1.10.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 256/1

(1)

Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined Portugal's application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected geographical indication ‘Ovos Moles de Aveiro’, registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 286/2009 (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 as required by Article 50(2)(a) of that Regulation (3).

(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,

1.10.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 256/3

(1)

By virtue of 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 geographical indication ‘Limone di Siracusa’, registered under Commission Regulation (EU) No 96/2011 (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 as required by Article 50(2)(a) of that Regulation (3).

(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,

1.10.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 256/4

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Netherlands' application to register the name ‘Hollandse maatjesharing’/‘Hollandse Nieuwe’/‘Holländischer Matjes’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union  (2).

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Hollandse maatjesharing’/‘Hollandse Nieuwe’/‘Holländischer Matjes’ should therefore be entered in the register,

1.10.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 256/5

(1)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 750/2014 (2) was adopted following reports of a novel swine enteric coronavirus disease caused by emerging porcine alphacoronaviruses, including porcine epidemic diarrhoea virus and a new porcine deltacoronavirus in North America. That Implementing Regulation lays down protection measures in relation to the introduction into the Union of consignments of live pigs for breeding and production from the areas in which the disease caused by those viruses is present in order to provide for the fulfilment of the necessary guarantees at the holding of origin and to prevent the introduction of porcine epidemic diarrhoea caused by those viruses into the Union. Those protection measures are to apply until 12 January 2015.

(2)

Implementing Regulation (EU) No 750/2014 was amended by Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1306/2014 (3) in order to extend its date of application until 31 October 2015 as the epidemiological situation in the third countries affected by novel swine enteric coronavirus disease caused by emerging porcine alphacoronaviruses, including the porcine epidemic diarrhoea virus and the porcine deltacoronavirus, had not changed in terms of the risk of the spread of those porcine entero-coronaviruses since the date of adoption of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 750/2014.

(3)

In light of the evolution in the disease situation in the third countries concerned and in the absence of new scientific information, the protection measures established by Implementing Regulation (EU) No 750/2014 should be prolonged until the end of October 2016. The period of application of that Implementing Regulation should therefore be amended accordingly.

(4)

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

1.10.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 256/7

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 provides for the authorisation of additives for use in animal nutrition and for the grounds and procedures for granting such authorisation. Article 10 of that Regulation provides for the re-evaluation of additives authorised pursuant to Council Directive 70/524/EEC (2).

(2)

Vitamin E was subject to re-evaluation and authorised by Commission Regulation (EU) No 26/2011 (3) until 4 February 2021 as a feed additive for all animal species.

(3)

Although Article 1 of Regulation (EU) No 26/2011 refers to the preparations of vitamin E that are authorised as feed additives subject to the conditions laid down in the Annex thereto, there is no reference to preparations in that Annex. This inconsistency leads the control authorities of some Member States to consider that preparations containing vitamin E are not authorised.

(4)

To enable the correct interpretation of Regulation (EU) No 26/2011, it is necessary to include a reference in the Annex to that Regulation that clarifies the use and placing on the market of preparations containing vitamin E, as this was the intention when the Regulation was adopted.

(5)

In addition, experience with official controls on the labelling of vitamin E showed that clarification should be brought as regards the specific name given to the additive.

(6)

Regulation (EU) No 26/2011 should therefore be corrected accordingly.

(7)

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

(1)

in the column under the heading ‘Additive’:

(2)

in the column under the heading ‘Other provisions’, the following point is added:

1.10.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 256/9

(1)

Pursuant to the third subparagraph of Article 75(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013, from 16 October to 30 November Member States may pay advances of up to 50 % for direct payments under Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) and up to 75 % for area-related and animal-related support measures under Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3).

(2)

Article 75(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 provides that payments referred to in paragraph 1 of that Article, including advances for direct payments, shall not be made before the administrative and on-the-spot checks to be carried out pursuant to Article 74 of that Regulation have been finalised. However, as regards area-related and animal-related support measures under rural development, Article 75(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 allows advances to be paid after the administrative checks pursuant to Article 59(1) of that Regulation have been finalised.

