4.8.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 214/1

(1)

Council Regulation (EEC) No 1208/81 of 28 April 1981 determining the Community scale for the classification of carcasses of adult bovine animals (3) has been substantially amended (4). In the interests of clarity and rationality the said Regulation should be codified.

(2)

A Community grading scale for the classification of carcasses of adult bovine animals should be applied for recording prices and for intervention in the beef and veal sector.

(3)

The classification of carcasses of adult bovine animals should be made on the basis of conformation and the degree of fat cover. The combination of these two criteria enables carcasses to be divided into classes. Carcasses thus classified should be identified.

(4)

In order to ensure the uniform application of this Regulation in the Community, provision should be made for on-the-spot checks by a Community inspection committee,

(a)

‘carcass’: the whole body of a slaughtered animal as presented after bleeding, evisceration and skinning, presented:

(b)

‘half-carcass’: the product obtained by separating the carcass referred to in point (a) symmetrically through the middle of each cervical, dorsal, lumbar and sacral vertebra and through the middle of the sternum and the ischiopubic symphysis.

—

without kidneys, kidney fat, or pelvic fat,

—

without thin skirt or thick skirt,

—

without the tail,

—

without the spinal cord,

—

without cod fat,

—

without fat on the inside of topside,

—

without jugular vein and the adjacent fat.

A.

carcasses of uncastrated young male animals of less than two years of age;

B.

carcasses of other uncastrated male animals;

C.

carcasses of castrated male animals;

D.

carcasses of female animals that have calved;

E.

carcasses of other female animals.

(a)

conformation, as defined in Annex I;

(b)

fat cover, as defined in Annex II.

4.8.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 214/7

(1)

The content of Council Regulation No 26 of 4 April 1962 applying certain rules of competition to production of and trade in agricultural products (2) has been amended (3). In the interests of clarity and rationality the said Regulation should be codified.

(2)

By virtue of Article 36 of the Treaty one of the matters to be decided under the common agricultural policy is whether the rules on competition laid down in the Treaty are to apply to the production of, and trade in, agricultural products. Accordingly, the provisions of this Regulation should be supplemented in the light of developments in that policy.

(3)

The rules on competition relating to the agreements, decisions and practices referred to in Article 81 of the Treaty and to the abuse of dominant positions are to be applied to the production of, and trade in, agricultural products, in so far as their application does not impede the functioning of national organisations of agricultural markets or jeopardise attainment of the objectives of the common agricultural policy.

(4)

Special attention is warranted in the case of farmers' organisations the particular objective of which is the joint production or marketing of agricultural products or the use of joint facilities, unless such joint action excludes competition or jeopardises attainment of the objectives of Article 33 of the Treaty.

(5)

In order both to avoid compromising the development of a common agricultural policy and to ensure certainty in the law and non-discriminatory treatment of the undertakings concerned, the Commission should have sole power, subject to review by the Court of Justice, to determine whether the conditions provided for in the two preceding recitals are fulfilled as regards the agreements, decisions and practices referred to in Article 81 of the Treaty.

(6)

In order to implement, as part of the development of the common agricultural policy, the rules on aid for production of, or trade in, agricultural products, the Commission should be in a position to draw up a list of existing, new or proposed types of aid, to make appropriate observations to the Member States and to propose suitable measures to them,

4.8.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 214/10

(1)

The Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Government of the People’s Republic of Angola on fishing off Angola (2) (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’) was signed in Luanda on 1 February 1989 and entered into force on that date pursuant to Article 15 thereof.

(2)

The last Protocol annexed to the Agreement, which set out, for the period from 3 August 2002 to 2 August 2004, the fishing opportunities and the financial contribution provided for by the Agreement (3), has not been renewed, since certain conditions laid down in the new legislative framework on Biological Aquatic Resources adopted by the Government of the Republic of Angola in October 2004 were incompatible with the Community’s requirements for fishing by Community fishing vessels in the waters of Angola.

(3)

It is therefore appropriate to denounce that Agreement in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 14 thereof.

