# Official Journal C 137/2016

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 137 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5919 April 2016 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 137

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5919 April 2016

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 137/01 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7853 — CMA CGM/Bollore/Kribi JV) (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2016/C 137/01

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7853 — CMA CGM/Bollore/Kribi JV) (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | Council |
| 2016/C 137/02 | Council Decision of 11 April 2016 renewing the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training | 2 |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 137/03 | Euro exchange rates | 4 |
| 2016/C 137/04 | Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions at its meeting on 25 January 2016 concerning a preliminary draft decision relating to Case AT.40028 — Alternators and starters — Rapporteur: Spain | 5 |
| 2016/C 137/05 | Final Report of the Hearing Officer — Alternators and starters (AT.40028) | 6 |
| 2016/C 137/06 | Summary of Commission Decision of 27 January 2016 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.40028 — Alternators and Starters) (notified under document C(2016) 223)
   (
  1
  ) | 7 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Council

2016/C 137/02

Council Decision of 11 April 2016 renewing the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training

2

European Commission

2016/C 137/03

Euro exchange rates

4

2016/C 137/04

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions at its meeting on 25 January 2016 concerning a preliminary draft decision relating to Case AT.40028 — Alternators and starters — Rapporteur: Spain

5

2016/C 137/05

Final Report of the Hearing Officer — Alternators and starters (AT.40028)

6

2016/C 137/06

Summary of Commission Decision of 27 January 2016 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.40028 — Alternators and Starters) (notified under document C(2016) 223)
   (
  1
  )

(notified under document C(2016) 223)

1

7

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 137/07 | Call for proposals under the 2016 work plan of the Bio-based Industries Public-Private Partnership | 10 |
| | OTHER ACTS |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 137/08 | Publication pursuant to Article 8(1) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 664/2014 of the single document for a designation of origin or a protected geographical indication registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 under the procedure laid down in Article 17 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 | 11 |

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Commission

2016/C 137/07

Call for proposals under the 2016 work plan of the Bio-based Industries Public-Private Partnership

10

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

2016/C 137/08

Publication pursuant to Article 8(1) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 664/2014 of the single document for a designation of origin or a protected geographical indication registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 under the procedure laid down in Article 17 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92

11

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN

---

II Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

| 19.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 137/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 137/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7853 — CMA CGM/Bollore/Kribi JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 137/01)

On 12 April 2016, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | In the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes. |
| --- | --- |

—

In the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes.

| — | In electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M7853. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

In electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M7853. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---

IV Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Council

| 19.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 137/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 137/2

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 11 April 2016

renewing the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training

(2016/C 137/02)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 337/75 of 10 February 1975 establishing the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training, and in particular Article 4 thereof (1),

Having regard to the nomination submitted by the Austrian government,

Having regard to the nominee submitted to the Council by the Commission as regards the Employers’ representatives,

Whereas:

| (1) | By its Decisions of 14 July 2015 (2) and of 14 September 2015 (3), the Council appointed the members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the period from 18 September 2015 to 17 September 2018. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

By its Decisions of 14 July 2015 (2) and of 14 September 2015 (3), the Council appointed the members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the period from 18 September 2015 to 17 September 2018.

| (2) | A member’s seat is available for Austria on the Governing Board of the Centre in the category of Government representatives as a result of the resignation of Mr Reinhard NÖBAUER. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

A member’s seat is available for Austria on the Governing Board of the Centre in the category of Government representatives as a result of the resignation of Mr Reinhard NÖBAUER.

| (3) | A member’s seat on the Governing Board of the Centre in the category of representatives of Employers’ organisations has become vacant for Cyprus as a result of the resignation of Mr Michael PILIKOS. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

A member’s seat on the Governing Board of the Centre in the category of representatives of Employers’ organisations has become vacant for Cyprus as a result of the resignation of Mr Michael PILIKOS.

| (4) | The members of the Governing Board of the aforementioned Centre should be appointed for the remainder of the current term of office, which expires on 17 September 2018, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The members of the Governing Board of the aforementioned Centre should be appointed for the remainder of the current term of office, which expires on 17 September 2018,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following people are hereby appointed members of the Governing Board of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training for the remainder of its term of office, which runs until 17 September 2018:

GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES:

| AUSTRIA | Mr Eduard STAUDECKER |
| --- | --- |

AUSTRIA

Mr Eduard STAUDECKER

REPRESENTATIVES OF EMPLOYERS’ ORGANISATIONS:

| CYPRUS | Mr Michael ANTONIOU |
| --- | --- |

CYPRUS

Mr Michael ANTONIOU

Article 2

This Decision shall be published, for information, in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Luxembourg, 11 April 2016.

