Commission Regulation (EC) No 1068/2005 of 6 July 2005 amending Regulation (EC) No 824/2000 establishing procedures for the taking-over of cereals by intervention agencies and laying down methods of analysis for determining the quality of cereals
Date: 2005-07-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: cereals, common organisation of markets, food safety, intervention agency, quality control of agricultural products

7.7.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 174/65

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1068/2005

of 6 July 2005

amending Regulation (EC) No 824/2000 establishing procedures for the taking-over of cereals by
intervention agencies and laying down methods of analysis for determining the quality of cereals

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty
Community,

establishing the European

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29
September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in
cereals (1), and in particular Article 6 thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 provides for no further
intervention for rye from the 2004/05 marketing year.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 824/2000 (2) should
therefore be adapted to take account of
this new
situation.

Common wheat and durum wheat are covered by
minimum quality criteria for human consumption and
must satisfy the health standards laid down by Council
Regulation (EEC) No 315/93 of 8 February 1993 laying
down Community procedures
in
food (3). The other cereals are mainly intended for
comply with Directive
animal
2002/32/EC of
the
Council of 7 May 2002 on undesirable substances in
feed (4). Provision should be made for
those
animal
standards
products
concerned are taken over under the present intervention
scheme.

and must
the European Parliament and of

applicable when

contaminants

feed

the

for

be

to

(3)

those standards are
As from 1 July 2006, some of
applicable when the products are first processed.
In
order to guarantee that cereals taken over before that
date may be marketed under optimum conditions at
from the
the time of supply following their removal

(1) OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78.
(2) OJ L 100, 20.4.2000, p. 31. Regulation as last amended by
Commission Regulation (EC) No 777/2004 (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004,
p. 50).

(3) OJ L 37, 13.2.1993, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC)
No 1882/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ
L 284, 31.10.2003, p. 1).

(4) OJ L 140, 30.5.2002, p. 10. Directive as

last amended by

Commission Directive 2005/8/EC (OJ L 27, 29.1.2005, p. 44).

(4)

(5)

(6)

intervention scheme, provision should be made for
products offered for intervention to comply with those
standards as from the 2005/06 marketing year.

The potential for mycotoxin formation has proved to be
identifiable essentially on
linked to specific conditions,
the basis of the weather conditions recorded during the
period of growth and,
flowering of the
cereals.

in particular,

The risks entailed by exceeding the maximum thresholds
for admissible contaminants can be identified by the
intervention agencies on the basis of the information
received from applicants and their own analysis criteria.
In order to limit the financial costs, therefore, there is
justification for requiring analyses, on the responsibility
of the intervention agencies prior to the taking-over of
the products, only on the basis of a risk analysis enabling
the quality of the products to be guaranteed on entry
into the intervention scheme.

Articles 2 and 5 of Council Regulation
(EEC)
No 3492/90 of 27 November 1990 laying down the
factors to be taken into consideration in the annual
accounts for the financing of intervention measures in
the form of public storage by the European Agricultural
Guidance and Guarantee Fund, Guarantee Section (5), lay
down the rules on responsibility. Those Articles specify
in particular that Member States are to take all measures
necessary to ensure the proper preservation of products
which have been the subject of Community intervention
and that quantities which have deteriorated on account
of the normal physical storage conditions or by reason of
overlong preservation are to be recorded in the accounts
as having left the intervention stock on the date when
the loss or deterioration was established. They also
specify that a product is to be deemed to have dete-
riorated if it no longer meets the quality requirements
applicable when it was bought in. Consequently, only
such deterioration as that laid down in those provisions
may be covered by the Community budget. Where a
decision taken by a Member State at
the time of
purchase of a product is inadequate in the light of the
risk analysis required by these rules, that Member State
should therefore be liable if it later emerges that the
product did not comply with the minimum standards.
Such a decision would not make it possible to guarantee
therefore, ensure its
the quality of
proper preservation. Consequently, the circumstances in
which a Member State is to be held liable should be
specified.

the product and,

(5) OJ L 337, 4.12.1990, p. 3.