(4)

Under Council Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 of 17 December 1999 laying down the detailed rules and arrangements regarding the Community structural assistance in the fisheries sector (4), the Member States may grant compensation to fishermen and owners of vessels for the temporary cessation of activities where a fisheries agreement is not renewed, or where it is suspended, for the Community fleets dependent on the agreement. The granting of compensation may not last longer than six months. It may be extended by a further six months provided a conversion plan approved by the Commission is implemented for the fleet concerned.

(5)

On 18 July 2005 the Commission adopted a Decision approving the conversion plan for fishing vessels affected by the non-renewal of the fishing protocol between the European Community and the Republic of Angola within the framework of the FIFG operational programme relating to Community structural interventions in the fisheries sector for Objective I regions in Spain during the 2000 to 2006 period.

(6)

In order to facilitate the implementation of that conversion plan, Community fishing vessels covered by the plan which, as a result of this denunciation, cease their activities under the Agreement should be exempted from certain provisions of Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999. In particular, they should not be subject to the obligation to reimburse public aid for the temporary cessation of activities or for renewal, modernisation or equipment or to the obligation to demonstrate continuous activity in the year preceding their deletion from the Community’s fishing vessel register,

4.8.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 214/12

(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,

4.8.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 214/14

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 of 21 April 2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of cross-compliance, modulation and the integrated administration and control system provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers (2) provides, in its Article 21, for reductions to be applied in the case of late submission of an aid application.

(2)

Several Member States have experienced exceptional circumstances in their administration of the single application for 2006. This situation has in turn affected in varying degrees the ability of farmers in the Member States concerned to lodge their single application within the deadline provided for in Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 796/2004. Accordingly, the situation is likely to unduly jeopardise the right of certain farmers to receive in full the aid to which they would normally be entitled.

(3)

France, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom have experienced unexpected problems in their practical implementation of the new Single Payment Scheme due in particular to unforeseeable technical or administrative difficulties. Furthermore, the inclusion of the olive oil sector in the scheme has significantly increased the complexity of the system. The high numbers of farmers lodging an application and the complex calculations of the olive areas to be declared have further complicated the handling of the applications for 2006 in France, Italy, Portugal and Spain.

(4)

Due to the severe situation created by floods in Hungary and unexpected technical difficulties in printing for the first time the relevant graphical information in Poland, the distribution by the competent authorities of complete application forms to the farmers was significantly delayed and affected the farmers’ ability to present their application within the deadline.

(5)

In view of this situation it is appropriate not to apply for 2006 the reduction of 1 % per working day and the exclusion provided for in Article 21(1) of Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 should not apply as regards the applications lodged until dates to be fixed in accordance with the specific circumstances in each of the Member States concerned.

(6)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Direct Payments,

(a)

until 31 May 2006, in respect of:

(b)

until 15 June 2006, in respect of:

4.8.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 214/19

(1)

The representative prices and additional duties applicable to imports of white sugar, raw sugar and certain syrups for the 2006/2007 marketing year are fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1002/2006 (3). These prices and duties have been last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1174/2006 (4).

(2)

The data currently available to the Commission indicate that the said amounts should be changed in accordance with the rules and procedures laid down in Regulation (EC) No 951/2006,

4.8.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 214/21

(1)

Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 lists the persons, groups and entities covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources under that Regulation.

(2)

On 25 July 2006, the Sanctions Committee of the United Nations Security Council decided to amend the list of persons, groups and entities to whom the freezing of funds and economic resources should apply. Annex I should therefore be amended accordingly,

4.8.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 214/29

(1)

Directive 2005/60/EC requires institutions and persons covered to apply, on a risk-sensitive basis, enhanced customer due diligence measures in respect of transactions or business relationships with politically exposed persons residing in another Member State or in a third country. In the context of this risk analysis, it is appropriate for the resources of the institutions and persons covered to be focused in particular on products and transactions that are characterised by a high risk of money laundering. Politically exposed persons are understood to be persons entrusted with prominent public functions, their immediate family members or persons known to be close associates of such persons. In order to provide for a coherent application of the concept of politically exposed person, when determining the groups of persons covered, it is essential to take into consideration the social, political and economic differences between countries concerned.

