Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 of 18 December 2008 establishing a long-term plan for cod stocks and the fisheries exploiting those stocks
Date: 2012-09-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: North Sea, authorised catch, exploitation of resources, fishery management, fishing area, fishing controls, sea fish

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 12.9.2012  
COM(2012) 498 final 

2012/0236 (COD) 

Proposal for a 

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 

amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 of 18 December 2008 establishing a 
long-term plan for cod stocks and the fisheries exploiting those stocks 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1. 

CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

Council Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 of 18 December 2008 establishing a long-term plan 
for  cod  stocks  and  the  fisheries  exploiting  those  stocks  calls  for  the  performance  of  the 
management  measures  to  be  evaluated  in  the  third  year  of  implementation  of  the  plan.  The 
Scientific, Technical  and  Economic  Committee for Fisheries (STECF)  evaluated the plan in 
2011. The STECF report stated that the cod plan has not achieved its objectives and that they 
are unlikely to be achieved by 2015. Furthermore, the report revealed that there are flaws in 
the design of the Regulation and problems with its implementation. In the light of this advice 
and  of  the  opinions  received  from  RACs  and  the  Member  States,  the  Commission  is 
proposing  an  amendment  to  the  Regulation.  The  proposal  for  the  amendment  of  the 
Regulation does not cover all the problems identified since this amendment is intended as an 
interim  solution  pending  the  development  and  implementation  of  a  mixed-fishery  plan  for 
North  Sea  fisheries  as  anticipated  in  the  reform.  Mixed-fishery  plans  represent  a  novel 
approach and the scientific tools required to develop, evaluate and assess the impact of such 
plans  are  not  yet  fully  developed.  At  present,  it  is  anticipated  that  these  tools  will  become 
available  later  this  year.  This  will  then  permit  the  start  of  the  development  and  impact 
assessment process, through a series of meetings involving scientists and stakeholders during 
2013. Given that mixed-fishery plans will involve trade-offs between fishing opportunities for 
different  stocks  caught  in  the  same  fisheries,  it  is  likely  that  further  consultation  will  be 
required to determine the final configuration of a North Sea plan. This means that it will not 
be possible to table a North Sea mixed fishery plan before 2014. The development of mixed-
fishery plans for the other areas where there are cod stocks covered by the current cod plan 
will  take  longer,  thus  reinforcing  the  need  for  an  amendment  of  the  current  cod  plan  which 
will address the most pressing needs as an interim solution. 

The main considerations justifying this amendment are the following: 

-  The  need  to  limit  the  scope  in  order  to  avoid  increasing  the  effort  by  using  different 
calculation methods 

By  applying  different  methodologies  for  calculating  fishing  effort  when  setting  national 
baselines and when calculating annual effort usage, some Member States have benefitted from 
higher levels of fishing effort than the plan is meant to allow. 

The  amendment  clarifies  that  whilst  different  calculation  methods  are  available,  Member 
States  must  use  the  same  method  to  calculate  their  annual  effort  usage  as  the  method  they 
applied when setting national effort baselines. 

The proposed amendment is, therefore, necessary to ensure that the plan works as intended. 
This  will  lead  to  an  improved  management  of  the  cod  stocks  and  their  long-term 
sustainability. 

- The need to introduce flexibility 

The TAC setting rules of the plan require estimates of certain parameters describing the state 
of  the  stock,  in  particular  estimates  of  fishing  mortality  rates  and  stock  biomass.  In  some 
geographical areas there is insufficient information to apply those rules, so the plan foresees 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
automatic reductions of 25% in the TAC and effort in such circumstances. What was intended 
to be a rule to be applied in exceptional circumstances has proved to have become the norm in 
certain areas, which would lead within a few years to the effective closure not just of the cod 
fisheries but also of the other fisheries using the same gears in these areas. In some cases this 
is not an appropriate response to the scientific advice. It is therefore important to modify the 
rule  about  what  to  do  in  circumstances  where  the  normal  harvest  rule  cannot  be  applied, 
allowing more flexibility to reflect the scientific advice on a case by case basis. 

Additionally, Member States and stakeholders have expressed serious concerns about further 
effort reductions and their social and economic impacts on the industry. 

The  amendment  proposes  a  procedure  for  TAC  and  effort  setting  in  the  absence  of  the 
necessary information to apply the normal harvest rule. It proposes to take a case-by-case, and 
therefore  a  more  flexible,  approach  though  remaining  firmly  based  on  available  scientific 
advice.  This  will  ensure  the  possibility  to  pursue  the  fisheries  whilst  maintaining  a 
precautionary approach. 

