(1)

By virtue of the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined France’s application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected designation of origin ‘Selles-sur-Cher’, registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 (2).

(2)

Since the amendments in question are not minor within the meaning of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union (3), as required by Article 50(2)(a) of that Regulation.

(3)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the amendments to the specification should be approved,

(1)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 601/2013 (2) authorised cobalt(II) acetate tetrahydrate, cobalt(II) carbonate, cobalt(II) carbonate hydroxide (2:3) monohydrate, cobalt(II) sulphate heptahydrate and coated granulated cobalt(II) carbonate hydroxide (2:3) monohydrate as feed additives belonging to the category ‘nutritional additives’ and to the functional group ‘compounds of trace elements’.

(2)

In order to clarify the identification of the additive cobalt(II) carbonate, the chemical formula Cobalt hydroxide should be deleted from the active substances.

(3)

For better clarity and to avoid confusion with the identification numbers of selenium compounds authorised as feed additives, it is appropriate to technically modify the identification numbers for the cobalt compounds.

(4)

The European Food Safety Authority (‘the Authority’) concluded in its opinions of 12 June 2012 (3), (4) and 22 May 2012 (5) that specific measures for the protection of the users should be foreseen. The respective requirement that compounds with a high dusting potential must be placed on the market in a pelleted form could be expanded to other non-powder forms without compromising the risk for the users.

(5)

The applicant for coated granulated cobalt(II) carbonate hydroxide (2:3) monohydrate submitted data in order to substantiate that the substance coated is cobalt(II) carbonate and not cobalt(II) carbonate hydroxide (2:3) monohydrate. After verification in the application dossier which was the basis for the above mentioned opinion of the Authority (6), it appears necessary to change the authorisation terms of this product accordingly.

(6)

As a result of the granting of new authorisations by Implementing Regulation (EU) No 601/2013, the provisions of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1334/2003 (7) concerning cobaltous acetate tetrahydrate, basic cobaltous carbonate monohydrate and cobaltous sulphate heptahydrate are obsolete and should be deleted.

(7)

As a consequence of these modifications, the transitional period provided for in Implementing Regulation (EU) No 601/2013 should be extended in order to allow interested parties to prepare themselves to meet the requirements resulting from the amendments. As regards feed intended for pet animals, the market consists in a huge number of different products with a specific labelling system. It is therefore appropriate to prolong such a transitional period in order to allow a smooth transition for the feed business operators concerned.

(8)

Implementing Regulation (EU) No 601/2013 should be amended accordingly.

(9)

In addition, a transitional period for operators who applied the provisions of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 601/2013 should be established.

(10)

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

1.

The following Article 1a is added:

(*1)   OJ L 187, 26.7.2003, p. 11.’ "

2.

Article 2 is replaced by the following:

3.

The Annex is replaced by the text set out in the Annex to this Regulation.

(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)

On 20 July 2001, the Council adopted Joint Action 2001/554/CFSP (1).

(2)

The European Union Institute for Security Studies (‘the Institute’) should assist the European Union and its Member States in the implementation of the common foreign and security policy (CFSP), including the common security and defence policy (CSDP), as well as other external action of the Union, under the political supervision of the Council and the operational direction of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR).

(3)

The Institute should have legal personality and work in complete intellectual independence, without prejudice to the responsibilities of the Council and of the HR.

(4)

On 20 September 2011, pursuant to Article 19 of Joint Action 2001/554/CFSP, the HR presented a report to the Council on the review of the functioning of the Institute. The Political and Security Committee (PSC) took note of that report and, on 1 February 2012, recommended that the Council amend Joint Action 2001/554/CFSP.

(5)

It is appropriate, for reasons of legal clarity, to consolidate previous amendments and the additional proposed changes into one single new decision, and to repeal Joint Action 2001/554/CFSP,

(1)

Pursuant to the first paragraph of Article 255 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, a panel is to be set up in order to give an opinion on candidates’ suitability to perform the duties of Judge and Advocate-General of the Court of Justice and the General Court before the Governments of the Member States make the appointments (hereafter referred to as the ‘panel’).

(2)

The panel is to comprise seven persons chosen from among former members of the Court of Justice and the General Court, members of national supreme courts and lawyers of recognised competence, one of whom is to be proposed by the European Parliament.

(3)

Account should be taken of a balanced membership of the panel, both in geographical terms and in terms of representation of the legal systems of the Member States.

(4)

The members of the panel and its President should therefore be appointed,

Mr Jean-Marc SAUVÉ, President

Mr Luigi BERLINGUER

Ms Pauliine KOSKELO

Lord MANCE

Mr Péter PACZOLAY

Mr Christiaan TIMMERMANS

Mr Andreas VOSSKUHLE

(1)

On 15 October 2013, the Council adopted Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions.