(2)

Institutions and persons covered by Directive 2005/60/EC may fail to identify a customer as falling within one of the politically exposed person categories, despite having taken reasonable and adequate measures in this regard. In those circumstances, Member States, when exercising their powers in relation to the application of that Directive, should give due consideration to the need to ensure that those persons do not automatically incur liability for such failure. Member States should also consider facilitating compliance with that Directive by providing the necessary guidance to institutions and persons in this connection.

(3)

Public functions exercised at levels lower than national should normally not be considered prominent. However, where their political exposure is comparable to that of similar positions at national level, institutions and persons covered by this Directive should consider, on a risk-sensitive basis, whether persons exercising those public functions should be considered as politically exposed persons.

(4)

Where Directive 2005/60/EC requires institutions and persons covered to identify close associates of natural persons who are entrusted with prominent public functions, this requirement applies to the extent that the relation with the associate is publicly known or that the institution or person has reasons to believe that such relation exists. Thus it does not presuppose active research on the part of the institutions and persons covered by the Directive.

(5)

Persons falling under the concept of politically exposed persons should not be considered as such after they have ceased to exercise prominent public functions, subject to a minimum period.

(6)

Since the adaptation, on a risk-sensitive basis, of the general customer due diligence procedures to low-risk situations is the normal tool under Directive 2005/60/EC, and given the fact that simplified customer due diligence procedures require adequate checks and balances elsewhere in the system aiming at preventing money laundering and terrorist financing, the application of simplified customer due diligence procedures should be restricted to a limited number of cases. In these cases, the requirements for institutions and persons covered by that Directive do not disappear, and these are expected to, inter alia, conduct ongoing monitoring of the business relations, in order to be able to detect complex or unusually large transactions which have no apparent economic or visible lawful purpose.

(7)

Domestic public authorities are generally considered as low-risk customers within their own Member State and, in accordance with Directive 2005/60/EC, may be subject to simplified customer due diligence procedures. However, none of the Community institutions, bodies, offices or agencies, including the European Central Bank (ECB), directly qualify in the Directive for simplified customer due diligence under the ‘domestic public authority’ category or, in the case of the ECB, under the ‘credit and financial institution’ category. However, since these entities do not appear to present a high risk of money laundering or terrorist financing, they should be recognised as low-risk customers and benefit from the simplified customer due diligence procedures provided that appropriate criteria are fulfilled.

(8)

Furthermore, it should be possible to apply simplified customer due diligence procedures in the case of legal entities undertaking financial activities which do not fall under the definition of financial institution under Directive 2005/60/EC but which are subject to national legislation pursuant to that Directive and comply with requirements concerning sufficient transparency as to their identity and adequate control mechanisms, in particular enhanced supervision. This could be the case for undertakings providing general insurance services.

(9)

It should be possible to apply simplified customer due diligence procedures to products and related transactions in limited circumstances, for example where the benefits of the financial product in question cannot generally be realised for the benefit of third parties and those benefits are only realisable in the long term, such as some investment insurance policies or savings products, or where the financial product aims at financing physical assets in the form of leasing agreements in which the legal and beneficial title of the underlying asset remains with the leasing company or in the form of low value consumer credit, provided the transactions are carried out through bank accounts and are below an appropriate threshold. State controlled products which are generally addressed to specific categories of clients, such as savings products for the benefit of children, should benefit from simplified customer due diligence procedures even if not all the criteria are fulfilled. State control should be understood as an activity beyond normal supervision on financial markets and should not be construed as covering products, such as debt securities, issued directly by the State.

(10)

Before allowing use of simplified customer due diligence procedures, Member States should assess whether the customers or the products and related transactions represent a low-risk of money laundering or terrorist financing, notably by paying special attention to any activity of these customers or to any type of products or transactions which may be regarded as particularly likely, by their nature, to be used or abused for money laundering or terrorist financing purposes. In particular, any attempt by customers in relation to low-risk products to act anonymously or hide their identity should be considered as a risk factor and as potentially suspicious.

(11)

In certain circumstances, natural persons or legal entities may conduct financial activities on an occasional or very limited basis, as a complement to other non-financial activities, such as hotels that provide currency exchange services to their clients. Directive 2005/60/EC allows Member States to decide that financial activities of that kind fall outside its scope. The assessment of the occasional or very limited nature of the activity should be made by reference to quantitative thresholds in relation to the transactions and the turnover of the business concerned. These thresholds should be decided at national level, depending on the type of financial activity, in order to take account of differences between countries.

