# Official Journal C 51/2009

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 51 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 524 March 2009 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 51

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 524 March 2009

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES |
| | Commission |
| 2009/C 051/01 | Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 2,00 % on 1 March 2009 — Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| 2009/C 051/02 | Opinion of the Advisory Committee on mergers given at its meeting of 3 December 2008 regarding a draft decision relating to Case COMP/M.5141 — KLM/Martinair — Rapporteur: Latvia | 2 |
| 2009/C 051/03 | Final Report in the Case COMP/M.5141 — KLM/Martinair | 3 |
| 2009/C 051/04 | Summary of Commission Decision of 17 December 2008 declaring a concentration compatible with the common market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/M.5141 — KLM/Martinair) (notified under document number C(2008) 8458 final) | 4 |
| | NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES |
| 2009/C 051/05 | Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of the Directive 2000/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to cableway installations designed to carry persons (
  1
  ) | 9 |
| 2009/C 051/06 | Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of the Directive 94/25/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to recreational craft (
  1
  ) | 12 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

2009/C 051/01

Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 2,00 % on 1 March 2009 — Euro exchange rates

1

2009/C 051/02

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on mergers given at its meeting of 3 December 2008 regarding a draft decision relating to Case COMP/M.5141 — KLM/Martinair — Rapporteur: Latvia

2

2009/C 051/03

Final Report in the Case COMP/M.5141 — KLM/Martinair

3

2009/C 051/04

Summary of Commission Decision of 17 December 2008 declaring a concentration compatible with the common market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/M.5141 — KLM/Martinair) (notified under document number C(2008) 8458 final)

(notified under document number C(2008) 8458 final)

4

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

2009/C 051/05

Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of the Directive 2000/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to cableway installations designed to carry persons (
  1
  )

1

9

2009/C 051/06

Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of the Directive 94/25/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to recreational craft (
  1
  )

1

12

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMON COMMERCIAL POLICY |
| | Commission |
| 2009/C 051/07 | Notice of initiation of an expiry review and a partial interim review of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of silicon originating in the People's Republic of China | 17 |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY |
| | Commission |
| 2009/C 051/08 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5482 — GSN/FUN) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 22 |
| 2009/C 051/09 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5445 — Mytilineos/Motor Oil/Corinthos Power) (
  1
  ) | 23 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMON COMMERCIAL POLICY

Commission

2009/C 051/07

Notice of initiation of an expiry review and a partial interim review of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of silicon originating in the People's Republic of China

17

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY

Commission

2009/C 051/08

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5482 — GSN/FUN) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

22

2009/C 051/09

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5445 — Mytilineos/Motor Oil/Corinthos Power) (
  1
  )

1

23

| | Corrigenda |
| --- | --- |
| 2009/C 051/10 | Corrigendum to the public holidays in 2009 (OJ C 14, 21.1.2009) | 24 |

Corrigenda

2009/C 051/10

Corrigendum to the public holidays in 2009 (OJ C 14, 21.1.2009)

(OJ C 14, 21.1.2009)

24

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

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

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

EN

---

IV Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

| 4.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/1

---

Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations (1):

2,00 % on 1 March 2009

Euro exchange rates (2)

3 March 2009

(2009/C 51/01)

1 euro=

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2615 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 123,64 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4510 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,89575 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 11,4853 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,4826 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,0125 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,961 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 306,84 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7087 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,7350 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,2990 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,1802 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,9619 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,6219 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,7866 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 2,5303 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,9550 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 968,44 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 13,2300 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,6303 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3747 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 131,69 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6795 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 61,560 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 45,7697 |
| THB | Thai baht | 45,603 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,0468 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 19,2631 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 65,5600 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2615

JPY

Japanese yen

123,64

DKK

Danish krone

7,4510

GBP

Pound sterling

0,89575

SEK

Swedish krona

11,4853

CHF

Swiss franc

1,4826

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,0125

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,961

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

306,84

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7087

PLN

Polish zloty

4,7350

RON

Romanian leu

4,2990

TRY

Turkish lira

2,1802

AUD

Australian dollar

1,9619

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,6219

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,7866

NZD

New Zealand dollar

2,5303

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,9550

KRW

South Korean won

1 968,44

ZAR

South African rand

13,2300

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,6303

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3747

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 131,69

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6795

PHP

Philippine peso

61,560

RUB

Russian rouble

45,7697

THB

Thai baht

45,603

BRL

Brazilian real

3,0468

MXN

Mexican peso

19,2631

INR

Indian rupee

65,5600

---

(1)

Rate applied to the most recent operation carried out before the indicated day. In the case of a variable rate tender, the interest rate is the marginal rate.

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

---

| 4.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/2

---

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on mergers given at its meeting of 3 December 2008 regarding a draft decision relating to Case COMP/M.5141 — KLM/Martinair

Rapporteur: Latvia

(2009/C 51/02)

| 1. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the notified operation constitutes a concentration within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the EC Merger Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the notified operation constitutes a concentration within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the EC Merger Regulation.

| 2. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the markets to be considered are:






  (a) | the markets for air transport of cargo on a uni-directional basis:






  — | between continents for transport of cargo between Europe and North America, |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the markets to be considered are:

(a)

the markets for air transport of cargo on a uni-directional basis:

—

between continents for transport of cargo between Europe and North America,

| — | between Europe and specific countries for transport of cargo between Europe and South American, Greater Caribbean, Far Eastern and African countries; |
| --- | --- |

—

between Europe and specific countries for transport of cargo between Europe and South American, Greater Caribbean, Far Eastern and African countries;

| (b) | the market for the supply of long-haul air transport services to end customers, subdivided on the basis of point of origin/point of destination (‘O&D’) pairs:






  — | whereby the point of origin includes the airport of Amsterdam and, at least with respect to flights to Punta Cana, Cancun, Havana, Curacao and Aruba, but possibly also with respect to flights to Vancouver, Toronto and Miami, also the airports of Düsseldorf and Brussels, |
| --- | --- | --- |

(b)

the market for the supply of long-haul air transport services to end customers, subdivided on the basis of point of origin/point of destination (‘O&D’) pairs:

—

whereby the point of origin includes the airport of Amsterdam and, at least with respect to flights to Punta Cana, Cancun, Havana, Curacao and Aruba, but possibly also with respect to flights to Vancouver, Toronto and Miami, also the airports of Düsseldorf and Brussels,

| — | and whereby the point of destination is likely to be limited to each of the above-mentioned destinations, but possibly extends to all long-haul destinations in the Greater Caribbean region or even all long-haul destinations worldwide; |
| --- | --- |

—

and whereby the point of destination is likely to be limited to each of the above-mentioned destinations, but possibly extends to all long-haul destinations in the Greater Caribbean region or even all long-haul destinations worldwide;

| (c) | the market for the wholesale supply of airline seats to tour operators comprising flights connecting the airports of Amsterdam, Düsseldorf and Brussels to all long-haul destinations worldwide, which might have to be subdivided on a route-by-route basis in accordance with the O&D pairs identified in question 2(b) with respect to the market for the supply of long-haul air transport services to end customers. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

the market for the wholesale supply of airline seats to tour operators comprising flights connecting the airports of Amsterdam, Düsseldorf and Brussels to all long-haul destinations worldwide, which might have to be subdivided on a route-by-route basis in accordance with the O&D pairs identified in question 2(b) with respect to the market for the supply of long-haul air transport services to end customers.

| 3. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment that the notified operation would not significantly impede effective competition in the Common Market or a substantial part of it with respect to the relevant markets for air transport of cargo. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment that the notified operation would not significantly impede effective competition in the Common Market or a substantial part of it with respect to the relevant markets for air transport of cargo.

| 4. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment that the notified operation would not significantly impede effective competition in the Common Market or a substantial part of it with respect to the markets for the supply of long-haul air transport services to end customers. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment that the notified operation would not significantly impede effective competition in the Common Market or a substantial part of it with respect to the markets for the supply of long-haul air transport services to end customers.

| 5. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment that the notified operation would not significantly impede effective competition in the Common Market or a substantial part of it with respect to the markets for the wholesale supply of airline seats to tour operators. |
| --- | --- |

5.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment that the notified operation would not significantly impede effective competition in the Common Market or a substantial part of it with respect to the markets for the wholesale supply of airline seats to tour operators.

| 6. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the notified concentration should be declared compatible with the Common Market and with the functioning of the EEA Agreement in accordance with Article 8(1) of the Merger Regulation and Article 57 of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

6.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the notified concentration should be declared compatible with the Common Market and with the functioning of the EEA Agreement in accordance with Article 8(1) of the Merger Regulation and Article 57 of the EEA Agreement.

---

| 4.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/3

---

Final Report (1) in the Case COMP/M.5141 — KLM/Martinair

(2009/C 51/03)

On 17 July 2008, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (‘EC Merger Regulation’) by which KLM Royal Dutch Airlines N.V., ultimately controlled by Air France-KLM Holding S.A. acquires, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the EC Merger Regulation, control of the whole of Martinair Holland N.V. by way of purchase of shares.

Based on the results of the first phase market investigation, the Commission concluded that the proposed transaction raised serious doubts as to its compatibility with the common market due to competition concerns identified with respect to air passenger transport on certain routes. The notifying party submitted subsequently a commitment proposal. It consisted in benchmarking the post-merger price evolution of economy class fares on the routes where competition concerns had been identified vis-à-vis the price evolution of economy class fares on a basket of comparable routes. However, the market test of the commitments revealed doubts as to the workability and effectiveness of the price control mechanism and showed that the commitment was too complex to implement and monitor. The proposed commitment therefore proved to be not sufficiently clear-cut to eliminate the serious doubts identified by the Commission in the course of its first phase investigation.

Accordingly, on 8 September 2008, the Commission concluded that the transaction raised serious doubts as to its compatibility with the common market and with the functioning of the EEA Agreement and decided to initiate proceedings under Article 6(1)(c) of the EC Merger Regulation.

The notifying party submitted comments on the Article 6(1)(c) decision and orally requested access to the key documents in the file, in accordance with the Best Practices rules for merger cases. The case team replied on the same day that no substantiated submissions within the meaning of paragraph 45 of the Best Practices rules had been made and that, therefore, no key documents existed to which access could be granted. The notifying party did not further pursue this issue.

Following an in-depth market investigation, the Commission concluded that the proposed concentration would not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or in a substantial part of it and that it should therefore be declared compatible with the common market pursuant to Article 8(1) of the EC Merger Regulation and with the EEA Agreement pursuant to Article 57 thereof. Accordingly, no statement of objections was sent to the notifying party.

No queries or submissions have been made to me by the parties or any third party. The case does not call for any particular comments as regards the right to be heard.

Brussels, 12 December 2008.

Michael ALBERS

---

(1)  Pursuant to Articles 15 and 16 of Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, ECSC of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of Hearing Officers in certain competition proceedings (OJ L 162, 19.6.2001, p. 21).

1

---

| 4.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/4

---

Summary of Commission Decision

of 17 December 2008

declaring a concentration compatible with the common market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement

(Case COMP/M.5141 — KLM/Martinair)

(notified under document number C(2008) 8458 final)

(Only the English version is authentic)

(2009/C 51/04)

On 17 December 2008, the Commission adopted a Decision in a merger case under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation), and in particular Article 8(1) of that Regulation. A non-confidential version of the full Decision can be found in the authentic language of the case and in the working languages of the Commission on the website of the Directorate-General for Competition, at the following address:

http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/index_en.html

I.   THE PARTIES

| (1) | KLM Royal Dutch Airlines N.V. (‘KLM’), a Dutch undertaking ultimately controlled by Air France-KLM Holding S.A. (‘Air France-KLM’, France), is a full-service network carrier with its hub at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol (‘Schiphol’). Its two core activities are the air transport of passengers and cargo. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines N.V. (‘KLM’), a Dutch undertaking ultimately controlled by Air France-KLM Holding S.A. (‘Air France-KLM’, France), is a full-service network carrier with its hub at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol (‘Schiphol’). Its two core activities are the air transport of passengers and cargo.

| (2) | Martinair (‘Martinair’) is a Dutch point-to-point carrier with its base at Schiphol. Martinair provides charter and scheduled air transport of passengers and cargo. Its fleet serves only intercontinental destinations. Martinair operates passenger flights to Vancouver, Toronto, Miami, Havana, Varadero, San José, Punta Cana, Puerto Plata, Cancun, Curacao and Aruba. Its cargo flights operate between Europe and the following continents: Africa, the Middle East, the Far East, North America and Latin America. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Martinair (‘Martinair’) is a Dutch point-to-point carrier with its base at Schiphol. Martinair provides charter and scheduled air transport of passengers and cargo. Its fleet serves only intercontinental destinations. Martinair operates passenger flights to Vancouver, Toronto, Miami, Havana, Varadero, San José, Punta Cana, Puerto Plata, Cancun, Curacao and Aruba. Its cargo flights operate between Europe and the following continents: Africa, the Middle East, the Far East, North America and Latin America.