For the Council

The President

M.H.P. VAN DAM

---

(1)  OJ L 39, 13.2.1975, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ C 232, 16.7.2015, p. 2.

2

(3)  OJ C 305, 16.9.2015, p. 2.

3

---

European Commission

| 19.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 137/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 137/4

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

18 April 2016

(2016/C 137/03)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1306 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 122,32 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4417 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,79780 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,1948 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0916 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,3325 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,022 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 310,33 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3059 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4749 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,2251 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4685 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4612 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,7688 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6303 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5328 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 299,62 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 16,5061 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,3241 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5050 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 890,95 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,4404 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 52,253 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 76,7591 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,605 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,9606 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 19,9043 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 75,2740 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1306

JPY

Japanese yen

122,32

DKK

Danish krone

7,4417

GBP

Pound sterling

0,79780

SEK

Swedish krona

9,1948

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0916

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,3325

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,022

HUF

Hungarian forint

310,33

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3059

RON

Romanian leu

4,4749

TRY

Turkish lira

3,2251

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4685

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4612

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,7688

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6303

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5328

KRW

South Korean won

1 299,62

ZAR

South African rand

16,5061

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,3241

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5050

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 890,95

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,4404

PHP

Philippine peso

52,253

RUB

Russian rouble

76,7591

THB

Thai baht

39,605

BRL

Brazilian real

3,9606

MXN

Mexican peso

19,9043

INR

Indian rupee

75,2740

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---

| 19.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 137/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 137/5

---

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions at its meeting on 25 January 2016 concerning a preliminary draft decision relating to Case AT.40028 — Alternators and starters

Rapporteur: Spain

(2016/C 137/04)

| 1. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the anticompetitive behaviour covered by the draft decision constitutes an agreement and/or concerted practice between undertakings within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the anticompetitive behaviour covered by the draft decision constitutes an agreement and/or concerted practice between undertakings within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.

| 2. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment of the product and geographic scope of the agreement and/or concerted practice contained in the draft decision. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment of the product and geographic scope of the agreement and/or concerted practice contained in the draft decision.

| 3. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the undertakings concerned by the draft decision have participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the undertakings concerned by the draft decision have participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.

| 4. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the object of the agreement and/or concerted practice was to restrict competition within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the object of the agreement and/or concerted practice was to restrict competition within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.

| 5. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the agreement and/or concerted practice have been capable of appreciably affecting trade between the Member States of the EU. |
| --- | --- |

5.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the agreement and/or concerted practice have been capable of appreciably affecting trade between the Member States of the EU.

| 6. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment as regards the duration of the infringement. |
| --- | --- |

6.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment as regards the duration of the infringement.

| 7. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s draft decision as regards the addressees. |
| --- | --- |

7.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s draft decision as regards the addressees.

| 8. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that a fine should be imposed on the addressees of the draft decision. |
| --- | --- |

8.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that a fine should be imposed on the addressees of the draft decision.

| 9. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the application of the 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003. |
| --- | --- |

9.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the application of the 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.

| 10. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amounts of the fines. |
| --- | --- |

10.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amounts of the fines.

| 11. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the determination of the duration for the purpose of calculating the fines. |
| --- | --- |

11.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the determination of the duration for the purpose of calculating the fines.

| 12. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the aggravating circumstances in this case. |
| --- | --- |

12.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the aggravating circumstances in this case.

| 13. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the mitigating circumstances in this case, reflecting the limited participation of Hitachi in the infringement. |
| --- | --- |

13.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the mitigating circumstances in this case, reflecting the limited participation of Hitachi in the infringement.

| 14. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the application of a deterrence multiplier in this case. |
| --- | --- |

14.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the application of a deterrence multiplier in this case.

| 15. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the reduction of the fines based on the 2006 Leniency Notice. |
| --- | --- |

15.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the reduction of the fines based on the 2006 Leniency Notice.

| 16. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the reduction of the fines based on the 2008 Settlement Notice. |
| --- | --- |

16.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the reduction of the fines based on the 2008 Settlement Notice.

| 17. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines. |
| --- | --- |

17.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines.

| 18. | The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its Opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

18.

