7.11.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 296/1

(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. Article 10 of that Regulation provides for the re-evaluation of additives authorised pursuant to Council Directive 70/524/EEC (2).

(2)

A preparation of Enterococcus faecium DSM 7134 and Lactobacillus rhamnosus DSM 7133 was authorised without a time limit in accordance with Directive 70/524/EEC as a feed additive for use on calves by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1288/2004 (3). That preparation was subsequently entered in the Register of feed additives as an existing product, in accordance with Article 10(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003.

(3)

In accordance with Article 10(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 in conjunction with Article 7 thereof, an application was submitted for the re-evaluation of a preparation of Enterococcus faecium DSM 7134 and Lactobacillus rhamnosus DSM 7133, as a feed additive for calves for rearing, requesting that additive to be classified in the additive category ‘zootechnical additives’ That application was accompanied by the particulars and documents required under Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003.

(4)

The European Food Safety Authority (‘the Authority’) concluded in its opinion of 13 March 2013 (4) that, under the proposed conditions of use in feed, the preparation of Enterococcus faecium DSM 7134 and Lactobacillus rhamnosus DSM 7133 does not have an adverse effect on animal and consumer health, and for the environment and it has the potential to improve the zootechnical performance in target animals. It also verified the report on the method of analysis of the feed additive in feed submitted by the Reference Laboratory set up by Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003.

(5)

The assessment of the preparation of Enterococcus faecium DSM 7134 and Lactobacillus rhamnosus DSM 7133 shows that the conditions for authorisation, as 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)

As a consequence of the granting of a new authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003, the provisions on Enterococcus faecium DSM 7134 and Lactobacillus rhamnosus DSM 7133 contained in Regulation (EC) No 1288/2004 should be deleted. Regulation (EC) No 1288/2004 should be therefore amended accordingly.

(7)

Since safety reasons do not require the immediate application of the modifications to the conditions of authorisation, it is appropriate to allow a transitional period for interested parties to prepare themselves to meet the new requirements resulting from the authorisation.

(8)

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

7.11.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 296/4

(1)

By Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1044/2012 (3), the Commission granted Guatemala a derogation from the rules of origin laid down in Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 allowing it to consider certain processed fishery products produced in Guatemala from non-originating fish as originating in Guatemala. This derogation expired on 30 June 2013.

(2)

By letter dated 27 May 2013, Guatemala submitted a request for the extension of the derogation. The request is for the extension until 31 December 2013 with respect to 987,5 tonnes of cooked, frozen and vacuum-packed tuna fillets known as ‘loins’ (hereafter ‘tuna loins’) of CN code 1604 14 16. By letters dated 17 and 29 July 2013, Guatemala submitted additional information in support of that request.

(3)

The request demonstrates that the time covered by the said derogation was insufficient for Guatemala to secure adequate flows of originating tuna to the country.

(4)

The extension of the derogation is therefore required in order to give Guatemala sufficient time to prepare its fish processing industry to comply with the rules for the acquisition of preferential origin of fish.

(5)

In order to ensure that the temporary derogation is limited to the time needed for Guatemala to achieve compliance with the rules for the acquisition of preferential origin of tuna loins, the derogation should be granted from 1 July 2013 to 31 December 2013.

(6)

In order to ensure the continuity of exports of the fish eligible for preferential tariff treatment from Guatemala to the Union, the derogation should be granted with retroactive effect from 1 July 2013.

(7)

Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1044/2012 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(8)

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

(1)

Article 2 is replaced by the following:

‘Article 2

The derogation provided for in Article 1 shall apply to tuna loins exported from Guatemala and declared for release for free circulation in the Union during the period from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2013 or until the date of a provisional application of the Association Agreement between the European Union and Central America by Guatemala if this date is the earlier and up to the quantities set out in the Annex to this Regulation.’

(2)

The Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1044/2012 is replaced by the text set out in the Annex to this Regulation.

7.11.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 296/6

(1)

In accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 272/2009 of 2 April 2009 supplementing the common basic standards on civil aviation security laid down in the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 300/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2), the Commission recognises the equivalence of aviation security standards of third countries under the condition that the criteria set out in that Regulation are met.

(2)

The Commission has verified that Vagar airport in Faroe Islands and Kangerlussuaq airport in Greenland fulfil the criteria set out in Part E of the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 272/2009.

(3)

Commission Regulation (EU) No 185/2010 (3), lists in its Annex the third countries recognised as applying security standards equivalent to the common basic standards that Regulation (EC) No 272/2009 establishes.