(12)

Moreover, a person engaging in a financial activity on an occasional or very limited basis should not provide a full range of financial services to the public but only those needed for improving the performance of its main business. When the main business of the person relates to an activity covered by Directive 2005/60/EC, the exemption for occasional or limited financial activities should not be granted, except in relation to traders in goods.

(13)

Some financial activities, such as money transmission or remittance services, are more likely to be used or abused for money laundering or terrorist financing purposes. It is therefore necessary to ensure that these or similar financial activities are not exempted from the scope of Directive 2005/60/EC.

(14)

Provision should be made for decisions pursuant to Article 2(2) of Directive 2005/60/EC to be withdrawn as quickly as possible if necessary.

(15)

Member States should ensure that the exemption decisions are not abused for money laundering or terrorist financing purposes. They notably should avoid adopting decisions under Article 2(2) of Directive 2005/60/EC in cases where monitoring or enforcement activities by national authorities present special difficulties as a result of overlapping competences between more than one Member State, such as the provision of financial services on board ships providing transport services between ports situated in different Member States.

(16)

The application of this Directive is without prejudice to the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 of 27 December 2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism (2) and Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 of 27 May 2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaida network and the Taliban, and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 467/2001 prohibiting the export of certain goods and services to Afghanistan, strengthening the flight ban and extending the freeze of funds and other financial resources in respect of the Taliban of Afghanistan (3).

(17)

The measures provided for in this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on the Prevention of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing,

1.

the technical aspects of the definition of politically exposed persons set out in Article 3(8) of that Directive;

2.

technical criteria for assessing whether situations represent a low risk of money laundering or terrorist financing as referred to in Article 11(2) and (5) of that Directive;

3.

technical criteria for assessing whether, in accordance with Article 2(2) of Directive 2005/60/EC, it is justified not to apply that Directive to certain legal or natural persons carrying out a financial activity on an occasional or very limited basis.

(a)

heads of State, heads of government, ministers and deputy or assistant ministers;

(b)

members of parliaments;

(c)

members of supreme courts, of constitutional courts or of other high-level judicial bodies whose decisions are not subject to further appeal, except in exceptional circumstances;

(d)

members of courts of auditors or of the boards of central banks;

(e)

ambassadors, chargés d'affaires and high-ranking officers in the armed forces;

(f)

members of the administrative, management or supervisory bodies of State-owned enterprises.

(a)

the spouse;

(b)

any partner considered by national law as equivalent to the spouse;

(c)

the children and their spouses or partners;

(d)

the parents.

(a)

any natural person who is known to have joint beneficial ownership of legal entities or legal arrangements, or any other close business relations, with a person referred to in paragraph 1;

(b)

any natural person who has sole beneficial ownership of a legal entity or legal arrangement which is known to have been set up for the benefit de facto of the person referred to in paragraph 1.

(a)

the customer has been entrusted with public functions pursuant to the Treaty on European Union, the Treaties on the Communities or Community secondary legislation;

(b)

the customer’s identity is publicly available, transparent and certain;

(c)

the activities of the customer, as well as its accounting practices, are transparent;

(d)

either the customer is accountable to a Community institution or to the authorities of a Member State, or appropriate check and balance procedures exist ensuring control of the customer’s activity.

(a)

the customer is an entity that undertakes financial activities outside the scope of Article 2 of Directive 2005/60/EC but to which national legislation has extended the obligations of that Directive pursuant to Article 4 thereof;

(b)

the identity of the customer is publicly available, transparent and certain;

(c)

the customer is subject to a mandatory licensing requirement under national law for the undertaking of financial activities and licensing may be refused if the competent authorities are not satisfied that the persons who effectively direct or will direct the business of such an entity, or its beneficial owner, are fit and proper persons;

(d)

the customer is subject to supervision, within the meaning of Article 37(3) of Directive 2005/60/EC, by competent authorities as regards compliance with the national legislation transposing that Directive and, where applicable, additional obligations under national legislation;

(e)

failure by the customer to comply with the obligations referred to in point (a) is subject to effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions including the possibility of appropriate administrative measures or the imposition of administrative sanctions.

