28.11.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 330/1

(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,

28.11.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 330/3

(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 1710/2006 (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,

28.11.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 330/5

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1445/95 of 26 June 1995 on rules of application for import and export licences in the beef and veal sector and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 2377/80 (2) sets out the conditions for the operation of the system of import and export licences in the beef and veal sector.

(2)

Since the start of 2005, the level of export refunds in the beef and veal sector has been reduced several times. The level of the security for export licences with advance fixing of the refund has not, however, been adapted to this new situation. The levels of that security should be adapted to take account of these reductions, maintaining a ratio between the level of the security and the level of the refund similar to that which applied prior to the reduction of the refunds.

(3)

Exports in the beef and veal sector have been declining steadily since 2000. In the interests of simplification and efficient management, in the current context it would also appear appropriate to review the rules for issuing those export licences which do not have to be issued immediately. In this context, the communication by the Member States to the Commission of applications for export licences should be limited to one notification per week. Similarly, the quantities for which export licences may, at the request of the operator, be issued immediately should be increased from 22 to 25 tonnes.

(4)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1741/2006 (3) lays down the conditions for granting the special export refund on boned meat of adult male bovine animals placed under the customs warehousing procedure prior to export. To allow the smooth operation of that system, it should be laid down that licences which are to be issued immediately, with a validity restricted to five working days, do not allow access to the customs warehousing procedure prior to export provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1741/2006.

(5)

For the same reasons, it should also be laid down that the reduction of the refund provided for in Article 18(3) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 of 15 April 1999 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products (4) where the destination of the beef and veal has changed from that initially indicated on the export certificate does not apply to the beef and veal placed under that system.

(6)

Regulation (EC) No 1445/95 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(7)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Beef and Veal,

1.

Article 9(1) is amended as follows:

2.

Article 10 is amended as follows:

3.

In Article 11, the following paragraph 2 is added:

‘2.   The second indent of Article 18(3)(b) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 (5) shall not apply to special export refunds granted to products falling within CN codes 0201 30 00 91 00 and 0201 30 00 91 20 of the agricultural product nomenclature for export refunds established by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 (6) where these products have been placed under the customs warehousing procedure in accordance with Article 4 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1741/2006 (7).

4.

In the first indent of Article 13(1)", the words ’and Thursday’ are deleted.

5.

Annex IIIa, as set out in the Annex to this Regulation, is added.

6.

Annex IV is amended as follows:

28.11.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 330/9

(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.

(2)

In accordance with Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003, an application was submitted for the authorisation of the preparation set out in the Annex. That application was accompanied by the particulars and documents required under Article 7(3) of that Regulation.

(3)

The application concerns authorisation of the preparation selenomethionine as a feed additive for all species, to be classified in the additive category ‘nutritional additives’.

(4)

The method of analysis included in the application for authorisation in accordance with Article 7(3)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 concerns the determination of the active substance of the feed additive in feed. The method of analysis referred to in the Annex to this Regulation is therefore not to be understood as a Community method of analysis within the meaning of Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules (2).

(5)

The European Food Safety Authority (the Authority) concluded in its opinion of 19 April 2006 that selenomethionine does not have an adverse effect on animal health, human health or the environment (3). It further concluded that selenomethionine not present any other risk which would, in accordance with Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003, exclude authorisation. According to that opinion, the use of that preparation can be considered as a source of bio available Se and fulfils the criteria of a nutritional additive for all species. The opinion of the Authority recommends appropriate measures for user safety. It does not consider that there is a need for specific requirements of post market monitoring. This opinion also verifies the report on the method of analysis of the feed additive in feed submitted by the Community Reference Laboratory set up by Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003. The assessment of that preparation shows that the conditions for authorisation, provided for in Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003, are satisfied. Accordingly, the use of that preparation should be authorised, as specified in the Annex to this Regulation.

(6)

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

28.11.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 330/12

(1)

Directive 2001/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) is one of the separate directives under the EC type-approval procedure which has been established by Directive 70/156/EEC. Directive 2001/56/EC lays down requirements for the type-approval of vehicles fitted with combustion heaters and of combustion heaters as components.