The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its Opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

---

| 19.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 137/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 137/6

---

Final Report of the Hearing Officer (1)

Alternators and starters

(AT.40028)

(2016/C 137/05)

On 24 September 2014, the European Commission (‘Commission’) initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 (2) against Denso Corporation (Denso), Mitsubishi Electric Corporation (Melco) and Hitachi, Ltd, and on 14 September 2015 against Hitachi Automotive Systems, Ltd. These two last legal entities are together referred to as ‘Hitachi’. Denso, Melco and Hitachi are together referred to as ‘the parties’.

Following settlement discussions and settlement submissions in accordance with Article 10a(2) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 the Commission adopted a statement of objections (SO) on 23 November 2015. According to the SO, the parties have participated in an infringement of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53 of the European Economic Area (EEA) Agreement, consisting in the coordination of prices and the allocation of supplies of alternators and starters to manufacturers of cars covering all the EEA between 14 September 2004 and 23 February 2010. The parties’ respective replies to the SO confirmed that the SO addressed to them reflected the contents of their settlement submissions.

Pursuant to Article 16 of Decision 2011/695/EU, I have examined whether the draft decision deals only with objections in respect of which the parties have been afforded the opportunity of making known its views. I conclude that it does so.

In view of the above, and taking into account that the parties have not addressed any requests or complaints to me (3), I consider that the effective exercise of the procedural rights of the parties to the proceedings in this case has been respected.

Brussels, 25 January 2016.

Wouter WILS

---

(1)  Pursuant to Articles 16 and 17 of Decision 2011/695/EU of the President of the European Commission of 13 October 2011 on the function and terms of reference of the hearing officer in certain competition proceedings (OJ L 275, 20.10.2011, p. 29).

1

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 of 7 April 2004 relating to the conduct of proceedings by the Commission pursuant to Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 18).

2

(3)  Under Article 15(2) of Decision 2011/695/EU, parties to the proceedings in cartel cases which engage in settlement discussions pursuant to Article 10a of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004, may call upon the hearing officer at any stage during the settlement procedure in order to ensure the effective exercise of their procedural rights. See also paragraph 18 of Commission Notice 2008/C-167/01 on the conduct of settlement procedures in view of the adoption of Decisions pursuant to Article 7 and Article 23 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 in cartel cases (OJ C 167, 2.7.2008, p. 1).

3

---

| 19.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 137/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 137/7

---

Summary of Commission Decision

of 27 January 2016

relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement

(Case AT.40028 — Alternators and Starters)

(notified under document C(2016) 223)

(Only the English text is authentic)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 137/06)

On 27 January 2016, the Commission adopted a decision relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. In accordance with the provisions of Article 30 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty
   (1)
  , the Commission herewith publishes the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed, having regard to the legitimate interest of undertakings in the protection of their business secrets.

1.   INTRODUCTION

| (1) | The Decision relates to a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. The decision is addressed to the following entities: Denso Corporation (referred to as ‘Denso’), Mitsubishi Electric Corporation (referred to as ‘Melco’), Hitachi, Ltd and Hitachi Automotive Systems, Ltd (collectively referred to as ‘Hitachi’) (also referred to as the ‘parties’ or individually the ‘party’). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The Decision relates to a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. The decision is addressed to the following entities: Denso Corporation (referred to as ‘Denso’), Mitsubishi Electric Corporation (referred to as ‘Melco’), Hitachi, Ltd and Hitachi Automotive Systems, Ltd (collectively referred to as ‘Hitachi’) (also referred to as the ‘parties’ or individually the ‘party’).

2.   CASE DESCRIPTION

2.1.   Procedure

| (2) | Following an immunity application by Denso, the Commission sent out several rounds of requests for information between 22 July 2011 and 11 December 2014, pursuant to Article 18(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 or point 12 of the Leniency Notice (2). Hitachi and Melco submitted leniency applications on 27 July 2011 and 6 November 2012, respectively. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Following an immunity application by Denso, the Commission sent out several rounds of requests for information between 22 July 2011 and 11 December 2014, pursuant to Article 18(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 or point 12 of the Leniency Notice (2). Hitachi and Melco submitted leniency applications on 27 July 2011 and 6 November 2012, respectively.