(4)

Regulation (EU) No 185/2010 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(5)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Civil Aviation Security,

7.11.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 296/8

(1)

Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 entered into force on 3 January 2013. It repealed and replaced Council Regulation (EC) No 509/2006 of 20 March 2006 on agricultural products and foodstuffs as traditional specialities guaranteed (2).

(2)

Pursuant to Article 8(2) of Regulation (EC) No 509/2006, the Netherlands’ application to register the name ‘Basterdsuiker’/‘Basterdsuicker’/‘Basterdsuijcker’/‘Basterdsuijker’/‘Basterd’/‘Bastardsuiker’/‘Bastardsuicker’/‘Bastardsuijcker’/‘Bastardsuijker’/‘Bastard’/‘Bastert’/‘Bastertsuiker’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union  (3).

(3)

As no statement of objection under Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 509/2006 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Basterdsuiker’/‘Basterdsuicker’/‘Basterdsuijcker’/‘Basterdsuijker’/‘Basterd’/‘Bastardsuiker’/‘Bastardsuicker’/‘Bastardsuijcker’/‘Bastardsuijker’/‘Bastard’/‘Bastert’/‘Bastertsuiker’ should therefore be entered in the register,

7.11.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 296/10

(1)

Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 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 Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)

The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union,

7.11.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 296/12

(1)

The ingestion of water is one of the pathways of incorporation of radioactive substances into the human body. In accordance with Council Directive 96/29/Euratom (2), the contribution to the exposure of the general public as a whole from practices which involve a risk from ionising radiation must be kept as low as reasonably achievable.

(2)

In view of the importance for human health of the quality of water intended for human consumption, it is necessary to lay down, at Community level, quality standards which have an indicator function and to provide for the monitoring of compliance with those standards.

(3)

Council Directive 98/83/EC (3) sets out indicator parameters relating to radioactive substances in Annex I, Part C and related monitoring provisions in Annex II thereto. However, those parameters fall within the scope of the basic standards defined in Article 30 of the Euratom Treaty.

(4)

The requirements for monitoring levels of radioactive substances in water intended for human consumption should therefore be adopted in specific legislation that ensures the uniformity, coherence and completeness of radiation protection legislation under the Euratom Treaty.

(5)

Since the Community is competent to adopt the basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiations, the provisions of this Directive supersede those of Directive 98/83/EC as regards the requirements for the protection of the health of the general public with regard to radioactive substances in water intended for human consumption.

(6)

As recognised by the Court of Justice in its case-law, the tasks imposed on the Community by Article 2(b) of the Euratom Treaty to establish uniform safety standards to protect the health of workers and of the general public do not preclude, unless explicitly stated in those standards, a Member State from providing for more stringent measures of protection. Since this Directive provides for minimum rules, Member States should be free to adopt or maintain more stringent measures in the field covered by this Directive, without prejudice to the free movement of goods in the internal market as defined by the case-law of the Court of Justice.

(7)

Parametric values should not be regarded as limit values. In the event that monitoring of water intended for human consumption indicates non-compliance with a parametric value, the Member State concerned should consider whether that poses a risk to human health which requires action and, where necessary, take remedial action to improve the quality of the water to a level which complies with the requirements for the protection of human health from a radiation protection point of view.

(8)

Monitoring of waters intended for human consumption put into bottles or containers intended for sale, other than natural mineral waters, for the purpose of checking whether the levels of radioactive substances comply with the parametric values laid down pursuant to this Directive, should be carried out in accordance with the principles of hazard analysis and critical control points (HACCP) as required by Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (4) and without prejudice to the principles of official controls laid down in Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (5).

(9)

The general public should be adequately and appropriately informed of the quality of water intended for human consumption.

(10)

It is necessary to exclude from the scope of this Directive natural mineral waters and waters which are medicinal products, since special rules for those types of water have been established in Directive 2009/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (6) and Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (7).

(11)

Each Member State should establish monitoring programmes to check that water intended for human consumption meets the requirements of this Directive.

(12)

The methods used to analyse the quality of water intended for human consumption should be such as to ensure that the results obtained are reliable and comparable.

(13)

Taking into consideration the large geographical variability in the natural occurrence of radon, the Commission adopted Recommendation 2001/928/Euratom (8), which deals with the quality of water intended for human consumption regarding radon and long-lived radon decay products. It is appropriate to include these radionuclides in the scope of this Directive.