II.   THE OPERATION

| (3) | KLM currently owns 50 % of Martinair, sharing the equity 50/50 with Maersk Holding B.V., a Dutch-based wholly-owned subsidiary of A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S (‘Maersk’), a Danish company with interests mainly in sea and land transport. Given the company organisation and corporate governance of Martinair, KLM and Maersk currently jointly control Martinair. KLM intends to acquire the 50 % shareholding of Maersk in Martinair. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

KLM currently owns 50 % of Martinair, sharing the equity 50/50 with Maersk Holding B.V., a Dutch-based wholly-owned subsidiary of A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S (‘Maersk’), a Danish company with interests mainly in sea and land transport. Given the company organisation and corporate governance of Martinair, KLM and Maersk currently jointly control Martinair. KLM intends to acquire the 50 % shareholding of Maersk in Martinair.

| (4) | Accordingly, on 17 July 2008, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of the EC Merger Regulation by which KLM acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the EC Merger Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Martinair by way of purchase of shares. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Accordingly, on 17 July 2008, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of the EC Merger Regulation by which KLM acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the EC Merger Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Martinair by way of purchase of shares.

III.   COMMUNITY DIMENSION

| (5) | The notified concentration has a Community dimension within the meaning of Article 1(2) of the EC Merger Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

The notified concentration has a Community dimension within the meaning of Article 1(2) of the EC Merger Regulation.

IV.   PROCEDURE AND SUMMARY

| (6) | Based on the results of the first phase market investigation, the Commission concluded that the proposed transaction raised serious doubts as to its compatibility with the common market due to competition concerns identified with respect to air passenger transport between Amsterdam and Aruba and Curacao. On 18 August 2008, the parties submitted undertakings which involved a commitment to benchmark the post-merger price evolution of economy class fares on the routes connecting Amsterdam to Aruba and Curacao, vis-à-vis the price evolution of economy class fares on a basket of comparable routes. However, the proposed commitment proved to be unsuitable to eliminate the serious doubts identified by the Commission. On 8 September 2008, the Commission adopted a decision to initiate proceedings under Article 6(1)(c) of the EC Merger Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

Based on the results of the first phase market investigation, the Commission concluded that the proposed transaction raised serious doubts as to its compatibility with the common market due to competition concerns identified with respect to air passenger transport between Amsterdam and Aruba and Curacao. On 18 August 2008, the parties submitted undertakings which involved a commitment to benchmark the post-merger price evolution of economy class fares on the routes connecting Amsterdam to Aruba and Curacao, vis-à-vis the price evolution of economy class fares on a basket of comparable routes. However, the proposed commitment proved to be unsuitable to eliminate the serious doubts identified by the Commission. On 8 September 2008, the Commission adopted a decision to initiate proceedings under Article 6(1)(c) of the EC Merger Regulation.

V.   CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE COMPETITIVE ASSESSMENT

| (7) | The proposed concentration involves a change from joint to sole control. Already pre-transaction, KLM therefore exercises some degree of control over Martinair. Moreover, KLM's incentives to compete with Martinair are arguably reduced given that KLM is entitled to half of Martinair's profits. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

The proposed concentration involves a change from joint to sole control. Already pre-transaction, KLM therefore exercises some degree of control over Martinair. Moreover, KLM's incentives to compete with Martinair are arguably reduced given that KLM is entitled to half of Martinair's profits.

| (8) | Nevertheless, the Commission found on the basis of Martinair's organisation, corporate governance and internal documents that KLM has little influence on Martinair's pricing decisions, decisions on entering a particular route, capacity increases or decreases and similar operational decisions. In fact, KLM's influence on Martinair's market conduct is limited to veto rights with regard to more far-reaching, strategic and operational choices including, in particular, strategic choices to operate within certain business segments (e.g. short-haul or long-haul passenger air transport, cargo air transport) and decisions to extend or reduce Martinair's fleet. Moreover, the market investigation largely confirmed that the parties' competitors and customers generally perceive KLM and Martinair as competing with regard to both their passenger and their cargo operations. |
| --- | --- |

(8)

Nevertheless, the Commission found on the basis of Martinair's organisation, corporate governance and internal documents that KLM has little influence on Martinair's pricing decisions, decisions on entering a particular route, capacity increases or decreases and similar operational decisions. In fact, KLM's influence on Martinair's market conduct is limited to veto rights with regard to more far-reaching, strategic and operational choices including, in particular, strategic choices to operate within certain business segments (e.g. short-haul or long-haul passenger air transport, cargo air transport) and decisions to extend or reduce Martinair's fleet. Moreover, the market investigation largely confirmed that the parties' competitors and customers generally perceive KLM and Martinair as competing with regard to both their passenger and their cargo operations.

| (9) | In the light of these circumstances, the Commission carefully analysed the effects that the elimination of the existing degree of competition between KLM and Martinair which would result from the proposed concentration might have on competition. |
| --- | --- |

(9)

In the light of these circumstances, the Commission carefully analysed the effects that the elimination of the existing degree of competition between KLM and Martinair which would result from the proposed concentration might have on competition.

VI.   AIR TRANSPORT OF CARGO

6.1.   The relevant product and geographic markets

| (10) | The market investigation confirmed that sea transport is increasingly becoming an economically attractive option not only for intra-European, but also for intercontinental cargo. However, due to their time-sensitiveness, many types of cargo still require transport by air. For the purpose of the present Decision, it is not necessary to decide whether intercontinental cargo, air and sea transport are part of the same market or not as the proposed concentration does not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it under either market definition. |
| --- | --- |

(10)

The market investigation confirmed that sea transport is increasingly becoming an economically attractive option not only for intra-European, but also for intercontinental cargo. However, due to their time-sensitiveness, many types of cargo still require transport by air. For the purpose of the present Decision, it is not necessary to decide whether intercontinental cargo, air and sea transport are part of the same market or not as the proposed concentration does not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it under either market definition.

| (11) | The market investigation also indicated that there is no need for a subdivision of the air cargo transport market by category or nature of the goods transported. Customers generally buy space which they fill with all sorts of different cargo, including perishables and other goods which might require specific handling. In addition, typically the same aircraft is used to transport the different types of cargo and carriers can adapt their services relatively easily to the specific requirements of certain goods. However, there is no need to decide on the precise market definition in this respect as the proposed concentration does not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it under either market definition. |
| --- | --- |

(11)

The market investigation also indicated that there is no need for a subdivision of the air cargo transport market by category or nature of the goods transported. Customers generally buy space which they fill with all sorts of different cargo, including perishables and other goods which might require specific handling. In addition, typically the same aircraft is used to transport the different types of cargo and carriers can adapt their services relatively easily to the specific requirements of certain goods. However, there is no need to decide on the precise market definition in this respect as the proposed concentration does not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it under either market definition.

| (12) | In accordance with previous decisions, the Decision defines the market for air cargo transport on a continent-to-continent basis for intercontinental transport of cargo, at least when it concerns continents with a sufficiently developed infrastructure allowing for onward connections. The latter was confirmed for North America and Europe, for all types of goods including time-critical, perishable goods such as flowers. In this respect, the market investigation confirmed that, due to the well-developed European trucking infrastructure, many cargo airports in Europe are substitutable to Schiphol for all kinds of cargo including flowers. As regards, Africa, South America and parts of Asia, the market investigation showed that these continents have to be subdivided on a country-by-country basis. |
| --- | --- |

(12)

In accordance with previous decisions, the Decision defines the market for air cargo transport on a continent-to-continent basis for intercontinental transport of cargo, at least when it concerns continents with a sufficiently developed infrastructure allowing for onward connections. The latter was confirmed for North America and Europe, for all types of goods including time-critical, perishable goods such as flowers. In this respect, the market investigation confirmed that, due to the well-developed European trucking infrastructure, many cargo airports in Europe are substitutable to Schiphol for all kinds of cargo including flowers. As regards, Africa, South America and parts of Asia, the market investigation showed that these continents have to be subdivided on a country-by-country basis.

| (13) | Moreover, the market investigation revealed that air cargo transport markets are one-directional in nature as the demand for air cargo transport can differ substantially on each end of the route. Finally, the market investigation also confirmed the Commission's findings in previous cases that indirect flights are generally substitutable to direct flights. |
| --- | --- |

(13)

Moreover, the market investigation revealed that air cargo transport markets are one-directional in nature as the demand for air cargo transport can differ substantially on each end of the route. Finally, the market investigation also confirmed the Commission's findings in previous cases that indirect flights are generally substitutable to direct flights.

| (14) | In view of the above, the air cargo transport market for the purpose of the Decision is to be divided on the basis of one-way continent-to-continent pairs with respect to routes connecting Europe and North America, and on a continent-to-country basis for all other routes. |
| --- | --- |

(14)

In view of the above, the air cargo transport market for the purpose of the Decision is to be divided on the basis of one-way continent-to-continent pairs with respect to routes connecting Europe and North America, and on a continent-to-country basis for all other routes.

6.2.   Competitive assessment

| (15) | As regards air cargo transport between Europe and North America, the parties' combined market shares will remain below 25 % and the parties will continue to face strong competition from several other major combination airlines, such as Lufthansa, British Airways and integrators such as FedEx and UPS. Similarly, with respect to air cargo transport between Europe and those Far Eastern countries where the parties' activities overlap, the parties' combined market shares will reach a maximum of 25 % and the parties will continue to face strong competition from several other carriers, such as Lufthansa, Cargolux, Cathay Pacific and Air China. Therefore, the proposed concentration will not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it with respect to any of these markets. |
| --- | --- |

(15)

As regards air cargo transport between Europe and North America, the parties' combined market shares will remain below 25 % and the parties will continue to face strong competition from several other major combination airlines, such as Lufthansa, British Airways and integrators such as FedEx and UPS. Similarly, with respect to air cargo transport between Europe and those Far Eastern countries where the parties' activities overlap, the parties' combined market shares will reach a maximum of 25 % and the parties will continue to face strong competition from several other carriers, such as Lufthansa, Cargolux, Cathay Pacific and Air China. Therefore, the proposed concentration will not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it with respect to any of these markets.

| (16) | With respect to air cargo transport between Europe and South America, the transaction will lead to affected markets on the routes connecting Europe to the following countries: Colombia, Peru and Ecuador. The parties' combined market shares on these routes reach between [30-40] % (on the route from Ecuador to Europe) and [60-70] % (on the route from Colombia to Europe) and the market share increments are significant. The situation is similar with respect to the routes connecting Europe to some Greater Caribbean countries, namely Mexico and Cuba, where the parties' market shares will reach between [20-30] % (on the route from Cuba to Europe) and [50-60] % (on the routes from Mexico to Europe) and again the increments will be significant. With respect to routes connecting Europe to African countries, the parties' market shares will be high in particular on the routes from Europe to Kenya (combined market share of [50-60] %) and from Europe to Sudan (combined market share of [60-70] %), whereas increments will also be substantial on these routes. |
| --- | --- |

(16)

With respect to air cargo transport between Europe and South America, the transaction will lead to affected markets on the routes connecting Europe to the following countries: Colombia, Peru and Ecuador. The parties' combined market shares on these routes reach between [30-40] % (on the route from Ecuador to Europe) and [60-70] % (on the route from Colombia to Europe) and the market share increments are significant. The situation is similar with respect to the routes connecting Europe to some Greater Caribbean countries, namely Mexico and Cuba, where the parties' market shares will reach between [20-30] % (on the route from Cuba to Europe) and [50-60] % (on the routes from Mexico to Europe) and again the increments will be significant. With respect to routes connecting Europe to African countries, the parties' market shares will be high in particular on the routes from Europe to Kenya (combined market share of [50-60] %) and from Europe to Sudan (combined market share of [60-70] %), whereas increments will also be substantial on these routes.

| (17) | However, even on those routes where the parties have combined high market shares and where market share increments are significant, the parties generally face several strong competitors which will constrain them post-transaction. Moreover, barriers to entry into air cargo transport on the relevant routes appear to be relatively low. Indeed, several new players have recently entered on some of these routes. In addition, in the course of the market investigation, customers, amongst which large freight forwarders having some degree of bargaining power, expressed their readiness to switch to a different supplier should the parties decide to increase prices and some of the parties' competitors indicated that they have extra capacity to take up additional demand. |
| --- | --- |

(17)

However, even on those routes where the parties have combined high market shares and where market share increments are significant, the parties generally face several strong competitors which will constrain them post-transaction. Moreover, barriers to entry into air cargo transport on the relevant routes appear to be relatively low. Indeed, several new players have recently entered on some of these routes. In addition, in the course of the market investigation, customers, amongst which large freight forwarders having some degree of bargaining power, expressed their readiness to switch to a different supplier should the parties decide to increase prices and some of the parties' competitors indicated that they have extra capacity to take up additional demand.

| (18) | For all these reasons, it is concluded in the Decision that the proposed concentration is unlikely to significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it with respect to any of the routes on which the parties' air cargo transport activities overlap. |
| --- | --- |

(18)

For all these reasons, it is concluded in the Decision that the proposed concentration is unlikely to significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it with respect to any of the routes on which the parties' air cargo transport activities overlap.