(a)

the product has a written contractual base;

(b)

the related transactions are carried out through an account of the customer with a credit institution covered by Directive 2005/60/EC or a credit institution situated in a third country which imposes requirements equivalent to those laid down in that Directive;

(c)

the product or related transactions are not anonymous and their nature is such that it allows for the timely application of Article 7(c) of Directive 2005/60/EC;

(d)

the product is subject to a predetermined maximum threshold;

(e)

the benefits of the product or related transactions cannot be realised for the benefit of third parties, except in the case of death, disablement, survival to a predetermined advanced age, or similar events;

(f)

in the case of products or related transactions allowing for the investment of funds in financial assets or claims, including insurance or other kind of contingent claims:

(a)

the financial activity is limited in absolute terms;

(b)

the financial activity is limited on a transaction basis;

(c)

the financial activity is not the main activity;

(d)

the financial activity is ancillary and directly related to the main activity;

(e)

with the exception of the activity referred to in point (3)(e) of Article 2(1) of Directive 2005/60/EC, the main activity is not an activity mentioned in Article 2(1) of that Directive;

(f)

the financial activity is provided only to the customers of the main activity and is not generally offered to the public.

4.8.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 214/35

(1)

The Community has already phased out the production and consumption of chlorofluorocarbons, other fully halogenated chlorofluorocarbons, halons, carbon tetrachloride, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, hydrobromofluorocarbon and bromochloromethane.

(2)

Each year the Commission is required to determine essential uses for these controlled substances, the quantities that may be used and the companies that may use them.

(3)

Decision IV/25 of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, hereinafter ‘the Montreal Protocol’, sets out the criteria used by the Commission for determining any essential uses and authorises the production and consumption necessary to satisfy essential uses of controlled substances in each Party.

(4)

Decision XV/8 of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol authorises the production and consumption necessary to satisfy essential uses of controlled substances listed in Annexes A, B and C (Group II and III substances) of the Montreal Protocol for laboratory and analytical uses as listed in Annex IV to the report of the Seventh Meeting of the Parties, subject to the conditions set out in Annex II to the report of the Sixth Meeting of the Parties, as well as Decisions VII/11, XI/15 and XV/5 of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol.Decision XVII/10 of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol authorises the production and consumption of the controlled substance listed in Annex E of the Montreal Protocol necessary to satisfy laboratory and analytical uses of methyl bromide.

(5)

Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Decision XII/2 of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol on measures to facilitate the transition to chlorofluorocarbon-free Metered-Dose Inhalers (MDIs), all Member States have notified (2) the United Nations Environment Programme that chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are no longer essential for the manufacture of salbutamol CFC-MDIs for placing on the market of the European Community.

Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Portugal, The Netherlands, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia have notified UNEP that the use of CFCs is not considered essential for the manufacture of MDIs for placing on the market of the European Community that contain the active ingredients belonging to the therapeutic category of ‘short-acting beta agonist bronchiodilators’, specifically terbutaline (3), fenoterol, orciprenaline, reproterol, carbuterol, hexoprenaline, pirbuterol, clenbuterol, bitolterol and procaterol.

Belgium, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Germany, Hungary, Latvia, the Netherlands, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia and Sweden have notified UNEP that use of CFCs is not considered essential for the manufacture of MDIs for placing on the market of the European Community that contain the active ingredients belonging to the therapeutic category of ‘inhaled steroids’, specifically beclomethasone, dexamethasone, flunisolide, fluticasone, budesonide (4) and triamcinolone.

Denmark (beclomethasone, fluticasone), Ireland (beclomethasone, fluticasone), Finland (beclomethasone, fluticasone), France (beclomethasone, fluticasone), Italy (beclomethasone, fluticasone, budesonide), Malta (fluticasone, budesonide), Portugal (fluticasone, budesonide), Slovenia (beclomethasone, fluticasone, budesonide), Spain (beclomethasone, fluticasone) and the United Kingdom (fluticasone) have notified UNEP that use of CFCs is not considered essential for the manufacture of MDIs for placing on the market of the European Community that contain the active ingredients belonging to the therapeutic category of ‘inhaled steroids’ shown in parentheses after each Member State.

Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Latvia, the Netherlands, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia have notified UNEP that use of CFCs is not considered essential for the manufacture of MDIs for placing on the market of the European Community that contain the active ingredients belonging to the therapeutic category of ‘non-steroidal anti-inflammatories’, specifically cromoglicic acid and nedrocromil.

Portugal has notified UNEP that use of CFCs is not considered essential for the manufacture of MDIs for placing on the market of the European Community that contains the active ingredient cromoglicic acid. Spain has notified UNEP that use of CFCs is not considered essential for the manufacture of MDIs for placing on the market of the European Community that contains the active ingredient nedrocromil.

Belgium, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Latvia, Malta, the Netherlands, the Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom have notified UNEP that use of CFCs is not considered essential for the manufacture of MDIs for placing on the market of the European Community that contain the active ingredients belonging to the therapeutic category of ‘anticholinergic bronchodilators’, specifically ipatropium bromide and oxitropium bromide.

Portugal has notified UNEP that use of CFCs is not considered essential for the manufacture of MDIs for placing on the market of the European Community that contains the active ingredient ipatropium bromide.

Germany has notified UNEP that use of CFCs is not considered essential for the manufacture of MDIs for placing on the market of the European Community that contain the active ingredients belonging to the therapeutic category of ‘long-acting beta agonist bronchiodilators’, specifically formoterol and salmeterol.

Italy has notified UNEP that use of CFCs is not considered essential for the manufacture of MDIs for placing on the market of the European Community that contains the active ingredient formoterol.

Germany and the Netherlands have notified UNEP that use of CFCs is not considered essential for the manufacture of MDIs for placing on the market of the European Community that contain combinations of active ingredients.

Article 4(4)(i)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 2037/2000 prevents CFCs from being used and placed on the market unless they are considered essential under the conditions described in Article 3(1) of that Regulation. These non-essentiality determinations have therefore reduced the demand for CFCs used in MDIs that are placed on the market of the European Community. In addition, Article 4(6) of Regulation (EC) No 2037/2000 prevents CFC-MDI products being imported and placed on the market unless the CFCs in these products are considered essential under the conditions described in Article 3(1).

(6)

The Commission has published a Notice (5) on 8 July 2005 to those companies in the Community of 25 Member States that request consideration by the Commission for the use of controlled substances for essential uses in the Community in 2006 and has received declarations on intended essential uses of controlled substances for 2006.

(7)

For the purpose of ensuring that interested companies and operators may continue to benefit in due time from the licensing system, it is appropriate that the present decision shall apply from 1 January 2006.

(8)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee established by Article 18(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2037/2000,

1.

The allocation of essential medical use quotas for chlorofluorocarbons 11, 12, 113, 114 and 115 shall be to the companies indicated in Annex II.

2.

The allocation of essential laboratory use quotas for chlorofluorocarbons 11, 12, 113, 114 and 115 and other fully halogenated chlorofluorocarbons shall be to the companies indicated in Annex III.

3.

The allocation of essential laboratory use quotas for halons shall be to the companies indicated in Annex IV.

4.

The allocation of essential laboratory use quotas for carbon tetrachloride shall be to the companies indicated in Annex V.

5.

The allocation of essential laboratory use quotas for 1,1,1-trichloroethane shall be to the companies indicated in Annex VI.

6.

The allocation of laboratory and analytical critical use quotas for methyl bromide shall be to the companies indicated in Annex VII.

7.

The allocation of essential laboratory use quotas for hydrobromofluorocarbons shall be to the companies indicated in Annex VIII.

8.

The allocation of essential laboratory use quotas for bromochloromethane shall be to the companies indicated in Annex IX.

9.

The essential use quotas for chlorofluorocarbons 11, 12, 113, 114 and 115, other fully halogenated chlorofluorocarbons, carbon tetrachloride, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, hydrobromofluorocarbons and bromochloromethane shall be as set out in Annex X.

on behalf of Boehringer Ingelheim (France)