(1)

Council Regulation (EU) 2015/104 (2), lays down quotas for 2015.

(2)

According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2015.

(3)

It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,

(1)

Council Regulation (EU) No 1367/2014 (2), lays down quotas for 2015.

(2)

According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2015.

(3)

It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,

(1)

Council Regulation (EU) 2015/104 (2), lays down quotas for 2015.

(2)

According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2015.

(3)

It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,

(1)

Council Regulation (EU) 2015/104 (2), lays down quotas for 2015.

(2)

According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2015.

(3)

It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,

(1)

Council Regulation (EU) No 1367/2014 (2) lays down quotas for 2015.

(2)

According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2015.

(3)

It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,

(1)

Council Regulation (EU) 2015/104 (2) lays down quotas for 2015.

(2)

According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2015.

(3)

It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,

(1)

Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined Italy's application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected designation of origin ‘Capocollo di Calabria’, registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 134/98 (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)

Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined Italy's application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected designation of origin ‘Pancetta di Calabria’, registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 134/98 (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)

Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined Italy's application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected designation of origin ‘Soppressata di Calabria’, registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 134/98 (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)

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)

According to Article 126(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), Member States are to avoid excessive government deficits. Government deficit and debt data relevant for the application of Articles 121 and 126 TFEU, or for the application of Protocol No 12 on the excessive deficit procedure annexed to the Treaties, are an essential input to economic policy coordination in the Union.

(2)

In order to enhance the enforcement of budgetary surveillance in the euro area, and to deter misrepresentation, whether intentional or due to serious negligence, of government deficit and debt data, the Council, acting upon a recommendation by the Commission, may decide to impose a fine on the Member State responsible.

(3)

On 11 July 2014, the Commission launched an investigation related to the manipulation of statistics in Spain as referred to in Regulation (EU) No 1173/2011. The preliminary findings of the investigation were sent to Spain for its observations on 19 February 2015, as required by Delegated Decision 2012/678/EU. Spain provided its written observations on the preliminary findings on time.

(4)

On 7 May 2015, the Commission adopted a report on the investigation related to the manipulation of statistics in Spain as referred to in Regulation (EU) No 1173/2011, taking into account the observations provided by Spain.

(5)

In its report, the Commission has concluded that an entity within the general government sector of Spain, the Regional Audit Office of the Autonomous Community of Valencia, was seriously negligent concerning the non-recording of health expenditure and the non-respect of the accrual principle in national accounts, leading to incorrect reporting of the government deficit data of Spain to the Commission (Eurostat) in March 2012. Based on the findings of the Commission, it is appropriate to conclude that a misrepresentation of deficit data due to serious negligence took place when Spain reported the incorrect figures to Eurostat in March 2012. These elements justify the imposition of a fine.

(6)

The amount of the fine should not exceed 0,2 % of the gross domestic product of Spain in 2014.

(7)

The reference amount of the fine to be imposed should be equal to 5 % of the larger impact of the misrepresentation of the general government deficit of Spain for the relevant years covered by the notification in the context of the excessive deficit procedure (EDP). The revision to the expenditure reported by Spain for the April 2012 EDP notification amounted to EUR 1,893 billion. The reference amount should thus be set at EUR 94,65 million.

(8)

Taking into account the criteria set out in point (a) of Article 14(3) of Delegated Decision 2012/678/EU, the Commission, in its report, has concluded that the misrepresentation of data had no significant impact on the functioning of the strengthened economic governance of the Union, due to the limited impact on the deficit of Spain as a whole. Moreover, it concludes that the reporting of the correct figures followed shortly after the publication of the incorrect deficit data for Spain in April 2012, allowing the revision of the deficit data for Spain to take place still in 2012. These elements justify a reduction of the amount of the fine.

(9)

Taking into account the criteria set out in point (b) of Article 14(3) of Delegated Decision 2012/678/EU, the Commission, in its report, has concluded that the misrepresentation was the result of serious negligence. No modulation should be applied to the amount of the fine in this respect.