VII.   AIR TRANSPORT OF PASSENGERS

7.1.   The relevant product and geographic market

| (19) | The parties passenger air transport activities overlap on the routes connecting Amsterdam to the following eight long-haul (holiday) destinations: Vancouver, Toronto, Miami, Punta Cana, Cancun, Havana, Curacao and Aruba. |
| --- | --- |

(19)

The parties passenger air transport activities overlap on the routes connecting Amsterdam to the following eight long-haul (holiday) destinations: Vancouver, Toronto, Miami, Punta Cana, Cancun, Havana, Curacao and Aruba.

| (20) | The market investigation as well as the customer survey commissioned by the Commission in this case confirmed the Commission's practice in previous cases to consider the ‘wholesale’ supply of airline seats to tour operators as a market distinct from the market for supply of scheduled air transport services to end-customers. According to the customer survey, from a demand-side perspective, end-customers do not generally consider package holidays and independent holidays as substitutable. Accordingly, only a small proportion of customers purchasing packages would switch to unbundled flights and an even smaller proportion of customers purchasing unbundled flights would consider purchasing a package. |
| --- | --- |

(20)

The market investigation as well as the customer survey commissioned by the Commission in this case confirmed the Commission's practice in previous cases to consider the ‘wholesale’ supply of airline seats to tour operators as a market distinct from the market for supply of scheduled air transport services to end-customers. According to the customer survey, from a demand-side perspective, end-customers do not generally consider package holidays and independent holidays as substitutable. Accordingly, only a small proportion of customers purchasing packages would switch to unbundled flights and an even smaller proportion of customers purchasing unbundled flights would consider purchasing a package.

7.1.1.   Supply of scheduled air transport services to end-customers

| (21) | As regards the market for the supply of passenger air transport services to end-customers, the market investigation and the customer survey confirmed that, for the purpose of the assessment of the proposed concentration, the traditional point of origin/point of destination (‘O&D’) approach on the basis of which the Commission defined the relevant market in previous cases is inappropriate. As regards the point of origin, the market investigation and customer survey revealed that the airports of Düsseldorf and Brussels must be included in the relevant market, at least for flights to the five holiday destinations in the Greater Caribbean (i.e. Punta Cana, Cancun, Havana, Curacao and Aruba) as a large proportion of travellers to these destinations consider these two airports as substitutes to Schiphol for flights to these destinations. For flights to Vancouver, Toronto and Miami, it is not necessary to decide on the precise market definition in this respect as the proposed concentration does not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it even under the narrowest market definition comprising only flights departing from Amsterdam. |
| --- | --- |

(21)

As regards the market for the supply of passenger air transport services to end-customers, the market investigation and the customer survey confirmed that, for the purpose of the assessment of the proposed concentration, the traditional point of origin/point of destination (‘O&D’) approach on the basis of which the Commission defined the relevant market in previous cases is inappropriate. As regards the point of origin, the market investigation and customer survey revealed that the airports of Düsseldorf and Brussels must be included in the relevant market, at least for flights to the five holiday destinations in the Greater Caribbean (i.e. Punta Cana, Cancun, Havana, Curacao and Aruba) as a large proportion of travellers to these destinations consider these two airports as substitutes to Schiphol for flights to these destinations. For flights to Vancouver, Toronto and Miami, it is not necessary to decide on the precise market definition in this respect as the proposed concentration does not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it even under the narrowest market definition comprising only flights departing from Amsterdam.

| (22) | As regards the point of destination, the market investigation and customer survey indicated, at least for the five holiday destinations in the Greater Caribbean, that there is some degree of substitutability between different long-haul (holiday) destinations, but did not provide clear results with respect to the exact scope of the point of destination. However, there is no need to decide on the precise market definition in this respect as the proposed concentration does not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it under either market definition. |
| --- | --- |

(22)

As regards the point of destination, the market investigation and customer survey indicated, at least for the five holiday destinations in the Greater Caribbean, that there is some degree of substitutability between different long-haul (holiday) destinations, but did not provide clear results with respect to the exact scope of the point of destination. However, there is no need to decide on the precise market definition in this respect as the proposed concentration does not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it under either market definition.

| (23) | Moreover, the market investigation confirmed the Commission's practice in previous cases that indirect flights should be included in the relevant market, provided that they are marketed as connecting flights on the relevant O&D pair in the computer reservation systems, they are operated on a daily basis and cause only a limited extension of the trip (maximum 150 minutes connecting time). |
| --- | --- |

(23)

Moreover, the market investigation confirmed the Commission's practice in previous cases that indirect flights should be included in the relevant market, provided that they are marketed as connecting flights on the relevant O&D pair in the computer reservation systems, they are operated on a daily basis and cause only a limited extension of the trip (maximum 150 minutes connecting time).

7.1.2.   Wholesale supply of seats to tour operators

| (24) | In previous decisions, the Commission has considered that the relevant market for the wholesale supply of seats to tour operators should comprise the supply of airline seats to all long-haul destinations without further sub-division of the market by destination. The market investigation indicated that a sub-division of the wholesale market on a route-by-route basis might be warranted. This might be the case at least for those routes where tour operators cannot arbitrage between destinations as they only purchase seats from airlines at the moment when their customers express interest in purchasing a package to a specific destination. However, for the purpose of the present Decision, there is no need to decide on the precise market definition in this respect as the proposed concentration does not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it under either market definition. |
| --- | --- |

(24)

In previous decisions, the Commission has considered that the relevant market for the wholesale supply of seats to tour operators should comprise the supply of airline seats to all long-haul destinations without further sub-division of the market by destination. The market investigation indicated that a sub-division of the wholesale market on a route-by-route basis might be warranted. This might be the case at least for those routes where tour operators cannot arbitrage between destinations as they only purchase seats from airlines at the moment when their customers express interest in purchasing a package to a specific destination. However, for the purpose of the present Decision, there is no need to decide on the precise market definition in this respect as the proposed concentration does not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it under either market definition.

| (25) | As with respect to the market for the supply of scheduled air transport services to end-customers, the market investigation confirmed that, for the purpose of the present case, the airports of Amsterdam, Düsseldorf and Brussels are part of the same relevant market for the wholesale supply of seats to tour operators. |
| --- | --- |

(25)

As with respect to the market for the supply of scheduled air transport services to end-customers, the market investigation confirmed that, for the purpose of the present case, the airports of Amsterdam, Düsseldorf and Brussels are part of the same relevant market for the wholesale supply of seats to tour operators.

7.2.   Competitive Assessment

7.2.1.   The relevant counterfactual for assessing the effect of the proposed transaction relating to the parties' operations in the air transport of passengers

| (26) | The Commission's market investigation has revealed that Martinair's passenger air transport operations have been loss-making during the last few years and will likely continue to be loss-making, despite Martinair's recent substantial restructuring efforts. In fact, it appears that, to continue to operate its passenger air transport business beyond the next two years, Martinair will need to make some large investments. |
| --- | --- |

(26)

The Commission's market investigation has revealed that Martinair's passenger air transport operations have been loss-making during the last few years and will likely continue to be loss-making, despite Martinair's recent substantial restructuring efforts. In fact, it appears that, to continue to operate its passenger air transport business beyond the next two years, Martinair will need to make some large investments.

| (27) | The main investment that Martinair would need to make to continue operating its passenger air transport business concerns the renewal of virtually its entire passenger fleet. Martinair's passenger fleet is very old and inefficient. Due to technical problems with the aircraft, Martinair flights are often delayed. Accordingly, Martinair's competitive strength with respect to the long-haul air transport of passengers has been suffering recently and, without the required fleet renewal, is likely to suffer even further. Martinair's financial situation, however, makes it difficult to raise finance for investment in its fleet. In addition, as regards the fleet renewal, KLM has a veto right under Martinair's Articles of Association. Martinair's position in this respect makes it likely that the competitive constraint exerted by Martinair will be eroded in the foreseeable future. In view of these circumstances, the merger specific effects of the proposed concentration with respect to the parties' passenger air transport activities are likely to be limited. |
| --- | --- |

(27)

The main investment that Martinair would need to make to continue operating its passenger air transport business concerns the renewal of virtually its entire passenger fleet. Martinair's passenger fleet is very old and inefficient. Due to technical problems with the aircraft, Martinair flights are often delayed. Accordingly, Martinair's competitive strength with respect to the long-haul air transport of passengers has been suffering recently and, without the required fleet renewal, is likely to suffer even further. Martinair's financial situation, however, makes it difficult to raise finance for investment in its fleet. In addition, as regards the fleet renewal, KLM has a veto right under Martinair's Articles of Association. Martinair's position in this respect makes it likely that the competitive constraint exerted by Martinair will be eroded in the foreseeable future. In view of these circumstances, the merger specific effects of the proposed concentration with respect to the parties' passenger air transport activities are likely to be limited.