The amendment also proposes to allow Council to decide each year whether or not to apply 
further annual fishing effort reductions, once the fishing-effort baseline has been reduced for 
four  consecutive  years.  This  aims  to  address  concerns  on  the  on-going  nature  of  effort 
reductions in light of its social and economic impact on industry. 

- The need to clarify and to simplify the procedure for applying Articles 11 and 13. 

The procedure for excluding from the fishing-effort regime those fishing activities that catch 
insignificant  quantities  of  cod  has  proved  to  be  extremely  cumbersome,  creating  a 
considerable administrative burden and requiring constant recalculations of the total allocated 
effort in order to avoid an increase in fishing effort by the vessels that remain included in the 
effort regime. The amendment seeks to simplify the procedure, first by fixing the final date 
for  the  submission  of  any  request  to  amend  the  effort  baseline  and  secondly  by  making 
successful  requests  generally  applicable  to  all  vessels  satisfying  the  same  criteria  without 
requiring Member States to submit separate requests. Some fleets that are excluded would not 
qualify for exclusion in accordance with proposed amendment therefore transitional measures 
are introduced. 

A  further  simplification  is  proposed,  drawing  from  the  enhanced  accountability  possible 
through  the  use  of  fully  documented  fisheries,  where  all  catches  are  counted  against  quota. 
The proposal is to exempt vessels participating in fully documented fisheries trials from the 
effort regime. The STECF has assessed this as an acceptable management option. 

The  French  version  of  Article  13(2)(b)  reads  differently  from  other  languages,  causing 
different  implementation  of  the  regulation.  To  ensure  uniform  implementation  of  this 
regulation, this provision should be clarified and amended. The proposed version corresponds 
to the French version, which is less restrictive in terms of implementation. Only vessels that 
do  not  target  cod  and  that  comply  with  the  5 %  catch  composition  rule  throughout  the 
management period should be eligible for this derogation. 

-The need to reduce cod discards 

One of the main concerns with the current regulation is that TACs have not constrained cod 
catches. This has resulted in a considerable proportion of over-quota catches being discarded. 
In  some  fisheries,  Member  State  cod-avoidance  and  discard-reduction  measures  have  been 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
partly successful in addressing this problem. But there is evidence of considerable levels of 
discards in some fisheries where the Member States concerned have not acted, even if action 
was suggested by the plan. 

In the light of the Commission's proposals to eliminate discards under a reformed CFP, and 
the large support for this expressed both by Member States and many stakeholders, there is a 
need  to  ensure  that  all  EU  legislation  supports  discards  elimination  rather  than  de  facto 
allowing it. 

The amendment proposes to strengthen the obligation on Member State to take action where 
data confirms high level of discards in certain fisheries. 

- The need to specify the level of required monitoring and control 

The  derogations  from  the  plan  provided  for  by  Articles  11  and  13  represent  a  risk  if  not 
properly implemented. Poor implementation could undermine the success of the plan. STECF 
assessed the implementation of these derogations and pointed out the need to strengthen the 
monitoring,  and  control  as  well  as  the  requirement  for  full  documentation  as  basic 
justification for the derogation. 

The proposal addresses this risk by requiring Member States to assign a ‘very high risk’ level, 
as  described  in  the  control  framework  of  the  CFP,  to  those  vessels  benefiting  from  the 
derogations. The proposal also requires Member States to include adequate measures in their 
national control action programmes to ensure compliance with the required conditions. These 
modifications specify existing requirements and are applicable only if Member States use the 
derogation. 

- The need to align with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 

The  cod  plan  pre-dates  the  entry  into  force  of  the  Lisbon  Treaty.  Given  its  continued 
application  until  it  is  replaced  by  a  new  mixed-fisheries  plan,  its  procedures  need  to  be 
brought  in  line  with  the  decision-making  provisions  applicable  since  the  entry  into  force  of 
the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. The proposed amendment aligns the plan with the 
new comitology procedures. 

Accordingly,  a  draft  proposal  for  amending  Regulation  (EC)  No  1342/2008  has  been 
prepared. 

The Commission is asked to adopt this proposal as soon as possible, and to forward it to the 
Council and the European Parliament. 

RESULTS  OF  CONSULTATIONS  WITH  THE  INTERESTED  PARTIES  AND 

2. 
IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 

The  changes  introduced  by  the  amendment  are  essentially  those  deemed  necessary  to 
implement the plan as originally intended. The changes will reduce the administrative burden 
for  the  Member  States,  the  Commission  and  the  scientific  bodies  charged  with  providing 
appropriate advice.  