(2)

United Nations ECE Regulation No 122 concerning the approval of vehicles of categories M, N and O with regard to their heating systems entered into force on 18 January 2006. Since this regulation is applicable to the Community, it is necessary to provide equivalence between the requirements laid down in Directive 2001/56/EC and those laid down in United Nations ECE Regulation No 122. Therefore, the specific requirements set out in Annex 9 to United Nations ECE Regulation No 122, concerning the heating systems of vehicles transporting dangerous goods, shall be introduced in Directive 2001/56/EC.

(3)

Directive 2001/56/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.

(4)

The measures provided for in this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for Adaptation to Technical Progress established under Article 13 of Directive 70/156/EEC,

(a)

refuse to grant EC type-approval or national type-approval;

(b)

prohibit the registration, sale or entry into service of a vehicle of that type.

(a)

refuse to grant EC type-approval or national type-approval;

(b)

prohibit the sale or entry into service of a component of that type.

28.11.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 330/16

(1)

Commission Directive 2005/30/EC contains some errors which must be corrected.

(2)

It is necessary to clarify with the retroactive effect that Article 3(1) of Directive 2005/30/EC concerns new replacement catalytic converters, which comply with Directive 97/24/EC as amended by Directive 2005/30/EC.

(3)

Editorial corrections should also be made in Annex I to Directive 2005/30/EC.

(4)

Furthermore, it is necessary to make clear, by way of a new provision, that the sale or installation on a vehicle of replacement catalytic converters which are not of a type in respect of which a type-approval has been granted in compliance with Directive 97/24/EC, as amended by 2005/30/EC, is forbidden after a certain transitional period.

(5)

Directive 2005/30/EC should therefore be corrected and amended accordingly.

(6)

The measures provided for this Directive are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for Adaptation to Technical Progress,

1.

Article 3(1) is replaced by the following:

‘1.   With effect from 18 May 2006 Member States shall not, in respect of new replacement catalytic converters complying with the requirements of Directive 97/24/EC as amended by this Directive and which are intended to be fitted on vehicles that have been type-approved in accordance with Directive 97/24/EC:

2.

In Annex I, ‘section 5 of Annex VI’ is replaced by ‘section 4a of Annex VI’ throughout the text.

28.11.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 330/18

(1)

The Council authorised the Commission on 5 June 2003 to open negotiations with third countries on the replacement of certain provisions in existing bilateral agreements with a Community agreement.

(2)

On behalf of the Community, the Commission has negotiated an Agreement with the Eastern Republic of Uruguay on certain aspects of air services in accordance with the mechanisms and directives in the Annex to the Council Decision authorising the Commission to open negotiations with third countries on the replacement of certain provisions in existing bilateral agreements with a Community agreement.

(3)

Subject to its possible conclusion at a later date, the Agreement negotiated by the Commission should be signed and provisionally applied,

28.11.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 330/28

(1)

Article 13(3)(a) of Council Decision 2001/923/EC (2) provided that the Commission was to send to the European Parliament and to the Council by 30 June 2005 a report that was independent of the programme manager, evaluating the relevance, the efficiency and the effectiveness of the programme and a communication on whether this programme should be continued and adapted, accompanied by an appropriate proposal.

(2)

The evaluation report provided for in Article 13 of that Decision was issued on 30 November 2004. It concluded that the programme had achieved its objectives and recommended its continuation.

(3)

A financial reference amount, within the meaning of point 38 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (3) is included in this Decision for the entire duration of the programme, without thereby affecting the powers of the budgetary authority as they are defined by the Treaty.

(4)

The continuation of the programme reflects the need for continuing vigilance, training and technical assistance necessary to sustain the protection of the euro against counterfeiting, by providing a stable framework for the planning of Member States programmes, particularly over a period during which new countries adopt the single currency.

(5)

In this spirit, the Commission submitted on 8 April 2005 a proposal for the continuation of the Pericles programme (4) until 31 December 2011.