| (3) | On 24 September 2014, the Commission initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 (3) against Denso Corporation, Mitsubishi Electric Corporation and Hitachi, Ltd with a view to engaging in settlement discussions with them under the Settlement Notice (4). On 14 September 2015, the Commission also initiated proceedings against Hitachi Automotive Systems, Ltd. Settlement meetings with the parties took place between 11 November 2014 and 25 September 2015. Each party then submitted its formal request to settle pursuant to Article 10a(2) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On 24 September 2014, the Commission initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 (3) against Denso Corporation, Mitsubishi Electric Corporation and Hitachi, Ltd with a view to engaging in settlement discussions with them under the Settlement Notice (4). On 14 September 2015, the Commission also initiated proceedings against Hitachi Automotive Systems, Ltd. Settlement meetings with the parties took place between 11 November 2014 and 25 September 2015. Each party then submitted its formal request to settle pursuant to Article 10a(2) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004.

| (4) | On 23 November 2015, the Commission adopted a statement of objections addressed to the parties. All parties replied to the statement of objections by confirming that it reflected the contents of their settlement submissions and that they remained committed to following the settlement procedure. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

On 23 November 2015, the Commission adopted a statement of objections addressed to the parties. All parties replied to the statement of objections by confirming that it reflected the contents of their settlement submissions and that they remained committed to following the settlement procedure.

| (5) | The Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions issued a favourable opinion on 25 January 2016 and the Commission adopted the Decision on 27 January 2016. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

The Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions issued a favourable opinion on 25 January 2016 and the Commission adopted the Decision on 27 January 2016.

2.2.   Addressees and duration

| (6) | The addressees of the Decision have participated in a cartel and/or bear liability for it, infringing therefore Article 101 of the Treaty, during the periods indicated below:






  Entity | Duration |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Denso Corporation | 14 September 2004-23 February 2010 |
| Mitsubishi Electric Corporation | 14 September 2004-23 February 2010 |
| Hitachi, Ltd | 14 September 2004-30 June 2009 (direct participation),
  1 July 2009-23 February 2010 (as 100 % parent of Hitachi Automotive Systems, Ltd) |
| Hitachi Automotive Systems, Ltd | 1 July 2009-23 February 2010 (direct participation) |

(6)

The addressees of the Decision have participated in a cartel and/or bear liability for it, infringing therefore Article 101 of the Treaty, during the periods indicated below:

Entity

Duration

Denso Corporation

14 September 2004-23 February 2010

Mitsubishi Electric Corporation

14 September 2004-23 February 2010

Hitachi, Ltd

14 September 2004-30 June 2009 (direct participation),

1 July 2009-23 February 2010 (as 100 % parent of Hitachi Automotive Systems, Ltd)

Hitachi Automotive Systems, Ltd

1 July 2009-23 February 2010 (direct participation)

2.3.   Summary of the infringement

| (7) | The Decision concerns a cartel between Japanese undertakings, relating to the supply of alternators and starters for passenger cars in the European Economic Area (‘EEA’). |
| --- | --- |

(7)

The Decision concerns a cartel between Japanese undertakings, relating to the supply of alternators and starters for passenger cars in the European Economic Area (‘EEA’).

| (8) | The products concerned by the cartel are alternators and starters, which are located inside a car’s engine. An alternator is a device which converts mechanical energy to electrical energy and a starter is a motor that starts the engine of the car. |
| --- | --- |

(8)

The products concerned by the cartel are alternators and starters, which are located inside a car’s engine. An alternator is a device which converts mechanical energy to electrical energy and a starter is a motor that starts the engine of the car.

| (9) | The parties engaged into price coordination, customer or project allocation and exchange of commercially sensitive information, such as price elements and market strategies. The parties respected each other’s vested supply rights (‘incumbency principle’) with regard to certain car manufacturers referred to as Original Equipment Manufacturers (‘OEMs’) by coordinating their responses to requests for quotations (‘RFQs’) issued by the OEMs. Hitachi had a limited participation, as it only participated in the cartel with regard to the supply of alternators and starters to two groups of OEMs out of the total number of OEM groups, with respect to which Denso and Melco coordinated. There is no evidence that Hitachi was aware of, or that it could have reasonably foreseen, the collusion between Denso and Melco regarding the supply of alternators and starters beyond these two groups of OEMs. |
| --- | --- |

(9)

The parties engaged into price coordination, customer or project allocation and exchange of commercially sensitive information, such as price elements and market strategies. The parties respected each other’s vested supply rights (‘incumbency principle’) with regard to certain car manufacturers referred to as Original Equipment Manufacturers (‘OEMs’) by coordinating their responses to requests for quotations (‘RFQs’) issued by the OEMs. Hitachi had a limited participation, as it only participated in the cartel with regard to the supply of alternators and starters to two groups of OEMs out of the total number of OEM groups, with respect to which Denso and Melco coordinated. There is no evidence that Hitachi was aware of, or that it could have reasonably foreseen, the collusion between Denso and Melco regarding the supply of alternators and starters beyond these two groups of OEMs.