The proposal has been drafted after consultations with Member States and stakeholders. These 
consultations are summarised in the table below: 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
STECF/ICES 

Commissions  

Council  

Commission  

Evaluation of the plan (open to 
stakeholders) 

Endorsed by the plenary  

Meeting with stakeholders on results 
of the evaluation and possible option 
for Impact Assessment  

Member States strongly request to 
freeze the fishing effort and exclude 
vessels involved in fully documented 
fishery project from effort regime  

June 2011 

July 2011 

October 2011 

December 2011 

Meeting with stakeholders on possible 
improvements of implementation of 
the cod plan  

March 2012 

STECF plenary 

Assessment of the preliminary options   April 2012 

Bilateral meeting s with 
Member States  

Attempt identify the specific problems 
of Member States  

May/June 2012 

STECF effort working group  

Review of the functioning of the effort 
regime 

June 11-15 2012 

STECF working group on 
multiannual plan (with 
stakeholder participation) 

Assessed modified options and advice 
on what would be needed to address 
the shortcomings indicated in the 
evaluation report to improve the 
performance of the plan. 

18-22 June 2012 

COM workshop on fishing 
effort management  

General  

July 5 2012 

3. 

• 

LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL 

Summary of the proposed action 

The  main  legal  action  is  as  far  as  possible  to  improve  and  clarify  the  provisions  of  the 
Regulation  (EC)  No  1342/2008  that  were  identified  in  the  evaluation  as  problematic,  in 
particular: 

– 

– 

Changes to Article 4 aims at closing the unintended possibility for Member States to 
deploy higher levels of effort than the plan was meant to allow simply by changing 
the  methods  used  for  the  calculation  of  effort  when  establishing  the  baselines  and 
when calculating usage. 

In Article 9 a procedure for TAC setting in the absence of the necessary information 
to apply Article 7 or 8. Instead of automatic reductions of 25% it is proposed to take 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
a  case-by-case,  and  therefore  a  more  flexible,  approach  though  remaining  firmly 
based on available scientific advice. 

The  former  Article  11  is  split  into  Article  11,  Article  11a  and  11b.  Instead  of 
exempting  groups  of  vessels  specified  by  each  Member  State,  exemptions  are  now 
based on criteria that would be generally applicable for any vessels that meet them, 
regardless  of  the  Member  State  to  which  they  belong.  The  amended  Article  also 
avoids the need for constant adjustments of the baseline by Council. 

Transitional  measures  will  ensure  that  vessels  groups  already  excluded  will  be 
subject to the criteria in force at the time of exclusion. 

A  new  Article  11c  is  introduced.  Vessels  involved  in  the  fully  documented  fishery 
trials, where all catches are counted against quota, are exempted from fishing effort 
regime. 

In Article 12(4) the changes are made on the same grounds as for Article 9. 

New paragraph 6 is introduced in Article 12. This paragraph foresees the possibility 
for  the  Council  to  decide  not  to  apply  further  fishing  effort  reductions,  once  the 
fishing-effort ceiling has been reduced for four consecutive years. 

In  Article  13  a  rewording  is  made  in  order  to  remove  differences  in  interpretation 
between language versions. It is now made clear that the condition that cod catch are 
less  than  5  %  of  the  total  refers  to  the  catch  composition  over  the  management 
period, not per trip. 

In Article 14 the Member State obligation to address the discard issue is strengthened 
since it is not the case under the current ruling, and level of control and monitoring is 
specified according to risk based management. 

Changes to Article 32 bring the Committee procedure in to line with the rules of the 
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and regulation (EU) No 182/2011. 

Legal basis 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

• 

Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. 

• 

Subsidiarity principle 

The proposal falls under the exclusive competence of the European Union. 

• 

Proportionality principle 

The  proposal  amends  measures  which  already  exist  in  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No 
1342/2008; accordingly, no concern with regard to the principle of proportionality arises. 

• 

Choice of instrument 

Proposed instrument: Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
Other means would not be adequate for the following reason: a Regulation must be amended 
by a Regulation. 

4. 

BUDGETARY IMPLICATION 

This measure does not involve any additional Union expenditure.