(6)

Pending final agreement on the Community Financial Framework for 2007-2013, the Council decided to extend the Pericles programme for the year 2006.

(7)

In its declaration of 30 January 2006 the Council considered that the Pericles programme has a multi-annual nature and that it should be extended to 2011. To this effect, it invited the Commission to present a proposal for extending the programme for the period starting from 2007, as soon as an agreement on the Financial Framework for 2007-2013 had been reached.

(8)

It is appropriate that the Community programmes be in line with the Community's Financial Framework.

(9)

In order to avoid overlaps and to ensure consistency and complementarity of actions under the Pericles programme, it is important to develop synergies between actions financed by the Commission, the European Central Bank and Europol.

(10)

Consequently, and in view of the need for continuous training and assistance for the protection of the euro, the Pericles programme should be extended until 31 December 2013. Decision 2001/923/EC should therefore be amended accordingly,

1.

in Article 1(2), the last sentence shall be replaced by the following:

‘It shall run from 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2013.’;

2.

the following subparagraph is added at the end of Article 6:

‘The financial reference amount for the implementation of the Community programme of action for the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013 shall be EUR 7 000 000.’;

3.

Article 13(3) shall be amended as follows:

28.11.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 330/30

(1)

When adopting Decision 2006/849/EC (1) the Council indicated that it should apply in the participating Member States as defined in the first indent of Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 974/98 of 3 May 1998 on the introduction of the euro (2).

(2)

However, the exchange of information and staff and the assistance and training measures implemented under the Pericles programme should be uniform throughout the Community and the requisite steps should therefore be taken to guarantee the same level of protection for the euro in the Member States where the euro is not the official currency,

28.11.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 330/31

(1)

The preamble to the Treaty recognises that the Member States are anxious to create the conditions of safety necessary to eliminate hazards to the life and health of the public.

(2)

Article 2(b) of the Treaty calls on the Community, in particular, to establish uniform safety standards to protect the health of workers and the general public and ensure that they are applied.

(3)

Chapter III of the Treaty lays down basic standards allowing the Community to ensure the protection of the health and safety of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation.

(4)

Council Directive 96/29/Euratom lays down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation (1).

(5)

Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (2), calls on the Member States to ‘adopt all measures necessary to ensure that, before consent is given, projects likely to have significant effects on the environment by virtue, inter alia, of their nature, size or location are made subject to an assessment with regard to their effects.’

(6)

Ionising radiation from radioactive materials can have consequences beyond the service life of nuclear installations and beyond national frontiers.

(7)

The safety of workers and of the general public against those risks is of paramount importance to the European Communities. High safety standards should therefore be observed to guarantee that these risks are addressed during and beyond the service life of nuclear installations.

(8)

The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission have underlined (3)‘the need for Member States to ensure that adequate financial resources for decommissioning and waste management activities, which are audited in Member States, are actually available for the purpose for which they have been established and are managed in a transparent way, thus avoiding obstacles to fair competition in the energy market’.

(9)

The Commission has also noted ‘the importance of ensuring that funds established for the purpose of decommissioning and waste management activities, which relate to the objectives of the Euratom Treaty, are managed in a transparent way, and used only for the said purpose. In this context, it intends, within the scope of its responsibilities of the Euratom Treaty to publish an annual report on the use of decommissioning and waste management funds. It shall pay particular attention to ensuring the full application of the relevant provisions of Community law’ (4).

(10)

In its Communication to the European Parliament and the Council (5), the Commission noted the need for increased transparency and harmonisation in the management of these financial resources. The Commission has also expressed its intention to present a recommendation in 2005.

(11)

Decommissioning operations themselves can also pose potential risks to public health and the environment, particularly if the measures necessary to deal with the radiological risks of decommissioning operations are not taken in time.

(12)

In order to address all these risks, safe decommissioning of nuclear installations, including long-term management of radioactive waste and spent fuel, should be ensured.

