# Official Journal C 131/2008

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 131 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5129 May 2008 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 131

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5129 May 2008

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions |
| | OPINIONS |
| | Commission |
| 2008/C 131/01 | Commission Opinion of 27 May 2008 in application of Article 7 of Directive 98/37/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards a prohibition measure adopted by Finland in respect of a forestry harvester bearing the trademark HARVERI MD-2007-144 (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

OPINIONS

Commission

2008/C 131/01

Commission Opinion of 27 May 2008 in application of Article 7 of Directive 98/37/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards a prohibition measure adopted by Finland in respect of a forestry harvester bearing the trademark HARVERI MD-2007-144 (
  1
  )

HARVERI

1

1

| | II   Information |
| --- | --- |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES |
| | Commission |
| 2008/C 131/02 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  ) | 5 |
| 2008/C 131/03 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  ) | 6 |
| 2008/C 131/04 | Communication from the Commission on the results of the risk evaluation of chlorodifluoromethane, bis(pentabromophenyl)ether and methenamine and on the risk reduction strategy for the substance methenamine (
  1
  ) | 7 |

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

2008/C 131/02

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  )

1

5

2008/C 131/03

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (
  1
  )

1

6

2008/C 131/04

Communication from the Commission on the results of the risk evaluation of chlorodifluoromethane, bis(pentabromophenyl)ether and methenamine and on the risk reduction strategy for the substance methenamine (
  1
  )

1

7

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES |
| | Commission |
| 2008/C 131/05 | Euro exchange rates | 13 |
| | NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES |
| 2008/C 131/06 | Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1628/2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to national regional investment aid (
  1
  ) | 14 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

2008/C 131/05

Euro exchange rates

13

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

2008/C 131/06

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1628/2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to national regional investment aid (
  1
  )

1

14

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY |
| | Commission |
| 2008/C 131/07 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5105 — SEPI/CDTI/INTA/Abertis/Hispasat) (
  1
  ) | 15 |
| 2008/C 131/08 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5159 — Apax Partners/D+S europe) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 16 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY

Commission

2008/C 131/07

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5105 — SEPI/CDTI/INTA/Abertis/Hispasat) (
  1
  )

1

15

2008/C 131/08

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5159 — Apax Partners/D+S europe) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

16

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

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

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

EN

---

I Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

OPINIONS

Commission

| 29.5.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 131/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 131/1

---

COMMISSION OPINION

of 27 May 2008

in application of Article 7 of Directive 98/37/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards a prohibition measure adopted by Finland in respect of a forestry harvester bearing the trademark HARVERI MD-2007-144

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 131/01)

1.   The notification by the Finnish authorities

Article 2(1) of Directive 98/37/EC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to machinery states that Member States shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that machinery covered by the Directive may be placed on the market and put into service only if it does not endanger the health and safety of persons and, where appropriate, domestic animals or property, when properly installed and maintained and used for its intended purpose.

Article 7(1) of the Directive provides that where a Member State ascertains that machinery bearing the CE marking used in accordance with its intended purpose is liable to endanger the safety of persons, and, where appropriate, domestic animals or property, it shall take all appropriate measures to withdraw such machinery from the market, to prohibit the placing on the market, putting into service or use thereof, or to restrict free movement thereof. The Member State shall immediately inform the Commission of any such measure, indicating the reason for its decision.

On 5 November 2007, the Finnish authorities notified to the European Commission a measure prohibiting the placing on the market of a forestry harvester bearing the trademark HARVERI manufactured by Oy RCM Harvester Ltd, Aakkulantie 46, FI-36220 Kangasala.

Pursuant to Article 7(2) of the Directive, the Commission is required, after consulting the parties concerned, to declare whether it finds such a measure justified or not. If the measure is found justified, the Commission shall inform the Member States so that they can take all appropriate measures with respect to the machinery concerned, in accordance with their obligations under Article 2(1).

2.   The reasons given by the Finnish authorities

The HARVERI forestry harvester concerned by the measure taken by the Finnish authorities is a small harvester for forestry thinning work. The machine has a self-propelled all-terrain chassis fitted at the front with an articulated arm on which a cutting device is mounted. The functions of the machine are to fell trees, to lop off the branches, to cut the tree trunk into logs, to load the logs into a rack mounted on top of the chassis, to transport the logs and to unload them to the ground by tipping the rack to one side. All the functions of the machine are controlled by a pedestrian operator by means of a remote radio control system.

The reason given by the Finnish authorities for the prohibition measure is the non-conformity of the machinery with the following essential health and safety requirements of Annex I to Directive 98/37/EC.

1.1.2.   Principles of safety integration

The manufacturer has not shown that the principles of safety integration, in accordance with the given order of priority, have been applied in the design and construction of the machine.

