(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 18 June 2009, the Sanctions Committee of the United Nations Security Council decided to amend the list of natural and legal persons, groups and entities to whom the freezing of funds and economic resources should apply, adding one natural person to the list given the information related to their association with Al-Qaida. The Sanctions Committee provided the statement of reasons for this listing decision.

(3)

Annex I should be amended accordingly.

(4)

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

(5)

The Commission will communicate the grounds on which this Regulation is based to the natural person concerned, provide him with the opportunity to comment on these grounds and review this Regulation in view of the comments and possible available additional information,

(1)

According to Article 61, first subparagraph, point (d) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 the sugar produced during the marketing year in excess of the quota referred to in Article 56 of that Regulation may be exported only within the quantitative limit fixed by the Commission.

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 924/2008 of 19 September 2008 fixing the quantitative limit for the exports of out-of-quota sugar and isoglucose until the end of the 2008/09 marketing year (3) sets the above mentioned limits.

(3)

The quantities of sugar covered by applications for export licences exceed the quantitative limit fixed by Regulation (EC) No 924/2008. An acceptance percentage should therefore be set for quantities applied for on 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26 June 2009. All export-licence applications for sugar lodged after 29 June2009 should accordingly be rejected and the lodging of export-licence applications should be suspended,

(1)

The import duties in the cereals sector applicable from 1 July 2009 were fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 570/2009 (3).

(2)

As the average of the import duties calculated differs by more than EUR 5/tonne from that fixed, a corresponding adjustment must be made to the import duties fixed by Regulation (EC) No 570/2009.

(3)

Regulation (EC) No 570/2009 should therefore be amended accordingly,

(1)

Applications for import licences were submitted to the competent authorities in the period from 22 to 26 June 2009 in accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 950/2006 and/or Council Regulation (EC) No 508/2007 of 7 May 2007 opening tariff quotas for imports into Bulgaria and Romania of raw cane sugar for supply to refineries in the marketing years 2006/07, 2007/08 and 2008/09 (3), for a total quantity equal to or exceeding the quantity available for order numbers 09.4331 and 09.4337 (2008-2009) and 09.4341 (July-September 2009).

(2)

In these circumstances, the Commission should establish an allocation coefficient for licences to be issued in proportion to the quantity available and/or inform the Member States that the limit established has been reached,

(1)

Article 2(b) of the Treaty provides for the establishment of uniform safety standards to protect the health of workers and of the general public.

(2)

Article 30 of the Treaty provides for the establishment of basic standards within the Community for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionizing radiations.

(3)

Council Directive 96/29/Euratom of 13 May 1996 laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionizing radiation (3) establishes the basic safety standards. The provisions of that Directive have been supplemented by more specific legislation.

(4)

As recognised by ‘the Court of Justice’ of the European Communities (hereinafter referred to as the Court of Justice) in its case-law (4), the Community shares competences, together with its Member States, in fields covered by the Convention on Nuclear Safety (5).

(5)

As recognised by the Court of Justice in its case-law, the provisions of Chapter 3 of the Treaty, related to health and safety, form a coherent whole conferring upon the Commission powers of some considerable scope in order to protect the population and the environment against risks of nuclear contamination.

(6)

As recognised by the Court of Justice in its case-law, the tasks imposed on the Community by Article 2(b) of the Treaty to lay down uniform safety standards to protect the health of the population and of workers does not mean that, once such standards have been defined, a Member State may not provide for more stringent measures of protection.

(7)

Council Decision 87/600/Euratom of 14 December 1987 on Community arrangements for the early exchange of information in the event of a radiological emergency (6) established a framework for notification and provision of information to be used by the Member States in order to protect the general public in case of a radiological emergency. Council Directive 89/618/Euratom of 27 November 1989 on informing the general public about health protection measures to be applied and steps to be taken in the event of a radiological emergency (7) imposed obligations on the Member States to inform the general public in the event of a radiological emergency.

(8)

National responsibility of Member States for the nuclear safety of nuclear installations is the fundamental principle on which nuclear safety regulation has been developed at the international level, as endorsed by the Convention on Nuclear Safety. That principle of national responsibility, as well as the principle of prime responsibility of the licence holder for the nuclear safety of a nuclear installation under the supervision of its national competent regulatory authority, should be enhanced and the role and independence of the competent regulatory authorities should be reinforced by this Directive.

(9)

Each Member State may decide on its energy mix in accordance with relevant national policies.

(10)

When developing the appropriate national framework under this Directive, national circumstances will be taken into account.

(11)

The Member States have already implemented measures enabling them to achieve a high level of nuclear safety within the Community.

(12)

While this Directive concerns principally the nuclear safety of nuclear installations, it is also important to ensure the safe management of spent fuel and radioactive waste, including at storage and disposal facilities.

(13)

Member States should assess, where appropriate, the relevant fundamental safety principles set by the International Atomic Energy Agency (8) which should constitute a framework of practices that Member States should have regard to when implementing this Directive.