(14)

In order to maintain the high quality of water intended for human consumption in view of its importance for human health, it is necessary for Annexes II and III to be regularly updated in the light of scientific and technical progress.

(15)

While it is for Member States to define the sampling and analysis frequencies for water intended for human consumption put into bottles or containers intended for sale, it is advisable for those Member States required to monitor water intended for human consumption for radon or tritium or to establish the Indicative Dose (ID), to carry out sampling and analysis at least once per year,

(1)

‘water intended for human consumption’ means:

(2)

‘radioactive substance’ means any substance that contains one or more radionuclides the activity or concentration of which cannot be disregarded as far as radiation protection is concerned;

(3)

‘indicative dose’ or ‘ID’ means the committed effective dose for one year of ingestion resulting from all the radionuclides whose presence has been detected in a supply of water intended for human consumption, of natural and artificial origin, but excluding tritium, potassium-40, radon and short-lived radon decay products;

(4)

‘parametric value’ means the value of radioactive substances in water intended for human consumption above which Member States shall assess whether the presence of radioactive substances in water intended for human consumption poses a risk to human health which requires action and, where necessary, shall take remedial action to improve the quality of water to a level which complies with the requirements for the protection of human health from a radiation protection point of view.

(a)

natural mineral waters recognised as such by the competent national authorities, in accordance with Directive 2009/54/EC;

(b)

waters which are medicinal products within the meaning of Directive 2001/83/EC.

(a)

water intended exclusively for those purposes for which the competent authorities are satisfied that the quality of the water has no influence, either directly or indirectly, on the health of the general public concerned;

(b)

water intended for human consumption from an individual supply providing on average less than 10 m3 a day, or serving fewer than 50 persons, unless the water is supplied as part of a commercial or public activity.

(a)

the general public concerned is informed thereof and of any action that can be taken to protect human health from the adverse effects resulting from any contamination of water intended for human consumption;

(b)

when a potential danger to human health arising from the quality of such water is apparent, the general public concerned promptly be given appropriate advice.

(a)

it shall be assessed whether that poses a risk to human health which requires action and,

(b)

remedial action shall be taken, where necessary, to improve the quality of water to a level which complies with requirements for the protection of human health from a radiation protection point of view.

(a)

in the case of water supplied from a distribution network, the point at which it emerges from the taps where the water is normally taken;

(b)

in the case of water supplied from a tanker, the point at which it emerges from the tanker;

(c)

in the case of water put into bottles or containers intended for sale, the point at which the water is put into the bottles or containers;

(d)

in the case of water used in a food-production undertaking, the point where the water is used in the undertaking.

(a)

take remedial action in order to comply with requirements for the protection of human health from a radiation protection point of view; and

(b)

ensure that the general public concerned is:

7.11.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 296/22

(1)

A number of Member States have implemented or intend to implement common safety principles and rules for radio equipment on vessels to which the 1974 International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) does not apply (hereinafter ‘non-SOLAS vessels’).

(2)

The harmonisation of radio services should contribute to a safer navigation of non-SOLAS vessels, particularly in case of distress and bad weather conditions.

(3)

Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) Circular 803 on the participation of non-SOLAS ships in the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS) and Resolution MSC.131 (75) of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) invite States to apply the Guidelines for the participation of non-SOLAS ships in the GMDSS and urges States to require certain features to be implemented in relation to the GMDSS on radio equipment to be used on all vessels.

(4)

The International Telecommunications Union Radio Regulations specify certain frequencies that are designated for use by the GMDSS. All radio equipment operating on those frequencies which is intended for use in times of distress should be compatible with the designated use of those frequencies and it should provide a reasonable guarantee of assurance that it will function correctly in times of distress.

(5)

It is necessary to clarify that Commission Decision 2004/71/EC of 4 September 2003 on essential requirements relating to marine radio communication equipment which is intended to be used on non-SOLAS vessels and to participate in the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS) (2) applies to GMDSS equipment for use on all non-SOLAS vessels, which is not covered by Council Directive 96/98/EC of 20 December 1996 on marine equipment (3).

(6)

Implementation of requirements to be complied with by GMDSS equipment destined for non-SOLAS vessels should be consistent across all Member States and in line with relevant IMO guidelines.

(7)

Given the number of changes to be made to Decision 2004/71/EC, that Decision should be replaced, in the interest of clarity.