1.3.1.   Stability

Insufficient measures have been taken to ensure that the operator is not at risk of being crushed by the machine if the machine rolls over during use on rough and oblique surfaces.

1.3.2. and 3.4.2.   Risk of break up during operation and 1.3.3. Risks due to falling or ejected objects

Insufficient structural measures have been taken to prevent the risk of the operator from being injured by falling trees and from being hit by ejected objects, such as fragments of the chain saw, in case of break up during operation.

3.2.1.   Driving position

Insufficient measures have been taken to ensure that the operator does not control the machine from positions other than those foreseen by the manufacturer's instructions in order to gain adequate visibility.

3.   The comments of the manufacturer

On 26 November 2007, the Commission wrote to the manufacturer asking him to communicate his observations regarding the measure taken by the Finnish authorities.

The manufacturer replied by letter dated 14 December 2007 including a written submission and copies of two statements made in support of an appeal to the Finnish Supreme Administrative Court against the prohibition measure. On 29 January 2008, a meeting was held between representatives of the manufacturer and the services of the Commission.

The manufacturer stated that the principles of safety integration set out in Section 1.1.2 of Annex I to Directive had been correctly applied during the design and construction of the machinery.

Concerning the stability of the machine, the manufacturer stated that the machine was equipped with a suspension system enabling the chassis to remain in a stable position on uneven ground and that maximum travel speed of the machine was limited by design to 3,7 km/h.

Concerning to the risk due to ejected objects and the risk due to break up during operation, the manufacturer pointed out that these risks were prevented by means of a protective housing surrounding the cutting device. The cutting device fitted to the HARVERI forestry harvester and its protective housing constituted a sub-assembly that was identical to that fitted to many other types of forestry harvester and that practical experience had shown to be safe and reliable.

Concerning the driving position, the manufacturer stated that precise indications were given in the instructions on the safe use of the machine and on the operator training required.

The manufacturer informed the Commission that a new version of the forestry harvester was under development, fitted with a device to prevent operation of the machine if the remote controls were located closer to the chassis than a given distance. However, the manufacturer stated that the technical means necessary to achieve this objective had not been available when the HARVERI forestry harvester was first designed and placed on the market.

4.   The Commission's observations

With respect to the non-conformities cited by the Finnish authorities, the Commission makes the following observations.

1.1.2.   Principles of safety integration

Section 1.1.2 paragraph (a) of Annex I to Directive 98/37/EC indicates that the aim of measures taken by the manufacturer of machinery must be to eliminate any risk of accident throughout the foreseeable lifetime of the machinery, even where risks of accident arise from foreseeable abnormal situations. Paragraph (b) of the same Section states that measures to reduce risks and protective measures shall be given priority over information to users on residual risks and training requirements. Paragraph (c) of the same Section requires that, when designing and constructing machinery and when drafting the instructions, the manufacturer must envisage not only the normal use of the machinery but also uses which could reasonably be expected. The machinery must be designed to prevent abnormal use if such use would engender a risk.

The Commission considers that the conformity with these requirements must be appreciated in light of the measures adopted to comply with the particular essential health and safety requirements mentioned below.

1.3.1.   Stability

Section 1.3.1 of Annex I requires that machinery, components and fittings thereof must be so designed and constructed that they are stable enough, under the foreseen operating conditions (if necessary taking climatic conditions into account) for use without risk of overturning, falling or unexpected movement.

In this respect, the Commission observes that the chassis and suspension system of the HARVERI forestry harvester are designed to maintain the stability of the machine during travel and operation on uneven ground. The Commission considers that the Finnish authorities have not demonstrated the non-conformity of the HARVERI forestry harvester with this requirement. However, despite the measures taken by the manufacturer, there remains a risk of the machine tipping or rolling over on extreme slopes.

1.3.2. and 3.4.2.   Risk of break up during operation

Section 1.3.2 of Annex I, on the risk of break up during operation, requires that the various parts of machinery and their linkages must be able to withstand the stresses to which they are subject when used as foreseen by the manufacturer. Where a risk of rupture or disintegration remains, despite the measures taken, the moving parts must be mounted and positioned in such a way that, in case of rupture, their fragments will be contained. Section 3.4.2 of Annex I, on the risk of break-up during operation for mobile machinery, requires that parts of machinery rotating at high speed which, despite the measures taken, may break up or disintegrate, must be mounted and guarded in such a way that, in case of breakage, their fragments will be contained or, if that is not possible, cannot be projected towards the driving and/or operation positions.

In this respect, the Commission observes that in order to prevent risks due to the break up of the chain saw during operation, the cutting means of the HARVERI forestry harvester are surrounded by a protective housing to the extent that is compatible with the function of the machine. The Commission considers that the Finnish authorities have not demonstrated the non-conformity of the machine with these requirements. However, despite the measures taken by the manufacturer, there remains a risk due to break up during operation.