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
2012/0236 (COD) 

Proposal for a 

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 

amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 of 18 December 2008 establishing a 
long-term plan for cod stocks and the fisheries exploiting those stocks 

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  and  in  particular 
Article 43(2) thereof, 

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission, 

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national Parliaments, 

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee1 

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, 

Whereas: 

(1) 

The  scientific  evaluation  of  the  performance  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No 
1342/2008 of 18 December 2008 establishing a long-term plan for cod stocks and the 
fisheries  exploiting  those  stocks2  carried  out  by  the  Scientific,  Technical  and 
Economic  Committee  for  Fisheries  (STECF)  has  shown  a  number  of  problems  with 
the application of that Regulation. 

(2)  Member  States  have  used  different  methodologies  to  calculate  effort  during  the 
reference years and to calculate reported effort consumption within the plan. This has 
allowed  a  higher  level  of  deployed  effort  than  intended  by  the  plan,  which  should 
therefore be rectified. 

(3) 

The  lack  of  analytical  assessments  in  some  geographical  areas  precludes  the 
application  of  the  harvest  control  rules,  resulting  in  an  automatic  25 %  annual 
reduction  of  TAC  and  effort.  Since  the  implementation  of  the  plan,  fishing-effort 
allocations  for  the  areas  concerned  have  been  reduced  significantly.  The  scientific 
evaluation  carried  out  by  the  STECF  suggests  that  in  some  cases  it  would  be  more 
appropriate to use metrics other than fishing mortality for setting the TAC, rather than 
automatic TAC and effort reductions. 

(4) 

The  plan  foresees  scope  to  exclude  vessels  whose  activities  do  not  contribute 
significantly to cod mortality. To avoid that the effort associated with those activities 

1 
2 

OJ C , , p. . 
OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 20. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

is redirected to cod-fishing activity, the baseline effort has to be decreased. To avoid 
the administrative burden of constant recalculations of the baseline effort each time it 
is  decided  to  exclude  certain  activities,  it  is  desirable  to  establish  clear  criteria  for 
exclusion, so that the baseline effort levels can be fixed definitively. 

In order to facilitate more selective fishing activities in the fully documented fisheries 
where  all  catches  are  counted  against  quota,  it  is  appropriate  to  exempt  the  vessels, 
when participating in those trials, from the fishing effort regime. 

Allocations of the maximum allowable fishing effort have been significantly reduced 
for the main cod catching gears since the entry into force of the plan. This may have a 
significant economic and social impact on the fleet segments that use the same gears 
but  which  fish  principally  for  species  other  than  cod.  To  address  those  social  and 
economic issues a mechanism to suspend further fishing effort adjustments should be 
introduced. 

As  a  certain  language  version  of  Article  13(2)(b)  reads  differently  from  the  other 
versions,  it  is  necessary  to  amend  the  text  of  that  provision  in  order  to  ensure  its 
uniform application. 

Given  the  high  levels  of  cod  discards  that  have  been  observed  during  the  period  of 
implementation of the plan, it is necessary that Member States take appropriate action 
to  minimise  discards,  inter  alia  by  allocating  their  fishing  opportunities  amongst 
vessels  in  such  a  way  as  to  match  quotas  to  expected  catches  to  the  greatest  degree 
possible. 

The derogations from the plan provided for by Articles 11 and 13 represent a risk for 
the  success  of  the  plan  if  they  are  not  properly  implemented.  An  assessment  of  the 
implementation  of  those  derogations  revealed  the  need  to  strengthen  the  monitoring, 
control  and  full  documentation  requirements  which  justify  them.  Considering  that 
Union  fisheries  control  framework  is  risk  based,  a  specific  "very  high  level"  of  risk 
should be assigned to activities under derogations. 

(10)  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1224/2009  of  20  November  2009  establishing  a 
Community  control  system  for  ensuring  compliance  with  the  rules  of  the  common 
fisheries policy3 repealed a number of Articles of Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 that 
referred to Annexes II and III. Since there are no other references to Annexes II and III 
in Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008, those Annexes should be deleted. 

(11)  Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 should be amended accordingly, 

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Article 1 

Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 is amended as follows: 

(1) 

Article 4 is replaced by the following: 

3 

OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
‘Article 4 

Calculation of fishing effort 

1. For the purposes of this Regulation, the fishing effort deployed by a group of vessels shall 
be  calculated  as  the  sum  of  the  products  of  capacity-values  in  kW  for  each  vessel  and  the 
number of days each vessel has been present within an area set out in Annex I. A day present 
within  an  area  shall  be  any  continuous  period  of  24  hours  or  part  thereof  during  which  a 
vessel is present within the area and absent from port.  