(14)

It is useful to build on the process where the national safety authorities of the Member States having nuclear power plants on their territory have been working together in the context of Western European Nuclear Regulators′ Association (WENRA) and have defined many safety reference levels for power reactors.

(15)

Following the Council’s invitation to set up a High Level Group at EU level, as recorded in its Conclusions of 8 May 2007 on nuclear safety and safe management of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste, the European Nuclear Safety Regulators Group (ENSREG) was established by Commission Decision 2007/530/Euratom of 17 July 2007 on establishing the European High Level Group on Nuclear Safety and Waste Management (9) to contribute to the achievement of the Community objectives in the field of nuclear safety.

(16)

It is useful to establish a unified structure for reports of Member States to the Commission on the implementation of this Directive. Given its members′ wide experience ENSREG could make a valuable contribution in this respect, thereby facilitating consultation and cooperation of national regulatory authorities.

(17)

On 15 October 2008 at its fifth meeting ENSREG adopted 10 principles to be used when drafting a nuclear safety Directive, as noted in its minutes dated 20 November 2008.

(18)

Advances in nuclear technology, lessons learnt from operating experience and safety research and improvements in regulatory frameworks could have the potential to further improve safety. In keeping with the commitment to maintain and improve safety, Member States should take those factors into account when extending their nuclear power programme or deciding to use nuclear power for the first time.

(19)

The establishment of a strong safety culture within a nuclear installation is one of the fundamental safety management principles necessary for achieving its safe operation.

(20)

Maintenance and further development of expertise and skills in nuclear safety should be based, inter alia, on a process of learning from past operating experience and employing developments in methodology and science, as appropriate.

(21)

In the past, self-assessments have been carried out in Member States in close connection with international peer reviews under the auspices of the IAEA as International Regulatory Review Team or Integrated Regulatory Review Service missions. These self-assessments were carried out and these missions were invited by Member States on a voluntary basis in the spirit of openness and transparency. Self-assessments and accompanying peer reviews of the legislative, regulatory and organisational infrastructure should be aimed at strengthening and enhancing the national framework of Member States, whilst recognising their competencies in ensuring nuclear safety of nuclear installations on their territory. The self-assessments followed by international peer reviews are neither an inspection nor an audit, but a mutual learning mechanism that accepts different approaches to the organisation and practices of a competent regulatory authority, while considering regulatory, technical and policy issues of a Member State that contribute to ensuring a strong nuclear safety regime. The international peer reviews should be regarded as an opportunity to exchange professional experience and to share lessons learned and good practices in an open and cooperative spirit through advice by peers rather than control or judgement. Recognising a need for flexibility and appropriateness in regard to different existing systems in Member States, a Member State should be free to determine the segments of its system being subject to the specific peer review invited, with the aim of continuously improving nuclear safety.

(22)

In accordance with point 34 of the Interinstitutional Agreement on better law-making (10), Member States are encouraged to draw up, for themselves and in the interests of the Community, their own tables illustrating, as far as possible, the correlation between this Directive and the transposition measures and to make them public,

(1)

Commission Regulations (EC) No 451/2000 (2) and (EC) No 1490/2002 (3) lay down the detailed rules for the implementation of the third stage of the programme of work referred to in Article 8(2) of Directive 91/414/EEC and establish a list of active substances to be assessed, with a view to their possible inclusion in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC. That list includes chlorsulfuron, cyromazine, dimethachlor, etofenprox, lufenuron, penconazole, tri-allate and triflusulfuron.

(2)

For those active substances the effects on human health and the environment have been assessed in accordance with the provisions laid down in Regulations (EC) No 451/2000 and (EC) No 1490/2002 for a range of uses proposed by the notifiers. Moreover, those Regulations designate the rapporteur Member States which have to submit the relevant assessment reports and recommendations to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in accordance with Article 10(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1490/2002. For chlorsulfuron and cyromazine the rapporteur Member State was Greece and all relevant information was submitted on 27 July 2007 and on 31 August 2007. For dimethachlor and penconazole the rapporteur Member State was Germany and all relevant information was submitted on 2 May 2007 and on 19 June 2007 respectively. For etofenprox the rapporteur Member State was Italy and all relevant information was submitted on 15 July 2005. For lufenuron the rapporteur Member State was Portugal and all relevant information was submitted on 20 September 2006. For tri-allate the rapporteur Member State was the United Kingdom and all relevant information was submitted on 6 August 2007. For triflusulfuron the rapporteur Member State was France and all relevant information was submitted on 26 July 2007.

(3)

The assessment reports have been peer reviewed by the Member States and the EFSA and presented to the Commission on 26 November 2008 for chlorsulfuron, on 17 September 2008 for cyromazine and for dimethachlor, on 19 December 2008 for etofenprox, on 30 September 2008 for lufenuron and triflusulfuron, on 25 September 2008 for penconazole and on 26 September 2008 for tri-allate in the format of the EFSA Scientific Reports (4). These reports have been reviewed by the Member States and the Commission within the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health and finalised on 26 February 2009 in the format of the Commission review reports for chlorsulfuron, cyromazine, dimethachlor, lufenuron, penconazole, tri-allate and triflusulfuron and on 13 March 2009 for etofenprox.