| (10) | The overall aim of the cartel was to avoid a decline of prices and at least to maintain the parties’ market shares in the EEA. The conduct covered supplies to OEMs in the EEA. |
| --- | --- |

(10)

The overall aim of the cartel was to avoid a decline of prices and at least to maintain the parties’ market shares in the EEA. The conduct covered supplies to OEMs in the EEA.

| (11) | The anticompetitive contacts took place mainly in Japan. During these contacts (both face-to-face meetings and phone conversations), the parties discussed the attribution of RFQs, exchanged various price elements and other commercially sensitive information and coordinated their responses to the RFQs. |
| --- | --- |

(11)

The anticompetitive contacts took place mainly in Japan. During these contacts (both face-to-face meetings and phone conversations), the parties discussed the attribution of RFQs, exchanged various price elements and other commercially sensitive information and coordinated their responses to the RFQs.

| (12) | The cartel lasted from 14 September 2004 until 23 February 2010. The geographic scope of the infringement involving all three parties was EEA wide for its entire duration. |
| --- | --- |

(12)

The cartel lasted from 14 September 2004 until 23 February 2010. The geographic scope of the infringement involving all three parties was EEA wide for its entire duration.

2.4.   Remedies

| (13) | The Decision applies the 2006 Guidelines on Fines (5). With the exception of Denso, the Decision imposes fines on all the entities listed under point (6) above. |
| --- | --- |

(13)

The Decision applies the 2006 Guidelines on Fines (5). With the exception of Denso, the Decision imposes fines on all the entities listed under point (6) above.

2.4.1.   Basic amount of the fine

| (14) | In setting the fines, the Commission took into account the undertakings’ direct sales of alternators and starters for passenger cars in the EEA. |
| --- | --- |

(14)

In setting the fines, the Commission took into account the undertakings’ direct sales of alternators and starters for passenger cars in the EEA.

| (15) | In this case, the overall infringement period was five years, five months and five days (14 September 2004-23 February 2010). However, each of the parties participated in the cartel for different periods depending on the product (alternator or starter) and on the OEM concerned. |
| --- | --- |

(15)

In this case, the overall infringement period was five years, five months and five days (14 September 2004-23 February 2010). However, each of the parties participated in the cartel for different periods depending on the product (alternator or starter) and on the OEM concerned.

| (16) | According to the information provided by the parties, their sales fluctuated to a significant extent during the entire period of the infringement. In order to adequately reflect this, the Commission used the annual average value of the direct sales of alternators and/or starters to the concerned OEMs in the EEA during the relevant sub-periods of the infringement. |
| --- | --- |

(16)

According to the information provided by the parties, their sales fluctuated to a significant extent during the entire period of the infringement. In order to adequately reflect this, the Commission used the annual average value of the direct sales of alternators and/or starters to the concerned OEMs in the EEA during the relevant sub-periods of the infringement.

| (17) | The basic amount of the fine is set at 17 % of the value of sales as defined under point (16) above to reflect the fact that the infringement featured several different kinds of anti-competitive elements (price fixing, market sharing) and covered the entire EEA. For the additional amount, the percentage was set at 17 %. |
| --- | --- |

(17)

The basic amount of the fine is set at 17 % of the value of sales as defined under point (16) above to reflect the fact that the infringement featured several different kinds of anti-competitive elements (price fixing, market sharing) and covered the entire EEA. For the additional amount, the percentage was set at 17 %.

2.4.2.   Adjustments to the basic amount

| (18) | The Commission applied an increase of 50 % on the basic amount of the fine of Melco and Hitachi for recidivism, since both undertakings were addressees of the Gas Insulated Switchgear decision of the Commission issued on 24 January 2007 (6). |
| --- | --- |

(18)

The Commission applied an increase of 50 % on the basic amount of the fine of Melco and Hitachi for recidivism, since both undertakings were addressees of the Gas Insulated Switchgear decision of the Commission issued on 24 January 2007 (6).

| (19) | The Commission granted a reduction of 15 % on the basic amount of the fine to Hitachi for its limited participation in the single and continuous infringement (see point (9)). |
| --- | --- |

(19)

The Commission granted a reduction of 15 % on the basic amount of the fine to Hitachi for its limited participation in the single and continuous infringement (see point (9)).

| (20) | The Commission applied a deterrence multiplier to all three addressees to take into account the particularly large turnovers beyond the value of sales of those undertakings. |
| --- | --- |

(20)

The Commission applied a deterrence multiplier to all three addressees to take into account the particularly large turnovers beyond the value of sales of those undertakings.