(10)

Taking into account the criteria set out in point (c) of Article 14(3) of Delegated Decision 2012/678/EU, the Commission, in its report, has concluded that the misrepresentation of data was essentially the work of one entity within the general government sector of Spain. These elements justify a reduction in the amount of the fine.

(11)

Taking into account the criteria set out in point (d) of Article 14(3) of Delegated Decision 2012/678/EU, the Commission, in its report, has concluded that the relevant actions of the Member State on which a fine may be based are those which took place in the period from 13 December 2011, when Regulation (EU) No 1173/2011 entered into force, until the launch of the investigation, namely, 11 July 2014. It has also concluded that the incorrectly reported deficit data were corrected in connection with the revision in the October 2012 EDP notification. No modulation should be applied to the amount of the fine on account of the duration of the misrepresentation.

(12)

Taking into account the criteria set out in point (e) of Article 14(3) of Delegated Decision 2012/678/EU, the Commission, in its report, has concluded that the Spanish statistical authorities and all the entities concerned have shown a high degree of cooperation in the course of the investigation. These elements justify a reduction in the amount of the fine.

(13)

In view of these circumstances, the fine to be imposed on Spain should be set at EUR 18,93 million,

(1)

On 25 June 2013, the company Technology Crops International made a request to the competent authorities of the United Kingdom to place refined oil from the seeds of Buglossoides arvensis on the market as a novel food ingredient.

(2)

On 6 January 2014, the competent food assessment body of the United Kingdom issued its initial assessment report. In that report, it came to the conclusion that refined oil from the seeds of Buglossoides arvensis meets the criteria for novel food set out in Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 258/97.

(3)

On 21 January 2014, the Commission forwarded the initial assessment report to the other Member States.

(4)

Reasoned objections were raised within the 60-day period laid down in the first subparagraph of Article 6(4) of Regulation (EC) No 258/97.

(5)

On 11 June 2014, the Commission consulted the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), asking it to carry out an assessment for refined oil from the seeds of Buglossoides arvensis as a novel food ingredient in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 258/97.

(6)

On 5 February 2015, EFSA in its ‘Scientific Opinion on the safety of refined Buglossoides oil as a novel food ingredient’ (2), concluded that refined oil from the seeds of Buglossoides arvensis is safe for the proposed uses and use levels.

(7)

Directive 2002/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (3) lays down requirements on food supplements. Regulation (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council (4) lays down requirements on the addition of vitamins and minerals and of certain other substances to foods. Commission Directive 1999/21/EC (5) lays down requirements for dietary foods for special medical purposes. Commission Directive 96/8/EC (6) lays down requirements on foods intended for use in energy-restricted diets for weight reduction. The use of refined oil from the seeds of Buglossoides arvensis should be authorised without prejudice to the requirements of those legislations.

(8)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,

(1)

On 18 December 2012, the company Avitop GmbH made a request to the competent authorities of Ireland to place heat-treated milk products fermented with Bacteroides xylanisolvens (DSM 23964) on the market as a novel food.

(2)

On 21 June 2013, the competent food assessment body of Ireland issued its initial assessment report. In that report it came to the conclusion that heat-treated milk products fermented with Bacteroides xylanisolvens (DSM 23964) meet the criteria for novel food set out in Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 258/97.

(3)

On 4 September 2013, the Commission forwarded the initial assessment report to the other Member States.

(4)

Reasoned objections were raised within the 60-day period laid down in the first subparagraph of Article 6(4) of Regulation (EC) No 258/97.

(5)

On 10 April 2014, the Commission consulted the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) asking it to carry out an assessment for heat-treated milk products fermented with Bacteroides xylanisolvens (DSM 23964) as novel food in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 258/97.

(6)

On 10 December 2014, EFSA adopted ‘Scientific Opinion on the safety of “heat-treated milk products fermented with Bacteroides xylanisolvens DSM 23964” as a novel food’ (2), concluding that those milk products are safe.

(7)

That opinion gives sufficient grounds to establish that heat-treated milk products fermented with Bacteroides xylanisolvens (DSM 23964) as a novel food complies with the criteria laid down in Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 258/97.

(8)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,