concerned as regards implementing year 2012, to take into account that until the Commission launched its appeal, Member States may have suspended processing payment applications during this period.

(7)

It is therefore appropriate to amend Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 accordingly.

(8)

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

(1)

Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 repealed and replaced Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (2).

(2)

Pursuant to Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Germany's application to register the name 'Bamberger Hörnla'/'Bamberger Hörnle'/'Bamberger Hörnchen' was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (3).

(3)

The Association 'Arche Noah', based in Schiltern in Austria, objected to the registration of that name. In accordance with Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 the Commission nevertheless considered that objection inadmissible, since it was sent directly to the Commission, which was in breach of the second subparagraph of Article 7(2) of that Regulation, which requires objections to be sent via the relevant national authorities.

(4)

The name 'Bamberger Hörnla'/'Bamberger Hörnle'/'Bamberger Hörnchen' should therefore be entered in the register,

(1)

Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 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 Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)

The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union,

(1)

By Council Decision 97/836/EC (1), the Union acceded to the Agreement of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe concerning the adoption of uniform technical prescriptions for wheeled vehicles, equipment and parts which can be fitted to and/or be used on wheeled vehicles and the conditions for reciprocal recognition of approvals granted on the basis of these prescriptions (2) (‘Revised 1958 Agreement’).

(2)

The harmonised requirements of Regulation No 41 of the Economic Commission for Europe of the United Nations (UN/ECE) — Uniform provisions concerning the approval of motor cycles with regard to noise (3) (‘UNECE Regulation No 41’) are intended to remove technical barriers to the trade in motor vehicles between the Contracting Parties to the Revised 1958 Agreement and to ensure that such vehicles offer a high level of safety and protection.

(3)

Directive 2002/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (4) and Directive 97/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (5) and its implementing measures mandate the adoption of permissible sound levels, exhaust systems and testing procedures of two and three-wheel motor vehicles.

(4)

Annex III to Chapter 9 of Directive 97/24/EC contains requirements for the type-approval of L-category vehicles with regard to their permissible sound level and exhaust system. L-category vehicles is the family name of light vehicles such as powered cycles, two or three-wheel mopeds, motor cycles with and without sidecar, tricycles and quadricycles.

(5)

At the date of its accession to the Revised 1958 Agreement, the Union acceded to a limited number of UNECE Regulations listed in Annex II to Decision 97/836/EC; UNECE Regulation No 41 was not included in that list.

(6)

As provided for in Article 3(3) of Decision 97/836/EC, and pursuant to Article 1(7) of the Revised 1958 Agreement, the Union may decide to apply one, some or all of the UNECE Regulations to which it has not acceded at the time of its accession to the Revised 1958 Agreement.

(7)

It is now appropriate for the Union to apply UNECE Regulation No 41 in order to have common harmonised requirements at international level, which will facilitate international trade and which will replace the existing approval requirements set-out in Annex III to Chapter 9 of Directive 97/24/EC. This will enable European companies to follow one set of requirements recognised worldwide, in particular in the Contracting Parties to the Revised 1958 Agreement,

(1)

On 22 December 2009 and on 18 January 2010, the Council adopted Decisions 2009/1014/EU (1) and 2010/29/EU (2) appointing the members and alternate members of the Committee of the Regions for the period from 26 January 2010 to 25 January 2015.

(2)

A member’s seat on the Committee of the Regions has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Mr Antonio GRIÑÁN MARTÍNEZ,

—

Ms Susana DÍAZ PACHECO, Presidenta de la Junta de Andalucía.

(1)

Article 9 of the Statutes and rules of procedure of the Centre for the Development of Enterprise (CDE), adopted by Decision No 8/2005 of the ACP-EC Committee of Ambassadors, provides that the Committee of Ambassadors shall appoint the members of the Executive Board, for a maximum period of five years;

(2)

The term of office of the current members of the Executive Board of the Centre for the Development of Enterprise, as amended by Decision No 1/2013 of the ACP-EC Committee of Ambassadors (5), will expire on 6 September 2013;

(3)

It is necessary to ensure the stability and continuity of the CDE, bearing in mind that it is being managed by an ad interim director,

—

Mr Adebayo AKINDEINDE

—

Mr Giovannangelo MONTECCHI PALAZZI

—

Ms Vera VENCLIKOVA,

—

Mr John Atkins ARUHURI

—

Ms Maria MACHAILO-ELLIS

—

Mr Félix MOUKO,