(8)

The measures set out in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Telecommunications Conformity Assessment and Market Surveillance Committee,

(a)

the maritime mobile service as defined in Article 1.28 of the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) Radio Regulations;

(b)

the maritime mobile satellite service as defined in Article 1.29 of the ITU Radio Regulations.

7.11.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 296/24

(1)

On 16 February 2013, the European Commission (the ‘Commission’) initiated an anti-dumping proceeding with regard to imports into the Union of certain seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel, of an external diameter exceeding 406,4 mm, originating in the People’s Republic of China (‘PRC’) and published a notice of initiation in the Official Journal of the European Union  (2).

(2)

The proceeding was initiated following a complaint lodged by the Defence Committee of the seamless pipes and tubes industry of the European Union (‘the complainant’), representing more than 25 % of the total Union production of certain seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel, of an external diameter exceeding 406,4 mm. The complaint contained prima facie evidence of dumping of the product and of resulting material injury that was sufficient to justify the initiation.

(3)

The Commission informed the complainant, other known Union producers, the known exporting producers in the PRC, possible analogue country producers, known importers, distributors, and other parties known to be concerned, and representatives of the PRC of the initiation of the proceeding. Interested parties were given an opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing within the time limit set in the notice of initiation.

(4)

The complainant, other Union producers, the exporting producers in the PRC, importers and distributors made their views known. All interested parties, who so requested and showed that there were particular reasons why they should be heard, were granted a hearing.

(5)

By a letter of 9 September 2013 to the Commission, the complainant withdrew its complaint.

(6)

In accordance with Article 9(1) of the basic Regulation, a proceeding may be terminated where the complaint is withdrawn, unless such termination would not be in the Union interest.

(7)

The investigation has not brought to light any considerations showing that such termination would be against the Union interest. Therefore, the Commission considered that the present proceeding should be terminated. Interested parties were informed accordingly and were given an opportunity to comment. No comments were received.

(8)

The Commission therefore concludes that the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports into the Union of certain seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel, of an external diameter exceeding 406,4 mm, originating in the PRC, should be terminated,

7.11.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 296/25

7.11.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 296/51

(1)

By letter dated 22 April 2013, received by the EFTA Surveillance Authority (“the Authority”) on 23 April 2013, Norway notified the Authority of measures to be taken pursuant to Article 14(1) of Directive 2010/13/EU.

(2)

The EFTA Surveillance Authority verified, within a period of three months from this notification, that such measures are compatible with EEA law, in particular with regard to the proportionality of the measures and the transparency of the national consultation procedure.

(3)

In its verification, the Authority considered the available data on the Norwegian media market.

(4)

The list of events of major importance for society included in the Norwegian measures was drawn up in a clear and transparent manner. Furthermore, a far-reaching consultation had been launched in Norway in this regard.

(5)

The Authority was satisfied that the events listed in the Norwegian measures met at least two of the following criteria considered to be reliable indicators of the importance of events for society: (i) a special general resonance within the EEA EFTA State, and not simply a significance to those who ordinarily follow the sport or activity concerned; (ii) a generally recognised and distinct cultural importance for the population in the EEA EFTA State, in particular as a catalyst of cultural identity; (iii) involvement of the national team in the event concerned in the context of a competition or tournament of international importance; and (iv) the fact that the event has traditionally been broadcast on free-to-air television and has commanded a large television audience.

(6)

A number of events listed in the Norwegian measures, such as the Olympic Games as well as the Men’s World Cup and the Men’s European Football Championship, both including qualifying games with Norwegian participation, fall within the category of events considered of major importance for society, as referred to explicitly in recital 49 of Directive 2010/13/EU.

(7)

The summer Olympic Games is an event that attracts enormous interest in Norway as Norwegian athletes have always participated in a wide range of individual and group disciplines. The event has a special resonance among the general public in Norway, as it interests audiences who would not normally follow it. The summer Olympic Games were traditionally broadcast on free-to-air television and commanded high viewing figures in Norway.

(8)

The winter Olympic Games is an event even more popular and enjoys very high viewing figures. A large number of Norwegian athletes participate in the winter Olympic Games in both individual and group disciplines. The event has traditionally been broadcast on free-to-air television and commanded high viewing figures in Norway. The event is watched not only by viewers that ordinarily follow the sports concerned.

(9)

The Men’s World Cup and the Men’s European Football Championship, both in their entirety and including qualifying games with Norwegian participation, are among the most popular sports events in Norway. The Norwegian public and media take great interest in the Norwegian team’s qualifying matches as well as the matches in the final round, especially the final matches. The events have traditionally been broadcast on free-to-air television and have commanded a large television audience. As the matches between other countries in the final round may affect the matches that Norway may play as well as the overall result, they also enjoy a special resonance in Norway.

