(1)

In the case of intervention measures in respect of which a sum per unit is not determined within the framework of a common organisation of the markets, implementing rules should be laid down, with regard in particular to the method for determining the amounts to be financed, the financing of expenditure resulting from the tying-up of the funds necessary for buying-in products and the financing of expenditure resulting from storage and, where appropriate, processing operations.

(2)

In view of the nature of the measures and programmes covered by Council Decision 90/424/EEC of 26 June 1990 on expenditure in the veterinary field (2), provision should be made that in duly justified exceptional cases the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) may finance administrative and personnel costs incurred in the execution of such measures and programmes.

(3)

Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 (3) sets out the procedure to be followed by the Commission to decide to reduce or suspend monthly payments as well as the procedure to be followed to decide to suspend or reduce intermediate payments.

(4)

Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005, the Commission decides on amounts that are to be excluded from Community financing if it finds that this expenditure has been incurred in a way that has infringed Community rules. In the context of the procedure leading to the exclusion from Community financing, the Commission, in order to remedy the situation, makes recommendations to the Member State concerned as to how to apply Community legislation. If the Member State fails to implement these recommendations, further decisions excluding the expenditure will be taken by the Commission. In addition to this it can be established in certain cases that such recommendations will not or cannot be implemented in the immediate future.

(5)

Under such circumstances the possibility to suspend or reduce monthly or intermediate payments as it is currently provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 does not protect sufficiently the financial interest of the Community. In this respect, it is considered useful to provide for a new procedure permitting the Commission to suspend or reduce payments in specific situations in a more effective way.

(6)

An ex-ante suspension or reduction of payments in the agricultural field could have serious financial implications for the Member State concerned. In addition, in comparison with the procedure for the conformity clearance decision, the Member State has only limited possibilities to defend its position vis-à-vis the Commission. For these reasons the new procedure of suspension or reduction of payments should only be used where one or more of the key components of the national control system in question do not exist or are not effective due to the gravity or persistence of the deficiencies found.

(7)

Provision should be made to clarify the conditions under which an intermediate declaration of expenditure under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) is inadmissible.

(8)

Council Regulation (EEC) No 4045/89 of 21 December 1989 on scrutiny by Member States of transactions forming part of the system of financing by the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (4) requires Member States to carry out ex-post controls on certain common agricultural policy expenditure of financial year ‘n’ in the period from 1 July n + 1 to 30 June n + 2. The report to the Commission on the control activities in that period is only due by the end of the year n + 2.

(9)

The limitation in time for the conformity clearance decisions laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 makes it effectively impossible for the Commission to decide on an exclusion from Community financing where a Member State does not comply with its control obligations under Regulation (EEC) No 4045/89. In order to deal with this problem, the limitation in time should not apply for infringements of the Member States’ control obligations under Regulation (EEC) No 4045/89, provided that the Commission acts upon the Member States’ report within a period of 12 months after receipt of that report.

(10)

Since there is no need for Member States to inform the Commission on the way they have decided or plan to reuse the cancelled funds and to amend the financing plan for the rural development programme concerned, the relevant provision of Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 should be deleted.

(11)

In order to align the transitional rules for the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) Guidance Section to the new provisions applicable for the next programming period of the Structural Funds, Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 should be amended in line with Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund (5).

(12)

It is necessary to clarify the legal basis for the adoption of detailed rules for the application of Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005. In particular, the Commission should be able to adopt detailed rules of application in respect of the publication of information on beneficiaries of the common agricultural policy, in respect of intervention measures where no fixed sum per item has been laid down in a common market organisation and in respect of appropriations which have been carried over to finance direct payments to farmers under the common agricultural policy.

(13)

In the context of the revision of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (6), the provisions on the annual ex-post publication of beneficiaries of funds deriving from the budget were inserted into that Regulation in order to implement the European Transparency Initiative. Sector-specific Regulations are to provide the means for such a publication. Both the EAGF and the EAFRD form part of the general budget of the European Communities and finance expenditure in a context of shared management between the Member States and the Community. Rules should therefore be laid down for the publication of information on the beneficiaries of these Funds. To that end, Member States should ensure annual ex-post publication of the beneficiaries and the amounts received per beneficiary under each of these Funds.

(14)

Making this information accessible to the public enhances transparency regarding the use of Community funds in the common agricultural policy and improves the sound financial management of these funds, in particular by reinforcing public control of the money used. Given the overriding weight of the objectives pursued, it is justified with regard to the principle of proportionality and the requirement of the protection of personal data to provide for the general publication of the relevant information as it does not go beyond what is necessary in a democratic society and for the prevention of irregularities. Taking into account the opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor of 10 April 2007 (7), it is appropriate to make provision for the beneficiaries of funds to be informed that those data may be made public and that they may be processed by auditing and investigating bodies.

(15)

Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 should therefore be amended accordingly,

1.

In Article 3, the following paragraph shall be added:

2.

In Article 13, the following subparagraph shall be added:

‘In duly justified exceptional cases, the first subparagraph shall not apply to measures and programmes covered by Council Decision 90/424/EEC of 26 June 1990 on expenditure in the veterinary field (*1).