(4)

It has appeared from the various examinations made that plant protection products containing chlorsulfuron, cyromazine, dimethachlor, etofenprox, lufenuron, penconazole, tri-allate and triflusulfuron may be expected to satisfy, in general, the requirements laid down in Article 5(1)(a) and (b) of Directive 91/414/EEC, in particular with regard to the uses which were examined and detailed in the Commission review reports. It is therefore appropriate to include these active substances in Annex I, in order to ensure that in all Member States the authorisations of plant protection products containing these active substances can be granted in accordance with the provisions of that Directive.

(5)

Without prejudice to that conclusion, it is appropriate to obtain further information on certain specific points. Article 6(1) of Directive 91/414/EC provides that inclusion of a substance in Annex I may be subject to conditions. Therefore, for lufenuron, dimethachlor and chlorsulfuron the notifiers should be required to submit further information on the chemical specification of the active substances as manufactured. Furthermore, for cyromazine and penconazole it is appropriate to require that the notifiers submit further information on the fate and behaviour of the soil metabolite NOA 435343 (for cyromazine) and U1 (for penconazole) and on the risk to aquatic organisms. Moreover, it is appropriate as regards tri-allate, to require that the notifier submit further information on the primary plant metabolism, the fate and behaviour of the soil metabolite diisopropylamine, the potential for biomagnification in aquatic food chains, the risk to fish-eating mammals and the long-term risk to earthworms. In addition, it is appropriate for the etofenprox to require that the notifier submit further information on the risk to aquatic organisms, including the risk to sediment dwellers, further studies on the endocrine disruption potential in aquatic organisms (fish full life cycle study) and biomagnification. Finally, for dimethachlor, chlorsulfuron and triflusulfuron, the notifiers should be required to submit further information on the toxicological relevance of metabolites in case the substance is classified as carcinogenic category 3.

(6)

A reasonable period should be allowed to elapse before an active substance is included in Annex I in order to permit Member States and the interested parties to prepare themselves to meet the new requirements which will result from the inclusion.

(7)

Without prejudice to the obligations defined by Directive 91/414/EEC as a consequence of including an active substance in Annex I, Member States should be allowed a period of six months after inclusion to review existing authorisations of plant protection products containing chlorsulfuron, cyromazine, dimethachlor, etofenprox, lufenuron, penconazole, tri-allate and triflusulfuron to ensure that the requirements laid down by Directive 91/414/EEC, in particular in its Article 13 and the relevant conditions set out in Annex I, are satisfied. Member States should vary, replace or withdraw, as appropriate, existing authorisations, in accordance with the provisions of Directive 91/414/EEC. By way of derogation from the above deadline, a longer period should be provided for the submission and assessment of the complete Annex III dossier of each plant protection product for each intended use in accordance with the uniform principles laid down in Directive 91/414/EEC.

(8)

The experience gained from previous inclusions in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC of active substances assessed in the framework of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3600/92 (5) has shown that difficulties can arise in interpreting the duties of holders of existing authorisations in relation to access to data. In order to avoid further difficulties it therefore appears necessary to clarify the duties of the Member States, especially the duty to verify that the holder of an authorisation demonstrates access to a dossier satisfying the requirements of Annex II to that Directive. However, this clarification does not impose any new obligations on Member States or holders of authorisations compared to the directives which have been adopted until now amending Annex I.

(9)

It is therefore appropriate to amend Directive 91/414/EEC accordingly.

(10)

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

(1)

The European Central Bank (ECB) has the exclusive right from 1 January 1999 to approve the volume of coins issued by the Member States that have adopted the euro (hereinafter the ‘participating Member States’).

(2)

On 26 May 2009 the Oesterreichische Nationalbank asked the ECB to approve an increase of EUR 160 million in the volume of euro coins that Austria may issue in 2009,

(1)

On 12 June 2007, the Council adopted Joint Action 2007/406/CFSP (1) on the European Union mission to provide advice and assistance for security sector reform in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (EUSEC RD Congo) which replaced the mission previously established by Joint Action 2005/355/CFSP (2).

(2)

On 26 June 2008, the Council adopted Joint Action 2008/491/CFSP (3) amending and extending Joint Action 2007/406/CFSP until 30 June 2009.

(3)

Following consultation with the Congolese authorities and other parties concerned, it appears necessary to extend the mission for a further period, and on 12 May 2009 the Political and Security Committee recommended that the mission be extended for an additional three months.

(4)

Joint Action 2007/406/CFSP should be amended accordingly,

1.

in Article 9(1), the second subparagraph shall be replaced by the following:

‘The financial reference amount to cover expenditure relating to the mission for the period from 1 July 2008 to 30 September 2009 shall be EUR 8 450 000.’;

2.

the second paragraph of Article 16 shall be replaced by the following:

‘It shall apply until 30 September 2009.’.