(1)

Directive 2002/32/EC provides that the use of products intended for animal feed which contain levels of undesirable substances exceeding the maximum levels laid down in Annex I to that Directive is prohibited.

(2)

Recent developments in technical knowledge on formulating fish feed with the increasing use of marine crustaceans such as marine krill as feed material in fish feed make a review of the maximum level for fluorine in fish feed appropriate. It results from the opinion of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) of 22 September 2004 (2) that an increase of the maximum allowable level of fluorine in fish feed would not result in unacceptable risks for animal and public health. As regards Lolium temulentum and Lolium remotum, EFSA recommends to delete the separate entries for those two plant species in its opinion of 25 January 2007 (3) and to apply the general maximum content for weed seeds and unground and uncrushed fruits containing alkaloids, glucosides and other toxic substances, as set out in row 14 of Annex I to Directive 2002/32/EC.

(3)

As regards DDT, the name DDD should be included in the row concerning that substance in Annex I to Directive 2002/32/EC, since that name is more commonly used for the metabolite dichlorodiphenyl-dichloroethane than TDE (4).

(4)

As regards apricots (Prunus armeniaca L.) and bitter almond (Prunus dulcis var. amara or Prunus amygdalus Batsch var: amara), it may be concluded from the EFSA opinion of 23 November 2006 (5) that the requirement for absence of quantifiable amounts of apricots and bitter almond is not necessary for the protection of animal and public health and that it is sufficient to apply the general maximum levels for hydrocyanic acid, as set out in row 8 of Annex I to Directive 2002/32/EC. It is therefore appropriate to delete the specific requirements for apricot and bitter almond.

(5)

Camelina (Camelina sativa) is included in the Annex to Directive 2002/32/EC and the seeds and fruits of these plant species as well as their processed derivatives may only be present in feedingstuffs in trace amounts not quantitatively determinable.

(6)

There is a renewed interest in Camelina sativa as oilseed crop because of an increasing demand for alternative low-input oilseed crops with the potential for use of the by-products of the oilseed production in animal feed. From the EFSA opinion of 27 November 2007 (6) it can be concluded that the requirement for absence of quantifiable amounts of Camelina sativa and their derivatives is not necessary for the protection of animal and public health provided that the amount of total glucosinolates in the diet does not endanger animal and public health. The protection of animal and public health against the toxic effects of glucosinolates is ensured by the provision for volatile mustard oil in complete feed, for which the maximum level is expressed as allyl isothiocyanates, as the toxicity of the glucosinolates is according to the EFSA opinion generally attributed to the (iso)thiocyanates. It is therefore appropriate to delete the requirement for absence of quantifiable amounts of Camelina sativa from Annex I to Directive 2002/32/EC.

(7)

Directive 2002/32/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.

(8)

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