(13)

Safe decommissioning of nuclear installations, including the long-term management of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, calls for substantial financial resources. A lack of these resources at the time they are needed may adversely affect the decommissioning process. Sufficient financial resources at the appropriate time should be available to allow complete decommissioning at nuclear installations in conformity with safety standards.

(14)

In accordance with the polluter-pays principle, nuclear operators should set aside adequate financial resources for the future decommissioning costs during the productive life of those installations.

(15)

In the context of the specificities of the accession negotiations, the issue of early shutdown of nuclear power reactors deemed not to be economically upgradeable was addressed. Accordingly, the Community has, on its own initiative, taken part in the raising of financial resources and provides economic support, subject to certain conditions, to various decommissioning projects in certain new Member States.

(16)

Article 26 of the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management, which entered into force on 18 June 2001, specifies that ‘each Contracting Party shall take the appropriate steps to ensure the safety of decommissioning of a nuclear facility. Such steps should ensure, inter alia, that qualified staff and adequate financial resources are available.’ Article 22(ii) of the Convention calls on each Contracting Party to take the appropriate steps to ensure that ‘adequate financial resources are available to support the safety of facilities for spent fuel and radioactive waste management during their operating lifetime and for decommissioning.’

(17)

Article 2(c) of the Treaty calls on the Community to facilitate investment and ensure the establishment of the basic installations necessary for the development of nuclear energy in the Community. The development of such energy cannot be dissociated from the process of the decommissioning of such investments or installations. Article 41 of the Treaty requires investment projects relating to nuclear energy to be communicated to the Commission for examination. Council Regulation (Euratom) No 2587/1999 of 2 December 1999 defining the investment projects to be communicated to the Commission in accordance with Article 41 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (6) includes decommissioning activities as investment projects to be communicated to and discussed with the Commission. Consequently, persons and undertakings (7) should inform the Commission of decommissioning funding arrangements in respect of newly built nuclear installations.

(18)

Ensuring sufficient financial resources when needed requires a sound and prudent analysis of both the sources for such financing and the costs linked to the decommissioning of such installations. The method of determining the amounts of funding for decommissioning has to take account of technological aspects and nuclear safety constraints.

(19)

In order to ensure the availability of resources when needed for the purposes of decommissioning nuclear installations, transparent management with appropriate external supervision of such financial resources is of paramount importance; this will also help to avoid obstacles to fair competition in the energy market. Various appropriate management possibilities could be in place in order to ensure such objectives. A dedicated national body should be put in place so as to provide an expert judgment concerning fund management and decommissioning cost matters.

(20)

This Recommendation does not create derogations from State aid rules. In this context, State intervention concerns issues covered by the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community and therefore has to be assessed accordingly. However, to the extent that it is not necessary for or goes beyond the objectives of this Treaty or distorts or threatens to distort competition in the internal market, it has to be assessed under the Treaty establishing the European Community.

(21)

The manner in which these financial resources are invested should be carefully addressed so as to avoid any possible misuse. The investments should be long-term and have a secure risk profile, while at the same time providing adequate protection of the real value of the funds.

(22)

With a view to ensuring safety, the gathering of appropriate resources to guarantee the decommissioning of nuclear installations should take into account the specific circumstances of certain installations.

(23)

Experience shows that exchange of information between national experts concerning the various approaches to and financial arrangements for decommissioning and waste management is an excellent way of facilitating a common response to safety challenges. In an effort to increase cooperation between the Commission and the Member States, the Commission therefore announces its intention to establish a permanent group on decommissioning funding. The Commission should be assisted by this Decommissioning Funding Group in its proceedings in the context of this Recommendation.

(24)

Without prejudice to the general principle of subsidiarity, a certain degree of harmonisation should be suggested with regard to the concepts used in decommissioning matters. Such harmonisation should be progressed through the Decommissioning Funding Group where commonly agreed interpretations of this Recommendation should be reached for its practical implementation and in particular with a view to harmonisation of methodologies for cost calculation of decommissioning activities.