(*1)   OJ L 224, 18.8.1990, p. 19. Decision as last amended by Decision 2006/965/EC (OJ L 397, 30.12.2006, p. 22).’ "

3.

The following article shall be inserted:

4.

In Article 26, paragraph 4 shall be replaced by the following:

5.

The following article shall be inserted:

6.

In Article 31(5), the following point shall be added:

(*2)   OJ L 388, 30.12.1989, p. 18. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2154/2002 (OJ L 328, 5.12.2002, p. 4).’ "

7.

In Article 33(4), the second subparagraph shall be deleted;

8.

In Article 40, paragraph 1 shall be replaced by the following:

(*3)   OJ L 161, 26.6.1999, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006 (OJ L 223, 15.8.2006, p. 1).’ "

9.

Article 42 is hereby amended as follows:

10.

The following article shall be inserted:

(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)

In order to ensure uniform application of the Combined Nomenclature annexed to Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87, it is necessary to adopt measures concerning the classification of the goods referred to in the Annex to this Regulation.

(2)

Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 has laid down the general rules for the interpretation of the Combined Nomenclature. Those rules apply also to any other nomenclature which is wholly or partly based on it or which adds any additional subdivision to it and which is established by specific Community provisions, with a view to the application of tariff and other measures relating to trade in goods.

(3)

Pursuant to those general rules, the goods described in column 1 of the table set out in the Annex should be classified under the CN codes indicated in column 2, by virtue of the reasons set out in column 3 of that table.

(4)

It is appropriate to provide that binding tariff information which has been issued by the customs authorities of Member States in respect of the classification of goods in the Combined Nomenclature, but which is not in accordance with this Regulation can, for a period of three months, continue to be invoked by the holder, under Article 12(6) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (2).

(5)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Customs Code Committee,

(1)

In order to ensure uniform application of the Combined Nomenclature annexed to Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87, it is necessary to adopt measures concerning the classification of the goods referred to in the Annex to this Regulation.

(2)

Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 has laid down the general rules for the interpretation of the Combined Nomenclature. Those rules apply also to any other nomenclature which is wholly or partly based on it or which adds any additional subdivision to it and which is established by specific Community provisions, with a view to the application of tariff and other measures relating to trade in goods.

(3)

Pursuant to those general rules, the goods described in column 1 of the table set out in the Annex should be classified under the CN codes indicated in column 2, by virtue of the reasons set out in column 3 of that table.

(4)

It is appropriate to provide that binding tariff information which has been issued by the customs authorities of Member States in respect of the classification of goods in the Combined Nomenclature but which is not in accordance with this Regulation can, for a period of three months, continue to be invoked by the holder, under Article 12(6) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (2).

(5)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Customs Code Committee,

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs (2) lays down microbiological criteria for certain micro-organisms and the implementing rules to be complied with by food business operators when implementing the general and specific hygiene measures referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 852/2004. Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 also provides that food business operators are to ensure that foodstuffs comply with the relevant microbiological criteria set out in Annex I to that Regulation.

(2)

Chapters 1 and 2 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 set out food safety criteria and process hygiene criteria regarding dried infant formulae and dried dietary foods for special medical purposes intended for infants below six months of age (dried infant formulae and dried dietary foods). Part 2.2 of Chapter 2 of that Annex provides that where dried infant formulae and dried dietary foods are tested and Enterobacteriaceae are detected in any of the sample units, the batch is to be tested for Enterobacter sakazakii and Salmonella.

(3)

On 24 January 2007, the Scientific Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ Panel) of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) issued an opinion with regard to Enterobacteriaceae as indicators of Salmonella and Enterobacter sakazakii. It concluded that it is not possible to establish a correlation between Enterobacteriaceae and Salmonella, and no universal correlation between Enterobacteriaceae and Enterobacter sakazakii exists. At individual plant level, a correlation between Enterobacteriaceae and Enterobacter sakazakii may however be established.

(4)

Therefore the requirement laid down in Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 as regards the testing of dried infant formulae and dried dietary foods for Salmonella and Enterobacter sakazakii where Enterobacteriaceae are detected in any of the sample units should no longer apply. Part 2.2 of Chapter 2 of Annex I to that Regulation should therefore be amended accordingly.

(5)

In line with the opinion on the microbiological risks in infant formulae and follow-on formulae issued by the BIOHAZ Panel of EFSA on 9 September 2004, microbiological criteria on Salmonella and Enterobacteriaceae should be laid down for dried follow-on formulae.

(6)

The BIOHAZ Panel of EFSA issued an opinion on Bacillus cereus and other Bacillus spp. in foodstuffs on 26 and 27 January 2005. It concluded that one of the major control measures is to control temperature and to establish a system based on hazard analysis and critical control point principles. Dehydrated foods, in which the presence of spores of pathogenic Bacillus spp. is frequent, might permit the growth of Bacillus cereus once rehydrated in warm water. Some dehydrated foods, including dried infant formulae and dried dietary foods, are consumed by potentially fragile consumers. In line with the EFSA opinion, the numbers of Bacillus cereus spores in dried infant formulae and dried dietary foods should be as low as possible during processing and a process hygiene criterion should be laid down in addition to good practices designed to reduce delay between preparation and consumption.