2.4.3.   Application of the 10 % turnover limit

| (21) | In this case, none of the fines calculated exceed 10 % of the respective undertaking’s total turnover in 2014 (financial year taken into account: 1 April 2014 until 31 March 2015). |
| --- | --- |

(21)

In this case, none of the fines calculated exceed 10 % of the respective undertaking’s total turnover in 2014 (financial year taken into account: 1 April 2014 until 31 March 2015).

2.4.4.   Application of the 2006 Leniency Notice: reduction of fines

| (22) | The Commission granted Denso full immunity from fines. Hitachi was granted a 30 % reduction of its fine and Melco a 28 % reduction of its fine. |
| --- | --- |

(22)

The Commission granted Denso full immunity from fines. Hitachi was granted a 30 % reduction of its fine and Melco a 28 % reduction of its fine.

2.4.5.   Application of the Settlement Notice

| (23) | As a result of the application of the Settlement Notice, the amount of the fines imposed on Hitachi and Melco was further reduced by 10 %. |
| --- | --- |

(23)

As a result of the application of the Settlement Notice, the amount of the fines imposed on Hitachi and Melco was further reduced by 10 %.

3.   CONCLUSION

| (24) | The following fines were imposed pursuant to Article 23(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003:






  (a) | Denso Corporation: EUR 0; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(24)

The following fines were imposed pursuant to Article 23(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003:

(a)

Denso Corporation: EUR 0;

| (b) | Mitsubishi Electric Corporation: EUR 110 929 000; and |
| --- | --- |

(b)

Mitsubishi Electric Corporation: EUR 110 929 000; and

| (c) | Hitachi, Ltd and Hitachi Automotive Systems, Ltd, jointly and severally liable: EUR 26 860 000. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

Hitachi, Ltd and Hitachi Automotive Systems, Ltd, jointly and severally liable: EUR 26 860 000.

---

(1)  OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1.

(2)  Commission Notice on Immunity from fines and reduction of fines in cartel cases (OJ C 298, 8.12.2006, p. 17).

(3)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 of 7 April 2004 relating to the conduct of proceedings by the Commission pursuant to Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 18).

(4)  Commission Notice on the conduct of settlement procedures in view of the adoption of Decisions pursuant to Article 7 and Article 23 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 in cartel cases (OJ C 167, 2.7.2008, p. 1).

(5)  Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (OJ C 210, 1.9.2006, p. 2).

(6)  http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/cases/dec_docs/38899/38899_1030_10.pdf

---

V Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Commission

| 19.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 137/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 137/10

---

Call for proposals under the 2016 work plan of the Bio-based Industries Public-Private Partnership

(2016/C 137/07)

Notice is hereby given of the launch of the call for proposals and related activities under the 2016 work plan of the Bio-based Industries Public-Private Partnership.

Proposals are invited for the following call: H2020-BBI-JTI-2016

This work plan, including deadlines and budgets for the activities, is available through the Participant Portal website (http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal) along with information on the modalities of the call and related activities, as well as guidance for applicants on how to submit proposals. All this information will be updated as necessary on the same Participant Portal.

---

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

| 19.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 137/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 137/11

---

Publication pursuant to Article 8(1) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 664/2014 of the single document for a designation of origin or a protected geographical indication registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 under the procedure laid down in Article 17 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92

(2016/C 137/08)

SINGLE DOCUMENT

‘NÍSPEROS CALLOSA D’EN SARRIÁ’

EU No: ES-PDO-0117-01352 — 1.7.2015

PDO ( X ) PGI ( )

1.   Name

‘Nísperos Callosa d’En Sarriá’

2.   Member State or Third Country

Member State or Third Country

Spain

3.   Description of the agricultural product or foodstuff

Description of the agricultural product or foodstuff

3.1.   Type of product

Type of product

Class 1.6. Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed

3.2.   Description of the product to which the name in (1) applies

Description of the product to which the name in (1) applies

Loquats — Eriobotrya japonica Lindl. The main varieties are Algar or Algerie and Nadal, with Golden and Magdall used as pollinating varieties. They are grown for human consumption fresh.