7.2.2.   The supply of air transport services to end-customers

| (28) | As regards flights to the three North American cities of Vancouver, Toronto and Miami, the parties' combined market shares are relatively high ranging between [70-80] % and [70-80] %, if only flights out of Amsterdam are taken into account, and amounting to [50-60] % when including also flights departing from Düsseldorf and Brussels. However, there are numerous credible alternatives available to end-customers whishing to travel from the Netherlands to these three cities, including flights offered by Air Canada, United Airlines, British Airways, Air Transat, Lufthansa and Continental Airlines, which will continue to constrain the merged entity post-transaction. The proposed transaction is therefore unlikely to significantly impede effective competition in the common market with respect to these three routes. |
| --- | --- |

(28)

As regards flights to the three North American cities of Vancouver, Toronto and Miami, the parties' combined market shares are relatively high ranging between [70-80] % and [70-80] %, if only flights out of Amsterdam are taken into account, and amounting to [50-60] % when including also flights departing from Düsseldorf and Brussels. However, there are numerous credible alternatives available to end-customers whishing to travel from the Netherlands to these three cities, including flights offered by Air Canada, United Airlines, British Airways, Air Transat, Lufthansa and Continental Airlines, which will continue to constrain the merged entity post-transaction. The proposed transaction is therefore unlikely to significantly impede effective competition in the common market with respect to these three routes.

| (29) | On the routes connecting Amsterdam, Düsseldorf and Brussels to Punta Cana, Cancun and Havana, the parties' combined market shares amount to [70-80] %, [80-90] % and [80-90] % respectively. Martinair operates scheduled and non-scheduled direct flights out of Amsterdam, while KLM operates only indirect flights on these routes. There are several competing direct and indirect alternatives from Amsterdam, Brussels and Düsseldorf. For example, LTU operates a direct service to Punta Cana and Cancun out of Düsseldorf, ArkeFly operates direct services to these two destinations from Amsterdam, Jetairfly serves Punta Cana directly from Brussels, and Iberia offers daily indirect flights to Havana from each of the airports of Amsterdam, Düsseldorf and Brussels. |
| --- | --- |

(29)

On the routes connecting Amsterdam, Düsseldorf and Brussels to Punta Cana, Cancun and Havana, the parties' combined market shares amount to [70-80] %, [80-90] % and [80-90] % respectively. Martinair operates scheduled and non-scheduled direct flights out of Amsterdam, while KLM operates only indirect flights on these routes. There are several competing direct and indirect alternatives from Amsterdam, Brussels and Düsseldorf. For example, LTU operates a direct service to Punta Cana and Cancun out of Düsseldorf, ArkeFly operates direct services to these two destinations from Amsterdam, Jetairfly serves Punta Cana directly from Brussels, and Iberia offers daily indirect flights to Havana from each of the airports of Amsterdam, Düsseldorf and Brussels.

| (30) | In addition, the market investigation and the customer survey indicated that, as regards Cancun and Punta Cana, there is significant competitive pressure from other typical ‘sun and beach’ holiday destinations. Also with respect to Havana, the customer survey indicated that a significant proportion of customers would either stop travelling altogether or switch to other destinations if prices for flights to Havana were to increase by 5-10 %. In view of all these circumstances, it must be concluded that also with regard to these three destinations, the proposed transaction is unlikely to significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it. |
| --- | --- |

(30)

In addition, the market investigation and the customer survey indicated that, as regards Cancun and Punta Cana, there is significant competitive pressure from other typical ‘sun and beach’ holiday destinations. Also with respect to Havana, the customer survey indicated that a significant proportion of customers would either stop travelling altogether or switch to other destinations if prices for flights to Havana were to increase by 5-10 %. In view of all these circumstances, it must be concluded that also with regard to these three destinations, the proposed transaction is unlikely to significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it.

| (31) | Finally, on the routes connecting Amsterdam to Curacao and Aruba, both parties operate direct scheduled services out of Amsterdam. There are no alternative flights to these two destinations out of Düsseldorf or Brussels. The parties' combined market share amounts to [80-90] % on both of these routes, while the third player on both routes, ArkeFly, accounts for the remaining [10-20] %. ArkeFly operates scheduled services on both routes serving Aruba with three direct flights per week and Curacao six times a week (seven times since 1 November 2008). |
| --- | --- |

(31)

Finally, on the routes connecting Amsterdam to Curacao and Aruba, both parties operate direct scheduled services out of Amsterdam. There are no alternative flights to these two destinations out of Düsseldorf or Brussels. The parties' combined market share amounts to [80-90] % on both of these routes, while the third player on both routes, ArkeFly, accounts for the remaining [10-20] %. ArkeFly operates scheduled services on both routes serving Aruba with three direct flights per week and Curacao six times a week (seven times since 1 November 2008).

| (32) | The market investigation and the customer survey showed that these two routes are somewhat different from the other destinations served by the parties. Due to historic and cultural ties between the Netherlands Antilles and the Netherlands, the proportion of travellers visiting friends and relatives is relatively high on these routes and a significant number of Dutch residents have a second home on these islands. Nevertheless, there is still a large proportion of typical holidaymakers travelling to these two destinations. The customer survey showed also for Aruba and Curacao that, in case of a 5-10 % price increase for flights on these routes, a significant proportion of travellers would either stop travelling altogether, switch to ArkeFly or to other holiday destinations. |
| --- | --- |

(32)

The market investigation and the customer survey showed that these two routes are somewhat different from the other destinations served by the parties. Due to historic and cultural ties between the Netherlands Antilles and the Netherlands, the proportion of travellers visiting friends and relatives is relatively high on these routes and a significant number of Dutch residents have a second home on these islands. Nevertheless, there is still a large proportion of typical holidaymakers travelling to these two destinations. The customer survey showed also for Aruba and Curacao that, in case of a 5-10 % price increase for flights on these routes, a significant proportion of travellers would either stop travelling altogether, switch to ArkeFly or to other holiday destinations.

| (33) | In view of all these circumstances, the second phase market investigation and the customer survey therefore suggest also for these two routes that the proposed transaction is unlikely to significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it. |
| --- | --- |

(33)

In view of all these circumstances, the second phase market investigation and the customer survey therefore suggest also for these two routes that the proposed transaction is unlikely to significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it.

7.2.3.   The wholesale supply of seats to tour operators

| (34) | As regards the wholesale supply of seats to tour operators for flights connecting only Amsterdam or Amsterdam, Düsseldorf and Brussels to the three North American cities Vancouver, Toronto and Miami and the three holiday destinations Punta Cana, Cancun and Havana, the situation is similar to that on the market for the supply of scheduled air passenger transport services to end-customers. Given the number of alternative suppliers on these routes the proposed transaction is unlikely to significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it with respect to these destinations. |
| --- | --- |

(34)

As regards the wholesale supply of seats to tour operators for flights connecting only Amsterdam or Amsterdam, Düsseldorf and Brussels to the three North American cities Vancouver, Toronto and Miami and the three holiday destinations Punta Cana, Cancun and Havana, the situation is similar to that on the market for the supply of scheduled air passenger transport services to end-customers. Given the number of alternative suppliers on these routes the proposed transaction is unlikely to significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it with respect to these destinations.

| (35) | Concerning Curacao and Aruba, the parties' combined market share amounts to [90-95] % and [90-95] % respectively. The only competitor on these two routes, ArkeFly, uses most of its capacity captively for inclusion in package holidays offered by TUI or other tour operators belonging to the same corporate group as TUI and ArkeFly and therefore has a market share of only [5-10] % on the ‘merchant market’. If captive sales were included, however, ArkeFly's market share would be more than [6-12] times higher, reaching around [40-60] %. In this context, it must be noted that ArkeFly has indicated during the second phase market investigation that, depending on the circumstances, it would consider increasing its sales to competing tour operators if it was approached by a group of tour operators asking them to supply seats on their flights. |
| --- | --- |

(35)

Concerning Curacao and Aruba, the parties' combined market share amounts to [90-95] % and [90-95] % respectively. The only competitor on these two routes, ArkeFly, uses most of its capacity captively for inclusion in package holidays offered by TUI or other tour operators belonging to the same corporate group as TUI and ArkeFly and therefore has a market share of only [5-10] % on the ‘merchant market’. If captive sales were included, however, ArkeFly's market share would be more than [6-12] times higher, reaching around [40-60] %. In this context, it must be noted that ArkeFly has indicated during the second phase market investigation that, depending on the circumstances, it would consider increasing its sales to competing tour operators if it was approached by a group of tour operators asking them to supply seats on their flights.

| (36) | In addition, the indirect constraint from the downstream market for end-customers, i.e. customers buying package holidays from tour operators, must be taken into account. The market investigation and the customer survey have shown that Dutch leisure travellers are generally very price-sensitive. If the parties were to raise prices to tour operators post-transaction, a significant number of customers who would normally purchase a package from one of TUI's competitors would likely switch to TUI's packages. In that case, however, these passengers would also be lost for the merged entity which, as a result, would likely refrain from increasing the price. |
| --- | --- |

(36)

In addition, the indirect constraint from the downstream market for end-customers, i.e. customers buying package holidays from tour operators, must be taken into account. The market investigation and the customer survey have shown that Dutch leisure travellers are generally very price-sensitive. If the parties were to raise prices to tour operators post-transaction, a significant number of customers who would normally purchase a package from one of TUI's competitors would likely switch to TUI's packages. In that case, however, these passengers would also be lost for the merged entity which, as a result, would likely refrain from increasing the price.

| (37) | In view of all these circumstances, also for these two routes the proposed transaction is therefore unlikely to significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it. |
| --- | --- |

(37)

In view of all these circumstances, also for these two routes the proposed transaction is therefore unlikely to significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it.

VIII.   CONCLUSION

| (38) | For the reasons mentioned above, the Decision concludes that the proposed concentration will not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or in a substantial part of it. |
| --- | --- |

(38)

For the reasons mentioned above, the Decision concludes that the proposed concentration will not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or in a substantial part of it.

| (39) | Consequently the concentration should be declared compatible with the common market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement, in accordance with Article 2(2) and Article 8(1) of the EC Merger Regulation and Article 57 of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(39)

Consequently the concentration should be declared compatible with the common market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement, in accordance with Article 2(2) and Article 8(1) of the EC Merger Regulation and Article 57 of the EEA Agreement.

---

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

| 4.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/9

---

Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of the Directive 2000/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to cableway installations designed to carry persons

(Text with EEA relevance)

(Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under the directive)

(2009/C 51/05)

| ESO (1) | Reference and title of the harmonised standard
  (and reference document) | Reference of superseded standard | Date of cessation of presumption of conformity of superseded standard
  (Note 1) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| CEN | EN 1709:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Precommissioning inspection, maintenance, operational inspection and checks | — | |
| CEN | EN 1908:2004
  Safety requirements of cableway installations designed to carry persons — Tensioning devices | — | |
| CEN | EN 1909:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Recovery and evacuation | — | |
| CEN | EN 12385-8:2002
  Steel wire ropes — Safety — Part 8: Stranded hauling and carrying-hauling ropes for cableway installations designed to carry persons | — | |
| CEN | EN 12385-9:2002
  Steel wire ropes — Safety — Part 9: Locked coil carrying ropes for cableway installations designed to carry persons | — | |
| CEN | EN 12397:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Operation | — | |
| CEN | EN 12927-1:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Ropes — Part 1: Selection criteria for ropes and their end fixings | — | |
| CEN | EN 12927-2:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Ropes — Part 2: Safety factors | — | |
| CEN | EN 12927-3:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Ropes — Part 3: Long splicing of 6 strand hauling, carrying hauling and towing ropes | — | |
| CEN | EN 12927-4:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Ropes — Part 4: End fixings | — | |
| CEN | EN 12927-5:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Ropes — Part 5: Storage, transportation, installation and tensioning | — | |
| CEN | EN 12927-6:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Ropes — Part 6: Discard criteria | — | |
| CEN | EN 12927-7:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Ropes — Part 7: Inspection, repair and maintenance | — | |
| CEN | EN 12927-8:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Ropes — Part 8: Magnetic rope testing (MRT) | — | |
| CEN | EN 12929-1:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — General requirements — Part 1: Requirements for all installations | — | |
| CEN | EN 12929-2:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — General requirements — Part 2: Additional requirements for reversible bicable aerial ropeways without carrier truck brakes | — | |
| CEN | EN 12930:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Calculations | — | |
| CEN | EN 13107:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Civil engineering works | — | |
| CEN | EN 13223:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Drive systems and other mechanical equipment | — | |
| CEN | EN 13243:2004
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Electrical equipment other than for drive systems | — | |
| EN 13243:2004/AC:2005 | | |
| CEN | EN 13796-1:2005
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Carriers — Part 1: Grips, carrier trucks, on-board brakes, cabins, chairs, carriages, maintenance carriers, tow-hangers | — | |
| EN 13796-1:2005/AC:2007 | | |
| CEN | EN 13796-2:2005
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Carriers — Part 2: Slipping resistance test for grips | — | |
| CEN | EN 13796-3:2005
  Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Carriers — Part 3: Fatigue tests | — | |

ESO (1)

Reference and title of the harmonised standard

(and reference document)

Reference of superseded standard

Date of cessation of presumption of conformity of superseded standard

(Note 1)

CEN

EN 1709:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Precommissioning inspection, maintenance, operational inspection and checks

—

CEN

EN 1908:2004

Safety requirements of cableway installations designed to carry persons — Tensioning devices

—

CEN

EN 1909:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Recovery and evacuation

—

CEN

EN 12385-8:2002

Steel wire ropes — Safety — Part 8: Stranded hauling and carrying-hauling ropes for cableway installations designed to carry persons

—

CEN

EN 12385-9:2002

Steel wire ropes — Safety — Part 9: Locked coil carrying ropes for cableway installations designed to carry persons