L 174/66

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

7.7.2005

(7)

(8)

For the purpose of determining the quality of the cereals
offered for intervention, Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No
824/2000 sets out a list of methods according to the
criteria for analysis. One of those methods, the Hagberg
falling number test, has been adapted by the International
Organisation for Standardisation. The relevant reference
should be adapted. The analysis methods for assessing
compliance with contaminant standards should also be
specified.

For reasons of clarity and precision, Article 6 of Regu-
lation (EC) No 824/2000 requires redrafting, particularly
as regards the order of the relevant provisions. Taking
the principle of risk analysis adopted for
account of
mycotoxin control,
there is justification for including
analyses for determining mycotoxin rates among those
whose costs are payable by the applicant.

(9)

Regulation (EC) No 824/2000 should be amended
accordingly.

(10)

The Management Committee
for Cereals has not
delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its
chairman,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

— for common wheat and durum wheat, those permitted
under Council Regulation (EEC) No 315/93 (*),
including the requirements regarding the Fusarium-
toxin level for common wheat and durum wheat laid
down in points 2.4 to 2.7 of Annex I to Commission
Regulation (EC) No 466/2001 (**).

— for barley, maize and sorghum, those set by Directive
2002/32/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council (***).

Member States shall check levels of contaminants, including
radioactivity, on the basis of a risk analysis, taking account
in particular of the information supplied by the applicant
and the commitments of the latter regarding compliance
with the standards set, especially in the light of the results
If necessary, the rate and scope of the
of the analyses.
controls
shall be determined in accordance with the
procedure laid down in Article 25 of Regulation (EC) No
1784/2003, particularly where the market situation may be
seriously disrupted by contaminants.

___________
(*) OJ L 37, 13.02.1993, p. 1.
(**) OJ L 77, 16.3.2001, p. 1. Regulation as last amended
by Commission Regulation (EC) No 856/2005 (OJ
L 143, 7.6.2005, p. 3).
(***) OJ L 140, 30.5.2002, p. 10.’

Article 1

3. Article 3 is amended as follows:

Regulation (EC) No 824/2000 is hereby amended as follows:

(a) point 3.7 is replaced by the following:

1. The first paragraph of Article 1 is

replaced by the

following:

‘During the periods referred to in Article 5(2) of Regulation
(EC) No 1784/2003, any holder of a homogeneous batch
less than 80 tonnes of common wheat, barley,
of not
sorghum or 10 tonnes of durum wheat,
maize or
harvested within the Community,
shall be entitled to
offer the batch to the intervention agency.’

2. The first and second subparagraphs of Article 2(2) are

replaced by the following:

shall be

considered sound,

‘The cereals
fair and of
marketable quality if they are of the typical colour of the
cereal in question, are free from abnormal smell and live
pests (including mites) at every stage of their development,
if they meet the minimum quality requirements set out in
levels of contaminants,
Annex I hereto, and if
their
exceed the maximum
including radioactivity, do not
levels permitted under Community
regulations. The
maximum contaminant level which must not be exceeded
shall be as follows:

‘3.7.

the method for determining the Hagberg falling
number (amylase activity test) shall comply with
ISO 3093:2004;’

(b) the following point 3.10 is added:

‘3.10.

the sampling methods and reference analysis
methods for determining mycotoxin rates shall
be those mentioned in Annex I to Regulation
(EC) No 466/2001’.

4. Article 6 is replaced by the following:

‘Article 6

The intervention agency shall see that the physical
1.
and technical characteristics of
taken are
analysed under its responsibility within 20 working days
of the representative sample being made up.

the samples

7.7.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 174/67

2.

