(1)

Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 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 the Annex thereto.

(2)

In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation,

(1)

Council Regulation (EC) No 2340/2002 of 16 December 2002 fixing for 2003 and 2004 the fishing opportunities for deep-sea fish stocks (2) lays down quotas for tusk for 2004.

(2)

In order to ensure compliance with the provisions relating to the quantity limits on catches of stocks subject to quotas, the Commission must fix the date by which catches made by vessels flying the flag of a Member State are deemed to have exhausted the quota allocated.

(3)

According to the information received by the Commission, catches of tusk in the waters of ICES sub-areas V, VI, VII (Community waters and waters not under the sovereignty or jurisdiction of third countries) by vessels flying the flag of Ireland or registered in Ireland have exhausted the quota allocated for 2004. Ireland has prohibited fishing for this stock from 1 October 2004. This date should be adopted in this Regulation also,

(1)

Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1763/2004 lists the persons covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources under that Regulation.

(2)

The Commission is empowered to amend that Annex, taking into account Council Decisions implementing Common Position 2004/694/CFSP on further measures in support of the effective implementation of the mandate of ICTY (2). Council Decision 2004/767/CFSP (3) implements that Common Position. Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1763/2004 should, therefore, be amended accordingly.

(3)

In order to ensure that the measures provided for in this Regulation are effective, this Regulation must enter into force immediately,

(1)

Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 provides that the rates of duty in the Common Customs Tariff are to be charged on import of the products referred to in Article 1 of that Regulation. However, in the case of the products referred to in paragraph 2 of that Article, the import duty is to be equal to the intervention price valid for such products on importation and increased by 55 %, minus the cif import price applicable to the consignment in question. However, that duty may not exceed the rate of duty in the Common Customs Tariff.

(2)

Pursuant to Article 10(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003, the cif import prices are calculated on the basis of the representative prices for the product in question on the world market.

(3)

Regulation (EC) No 1249/96 lays down detailed rules for the application of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 as regards import duties in the cereals sector.

(4)

The import duties are applicable until new duties are fixed and enter into force.

(5)

In order to allow the import duty system to function normally, the representative market rates recorded during a reference period should be used for calculating the duties.

(6)

Application of Regulation (EC) No 1249/96 results in import duties being fixed as set out in Annex I to this Regulation,

(1)

The Netherlands have requested an extension to 12 months of the maximum period laid down for the application of eartags to bovine animals in nature reserves, due to practical difficulties.

(2)

Those animals are primarily kept for the purpose of nature protection and landscape conservation and not for production purposes. They are kept under extensive holding conditions and in free range where calves stay always close to their mother.

(3)

It is justified to take account of the Dutch request, provided that the extension of the maximum period for tagging does not affect the quality of information provided by the Dutch database for bovine animals and that there is no movement of bovine animals to which eartags have not been applied.

(4)

In the case of animals, which have not been tagged until the age of 6 months, the identity of the mother should be verified by a DNA test. Taking this additional guarantee into account the maximum period for tagging should not be longer than 12 months.

(5)

This derogation should be strictly restricted to a limited number of holdings, which have been separately authorised according to defined criteria as nature reserves and communicated to the Commission.

(6)

The Dutch authorities undertake not to extend this derogation to the identification and registration system of bovine animals.

(7)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund,

(1)

In accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 19(2) of Directive 2000/13/EC, the German authorities notified the Commission on 1 March 2004 of a draft Regulation amending the Regulation on maximum residue limits, with a view to adding to it specific provisions on the compulsory labelling of fruit, vegetables and potatoes treated with plant protection substances after harvesting for the purpose of preservation.

(2)

Pursuant to the new Article 3a added by the aforementioned draft Regulation, directions on the labels of fruit, vegetables or potatoes treated after harvesting should state ‘treated after harvesting with …’ followed by the name of the substance.

(3)

In accordance with the provisions of Article 19(2) of Directive 2000/13/EC, the Commission consulted the other Member States via the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health.