2. When calculating a day present within an area Member States shall use the same method 
used to establish the effort baseline referred to in Article 12(2)(a).’ 

(2) 

Article 9 is replaced by the following: 

‘Article 9 

Special procedure for setting TACs 

1. Where there is insufficient information to set the TACs in accordance with Article 7, the 
TACs for cod stocks in the Kattegat, the west of Scotland and the Irish Sea shall be set at a 
level  indicated  by  scientific  advice.  However,  if  the  level  indicated  by  scientific  advice  is 
more than 20 % greater than the TACs in the previous year, they shall be set at a level 20% 
greater  than  the  TACs  in  the  previous  year,  or  if  the  level  indicated  by  scientific  advice  is 
more than 25% less than the TACs in the previous year they shall be set at a level 25% less 
than the TACs in the previous year.  

2. Where there is insufficient information to set the TACs in accordance with paragraph 1, the 
TACs for cod stocks in the Kattegat, the west of Scotland and the Irish Sea shall be set at a 
level corresponding to: 

(a) a 25 % reduction compared to the TAC in the previous year, 

or, if scientific advice so recommends, 

(b)  a  reduction  not  exceeding  25 %,  compared  to  the  TAC  in  the  previous  year, 
together with other appropriate measures. 

3. Where there is insufficient information to set the TACs in accordance with Article 8, the 
TACs for the cod stock in the North Sea, the Skagerrak and the eastern Channel shall be set 
by  applying  mutatis  mutandis  paragraphs  1  and  2  of  this  Article,  unless  consultations  with 
Norway result in agreement on a different level of the TAC.’ 

(3) 

(4) 

In Article 11, paragraphs 2 and 3 are deleted 

The following Articles 11a, 11b, 11c and 11d are inserted: 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
‘Article 11a 

Exclusion of fishing effort deployed in certain areas, depth or by certain gears  

1. Fishing effort deployed  by  a vessel  during a trip  may be excluded by the Member States 
when counting the deployed effort against the maximum allowable fishing effort if: 

(a) 

or  

(b) 

or 

(c) 

the  entire  fishing  activity  of  that  trip  by  the  vessel  concerned  is  carried  out 
outside cod-distribution areas as listed in accordance with paragraph 2  

the entire fishing activity of that trip by the vessel concerned is carried out at a 
depth greater than 300 m; 

during  that  trip  the  fishing  vessel  concerned  has  only  one  regulated  gear  on 
board and that gear is listed in accordance with paragraph 2. 

2.  Based  on  the  information  provided  by  Member  States  pursuant  to  paragraph  3,  and  in 
accordance  with  scientific  advice,  the  Council  shall  establish  a  list  of  areas  outside  cod-
distribution and a list of gears the  technical attributes  of which result in cod  catches of less 
than 1,5 % of the total catches measured by weight. 

3.  Member  States  shall  provide  appropriate  information  to  allow  the  Commission  to  assess 
whether  an  area  or  a  gear  shall  be  on  the  list  of  areas  and  the  list  of  gears  referred  to  in 
paragraph 2. 

4. Detailed rules concerning the format and procedure for the transmission to the Commission 
of the information referred to in paragraph 3 may be adopted by means of implementing acts 
in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 32.’ 

‘Article 11b 

Adjustment of the baseline for the calculation of the maximum allowable fishing effort 

1.  Fishing  effort  referred  to  in  Article  11a(1)  that  contributed  to  the  establishment  of  the 
baseline  referred  to  in  Article  12(2)(a)  shall  be  deducted  from  the  baseline  pursuant  to  this 
Article. 

2. Requests for the adjustment of the baseline referred to in paragraph 1 shall be submitted by 
Member  States  to  the  Commission  by  [within  one  year  from  adoption  of  this  amendment  - 
will be filled with concrete date]. 

3  The  adjusted  baseline  shall  be  used  to  recalculate  the  maximum  allowable  fishing  effort 
level  for  the  effort  group  concerned  by  applying  the  annual  percentage  adjustments  applied 
since the entry into force of the plan. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
4.  The  exclusion  of  fishing  effort  referred  to  in  Article  11a  may  be  applied  to  the  relevant 
effort  group  only  after  the  maximum  allowable  fishing  effort  has  been  recalculated  in 
accordance with this Article. 

5. Detailed rules concerning the format and procedure for the transmission to the Commission 
of the requests referred to in paragraph 2 may be adopted by means of implementing acts in 
accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 32.’ 