(3)

The severity of the economic situation in certain agricultural sectors, and particularly in the dairy market, has generated serious financial difficulties and cash-flow problems for beneficiaries. That situation coincides with the first year of implementation of the new direct payment schemes. Due to the difficulties experienced by Member States in their practical implementation of those schemes, the administration of the single application, aid applications and payment claims and applications for allocation of payment entitlements or the increase of the value of payment entitlements under the basic payment scheme has been delayed. As a consequence, the necessary checks are likely to be completed later than usual and the payments to beneficiaries are likely to be deferred.

(4)

Due to the exceptional nature of those combined circumstances and the resulting financial difficulties for beneficiaries, it is necessary to alleviate those difficulties by making it possible for beneficiaries to absorb losses until a stabilisation of markets is reached.

(5)

It is therefore justified to derogate from the third subparagraph of Article 75(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 in order to allow Member States to pay a higher level of advances to beneficiaries for claim year 2015.

(6)

The principle of paying direct payments only after all administrative and on-the-spot checks are completed is a corner stone of the assurance that is obtained by the integrated administration and control system. However, in view of the serious difficulties encountered by the beneficiaries, it is necessary, as an exceptional measure for claim year 2015, to derogate from the first subparagraph of Article 75(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 in order to allow advances for direct payments to be made after the administrative checks as specified in Articles 28 and 29 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 809/2014 (4) are completed. It is however imperative that such a derogation will not impede the sound financial management and the requirement of a sufficient level of assurance. Accordingly, Member States making use of that derogation are responsible for taking all necessary measures to ensure that overpayments are avoided and that any undue amounts are quickly and actually recovered. Moreover, the use of that derogation should be covered by the management declaration referred to in Article 7(3)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 for financial year 2016.

(7)

In view of the seriousness of the financial difficulties currently being encountered by beneficiaries, this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its publication.

(8)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on the Agricultural Funds, the Committee for Direct Payments and the Rural Development Committee,

1.10.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 256/11

(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,

1.10.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 256/13

(1)

Pursuant to Article 6(1) of Joint Action 2008/851/CFSP, the Council authorised the Political and Security Committee (PSC) to take the relevant decisions on the appointment of the EU Force Commander for the European Union military operation to contribute to the deterrence, prevention and repression of acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast (‘EU Force Commander’).

(2)

On 15 April 2015, the PSC adopted Decision (CFSP) 2015/607 (2) appointing Captain (Navy) Alfonso GÓMEZ FERNÁNDEZ DE CÓRDOBA as EU Force Commander.

(3)

The EU Operation Commander has recommended the appointment of Rear Admiral Stefano BARBIERI as the new EU Force Commander to succeed Captain (Navy) Alfonso GÓMEZ FERNÁNDEZ DE CÓRDOBA.

(4)

The EU Military Committee supports that recommendation.

(5)

Decision (CFSP) 2015/607 should therefore be repealed.

(6)

In accordance with Article 5 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark does not participate in the elaboration and the implementation of decisions and actions of the Union which have defence implications,

1.10.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 256/15

(1)

The company Rentokil Initial 1927 plc (‘the applicant’) submitted on 8 April 2014 a complete application to Germany (‘the concerned Member State’) for mutual recognition of an authorisation granted by the United Kingdom (‘the reference Member State’) in respect of a rodenticide biocidal product containing the active substance bromadiolone as a wax block formulation (‘the contested product’).

(2)

The reference Member State authorised the contested product on 17 February 2014 for use in and around buildings against mice and rats and in sewers against rats. The authorisation has subsequently been mutually recognised by Estonia, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Norway.

(3)

In accordance with Article 35(2) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, the concerned Member State referred to the Coordination Group established under Article 35 of that Regulation on 9 September 2014 three points of disagreement indicating that the contested product does not meet the conditions laid down in Article 19 of that Regulation.

(4)

The concerned Member State considers that (a) regarding the use in and around buildings against rats, the efficacy has not been demonstrated since the results of two out of the three field trials submitted by the applicant did not demonstrate an acceptable level of efficacy; (b) regarding the use in sewers against rats, the approach followed by the reference Member State to establish the efficacy of the product is not acceptable as a consequence of the first point of disagreement; (c) regarding the use against mice, the set of laboratory studies and one out of the two field trials submitted by the applicant failed to fulfil the criteria to demonstrate efficacy.