(4)

Community law already contains certain provisions to ensure that the use of these substances does not present a risk to consumers’ health. These substances have to be authorised, pursuant to Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market (2), and maximum levels for residues are established in accordance with Council Directive 90/642/EEC of 27 November 1990 on the fixing of maximum levels for pesticide residues in and on certain products of plant origin, including fruit and vegetables (3).

(5)

Furthermore, in some cases, it may be useful for consumers to be informed, by means of a specific warning on the label, where foodstuffs have been treated after harvesting so that they can choose between products which have been treated and those which have not or take precautions such as washing or peeling the products. This type of measure is already in place for citrus fruit under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1799/2001 (4), in particular because of the method for calculating the maximum residue levels which, for these products, takes into account that they are normally consumed peeled.

(6)

However, such a measure applied unilaterally and indiscriminately by Germany in respect of all fruit and vegetables would be sure to hinder intra-Community trade to a disproportionate extent. It would oblige producers or operators in other Member States to provide specific labelling for fruit, vegetables and potatoes imported into Germany and to take measures to this effect right from the start of the production process, depending on the destination of the products.

(7)

The cases where non-harmonised national provisions governing the labelling and presentation of certain foodstuffs or foodstuffs in general may be acceptable are listed limitatively in Article 18(2) of Directive 2000/13/EC. Apart from cases relating to the protection of public health, such measures may be admissible only where justified for the prevention of fraud or the protection of industrial and commercial property rights, indications of provenance, registered designations of origin and prevention of unfair competition.

(8)

Germany has not provided any evidence that the draft Regulation is necessary to attain one of the objectives of the abovementioned Article 18 or that the obstacle thus created is proportionate. It mentions only the aim of informing consumers on post-harvesting treatments.

(9)

Consequently, a Community labelling measure should be created for cases where it would be desirable to inform consumers of post-harvesting treatments, as envisaged by Germany. This is the case for sodium orthophenylphenol and orthophenylphenate, as Directive 2003/114/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (5) provides that they are to be removed from the scope of the legislation on additives as soon as provisions on the labelling of foods treated with these substances come into force pursuant to Community legislation laying down maximum levels of pesticide residues.

(10)

The Commission will be continuing discussions with the Member States with regard to other extensions of labelling to indicate treatment after harvesting.

(11)

Member States should therefore suspend any national initiatives in this area.

(12)

In light of these observations, the Commission has delivered a negative opinion pursuant to Article 19(3) of Directive 2000/13/EC.

(13)

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

(1)

In accordance with Article 2 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3149/92 of 29 October 1992 laying down detailed rules for the supply of food from intervention stocks for the benefit of the most deprived persons in the Community (3), the Commission must adopt a distribution plan to be financed from resources available in the 2005 budget year. The plan should lay down in particular, for each of the Member States applying the measure, the maximum financial resources available to carry out its part of the plan, and the quantity of each type of product to be withdrawn from the stocks held by the intervention agencies.

(2)

The Member States involved in the plan have supplied the information required in accordance with Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 3149/92.

(3)

For the purposes of resource allocation, account must be taken of experience and of the degree to which the Member States used the resources allocated to them in previous years.

(4)

The intra-Community transfers necessary to bring the plan to fruition should also be authorised under the conditions provided for in Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 3149/92.

(5)

To implement the plan, the operative event within the meaning of Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 2799/98 should be the date on which the financial year for administration of stocks in public storage starts.

(6)

In accordance with Article 2(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 3149/92 the Commission sought the advice of the major organisations familiar with the problems of the most deprived persons in the Community when drawing up the plan.

(7)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinions of all the relevant committees,

(1)

By Common Position 2004/694/CFSP the Council adopted measures in order to freeze all funds and economic resources belonging to Radovan Karadžić, Ratko Mladić and Ante Gotovina.

(2)

These measures should be extended to all persons publicly indicted by the ICTY for war crimes who are not in the custody of the Tribunal.

(3)

The list contained in the Annex to Common Position 2004/694/CFSP should therefore be amended.

(4)

Action by the Community is needed in order to implement this Decision,