‘Article 11c 

Exclusion of vessels participating in trials of a fully documented fishery 

1.  Fishing  effort  deployed  by  a  vessel  when  participating  in  trials  of  a  fully  documented 
fishery  whereby  all  cod  catches  including  discards  are  counted  against  the  quota  may  be 
excluded by the Member States from the fishing effort regime. 

2. When paragraph 1 is applied, Member States shall adjust the maximum allowable fishing 
effort set pursuant to Article 12(1) for the effort group concerned by deducting an amount of 
effort  equivalent  to  the  amount  of  effort  deployed  by  the  participating  vessel  in  the  year 
before its exclusion from the fishing effort regime.  

3. Member States shall notify to the Commission any adjustment of the maximum allowable 
fishing  effort  made  pursuant  to  paragraph  2.  The  notification  shall  include  details  of  the 
vessels excluded and the amount of fishing effort deducted both at aggregated and at vessel 
level. 

4. Transfers of cod quota to and from the vessels excluded from the fishing-effort regime in 
accordance with paragraph 1 shall be prohibited. 

5.  Detailed  rules  concerning  the  format  and  procedure  for  the  notification  referred  to  in 
paragraph 3 may be adopted by the Commission by way of implementing acts in accordance 
with the procedure referred to in Article 32.’ 

‘Article 11d 

Transitional measures on exclusions 

Exclusions from the fishing effort regime that were already in force prior to [__ - will be filled 
with  concrete  date]  shall  continue  to  apply  for  as  long  as  the  conditions  under  which  those 
exclusions  were  granted  remain  fulfilled.  Member  States  shall  provide  annually  to  the 
Commission  any  relevant  information  enabling  it  to  establish  that  those  conditions  remain 
fulfilled.’ 

(5) 

Article 12 is amended as follows: 

(a) Paragraph 4 is replaced by the following: 

‘4. For aggregated effort groups where the percentage cumulative catch calculated according 
to paragraph 3(d) is equal to or exceeds 20 %, annual adjustments shall apply. The maximum 
allowable fishing effort of the groups concerned shall be calculated as follows: 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
(a)     where  Articles  7  or  8  apply,  by  applying  to  the  baseline  the  same  percentage 

adjustment as that set out in those Articles for fishing mortality; 

(b)     where  Article  9(1)  applies,  by  applying  the  same  percentage  adjustment  in  fishing 

effort as the adjustment of the TAC compared with the previous year; 

(c)     where Article 9(2) applies, by applying a reduction not exceeding 25 %, compared to 
the maximum allowable fishing-effort for the effort groups concerned in the previous 
year, together with other appropriate measures. 

(b) The following paragraph 6 is added: 

‘By  way  of  derogation  from  paragraph  4,  the  Council  may,  where  the  maximum  allowable 
fishing  effort  has  been  reduced  for  four  consecutive  years,  decide  not  to  apply  an  annual 
adjustment to the maximum allowable fishing effort in the subsequent year or in subsequent 
years.’ 

(6) 

In Article 13(2) point (b) is replaced by the following: 

‘(b) results in a catch composition, including discards, of less than 5 % cod over the 
management period’ 

(7) 

In Article 14 the following paragraphs 5 and 6 are added: 

5.  Where  the  scientific  data  indicate  that  more  than  10 %  of  the  total  cod  catches  for  a 
particular effort group consist of discards, or where the quota allocation does not correspond 
to  the  expected  catches  and  is  likely  to  result  in  cod  discards,  the  Member  State  concerned 
shall take immediate measures to minimise cod discards. 

6. Member States shall establish and include in their national control action programmes, as 
provided  for  in  Article  46  of  Regulation  Council  (EC)  No  1224/20094,  systems  to  ensure 
compliance with the conditions referred to in Articles 11a, 11b, 11c and 13. Member States 
shall  assign  a  ‘very  high  risk’  level  to  vessels  operating  pursuant  to  those  Articles  in  their 
risk-based management as referred to in Article 5 of Regulation 1224/2009. 

(8) 

Article 32 is replaced by the following: 

‘Article 32 

Committee procedure 

1.  The  Commission  shall  be  assisted  by  the  Committee  for  Fisheries  and  Aquaculture 
established  by  Article  30  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  2371/2002.  That  Committee  shall  be  a 
committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. 

2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall 
apply.’ 

(9) 

Annexes II and III are deleted. 

4 

OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
                                                 
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following that of its publication in the 
Official Journal of the European Union. 

Article 2 

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

Done at Brussels,  

For the European Parliament 
The President 

For the Council 
The President 

EN 

14 

   EN