The offerer shall bear the costs relating to:

6. The following paragraph 3 is added to Article 10:

(a) determination of the tannin content of sorghum,

(b) the amylasic activity (Hagberg) test,

(c) determination of the protein content of durum wheat

and common wheat,

‘3. Where the checks provided for under this Regulation
are to be carried out on the basis of the risk analysis
referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 2(2),
the Member States shall be liable for the financial conse-
quences of any failure to comply with the maximum
admissible contaminant level. Such liability shall be estab-
lished, without prejudice to any action which the Member
State may itself take against the offerer or storekeeper, in
the event of a failure to respect their commitments or
obligations.

(d) the Zeleny test,

(e)

the machinability test,

(f) analyses of contaminants.

able

concerned is

However, in the case of ochratoxin A and aflatoxin, if the
Member State
to the
Commission’s satisfaction that the standards were met on
entry, that normal storage conditions were observed and
that the storekeeper’s other commitments were respected,
the financial
liability shall be borne by the Community
budget.’

to prove

If the analyses referred to in paragraph 1 show that
3.
the cereals offered do not meet
the minimum quality
required for intervention, those cereals shall be withdrawn
at the offerer's expense. The offerer shall also bear all the
costs incurred.

7. In Annex I, the ‘rye’ column is deleted.

8. Annex II is amended as follows:

4.
In cases of dispute, the intervention agency shall have
the necessary tests on the cereals in question carried out
again, the cost being met by the losing party.’

5. Article 9 is amended as follows:

(a)

In point 1.2(a), the first paragraph is replaced by the
following:

‘grains which, after elimination from the sample of all
other matter referred to in this Annex, pass through
sieves with apertures of
the following dimensions:
common wheat 2,0 mm, durum wheat 1,9 mm,
barley 2,2 mm.’

(a) Points (c) and (d) shall be replaced by the following:

(b) Point 2.3 is deleted.

‘(c) where the percentage of broken grains exceeds 3 %
for durum wheat, common wheat and barley, and
4 % for maize and sorghum, a reduction of
EUR 0,05 shall be applied for each additional 0,1
percentage point;

(d) where the percentage of grain impurities exceeds
2 % for durum wheat, 4 % for maize
and
sorghum, and 5 % for common wheat and barley,
a reduction of EUR 0,05 shall be applied for each
additional 0,1 percentage point;’

(b) Point (f) is replaced by the following:

‘(f) where the percentage of miscellaneous impurities
(Schwarzbesatz) exceeds 0,5 % for durum wheat
and 1 % for common wheat, barley, maize and
sorghum, a reduction of EUR 0,1 shall be applied
for each additional 0,1 precentage point.’

9. Annex III, point 1 is amended as follows:

(a) The first subparagraph is replaced by the following:

‘For common wheat, durum wheat and barley, an
average sample of 250 g shall be passed through two
sieves, one with slotted perforations of 3,5 mm and the
other with slotted perforations of 1,0 mm, for half a
minute each.’

(b) The seventh subparagraph is replaced by the following:

‘The partial sample shall be passed for half a minute
through a sieve with a mesh size of 2,0 mm for
common wheat, 1,9 mm for durum wheat
and
2,2 mm for barley. Matter which passes through this
sieve shall be considered as shrivelled grains. Grains
damaged by frost and unripe green grains
shall
belong to the “shrivelled grains” group.’

L 174/68

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

7.7.2005

10. In footnote 2 of Annex IV,
replaced by the following:

the second paragraph is

‘Ventilation should be such that, when small-grained cereals
(common wheat, durum wheat, barley and sorghum) are
dried for two hours and maize for four hours, the results
from all the test samples of semolina or, as the case may
be, maize that the heating chamber can hold differ by less
than 0,15 % from the results obtained after drying small-
grained cereals for three hours and maize for five hours.’

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day
following that of its publication in the Official
Journal of the
European Union.

However, the provisions on Fusarium-toxins and the method for
checking contaminant levels introduced by point 2 shall be
applicable only to cereals harvested and taken over as from
the 2005/06 marketing year.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 6 July 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL
Member of the Commission