—

CEN

EN 12397:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Operation

—

CEN

EN 12927-1:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Ropes — Part 1: Selection criteria for ropes and their end fixings

—

CEN

EN 12927-2:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Ropes — Part 2: Safety factors

—

CEN

EN 12927-3:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Ropes — Part 3: Long splicing of 6 strand hauling, carrying hauling and towing ropes

—

CEN

EN 12927-4:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Ropes — Part 4: End fixings

—

CEN

EN 12927-5:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Ropes — Part 5: Storage, transportation, installation and tensioning

—

CEN

EN 12927-6:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Ropes — Part 6: Discard criteria

—

CEN

EN 12927-7:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Ropes — Part 7: Inspection, repair and maintenance

—

CEN

EN 12927-8:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Ropes — Part 8: Magnetic rope testing (MRT)

—

CEN

EN 12929-1:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — General requirements — Part 1: Requirements for all installations

—

CEN

EN 12929-2:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — General requirements — Part 2: Additional requirements for reversible bicable aerial ropeways without carrier truck brakes

—

CEN

EN 12930:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Calculations

—

CEN

EN 13107:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Civil engineering works

—

CEN

EN 13223:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Drive systems and other mechanical equipment

—

CEN

EN 13243:2004

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Electrical equipment other than for drive systems

—

EN 13243:2004/AC:2005

CEN

EN 13796-1:2005

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Carriers — Part 1: Grips, carrier trucks, on-board brakes, cabins, chairs, carriages, maintenance carriers, tow-hangers

—

EN 13796-1:2005/AC:2007

CEN

EN 13796-2:2005

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Carriers — Part 2: Slipping resistance test for grips

—

CEN

EN 13796-3:2005

Safety requirements for cableway installations designed to carry persons — Carriers — Part 3: Fatigue tests

—

| Note 1 | Generally the date of cessation of presumption of conformity will be the date of withdrawal (‘dow’), set by the European Standardisation Organisation, but attention of users of these standards is drawn to the fact that in certain exceptional cases this can be otherwise. |
| --- | --- |

Note 1

Generally the date of cessation of presumption of conformity will be the date of withdrawal (‘dow’), set by the European Standardisation Organisation, but attention of users of these standards is drawn to the fact that in certain exceptional cases this can be otherwise.

NOTE:

| — | any information concerning the availability of the standards can be obtained either from the European Standardisation Organisations or from the national standardisation bodies of which the list is annexed to the Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) amended by the Directive 98/48/EC (3), |
| --- | --- |

—

any information concerning the availability of the standards can be obtained either from the European Standardisation Organisations or from the national standardisation bodies of which the list is annexed to the Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) amended by the Directive 98/48/EC (3),

| — | publication of the references in the Official Journal of the European Union does not imply that the standards are available in all the Community languages, |
| --- | --- |

—

publication of the references in the Official Journal of the European Union does not imply that the standards are available in all the Community languages,

| — | this list replaces all the previous lists published in the Official Journal of the European Union. The Commission ensures the updating of this list. |
| --- | --- |

—

this list replaces all the previous lists published in the Official Journal of the European Union. The Commission ensures the updating of this list.

More information about harmonised standards on the Internet at:

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/newapproach/standardization/harmstds/

---

(1)  ESO: European Standardisation Organisation:

| — | CEN: rue de Stassart 36, B-1050 Brussels, tel. (32-2) 550 08 11; fax (32-2) 550 08 19 (http://www.cen.eu), |
| --- | --- |

—

CEN: rue de Stassart 36, B-1050 Brussels, tel. (32-2) 550 08 11; fax (32-2) 550 08 19 (http://www.cen.eu),

| — | Cenelec: rue de Stassart 35, B-1050 Brussels, tel. (32-2) 519 68 71; fax (32-2) 519 69 19 (http://www.cenelec.org), |
| --- | --- |

—

Cenelec: rue de Stassart 35, B-1050 Brussels, tel. (32-2) 519 68 71; fax (32-2) 519 69 19 (http://www.cenelec.org),

| — | ETSI: 650, route des Lucioles, F-06921 Sophia Antipolis, tel. (33) 492 94 42 00; fax (33) 493 65 47 16 (http://www.etsi.org). |
| --- | --- |

—

ETSI: 650, route des Lucioles, F-06921 Sophia Antipolis, tel. (33) 492 94 42 00; fax (33) 493 65 47 16 (http://www.etsi.org).

(2)  OJ L 204, 21.7.1998, p. 37.

(3)  OJ L 217, 5.8.1998, p. 18.

---

| 4.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/12

---

Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of the Directive 94/25/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to recreational craft

(Text with EEA relevance)

(Publication of titles and references of harmonised standards under the directive)

(2009/C 51/06)

| ESO (1) | Reference and title of the harmonised standard
  (and reference document) | Reference of superseded standard | Date of cessation of presumption of conformity of superseded standard
  (Note 1) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| CEN | EN ISO 6185-1:2001
  Inflatable boats — Part 1: Boats with a maximum motor power rating of 4,5 kW (ISO 6185-1:2001) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 6185-2:2001
  Inflatable boats — Part 2: Boats with a maximum motor power rating of 4,5 kW to 15 kW inclusive (ISO 6185-2:2001) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 6185-3:2001
  Inflatable boats Part 3: Boats with a maximum motor power rating of 15 kW and greater (ISO 6185-3:2001) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 7840:2004
  Small craft — Fire-resistant fuel hoses (ISO 7840:2004) | EN ISO 7840:1995 | Date expired
  (31.8.2004) |
| CEN | EN ISO 8099:2000
  Small craft — Toilet waste retention systems (ISO 8099:2000) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 8469:2006
  Small craft — Non-fire-resistant fuel hoses (ISO 8469:2006) | EN ISO 8469:1995 | Date expired
  (31.1.2007) |
| CEN | EN ISO 8665:2006
  Small craft — Marine propulsion reciprocating internal combustion engines — Power measurements and declarations (ISO 8665:2006) | EN ISO 8665:1995 | Date expired
  (31.12.2006) |
| CEN | EN ISO 8666:2002
  Small craft — Principal data (ISO 8666:2002) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 8847:2004
  Small craft — Steering gear — Cable and pulley systems (ISO 8847:2004) | EN 28847:1989 | Date expired
  (30.11.2004) |
| EN ISO 8847:2004/AC:2005 | | |
| CEN | EN ISO 8849:2003
  Small craft — Electrically operated direct-current bilge-pumps (ISO 8849:2003) | EN 28849:1993 | Date expired
  (30.4.2004) |
| CEN | EN ISO 9093-1:1997
  Small craft — Seacocks and through-hull fittings — Part 1: Metallic (ISO 9093-1:1994) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 9093-2:2002
  Small craft — Seacocks and through-hull fittings — Part 2: Non-metallic (ISO 9093-2:2002) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 9094-1:2003
  Small craft — Fire protection — Part 1: Craft with a hull length of up to and including 15 m (ISO 9094-1:2003) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 9094-2:2002
  Small craft — Fire protection — Part 2: Craft with a hull length of over 15 m (ISO 9094-2:2002) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 9097:1994
  Small craft — Electric fans (ISO 9097:1991) | — | |
| EN ISO 9097:1994/A1:2000 | Note 3 | Date expired
  (31.3.2001) |
| CEN | EN ISO 10087:2006
  Small craft — Craft identification — Coding system (ISO 10087:2006) | EN ISO 10087:1996 | Date expired
  (30.9.2006) |
| CEN | EN ISO 10088:2001
  Small craft — Permanently installed fuel systems and fixed fuel tanks (ISO 10088:2001) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 10133:2000
  Small craft — Electrical systems — Extra-low-voltage d.c. installations (ISO 10133:2000) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 10239:2008
  Small craft — Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) systems (ISO 10239:2008) | EN ISO 10239:2000 | Date expired
  (31.8.2008) |
| CEN | EN ISO 10240:2004
  Small craft — Owner's manual (ISO 10240:2004) | EN ISO 10240:1996 | Date expired
  (30.4.2005) |
| CEN | EN ISO 10592:1995
  Small craft — Hydraulic steering systems (ISO 10592:1994) | — | |
| EN ISO 10592:1995/A1:2000 | Note 3 | Date expired
  (31.3.2001) |
| CEN | EN ISO 11105:1997
  Small craft — Ventilation of petrol engine and/or petrol tank compartments (ISO 11105:1997) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 11192:2005
  Small craft — Graphical symbols (ISO 11192:2005) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 11547:1995
  Small craft — Start-in-gear protection (ISO 11547:1994) | — | |
| EN ISO 11547:1995/A1:2000 | Note 3 | Date expired
  (31.3.2001) |
| CEN | EN ISO 11591:2000
  Small craft, engine-driven — Field of vision from helm position (ISO 11591:2000) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 11592:2001
  Small craft less than 8 m length of hull — Determination of maximum propulsion power rating (ISO 11592:2001) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 11812:2001
  Small craft — Watertight cockpits and quick-draining cockpits (ISO 11812:2001) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 12215-1:2000
  Small craft — Hull construction and scantlings — Part 1: Materials: Thermosetting resins, glass-fibre reinforcement, reference laminate (ISO 12215-1:2000) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 12215-2:2002
  Small craft — Hull construction and scantlings — Part 2: Materials: Core materials for sandwich construction, embedded materials (ISO 12215-2:2002) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 12215-3:2002
  Small craft — Hull construction and scantlings — Part 3: Materials: Steel, aluminium alloys, wood, other materials (ISO 12215-3:2002) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 12215-4:2002
  Small craft — Hull construction and scantlings — Part 4: Workshop and manufacturing (ISO 12215-4:2002) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 12215-5:2008
  Small craft — Hull construction and scantlings — Part 5: Design pressures for monohulls, design stresses, scantlings determination (ISO 12215-5:2008) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 12215-6:2008
  Small craft — Hull construction and scantlings — Part 6: Structural arrangements and details (ISO 12215-6:2008) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 12216:2002
  Small craft — Windows, portlights, hatches, deadlights and doors — Strength and watertightness requirements (ISO 12216:2002) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 12217-1:2002
  Small craft — Stability and buoyancy assessment and categorization — Part 1: Non-sailing boats of hull length greater than or equal to 6 m (ISO 12217-1:2002) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 12217-2:2002
  Small craft — Stability and buoyancy assessment and categorization — Part 2: Sailing boats of hull length greater than or equal to 6 m (ISO 12217-2:2002) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 12217-3:2002
  Small craft — Stability and buoyancy assessment and categorization — Part 3: Boats of hull length less than 6 m (ISO 12217-3:2002) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 13297:2000
  Small craft — Electrical systems — Alternating current installations (ISO 13297:2000) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 13590:2003
  Small craft — Personal watercraft — Construction and system installation requirements (ISO 13590:2003) | — | |
| EN ISO 13590:2003/AC:2004 | | |
| CEN | EN ISO 13929:2001
  Small craft — Steering gear — Geared link systems (ISO 13929:2001) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 14509-1:2008
  Small craft — Airborne sound emitted by powered recreational craft — Part 1: Pass-by measurement procedures (ISO 14509-1:2008) | EN ISO 14509:2000 | 30.4.2009 |
| CEN | EN ISO 14509-2:2006
  Small craft — Airborne sound emitted by powered recreational craft — Part 2: Sound assessment using reference craft (ISO 14509-2:2006) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 14895:2003
  Small craft — Liquid-fuelled galley stoves (ISO 14895:2000) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 14945:2004
  Small craft — Builder's plate (ISO 14945:2004) | — | |
| EN ISO 14945:2004/AC:2005 | | |
| CEN | EN ISO 14946:2001
  Small craft — Maximum load capacity (ISO 14946:2001) | — | |
| EN ISO 14946:2001/AC:2005 | | |
| CEN | EN ISO 15083:2003
  Small craft — Bilge-pumping systems (ISO 15083:2003) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 15084:2003
  Small craft — Anchoring, mooring and towing — Strong points (ISO 15084:2003) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 15085:2003
  Small craft — Man-overboard prevention and recovery (ISO 15085:2003) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 15584:2001
  Small craft — Inboard petrol engines — Engine-mounted fuel and electrical components (ISO 15584:2001) | — | |
| CEN | EN 15609:2008
  LPG equipment and accessories — LPG propulsion systems for boats, yachts and other craft — Installation requirements | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 15652:2005
  Small craft — Remote steering systems for inboard mini jet boats (ISO 15652:2003) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 16147:2002
  Small craft — Inboard diesel engines — Engine-mounted fuel and electrical components (ISO 16147:2002) | — | |
| CEN | EN ISO 21487:2006
  Small craft — Permanently installed petrol and diesel fuel tanks (ISO 21487:2006) | — | |
| CEN | EN 28846:1993
  Small craft — Electrical devices — Protection against ignition of surrounding flammable gases (ISO 8846:1990) | — | |
| EN 28846:1993/A1:2000 | Note 3 | Date expired
  (31.3.2001) |
| CEN | EN 28848:1993
  Small craft — Remote steering systems (ISO 8848:1990) | — | |
| EN 28848:1993/A1:2000 | Note 3 | Date expired
  (31.3.2001) |
| CEN | EN 29775:1993
  Small craft — Remote steering systems for single outboard motors of 15 kW to 40 kW power (ISO 9775:1990) | — | |
| EN 29775:1993/A1:2000 | Note 3 | Date expired
  (31.3.2001) |
| Cenelec | EN 60092-507:2000 | — | |
| Electrical installations in ships — Part 507: Pleasure craft (IEC 60092-507:2000) | | |