(2)

The planning and execution of the tasks conferred on the ECB should be fully undertaken by an internal body composed of its Chair and Vice-Chair and four representatives of the ECB and one representative of the national competent authority in each participating Member State (‘Supervisory Board’).

(3)

The Supervisory Board should be an essential body in the exercise of supervisory tasks by the ECB, tasks which until now have always been in the hands of national competent authorities. For this reason, on 16 December 2013 the Council adopted an implementing decision to appoint the Chair of the Supervisory Board (2). On the same grounds, the Council should be given the power to adopt an implementing decision to appoint the Vice-Chair of the Supervisory Board.

(4)

In accordance with Article 26(3) of the above-mentioned Regulation, and after hearing the Supervisory Board, the ECB submitted a proposal for the appointment of the Vice-Chair of the Supervisory Board to the European Parliament for approval on 22 January 2014. The European Parliament approved this proposal on 5 February 2014.

(5)

Subsequently, on 5 February 2014, the ECB submitted to the Council a proposal for the appointment of the Vice-Chair of the Supervisory Board.

(1)

In accordance with the procedure set out in Article 11(2) of Directive 2006/42/EC, the Danish authorities notified to the Commission and to the other Member States a measure relating to machinery of the Avant 600 series manufactured by Avant Tecno Oy, Ylötie 1, FIN-33470 Ylöjärvi, Finland. The machinery bore the CE marking and was accompanied by an EC Declaration of conformity according to Directive 2006/42/EC on machinery, Directive 2004/108/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) on electromagnetic compatibility and Directive 2000/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (3) on noise emission in the environment by equipment for use outdoors.

(2)

Machinery of the Avant 600 series is multi-purpose earthmoving machinery that can be fitted with a wide range of attachments in order to carry out many different functions during activities such as forestry, farming, landscaping, ground care, property maintenance, material handling, digging and construction.

(3)

The Danish measure was motivated by the non-conformity of the machinery with the essential health and safety requirement set out in Section 3.4.4 of Annex I to Directive 2006/42/EC, which requires that where, in the case of self-propelled machinery with a ride-on operator, there is a risk due to falling objects or material, the machinery must be designed and constructed in such a way as to take account of this risk and fitted, if its size allows, with an appropriate protective structure.

(4)

The Danish authorities indicated that, while several of the intended functions of the machinery exposed the ride-on operator to risks due to falling objects or material, the machinery had been placed on the market without a falling object protective structure (FOPS). The Danish authorities asked the manufacturer to take corrective measures. Since this request was not met, the Danish authorities prohibited the placing on the market of machinery of the Avant 600 series without a FOPS and ordered the manufacturer to take corrective action with respect to machines already placed on the market.

(5)

The Commission wrote to the manufacturer inviting him to communicate his observations on the measure taken by Denmark. In his reply, the manufacturer indicated the Avant 600 series was equipped with a cab tested by the Notified Body MTT-Vakola No 0504. The cab was always fitted with a roll-over protective structure (ROPS) and could be fitted with a FOPS as an option. When the machinery was sold for use in agriculture, property maintenance, landscaping or for use in stables, for example, where there was no risk of falling objects, no FOPS was fitted. On the other hand, when the machinery was sold for applications where there was a risk of falling objects, such as for example, use in mines, it was always fitted with a FOPS. The manufacturer also stated that he had decided to clarify the instruction manual and sales literature in order to specify in which situations a cab fitted with a FOPS must be used.

(6)

Section 1.1.2(a) of Annex I to Directive 2006/42/EC requires machinery to be designed and constructed so that it is fitted for its function and can be operated, adjusted and maintained without putting persons at risk when these operations are carried out under the conditions foreseen but also taking into account any reasonable foreseeable misuse thereof. The aim of measures taken must be to eliminate any risk throughout the foreseeable lifetime of the machinery including the phases of transport, assembly, dismantling, disabling and scrapping. The measures must be taken according to the principles of safety integration set out in Section 1.1.2(b) of Annex I which give priority to integrated protective measures over information for users.

(7)

In the case of multi-purpose earthmoving machinery such as the Avant 600 series, even if a particular machine is initially supplied for functions or for use in environments not involving a risk due to falling objects or material, it is possible to be used during its foreseeable lifetime for other intended functions or in environments that expose operators to that risk. Consequently, the risk due to falling objects or material must be taken into account in the design and construction of the machine.

(8)

Examination of the evidence provided by the Danish authorities and of the observations communicated by the manufacturer confirms that machinery of the Avant 600 series without a FOPS does not comply with the essential health and safety requirement set out in Section 3.4.4 of Annex I to Directive 2006/42/EC and that this non-conformity gives rise to a serious risk of injury to ride-on operators due to falling objects or material,