Eriobotrya japonica

The particular characteristics of the authorised varieties are:

—   colour: varies from yellowish to orange,

colour

—   taste: sweet or slightly sour,

taste

—   flesh: yellowish or whitish, firm and shiny,

flesh

—   skin: thick and pliable,

skin

—   shape: oval, sometimes more elongated at the end that is attached to the branch.

shape

The loquats of the authorised varieties must have the following quality characteristics:

| — | whole, |
| --- | --- |

—

whole,

| — | sound, |
| --- | --- |

—

sound,

| — | clean, practically free of any visible foreign matter, |
| --- | --- |

—

clean, practically free of any visible foreign matter,

| — | free of abnormal external moisture, |
| --- | --- |

—

free of abnormal external moisture,

| — | free of foreign odours and/or tastes, |
| --- | --- |

—

free of foreign odours and/or tastes,

| — | stalk attached. |
| --- | --- |

—

stalk attached.

The fruit must be picked when at the peak of ripeness both inside and out. All these characteristics should enable them to withstand handling and transport and satisfy established trade requirements at destination.

The PDO loquats must be of categories ‘extra’ or ‘I’ with a minimum diameter of 32 mm.

Packaged fruit: there must be no damage to the flesh, but slight flaws in the appearance of the skin are permitted, provided that they do not affect the general condition of the fruit, its quality, conservation or appearance. The fruit must have a minimum of 7,5 °Brix.

3.3.   Feed (for products of animal origin only) and raw materials (for processed products only)

Feed (for products of animal origin only) and raw materials (for processed products only)

—

3.4.   Specific steps in production that must take place in the defined geographical area

Specific steps in production that must take place in the defined geographical area

All steps in production must take place in the defined geographical area. There are no geographical restrictions with respect to packaging.

3.5.   Specific rules concerning slicing, grating, packaging, etc. of the product to which the registered name refers

Specific rules concerning slicing, grating, packaging, etc. of the product to which the registered name refers

—

3.6.   Specific rules concerning labelling of the product to which the registered name refers

Specific rules concerning labelling of the product to which the registered name refers

The wording or labels identifying ‘Níspero Callosa d’En Sarriá’ intended for consumption must include the European Union’s Protected Designation of Origin logo and the words ‘Protected Designation of Origin’ and ‘Níspero Callosa d’En Sarriá’. The labelling must also include a conformity mark, known as a secondary label, identified by an alphanumeric code, to be affixed by the registered packhouse in such a way that it cannot be reused and assuring traceability.

4.   Concise definition of the geographical area

Concise definition of the geographical area

The fruit are grown in the north-eastern part of the province of Alicante.

The production area comprises the area around Callosa d’En Sarriá, covering a series of localities in the comarca of Marina Baixa; it includes the whole of the Guadalest valley and stretches along the coast from Altea to Villajoyosa.

comarca

The geographical boundaries of this area are: the Mediterranean Sea to the east, the Sierra de Bernia to the north-east and the rivers Sella and Amadorio to the west.

It comprises the land situated in the municipalities of Aigues, Alfaz del Pí, Altea, Beniarda, Benidorm, Benifato, Benimantell, Bolulla, Callosa d’En Sarriá, Confrides, Finestrat, Guadalest, La Nucia, Orcheta, Polop, Relleu, Sella, Tarbena and Villajoiosa in the province of Alicante.

5.   Link with the geographical area

Link with the geographical area

| (a) | Geographical area
  Natural factors:
  The area is located in a fairly mountainous region. It is crossed by the foothills of the Baetic System, the Sierra de Aitana, Sierra de Bernia and Sierra de Almedia, with peaks of 600 to 1 100 m. The land is made up of various different geological formations, Triassic and Quaternary predominating.
  The subsoil is Triassic and essentially made up of limestone, marl and gypsum. Generally speaking, the soil is clayey, well supplied with calcium carbonate and poor in organic matter and phosphorus.
  The climate is mainly dry Mediterranean, except along the coast and in the mountains, where it is maritime Mediterranean and subtropical respectively. The average annual temperature is between 15 °C and 19 °C; the most notable feature is that the temperature almost never falls below zero degrees, and the average annual minimum is between 9 °C and 15 °C.
  Precipitation is scant and the annual average is 800-900 mm.
  Human factors:
  Loquats were first brought to Spain by merchant seamen over 2 000 years ago. They were planted all along the eastern and south-eastern part of the Iberian peninsula, and found to thrive especially well in the Callosa d’En Sarriá area and in the Algar and Guadalest river basins. For 30 years now they have been grown here as a monoculture, especially in Callosa d’En Sarriá. This is almost the only area in Spain where loquats are grown.
  Over the years the local growers have developed specific thinning techniques to achieve the best possible fruit size.
  Thinning is also done to improve the yield and the quality of the fruit. The method used is attuned to the fruit growth cycle and the local climate. Thus, the first stage entails removing shoots and secondary panicles. This is done at the end of summer, when temperatures are still warm and these shoots and secondary panicles have barely started to develop.
  The next stage takes place when the trees are in full bloom, at the beginning of autumn, when the average temperature is mild but there is noticeable temperature variation; this is the best time to remove part of the panicle.
  The final stage of thinning is carried out in the months when temperatures are lowest, when the fruit is already formed but there is still some time to go before it begins to ripen. At this stage just a few fruits are left on each panicle. |
| --- | --- |