(5)

The Coordination Group Secretariat invited the other Member States and the applicant to submit written comments to the referral and comments were submitted by Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom. The referral was also discussed between the Member States' Competent Authorities for biocidal products in the meeting of the Coordination Group of 11 November 2014.

(6)

As no agreement was reached within the Coordination Group, in accordance with Article 36(1) of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 the reference Member State referred to the Commission on 13 March 2015 a detailed statement of the matters on which Member States were unable to reach agreement and the reasons for their disagreement. A copy of this statement was also forwarded to the Member States concerned referred to in Article 35(2) of that Regulation and the applicant.

(7)

Concerning the efficacy against rats in and around buildings, the results of the laboratory tests and of one of the field trials submitted by the applicant demonstrate an acceptable level of efficacy against the criteria established in the EU guidance on efficacy evaluation of rodenticides (hereafter ‘the EU guidance’) (2). In addition, the availability of at least one valid field trial was deemed to be in line with the EU guidance and acceptable to demonstrate the efficacy of a rodenticide by the Coordination Group in a previous similar case (3).

(8)

Concerning the efficacy against rats in sewers, the reference Member State used the results of one of the field trials submitted by the applicant demonstrating an acceptable level of efficacy to overcome the inconclusive results of the palatability studies. The same approach was used previously by the concerned Member State during the evaluation of a similar product, but with positive results from three field trials.

(9)

Concerning the use against mice, the laboratory studies do not fulfil the criteria established in the EU guidance. However, that EU guidance also establishes that results of field trials might outweigh those of laboratory trials. In the present case, the results of one of the field trials demonstrate an acceptable level of efficacy against the criteria established in the available EU guidance.

(10)

In the light of the elements referred to in recitals 7 to 9, the Commission considers the conclusions reached by the reference Member State on the three points of disagreement to be valid.

(11)

The Commission also notes that the conclusions reached by the reference Member State on the basis of these elements and of the judgement of its experts, as provided for by paragraph 12 of Annex VI to Regulation (EU) No 528/2012, were supported by those Member States having authorised the contested product through mutual recognition.

(12)

Since the legal basis for this Decision is Article 36(3) of that Regulation, this decision should be addressed to all Member States by virtue of Article 36(4) of that Regulation.

(13)

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

1.10.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 256/17

(1)

African swine fever is a highly contagious and fatal infection of domestic pigs and wild boar, with the potential for rapid spread, notably through products obtained from infected animals and contaminated inanimate objects.

(2)

Due to the African swine fever situation in Russia and in Belarus, the Commission adopted Implementing Decision 2013/426/EU (2) laying down measures which provide amongst others for appropriate cleansing and disinfection of ‘livestock vehicles’ having transported live animals and feed and which enter the Union from those two countries.

(3)

Following recent notifications of African swine fever outbreaks in Ukraine, the existing measures of cleansing and disinfection provided for in Implementing Decision 2013/426/EU should also be extended to the vehicles entering the Union from Ukraine.

(4)

The list of third countries and parts of territory of third countries where the presence of African swine fever virus is confirmed, as provided for in Annex I of Implementing Decision 2013/426/EU, should therefore be amended accordingly.

(5)

Implementing Decision 2013/426/EU applies until 31 December 2015. Due to the unfavourable disease situation as regards African swine fever in the countries neighbouring the Union borders, and taking into account the epidemiology of African swine fever and the measures applicable in the Union as regards that disease, it is appropriate to extend this period until 31 December 2019.

(6)

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

1.10.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 256/19

(1)

On 10 March 2011, the Council decided to authorise enhanced cooperation between Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden and the United Kingdom in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection.

(2)

On 17 December 2012, the European Parliament and the Council adopted Regulation (EU) No 1257/2012 (2).

(3)

On 17 December 2012, the Council adopted Regulation (EU) No 1260/2012 (3).

(4)

Italy has notified its intention to participate in enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection by letter dated 2 July 2015, which the Commission registered as received on 20 July 2015.

(5)

The Commission notes that neither Decision 2011/167/EU nor Regulations (EU) No 1257/2012 and (EU) No 1260/2012 prescribe any particular conditions of participation in enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection and that Italy's participation should strengthen the benefits of this enhanced cooperation,