ESO (1)

Reference and title of the harmonised standard

(and reference document)

Reference of superseded standard

Date of cessation of presumption of conformity of superseded standard

(Note 1)

CEN

EN ISO 6185-1:2001

Inflatable boats — Part 1: Boats with a maximum motor power rating of 4,5 kW (ISO 6185-1:2001)

—

CEN

EN ISO 6185-2:2001

Inflatable boats — Part 2: Boats with a maximum motor power rating of 4,5 kW to 15 kW inclusive (ISO 6185-2:2001)

—

CEN

EN ISO 6185-3:2001

Inflatable boats Part 3: Boats with a maximum motor power rating of 15 kW and greater (ISO 6185-3:2001)

—

CEN

EN ISO 7840:2004

Small craft — Fire-resistant fuel hoses (ISO 7840:2004)

EN ISO 7840:1995

Date expired

(31.8.2004)

CEN

EN ISO 8099:2000

Small craft — Toilet waste retention systems (ISO 8099:2000)

—

CEN

EN ISO 8469:2006

Small craft — Non-fire-resistant fuel hoses (ISO 8469:2006)

EN ISO 8469:1995

Date expired

(31.1.2007)

CEN

EN ISO 8665:2006

Small craft — Marine propulsion reciprocating internal combustion engines — Power measurements and declarations (ISO 8665:2006)

EN ISO 8665:1995

Date expired

(31.12.2006)

CEN

EN ISO 8666:2002

Small craft — Principal data (ISO 8666:2002)

—

CEN

EN ISO 8847:2004

Small craft — Steering gear — Cable and pulley systems (ISO 8847:2004)

EN 28847:1989

Date expired

(30.11.2004)

EN ISO 8847:2004/AC:2005

CEN

EN ISO 8849:2003

Small craft — Electrically operated direct-current bilge-pumps (ISO 8849:2003)

EN 28849:1993

Date expired

(30.4.2004)

CEN

EN ISO 9093-1:1997

Small craft — Seacocks and through-hull fittings — Part 1: Metallic (ISO 9093-1:1994)

—

CEN

EN ISO 9093-2:2002

Small craft — Seacocks and through-hull fittings — Part 2: Non-metallic (ISO 9093-2:2002)

—

CEN

EN ISO 9094-1:2003

Small craft — Fire protection — Part 1: Craft with a hull length of up to and including 15 m (ISO 9094-1:2003)

—

CEN

EN ISO 9094-2:2002

Small craft — Fire protection — Part 2: Craft with a hull length of over 15 m (ISO 9094-2:2002)

—

CEN

EN ISO 9097:1994

Small craft — Electric fans (ISO 9097:1991)

—

EN ISO 9097:1994/A1:2000

Note 3

Date expired

(31.3.2001)

CEN

EN ISO 10087:2006

Small craft — Craft identification — Coding system (ISO 10087:2006)

EN ISO 10087:1996

Date expired

(30.9.2006)

CEN

EN ISO 10088:2001

Small craft — Permanently installed fuel systems and fixed fuel tanks (ISO 10088:2001)

—

CEN

EN ISO 10133:2000

Small craft — Electrical systems — Extra-low-voltage d.c. installations (ISO 10133:2000)

—

CEN

EN ISO 10239:2008

Small craft — Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) systems (ISO 10239:2008)

EN ISO 10239:2000

Date expired

(31.8.2008)

CEN

EN ISO 10240:2004

Small craft — Owner's manual (ISO 10240:2004)

EN ISO 10240:1996

Date expired

(30.4.2005)

CEN

EN ISO 10592:1995

Small craft — Hydraulic steering systems (ISO 10592:1994)

—

EN ISO 10592:1995/A1:2000

Note 3

Date expired

(31.3.2001)

CEN

EN ISO 11105:1997

Small craft — Ventilation of petrol engine and/or petrol tank compartments (ISO 11105:1997)

—

CEN

EN ISO 11192:2005

Small craft — Graphical symbols (ISO 11192:2005)

—

CEN

EN ISO 11547:1995

Small craft — Start-in-gear protection (ISO 11547:1994)

—

EN ISO 11547:1995/A1:2000

Note 3

Date expired

(31.3.2001)

CEN

EN ISO 11591:2000

Small craft, engine-driven — Field of vision from helm position (ISO 11591:2000)

—

CEN

EN ISO 11592:2001

Small craft less than 8 m length of hull — Determination of maximum propulsion power rating (ISO 11592:2001)

—

CEN

EN ISO 11812:2001

Small craft — Watertight cockpits and quick-draining cockpits (ISO 11812:2001)

—

CEN

EN ISO 12215-1:2000

Small craft — Hull construction and scantlings — Part 1: Materials: Thermosetting resins, glass-fibre reinforcement, reference laminate (ISO 12215-1:2000)

—

CEN

EN ISO 12215-2:2002

Small craft — Hull construction and scantlings — Part 2: Materials: Core materials for sandwich construction, embedded materials (ISO 12215-2:2002)

—

CEN

EN ISO 12215-3:2002

Small craft — Hull construction and scantlings — Part 3: Materials: Steel, aluminium alloys, wood, other materials (ISO 12215-3:2002)

—

CEN

EN ISO 12215-4:2002

Small craft — Hull construction and scantlings — Part 4: Workshop and manufacturing (ISO 12215-4:2002)

—

CEN

EN ISO 12215-5:2008

Small craft — Hull construction and scantlings — Part 5: Design pressures for monohulls, design stresses, scantlings determination (ISO 12215-5:2008)

—

CEN

EN ISO 12215-6:2008

Small craft — Hull construction and scantlings — Part 6: Structural arrangements and details (ISO 12215-6:2008)

—

CEN

EN ISO 12216:2002

Small craft — Windows, portlights, hatches, deadlights and doors — Strength and watertightness requirements (ISO 12216:2002)

—

CEN

EN ISO 12217-1:2002

Small craft — Stability and buoyancy assessment and categorization — Part 1: Non-sailing boats of hull length greater than or equal to 6 m (ISO 12217-1:2002)

—

CEN

EN ISO 12217-2:2002

Small craft — Stability and buoyancy assessment and categorization — Part 2: Sailing boats of hull length greater than or equal to 6 m (ISO 12217-2:2002)

—

CEN

EN ISO 12217-3:2002

Small craft — Stability and buoyancy assessment and categorization — Part 3: Boats of hull length less than 6 m (ISO 12217-3:2002)

—

CEN

EN ISO 13297:2000

Small craft — Electrical systems — Alternating current installations (ISO 13297:2000)

—

CEN

EN ISO 13590:2003

Small craft — Personal watercraft — Construction and system installation requirements (ISO 13590:2003)

—

EN ISO 13590:2003/AC:2004

CEN

EN ISO 13929:2001

Small craft — Steering gear — Geared link systems (ISO 13929:2001)

—

CEN

EN ISO 14509-1:2008

Small craft — Airborne sound emitted by powered recreational craft — Part 1: Pass-by measurement procedures (ISO 14509-1:2008)

EN ISO 14509:2000

30.4.2009

CEN

EN ISO 14509-2:2006

Small craft — Airborne sound emitted by powered recreational craft — Part 2: Sound assessment using reference craft (ISO 14509-2:2006)

—

CEN

EN ISO 14895:2003

Small craft — Liquid-fuelled galley stoves (ISO 14895:2000)

—

CEN

EN ISO 14945:2004

Small craft — Builder's plate (ISO 14945:2004)

—

EN ISO 14945:2004/AC:2005

CEN

EN ISO 14946:2001

Small craft — Maximum load capacity (ISO 14946:2001)

—

EN ISO 14946:2001/AC:2005

CEN

EN ISO 15083:2003

Small craft — Bilge-pumping systems (ISO 15083:2003)

—

CEN

EN ISO 15084:2003

Small craft — Anchoring, mooring and towing — Strong points (ISO 15084:2003)

—

CEN

EN ISO 15085:2003

Small craft — Man-overboard prevention and recovery (ISO 15085:2003)

—

CEN

EN ISO 15584:2001

Small craft — Inboard petrol engines — Engine-mounted fuel and electrical components (ISO 15584:2001)

—

CEN

EN 15609:2008

LPG equipment and accessories — LPG propulsion systems for boats, yachts and other craft — Installation requirements

—

CEN

EN ISO 15652:2005

Small craft — Remote steering systems for inboard mini jet boats (ISO 15652:2003)

—

CEN

EN ISO 16147:2002

Small craft — Inboard diesel engines — Engine-mounted fuel and electrical components (ISO 16147:2002)

—

CEN

EN ISO 21487:2006

Small craft — Permanently installed petrol and diesel fuel tanks (ISO 21487:2006)

—

CEN

EN 28846:1993

Small craft — Electrical devices — Protection against ignition of surrounding flammable gases (ISO 8846:1990)

—

EN 28846:1993/A1:2000

Note 3

Date expired

(31.3.2001)

CEN

EN 28848:1993

Small craft — Remote steering systems (ISO 8848:1990)

—

EN 28848:1993/A1:2000

Note 3

Date expired

(31.3.2001)

CEN

EN 29775:1993

Small craft — Remote steering systems for single outboard motors of 15 kW to 40 kW power (ISO 9775:1990)

—

EN 29775:1993/A1:2000

Note 3

Date expired

(31.3.2001)

Cenelec

EN 60092-507:2000

—

Electrical installations in ships — Part 507: Pleasure craft (IEC 60092-507:2000)

| Note 1 | Generally the date of cessation of presumption of conformity will be the date of withdrawal (‘dow’), set by the European Standardisation Organisation, but attention of users of these standards is drawn to the fact that in certain exceptional cases this can be otherwise. |
| --- | --- |

Note 1

Generally the date of cessation of presumption of conformity will be the date of withdrawal (‘dow’), set by the European Standardisation Organisation, but attention of users of these standards is drawn to the fact that in certain exceptional cases this can be otherwise.

| Note 3 | In case of amendments, the referenced standard is EN CCCCC:YYYY, its previous amendments, if any, and the new, quoted amendment. The superseded standard (column 3) therefore consists of EN CCCCC:YYYY and its previous amendments, if any, but without the new quoted amendment. On the date stated, the superseded standard ceases to give presumption of conformity with the essential requirements of the directive. |
| --- | --- |

Note 3

In case of amendments, the referenced standard is EN CCCCC:YYYY, its previous amendments, if any, and the new, quoted amendment. The superseded standard (column 3) therefore consists of EN CCCCC:YYYY and its previous amendments, if any, but without the new quoted amendment. On the date stated, the superseded standard ceases to give presumption of conformity with the essential requirements of the directive.