(7)

Chapter 1 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 provides for the analytical reference method for staphylococcal enterotoxins in certain cheeses, milk powder and whey powder. That method has been revised by the Community reference laboratory for coagulase positive staphylococci. The reference to that analytical reference method should therefore be amended. Chapter 1 of Annex I to that Regulation should therefore be amended accordingly.

(8)

Chapter 3 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 sets out sampling rules for carcasses of cattle, pig, sheep, goats and horses for Salmonella analyses. Pursuant to those rules the sampling area is to cover a minimum of 100 cm2 per site selected. However, neither the number of sampling sites nor the minimum total area of sampling is specified. In order to improve the implementation of these rules in the Community, it is appropriate to further specify in Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 that the areas most likely to be contaminated should be selected for sampling and that the total sampling area should be increased. Chapter 3 of Annex I to that Regulation should therefore be amended accordingly.

(9)

In the interests of clarity of Community legislation, it is appropriate to replace Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 by the text set out in the Annex to this Regulation.

(10)

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

(1)

Article 32 of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 provides that the difference between prices on the world market for the products listed in Article 1(1)(b) of that Regulation and prices for those products on the Community market may be covered by an export refund.

(2)

Given the present situation on the sugar market, export refunds should therefore be fixed in accordance with the rules and certain criteria provided for in Articles 32 and 33 of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006.

(3)

The first subparagraph of Article 33(2) of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 provides that the world market situation or the specific requirements of certain markets may make it necessary to vary the refund according to destination.

(4)

Refunds should be granted only on products that are allowed to move freely in the Community and that comply with the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006.

(5)

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

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 900/2007 of 27 July 2007 on a standing invitation to tender to determine refunds on exports of white sugar for the 2007/2008 marketing year (2) requires the issuing of partial invitations to tender.

(2)

Pursuant to Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 900/2007 and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the partial invitation to tender ending on 6 December 2007, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for that partial invitation to tender.

(3)

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

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1060/2007 of 14 September 2007 opening a standing invitation to tender for the resale for export of sugar held by the intervention agencies of Belgium, the Czech Republic, Spain, Ireland, Italy, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and Sweden (2) requires the issuing of partial invitations to tender.

(2)

Pursuant to Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1060/2007 and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the partial invitation to tender ending on 5 December 2007, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for that partial invitation to tender.

(3)

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

(1)

Pursuant to Decision 90/424/EEC, the Community may undertake, or assist the Member States or international organisations in undertaking, the technical and scientific measures necessary for the development of Community veterinary legislation and for the development of veterinary education or training.

(2)

Studies, impact assessments as well as systematic and timely evaluations of expenditure programmes in the areas of food safety, animal health and welfare and zootechnics are essential in order to carry out those measures and will also support the actions identified in the Community Action Plan on the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2006-2010.

(3)

All individual tasks are subject to specific contracts under an evaluation framework contract for which a call for tender was launched in 2004. Those specific contracts are to be signed between the Commission and the selected contractor as defined in the framework contract.

(4)

Studies, impact assessments and evaluations covering the areas of food safety, animal health and welfare and zootechnics are to form part of the further development of Community veterinary legislation and the development of veterinary education or training and will also support the actions identified in the Community Action Plan on the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2006-2010.

(5)

It is therefore appropriate for the Community to fund for the year 2007, studies, impact assessments and evaluations, covering the areas of food safety, animal health and welfare and zootechnics. The maximum amount to be allocated to these actions should be specified.

(6)

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)

Following recent outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease in Great Britain, Commission Decision 2007/554/EC of 9 August 2007 concerning certain protection measures against foot-and-mouth disease in the United Kingdom repealing Decision 2007/552/EC (4) was adopted to reinforce the control measures against foot-and-mouth disease taken by that Member State in the framework of Directive 2003/85/EC.

(2)

Decision 2007/554/EC lays down rules applicable to the dispatch from the high risk areas, listed in Annex I, and the low risk areas listed in Annex II, to that Decision (restricted areas), in Great Britain of products considered safe that either were produced before the restrictions were put in place in the United Kingdom, from raw material sourced from outside those restricted areas, or that have undergone a treatment proven effective in inactivating possible foot-and-mouth disease virus.

(3)

In Decision 2007/554/EC, as amended by Decision 2007/664/EC, the Commission laid down rules for the dispatch of certain categories of meat from certain areas listed in Annex III to Decision 2007/554/EC, as thus amended, that have not recorded any outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease for a period of at least 90 days prior to slaughter and which comply with certain specified conditions.

(4)

On the basis of the evolution of the animal health situation in the United Kingdom, and in particular the results of the ongoing surveillance, it is now possible to further enlarge the areas listed in Annex II and to reduce the area consisting of administrative units listed in Annex I to Decision 2007/554/EC.

(5)

Decision 2007/554/EC should therefore be amended accordingly.

(6)

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