(25)

The Joint Research Centre, set up on the basis of Article 8 of the Treaty, carries out research programmes in the nuclear field, which may involve ionising risks after the life service of its installations. To guarantee the safety of those installations, the Commission should ensure compliance of this Centre with the recommendations contained herein. In particular, the Commission should verify the adequacy of financing resources for the purposes of decommissioning the installations of the Centre. The Commission departments responsible for nuclear and budgetary matters are the best placed to carry out such tasks,

1.

All nuclear installations should be decommissioned after permanent shutdown and the management of waste should be properly addressed.

2.

Decommissioning activities should be carried out without undue risk to the health and safety of workers and the general public.

3.

The polluter pays principle should be fully applied throughout the decommissioning of nuclear installations. In this regard, the primary concern of nuclear operators should be to ensure the availability of adequate financial resources for safe decommissioning by the time the respective nuclear installation is permanently shut down.

4.

The financial resources available should be aimed at covering all aspects of decommissioning activities, from technical decommissioning of the installation to waste management.

5.

Without prejudice to the provisions of Article 41 of the Treaty and the Regulations in force with regards to its implementation (8), persons and undertakings should report on the planned decommissioning funding regime in the context of the procedure provided for under Article 41 of the Treaty concerning the construction of new nuclear installations.

In the review of the proposed decommissioning funding regime the Commission will — subject to the requirements of Article 44 of the Treaty — consult the Decommissioning Funding Group.

6.

Where not already provided for, Member States should set up or appoint a national body capable of providing an expert judgment on fund management and decommissioning cost matters. This body should be independent as regards the contributors to the fund.

The national body should annually review the financial resources gathered and periodically, at least every five years, the decommissioning cost estimates. Any shortfall between cost estimates and resources gathered should be addressed in good time.

Member States should report annually on the conclusions of the proceedings of the relevant national body mentioned above to the Commission.

7.

Nuclear installations should set up adequate decommissioning funds on the basis of the revenues obtained from their nuclear activities during the designed lifetime.

8.

A segregated fund with appropriate control on prudent use should be the preferred option for all nuclear installations. The review of the national body provided for in this Recommendation should play a key role in ensuring proper management and use of the funds.

9.

New nuclear installations should set up segregated decommissioning funds with appropriate control on prudent use.

10.

In view of the differences in the use of the decommissioning funds gathered, technical decommissioning of the installation, on the one hand, and waste management, on the other, should be addressed separately, on the basis of separate cost calculations.

11.

In order to ensure that adequate financial resources are available, cost calculations should be based upon a prudent choice from the realistically available alternatives and subject to the external supervision and agreement of the national body foreseen in this Recommendation.

12.

All cost estimates should be site-specific and based upon best available estimates.

13.

If during implementation the decommissioning project proves to be more expensive than the approved cost estimates, the operator should cover the additional expenses. This aspect should be carefully addressed should the operator change during or beyond the lifetime of the nuclear installation.

14.

Due attention should be paid to cases arising for historical reasons where a special solution is the most appropriate. This case-by-case approach should be transparent and with the full involvement of the national body provided for in this Recommendation.

15.

Financial resources should be used only for the purpose for which they have been established and managed. In this context, due consideration should be given to transparency. All commercially non-sensitive information should be publicly available.

16.

A secure risk profile should be sought in the investment of the assets, ensuring that a positive return is achieved over any given period of time.

17.

As the operator has no influence on the financial management of an external decommissioning fund, the value of the investments should be guaranteed by the State in order to ensure that adequate funds are available when required, even if a nominal loss is made by the independent manager of the invested amounts by the time these financial resources are to be used. In such cases, the funds should not be supplemented with an amount higher than the loss in the investment.

18.

If the management of an internal fund underperforms, the operator should be responsible for ensuring that adequate funds are available when needed.

19.

In the case of nuclear installations whose main purpose is other than the sale of products or services, decommissioning should be properly planned and budgeted so as to allow adequate funding to be available for the safe and timely decommissioning of such installations.

20.

Budgetary planning should be subject to the review of the national body provided for in this Recommendation. In the absence of such a national body, Member States may request the Commission to provide advice concerning the measures to be taken.