NOTE:

| — | any information concerning the availability of the standards can be obtained either from the European Standardisation Organisations or from the national standardisation bodies of which the list is annexed to the Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) amended by the Directive 98/48/EC (3), |
| --- | --- |

—

any information concerning the availability of the standards can be obtained either from the European Standardisation Organisations or from the national standardisation bodies of which the list is annexed to the Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) amended by the Directive 98/48/EC (3),

| — | publication of the references in the Official Journal of the European Union does not imply that the standards are available in all the Community languages, |
| --- | --- |

—

publication of the references in the Official Journal of the European Union does not imply that the standards are available in all the Community languages,

| — | this list replaces all the previous lists published in the Official Journal of the European Union. The Commission ensures the updating of this list. |
| --- | --- |

—

this list replaces all the previous lists published in the Official Journal of the European Union. The Commission ensures the updating of this list.

More information about harmonised standards on the Internet at:

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/newapproach/standardization/harmstds/

---

(1)  ESO: European Standardisation Organisation:

| — | CEN: rue de Stassart 36, B-1050 Brussels, tel. (32-2) 550 08 11; fax (32-2) 550 08 19 (http://www.cen.eu), |
| --- | --- |

—

CEN: rue de Stassart 36, B-1050 Brussels, tel. (32-2) 550 08 11; fax (32-2) 550 08 19 (http://www.cen.eu),

| — | Cenelec: rue de Stassart 35, B-1050 Brussels, tel. (32-2) 519 68 71; fax (32-2) 519 69 19 (http://www.cenelec.org), |
| --- | --- |

—

Cenelec: rue de Stassart 35, B-1050 Brussels, tel. (32-2) 519 68 71; fax (32-2) 519 69 19 (http://www.cenelec.org),

| — | ETSI: 650, route des Lucioles, F-06921 Sophia Antipolis, tel. (33) 492 94 42 00; fax (33) 493 65 47 16 (http://www.etsi.org). |
| --- | --- |

—

ETSI: 650, route des Lucioles, F-06921 Sophia Antipolis, tel. (33) 492 94 42 00; fax (33) 493 65 47 16 (http://www.etsi.org).

(2)  OJ L 204, 21.7.1998, p. 37.

(3)  OJ L 217, 5.8.1998, p. 18.

---

V Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMON COMMERCIAL POLICY

Commission

| 4.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/17

---

Notice of initiation of an expiry review and a partial interim review of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of silicon originating in the People's Republic of China

(2009/C 51/07)

Following the publication of a notice of impending expiry (1) of the anti-dumping measures in force on imports of silicon originating in the People's Republic of China (‘country concerned’), the Commission has received a request for review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (2) (‘the basic Regulation’). In addition, the Commission has received a request for review pursuant to Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation.

1.   Requests for review

The expiry review request was lodged on 1 December 2008 by Euroalliages (Liaison Committee of the Ferro-Alloy Industry) on behalf of producers representing 100 % of the Community production of silicon.

The interim review request was lodged by EUSMET (European Users of Silicon Metal), and is limited in scope to the examination of dumping.

2.   Product

The product under review is silicon originating in the People's Republic of China (‘the product concerned’), currently classifiable within CN code 2804 69 00. This CN code is given only for information.

3.   Existing measures

The measures currently in force are a definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Council Regulation (EC) No 398/2004 (3). By Council Regulation (EC) No 42/2007 (4) the definitive anti-dumping duty was extended to imports of silicon consigned from the Republic of Korea, whether declared as originating in the Republic of Korea or not.

4.   Grounds for the reviews

4.1.   Grounds for the expiry review

The request is based on the grounds that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury to the Community industry.

In view of the provisions of Article 2(7) of the basic Regulation, Euroalliages established normal value for the People's Republic of China on the basis of the price in an appropriate market economy country, which is mentioned in point 5(1)(d) of this notice. The allegation of continuation of dumping is based on a comparison of normal value, as set out in the preceding sentence, with the export prices of the product concerned when sold for export to the Community.

On this basis, the dumping margin calculated is significant.

Furthermore, Euroalliages points out that during the period of imposition of measures, the exporters/producers of the product concerned from the People's Republic of China tried to undermine the existing measures by circumvention practices, which were counteracted by Council Regulation (EC) No 42/2007 (4).

Euroalliages further alleges the likelihood of further injurious dumping. In this respect it presents evidence to the effect that, should measures be allowed to lapse, the current import level of the product concerned is likely to increase due to the existence of unused capacity and stocks in the country concerned. In addition, it is also alleged that the exports to other third countries, i.e. Japan, Canada and Norway, are made at dumped prices.

It is also alleged that the flow of imports of the product concerned is likely to rise due to the measures in force on imports of similar products originating in the country concerned in traditional markets other than the EU (i.e. the United States of America). All this can lead to a redirection of exports from other third countries to the Community.

In addition, Euroalliages alleges that the removal of injury is mainly due to the existence of measures and that any recurrence of substantial imports at dumped prices from the country concerned would likely lead to a recurrence of injury of the Community industry should measures be allowed to lapse.

4.2.   Grounds for the interim review

The request pursuant to Article 11(3) is based on prima facie evidence, provided by EUSMET that the circumstances on the basis of which measures were established have changed and that the new circumstances are of a lasting nature.

EUSMET alleges that the circumstances have changed significantly since the imposition of the measures, inter alia, due to a substantial increase in consumption. It further alleges that the level of dumping has significantly decreased. Therefore the continued imposition of measures at the existing levels is no longer necessary to offset dumping.

5.   Procedure

Having determined, after consulting the Advisory Committee, that sufficient evidence exists to justify the initiation of an expiry review and a partial interim review limited to the examination of dumping, the Commission hereby initiates reviews in accordance with Article 11(2) and 11(3) of the basic Regulation.

5.1.   Procedure for the determination of dumping, likelihood of dumping and injury

The investigation will determine whether the expiry of the measures would be likely, or unlikely, to lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. The partial interim review will determine whether the current level of the measures is appropriate to counteract the injurious dumping.

(a)   Sampling

In view of the apparent large number of parties involved in this proceeding, the Commission may decide to apply sampling, in accordance with Article 17 of the basic Regulation.

(i)   Sampling for exporters/producers in the country concerned

In order to enable the Commission to decide whether sampling is necessary and, if so, to select a sample, all exporters/producers, or representatives acting on their behalf, are hereby requested to make themselves known by contacting the Commission and providing the following information on their company or companies within the time limit set in point 6(b)(i) and in the formats indicated in point 7:

| — | name, address, e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers and contact person, |
| --- | --- |

—

name, address, e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers and contact person,

| — | the turnover in local currency and the volume in tonnes of the product concerned sold for export to the Community during the period 1 January-31 December 2008, |
| --- | --- |

—

the turnover in local currency and the volume in tonnes of the product concerned sold for export to the Community during the period 1 January-31 December 2008,

| — | the turnover in local currency and the sales volume in tonnes of the product concerned sold on the domestic market during the period 1 January-31 December 2008, |
| --- | --- |

—

the turnover in local currency and the sales volume in tonnes of the product concerned sold on the domestic market during the period 1 January-31 December 2008,

| — | the turnover in local currency and the sales volume in tonnes for the product concerned sold to other third countries during the period 1 January-31 December 2008, |
| --- | --- |

—

the turnover in local currency and the sales volume in tonnes for the product concerned sold to other third countries during the period 1 January-31 December 2008,

| — | the precise activities of the company with regard to the production of the product concerned and the production volume in tonnes of the product concerned, the production capacity and the investments in production capacity during the period 1 January-31 December 2008, |
| --- | --- |

—

the precise activities of the company with regard to the production of the product concerned and the production volume in tonnes of the product concerned, the production capacity and the investments in production capacity during the period 1 January-31 December 2008,

| — | the names and the precise activities of all related companies (5) involved in the production and/or selling (export and/or domestic) of the product concerned, |
| --- | --- |

—

the names and the precise activities of all related companies (5) involved in the production and/or selling (export and/or domestic) of the product concerned,

| — | any other relevant information that would assist the Commission in the selection of the sample. |
| --- | --- |

—

any other relevant information that would assist the Commission in the selection of the sample.

By providing the above information, the company agrees to its possible inclusion in the sample. If the company is chosen to be part of the sample, this will imply replying to a questionnaire and accepting an on-the-spot investigation of its response. If the company indicates that it does not agree to its possible inclusion in the sample, it will be deemed not to have co-operated in the investigation. The consequences of non-cooperation are set out in point 8 below. In order to obtain the information it deems necessary for the selection of the sample of exporters/producers, the Commission will, in addition, contact the authorities of the exporting country and any known associations of exporters/producers.

Since a company cannot be certain that it will be selected in the sample, exporters/producers that wish to claim an individual margin pursuant to Article 17(3) of the basic Regulation are advised to request a questionnaire within the deadline foreseen in point 6(a)(i) of this notice, and file it within the deadline foreseen in point 6(a)(ii) first paragraph of this notice. However, attention is drawn to the last sentence of point 5.1(b) of this notice.

(ii)   Sampling for importers

In order to enable the Commission to decide whether sampling is necessary and, if so, to select a sample, all importers, or representatives acting on their behalf, are hereby requested to make themselves known to the Commission and to provide the following information on their company or companies within the time limit set in point 6(b)(i) and in the formats indicated in point 7:

| — | name, address, e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers and contact person, |
| --- | --- |

—

name, address, e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers and contact person,

| — | the total turnover in euro of the company during the period 1 January-31 December 2008, |
| --- | --- |

—

the total turnover in euro of the company during the period 1 January-31 December 2008,

| — | the total number of employees, |
| --- | --- |

—

the total number of employees,

| — | the precise activities of the company with regard to the product concerned, |
| --- | --- |

—

the precise activities of the company with regard to the product concerned,

| — | the volume in tonnes and value in euro of imports into and resales made in the Community market during the period 1 January-31 December 2008 of the imported product concerned originating in the People's Republic of China or consigned from the Republic of Korea, whether declared as originating in the Republic of Korea or not, |
| --- | --- |

—

the volume in tonnes and value in euro of imports into and resales made in the Community market during the period 1 January-31 December 2008 of the imported product concerned originating in the People's Republic of China or consigned from the Republic of Korea, whether declared as originating in the Republic of Korea or not,

| — | the names and the precise activities of all related companies (5) involved in the production and/or selling of the product concerned, |
| --- | --- |

—

the names and the precise activities of all related companies (5) involved in the production and/or selling of the product concerned,

| — | any other relevant information that would assist the Commission in the selection of the sample. |
| --- | --- |

—

any other relevant information that would assist the Commission in the selection of the sample.

By providing the above information, the company agrees to its possible inclusion in the sample. If the company is chosen to be part of the sample, this will imply replying to a questionnaire and accepting an on-the-spot investigation of its response. If the company indicates that it does not agree to its possible inclusion in the sample, it will be deemed not to have co-operated in the investigation. The consequences of non-cooperation are set out in point 8 below. In order to obtain the information it deems necessary for the selection of the sample of importers, the Commission will, in addition, contact any known associations of importers.

(iii)   Final selection of the samples

All interested parties wishing to submit any relevant information regarding the selection of the samples must do so within the time limit set in point 6(b)(ii).

The Commission intends to make the final selection of the samples after having consulted the parties concerned that have expressed their willingness to be included in the samples.

Companies included in the samples must reply to a questionnaire within the time limit set in point 6(b)(iii) and must co-operate within the framework of the investigation.

If sufficient co-operation is not forthcoming, the Commission may base its findings, in accordance with Articles 17(4) and 18 of the basic Regulation, on the facts available. A finding based on facts available may be less advantageous to the party concerned, as explained in point 8.

(b)   Questionnaires

In order to obtain the information it deems necessary for its investigation, the Commission will send questionnaires to the Community industry and to any association of producers in the Community, to the sampled exporters/producers in the People's Republic of China, to any association of exporters/producers in the People's Republic of China, to the sampled importers, to any known association of importers.

Exporters/producers in the People's Republic of China claiming an individual margin, with a view to the application of Articles 17(3) and 9(6) of the basic Regulation, must submit a completed questionnaire within the time limit set in point 6(a)(ii) of this notice. They therefore have to request a questionnaire within the time limit set in point 6(a)(i). However, such parties should be aware that if sampling is applied to exporters/producers, the Commission may nonetheless decide not to calculate an individual margin for them, if the number of exporters/producers is so large that individual examination would be unduly burdensome and would prevent the timely completion of the investigation.