(10)

In Norway, there is a strong interest in local football clubs. The Men’s Norwegian Football Cup Final has traditionally been broadcast on free-to-air television. The high viewing figures that the event has enjoyed so far indicate a significant public interest in this event, also outside of the audience that usually follows the matches of the local football clubs.

(11)

The Women’s World and European Handball Championships (the final round tournaments) are events traditionally broadcast on free-to-air television with significant viewing figures. The Norwegian women’s national handball team has enjoyed great success over a long period which led to general resonance in Norway, also among audiences that would not normally follow this sport. The matches between other countries in the final rounds of both events affect the matches that the Norwegian national team may play as well as the overall result.

(12)

The FIS Nordic World Ski Championships is a popular event in Norway. Cross-country skiing is deeply rooted in the Norwegian culture and constitutes an important element of the Norwegian cultural heritage. The event has a generally recognised, distinct cultural importance for the Norwegian population and it has traditionally been broadcast on free-to-air television with large audience figures. The large viewing audience attracted by this event shows that the event and its outcome have a special general resonance in Norway and are not simply of significance to those who ordinarily follow the sport.

(13)

The FIS Alpine World Ski Championships is a popular event in Norway. Alpine skiing is deeply rooted in Norwegian culture and constitutes an important element of the Norwegian cultural heritage. The FIS Alpine Ski Championships can therefore be regarded as having a generally recognised, distinct cultural importance for the Norwegian population. Norway has had a number of winning alpine skiers which greatly impacted the interest for the discipline in Norway. The event and its outcome have therefore a special general resonance in Norway and not simply to those who ordinarily follow the sport.

(14)

The Holmenkollen FIS World Cup Nordic is an annual event in Holmenkollen, Oslo and forms part of the FIS World Cup Nordic. The event is one of the most important annual sports events in Norway, has a long tradition and it can be regarded as having a generally recognised, distinct cultural importance for the Norwegian population. The event has also traditionally been broadcast on free-to-air television and has commanded a large viewing audience. Because of the cultural significance of the event, the outcome of the event has a special general resonance in Norway, even for audiences that do not usually follow this discipline.

(15)

The Biathlon World Championships is an important winter event in Norway and has a special resonance and wide interest in the population, also for those who do not normally follow the disciplines, as a part of the Norwegian’s cultural identity and ski heritage. The event has traditionally been broadcast on free-to-air television and has commanded a large television audience.

(16)

The Norwegian measures appear proportionate to justify, by the overriding reason of public interest in ensuring wide public access to broadcasts of events of major importance for society, the derogation from the fundamental freedom to provide services laid down in Article 36 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area.

(17)

The Norwegian measures are also compatible with EEA competition rules in so far as the definition of the qualifying broadcasters for the broadcasting of listed events relies on objective criteria (required coverage), which allow potential competition for the acquisition of the rights to broadcast these events. In addition, the number of listed events is not so disproportionate as to distort competition on the downstream free television and pay television markets.

(18)

The general proportionality of the Norwegian measures is supported by several factors. Firstly, the introduction of the 90 % threshold of the required potential coverage of the population for qualifying broadcasters increases the proportionality of the measures, in so far as it increases the number of broadcasters who potentially qualify. Secondly, the number of events included in the list is proportionate. Thirdly, a mechanism has been introduced for the resolution of disputes between broadcasters as regards the payment of fair compensation for broadcasting rights. Furthermore, the Norwegian measures provide for appropriate arrangements in situations where the events listed are purchased by non-qualifying broadcasters, in order to ensure a system for relicensing of exclusive rights to qualifying broadcasters. Furthermore, the Norwegian measures anticipate situations in which the rights to the events listed are purchased by a non-qualifying broadcaster, and no request has been received from a qualified buyer, in order to ensure that the non-qualifying broadcaster is able to exercise its rights. Finally, the entry into force of the final Norwegian is postponed to 1 July 2014 in order to ensure that any contract negotiations made before that date are not adversely effected.

(19)

The Authority communicated the measures notified by Norway to the other EEA EFTA States and sought the opinion of the EFTA Contact Committee established pursuant to Article 29 of Directive 2010/13/EU. The Committee adopted a favourable opinion.

7.11.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 296/56

7.11.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 296/56