(a)

Geographical area

Natural factors:

The area is located in a fairly mountainous region. It is crossed by the foothills of the Baetic System, the Sierra de Aitana, Sierra de Bernia and Sierra de Almedia, with peaks of 600 to 1 100 m. The land is made up of various different geological formations, Triassic and Quaternary predominating.

The subsoil is Triassic and essentially made up of limestone, marl and gypsum. Generally speaking, the soil is clayey, well supplied with calcium carbonate and poor in organic matter and phosphorus.

The climate is mainly dry Mediterranean, except along the coast and in the mountains, where it is maritime Mediterranean and subtropical respectively. The average annual temperature is between 15 °C and 19 °C; the most notable feature is that the temperature almost never falls below zero degrees, and the average annual minimum is between 9 °C and 15 °C.

Precipitation is scant and the annual average is 800-900 mm.

Human factors:

Loquats were first brought to Spain by merchant seamen over 2 000 years ago. They were planted all along the eastern and south-eastern part of the Iberian peninsula, and found to thrive especially well in the Callosa d’En Sarriá area and in the Algar and Guadalest river basins. For 30 years now they have been grown here as a monoculture, especially in Callosa d’En Sarriá. This is almost the only area in Spain where loquats are grown.

Over the years the local growers have developed specific thinning techniques to achieve the best possible fruit size.

Thinning is also done to improve the yield and the quality of the fruit. The method used is attuned to the fruit growth cycle and the local climate. Thus, the first stage entails removing shoots and secondary panicles. This is done at the end of summer, when temperatures are still warm and these shoots and secondary panicles have barely started to develop.

The next stage takes place when the trees are in full bloom, at the beginning of autumn, when the average temperature is mild but there is noticeable temperature variation; this is the best time to remove part of the panicle.

The final stage of thinning is carried out in the months when temperatures are lowest, when the fruit is already formed but there is still some time to go before it begins to ripen. At this stage just a few fruits are left on each panicle.

| (b) | The loquats grown in the Callosa d’En Sarriá area are a deeper orange colour and are sweeter than loquats grown elsewhere. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

The loquats grown in the Callosa d’En Sarriá area are a deeper orange colour and are sweeter than loquats grown elsewhere.

| (c) | Causal link between the geographical area and the characteristics of the product:
  The defined area has very specific orographic features. Several sierras form a perimeter surrounding all the towns and villages, creating a distinct microclimate.
  This microclimate is characterised by mild temperatures throughout the year and slightly higher rainfall than on the Mediterranean coast.
  The combination of mild temperatures and somewhat higher rainfall gives the fruit a deeper yellowish-orange colour than that of loquats grown elsewhere.
  The thinning method that has been developed in the area, attuned to the fruit growth cycle and the local climate, helps produce fruit of a certain size and with a sugar content of at least 7,5 °Brix. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

Causal link between the geographical area and the characteristics of the product:

The defined area has very specific orographic features. Several sierras form a perimeter surrounding all the towns and villages, creating a distinct microclimate.

sierras

This microclimate is characterised by mild temperatures throughout the year and slightly higher rainfall than on the Mediterranean coast.

The combination of mild temperatures and somewhat higher rainfall gives the fruit a deeper yellowish-orange colour than that of loquats grown elsewhere.

The thinning method that has been developed in the area, attuned to the fruit growth cycle and the local climate, helps produce fruit of a certain size and with a sugar content of at least 7,5 °Brix.

Publication reference of the specification

Publication reference of the specification

(the second subparagraph of Article 6(1) of this Regulation)

http://www.agricultura.gva.es/pc_nisperoscallosa

---