(c)   Collection of information and holding of hearings

All interested parties are hereby invited to make their views known, submit information other than questionnaire replies and to provide supporting evidence. This information and supporting evidence must reach the Commission within the time limit set in point 6(a)(ii).

Furthermore, the Commission may hear interested parties, provided that they make a request showing that there are particular reasons why they should be heard. This request must be made within the time limit set in point 6(a)(iii).

(d)   Selection of the market economy country

The Commission envisages using Brazil as an appropriate market economy third country for the purpose of establishing normal value with respect to the People's Republic of China. Interested parties are hereby invited to comment on the appropriateness of this country within the specific time limit set in point 6(c).

(e)   Market economy treatment or Individual treatment claims

For those exporters/producers in the People's Republic of China who claim and provide sufficient evidence that they operate under market economy conditions, i.e. that they meet the criteria laid down in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation, normal value will be determined in accordance with Article 2(7)(b) of the basic Regulation. Exporters/producers intending to submit duly substantiated claims must do so within the specific time limit set in point 6(d). The Commission will send claim forms to all exporters/producers in the People's Republic of China who have been included in the sample and to any association of exporters/producers named in the complaint, as well as to the authorities of the People's Republic of China. This claim form may also be used by the applicant to claim individual treatment, i.e. that it meets the criteria laid down in Article 9(5) of the basic Regulation.

5.2.   Procedure for the assessment of Community interest

In accordance with Article 21 of the basic Regulation and in the event that the likelihood of a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury is confirmed, a determination will be made as to whether maintaining the anti-dumping measures would not be against the Community interest. For this reason the Commission may send questionnaires to the known Community industry, importers, their representative associations, representative users and representative consumer organisations. Such parties, including those not known to the Commission, provided that they prove that there is an objective link between their activity and the product concerned, may, within the general time limits set in point 6(a)(ii), make themselves known and provide the Commission with information. The parties which have acted in conformity with the preceding sentence may request a hearing setting the particular reasons why they should be heard within the time limit set in point 6(a)(iii). It should be noted that any information submitted pursuant to Article 21 of the basic Regulation will only be taken into account if supported by factual evidence at the time of submission.

6.   Time limits

(a)   General time limits

(i)   For parties to request a questionnaire or other claim forms

All interested parties should request a questionnaire or other claim forms as soon as possible, but not later than 10 days after the publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union.

(ii)   For parties to make themselves known, to submit questionnaire replies and any other information

All interested parties, if their representations are to be taken into account during the investigation, must make themselves known by contacting the Commission, present their views and submit questionnaire replies or any other information within 40 days of the date of publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union, unless otherwise specified. Attention is drawn to the fact that the exercise of most procedural rights set out in the basic Regulation depends on the party's making itself known within the aforementioned period.

Companies selected in a sample must submit questionnaire replies within the time limits specified in point 6(b)(iii).

(iii)   Hearings

All interested parties may also apply to be heard by the Commission within the same 40-day time limit.

(b)   Specific time limit in respect of sampling

| (i) | The information specified in points 5.1(a)(i) and 5.1(a)(ii) should reach the Commission within 15 days of the date of publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union, given that the Commission intends to consult parties concerned that have expressed their willingness to be included in the sample on its final selection within a period of 21 days of the publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

(i)

The information specified in points 5.1(a)(i) and 5.1(a)(ii) should reach the Commission within 15 days of the date of publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union, given that the Commission intends to consult parties concerned that have expressed their willingness to be included in the sample on its final selection within a period of 21 days of the publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union.

| (ii) | All other information relevant for the selection of the sample as referred to in 5.1(a)(iii) must reach the Commission within a period of 21 days of the publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

All other information relevant for the selection of the sample as referred to in 5.1(a)(iii) must reach the Commission within a period of 21 days of the publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union.

| (iii) | The questionnaire replies from sampled parties must reach the Commission within 37 days from the date of the notification of their inclusion in the sample. |
| --- | --- |

(iii)

The questionnaire replies from sampled parties must reach the Commission within 37 days from the date of the notification of their inclusion in the sample.

(c)   Specific time limit for the selection of the market economy country

Parties to the investigation may wish to comment on the appropriateness of Brazil which, as mentioned in point 5.1(d), is envisaged as a market economy country for the purpose of establishing normal value in respect of the People's Republic of China. These comments must reach the Commission within 10 days of the date of publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union.

(d)   Specific time limit for submission of claims for market economy treatment and/or for individual treatment

Duly substantiated claims for market economy status (as mentioned in point 5.1(e)) and/or for individual treatment pursuant to Article 9(5) of the basic Regulation, must reach the Commission within 15 days of the date of publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union.

7.   Written submissions, questionnaire replies and correspondence

All submissions and requests made by interested parties must be made in writing (not in electronic format, unless otherwise specified) and must indicate the name, address, e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers of the interested party. All written submissions, including the information requested in this notice, questionnaire replies and correspondence provided by interested parties on a confidential basis shall be labelled as ‘Limited’ (6) and, in accordance with Article 19(2) of the basic Regulation, shall be accompanied by a non-confidential version, which will be labelled ‘For inspection by interested parties’.

Commission address for correspondence:

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate General for Trade |
| Directorate H |
| Office: N-105 04/092 |
| B-1049 Brussels |
| Fax (32-2) 295 65 05 |

European Commission

Directorate General for Trade

Directorate H

Office: N-105 04/092

B-1049 Brussels

Fax (32-2) 295 65 05

8.   Non-co-operation

In cases in which any interested party refuses access to or does not provide the necessary information within the time limits, or significantly impedes the investigation, findings, affirmative or negative, may be made in accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation, on the basis of the facts available.

Where it is found that any interested party has supplied false or misleading information, the information shall be disregarded and use may be made, in accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation, of the facts available. If an interested party does not cooperate or cooperates only partially, and use of facts available is made, the result may be less favorable to that party than if it had cooperated.

9.   Schedule of the investigation

The investigation will be concluded, according to Article 11(5) of the basic Regulation within 15 months of the date of the publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union.

10.   Processing of personal data

It is noted that any personal data collected in this investigation will be treated in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data (7).

11.   Hearing Officer

It is also noted that if interested parties consider that they are encountering difficulties in the exercise of their rights of defence, they may request the intervention of the Hearing Officer of DG Trade. He acts as an interface between the interested parties and the Commission services, offering, where necessary, mediation on procedural matters affecting the protection of their interests in this proceeding, in particular with regard to issues concerning access to file, confidentiality, extension of time limits and the treatment of written and/or oral submission of views. For further information and contact details interested parties may consult the Hearing Officer's web pages of the website of DG Trade (http://ec.europa.eu/trade).

---

(1)  OJ C 254, 7.10.2008, p. 9.

(2)  OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1.

(3)  OJ L 66, 4.3.2004, p. 15.

(4)  OJ L 13, 19.1.2007, p. 1.

(5)  For guidance on the meaning of related companies, please refer to Article 143 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ L 253, 11.10.1993, p. 1).

(6)  This means that the document is for internal use only. It is protected pursuant to Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43). It is a confidential document pursuant to Article 19 of the basic Regulation and Article 6 of the WTO Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994 (Anti-dumping Agreement).

(7)  OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1.

---

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY

Commission

| 4.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/22

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.5482 — GSN/FUN)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2009/C 51/08)

| 1. | On 25 February 2009, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Game Show Network, LLC (‘GSN’, United States of America) jointly controlled by Liberty Media Corporation (‘Liberty Media’, United States of America) and Sony Pictures Entertainment (‘SPE’, United States of America) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Fun Technologies, Inc (‘FUN’, Canada) by way of purchase of shares. |
| --- | --- |

1.

On 25 February 2009, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Game Show Network, LLC (‘GSN’, United States of America) jointly controlled by Liberty Media Corporation (‘Liberty Media’, United States of America) and Sony Pictures Entertainment (‘SPE’, United States of America) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Fun Technologies, Inc (‘FUN’, Canada) by way of purchase of shares.

| 2. | The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






  — | for GSN: supply of the Game Show Network television channel to TV operators in the United States of America. GSN also operates the website GSN.com, which offers various online services, |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—

for GSN: supply of the Game Show Network television channel to TV operators in the United States of America. GSN also operates the website GSN.com, which offers various online services,

| — | for FUN: publication and distribution of skill-based online casual games to be played on its own websites and certain third-party websites, |
| --- | --- |

—

for FUN: publication and distribution of skill-based online casual games to be played on its own websites and certain third-party websites,

| — | for Liberty Media: video and on-line commerce, media, communications and entertainment industries, |
| --- | --- |

—

for Liberty Media: video and on-line commerce, media, communications and entertainment industries,

| — | for SPE: development, production, acquisition and distribution of motion pictures, television programming, TV channels and other digital programming content. SPE also offers entertainment content such as games and ringtones for the Internet and mobile platforms. |
| --- | --- |

—

for SPE: development, production, acquisition and distribution of motion pictures, television programming, TV channels and other digital programming content. SPE also offers entertainment content such as games and ringtones for the Internet and mobile platforms.

| 3. | On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice. |
| --- | --- |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

| 4. | The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
  Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax ((32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5482 — GSN/FUN, to the following address:





  European Commission |
| --- | --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| J-70 |
| B-1049 Brussels |

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax ((32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5482 — GSN/FUN, to the following address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

J-70

B-1049 Brussels

---

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

(2)  OJ C 56, 5.3.2005, p. 32.

---

| 4.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/23

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.5445 — Mytilineos/Motor Oil/Corinthos Power)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2009/C 51/09)

| 1. | On 25 February 2009, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Mytilineos Holdings S.A. (‘Mytilineos’, Greece) and Motor Oil (Hellas) Corinth Refineries S.A. (‘MOH’, Greece) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation joint control of Corinthos Power S.A. (‘Corinthos Power’, Greece), a company constituting a joint venture, by way of purchase of shares. |
| --- | --- |

1.

On 25 February 2009, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Mytilineos Holdings S.A. (‘Mytilineos’, Greece) and Motor Oil (Hellas) Corinth Refineries S.A. (‘MOH’, Greece) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation joint control of Corinthos Power S.A. (‘Corinthos Power’, Greece), a company constituting a joint venture, by way of purchase of shares.

| 2. | The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






  — | for Mytilineos holdings S.A.: activities in different sectors such as: (i) metallurgy and mining; (ii) EPC (i.e. engineering, procurement and construction) projects; (iii) energy, including electricity generation and wholesale supply and (iv) defence vehicle manufacturing, |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—

for Mytilineos holdings S.A.: activities in different sectors such as: (i) metallurgy and mining; (ii) EPC (i.e. engineering, procurement and construction) projects; (iii) energy, including electricity generation and wholesale supply and (iv) defence vehicle manufacturing,

| — | for Motor Oil (Hellas) Corinth Refineries S.A.: activities in the refining sector and sale of petroleum products (retail and non-retail sales of automotive fuels, jet fuel, fuel oil, lubricants, etc.), |
| --- | --- |

—

for Motor Oil (Hellas) Corinth Refineries S.A.: activities in the refining sector and sale of petroleum products (retail and non-retail sales of automotive fuels, jet fuel, fuel oil, lubricants, etc.),

| — | for Corinthos Power S.A.: generation and wholesale supply of electricity. |
| --- | --- |

—

for Corinthos Power S.A.: generation and wholesale supply of electricity.

| 3. | On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. |
| --- | --- |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

| 4. | The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
  Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax ((32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5445 — Mytilineos/Motor Oil/Corinthos Power, to the following address:





  European Commission |
| --- | --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| J-70 |
| B-1049 Brussels |

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax ((32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5445 — Mytilineos/Motor Oil/Corinthos Power, to the following address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

J-70

B-1049 Brussels

---

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

---

Corrigenda

| 4.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/24

---

Corrigendum to the public holidays in 2009

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 14 of 21 January 2009
  )

(2009/C 51/10)

On page 6, under ‘Italia’:

for:

‘1.1, 13.4, 1.5, 21.5, 1.6, 2.6, 21.7, 15.8, 1.11, 25.12, 26.12’,

read:

‘1.1, 6.1, 13.4, 25.4, 1.5, 2.6, 15.8, 1.11, 8.12, 25.12, 26.12’.

---