1.3.3.   Risks due to falling or ejected objects and 3.2.1. Driving position

Section 1.3.3 of Annex I requires that precautions must be taken to prevent risks from falling or ejected objects (e.g. work pieces, tools, cuttings, fragments, waste, etc.). Section 3.2.1 of Annex I requires, in particular, that visibility from the driving position must be such that the driver can in complete safety for himself and the exposed persons, operate the machinery and its tools in their intended conditions of use.

In this respect, the Commission observes that, during operation of the HARVERI forestry harvester, there remains a risk due to the ejection of fragments in case of break-up of the chain saw, since the cutting means cannot be entirely enclosed. The manufacturer's instructions indicate that the speed of the chain saw is 35 m/s during cutting operations and higher if the saw is not in contact with the tree, and that the kinetic energy of a fragment of chain which has broken up is as high as that of a bullet from a pistol. The instructions indicate that there is a risk of serious or fatal injury in the operating zone situated in an angle of 60° either side of the centre line of the cutting means.

The Commission observes that there is also a risk due to falling objects. The manufacturer's instructions indicate that, during felling operations, there is a risk of the tree falling in an unintended direction due to its weight or angle, to the effects of wind, snow or other trees, to a failure of one of the components of the machine or to an error by the operator. The Commission observes that the operator is also exposed to a risk of being hit by falling logs, in particular when they are unloaded to the ground by tipping the rack on top of the chassis.

The Commission further observes that there is a risk of the operator being crushed if the machine tips or rolls over on extreme slopes.

The manufacturer's instructions indicate that the operator shall stand in a safe driving zone when using the remote controls. The driving zone is situated about 2 metres away from the rear of the machine and about 4 metres away from the side of the machine. Furthermore, the instructions warn the operator never to stand in the operating zone in front of the harvester or in the sawing line of the chain saw when felling trees or when cutting logs.

The Commission considers that it can reasonably be expected that, despite these instructions and warnings, the operator may leave the safe driving zone and stand in an unsafe position in order to gain a better view of the cutting means during felling and cutting operations or of the trajectory of the machine during travel. In this respect, the Commission notes that an advertising brochure for the HARVERI forestry harvester, communicated by the Finnish authorities, includes three photographs of the machine in use showing the operator standing close to the machine outside the safe driving zone indicated in the instructions. The Commission observes that the HARVERI forestry harvester is not designed and constructed to prevent such abnormal use, as required by Section 1.1.2(c) of Annex I, since the remote controls can be used to operate the machine from any position around the machine.

The Commission recalls that, according to preliminary observation 2 to Annex I, taking into account the state of the art, it may not be possible to meet the objectives set by the essential health and safety requirements laid down in the Directive. In this case, the machinery must as far as possible be designed and constructed with the purpose of approaching those objectives.

The Commission notes that the harmonised standard applicable to forestry harvesters, EN 14861:2004, requires such machines to be fitted with a cab, a falling object protective structure, a roll-over protective structure and an operator protective structure to protect the operator against risks due to tipping or rolling over and risks due to falling or ejected objects. While this standard was adopted after the HARVERI forestry harvester was first designed and placed on the market, while its application remains voluntary and while it does not include specifications for remote controlled machines, the Commission considers that it gives an indication of the state of the art to be taken into account by manufacturers of forestry harvesters and that alternative solutions for complying with the essential health and safety requirements of Annex I should provide a level of protection at least equivalent to that set by the relevant harmonised standard.

The Commission further observes that, even if the technical means to prevent use of the remote controls from unsafe positions were not available when the HARVERI forestry harvester was first designed and placed on the market, the manufacturer must take developments in the state of the art into account for the machinery he subsequently places on the market, in order to approach the objectives stated in the essential health and safety requirements.

5.   The Commission's opinion

In light of the documentation available and the comments of the parties concerned, the Commission considers that the Finnish authorities have established the non-conformity of HARVERI forestry harvester with the essential health and safety requirements 1.3.3 and 3.2.1, in conjunction with the preliminary observation 2 and the essential health and safety requirement 1.1.2 of Annex I to Directive 98/37/EC, and that these non-conformities give rise to a risk of serious or fatal injury to operators.

Consequently, having followed the required procedure, the Commission is of the opinion that the measure taken by the Finnish authorities is justified.

Done at Brussels, 27 May 2008.

For the Commission

Günter VERHEUGEN

Vice-President

---

II Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

| 29.5.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 131/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 131/5

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 131/02)

| Date of adoption of the decision | 6.3.2008 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of the aid | N 66/08 |
| Member State | France |
| Region | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Prolongation du régime cadre existant d'aide aux entreprises pour la protection de l'environnement |
| Legal basis | Programmes opérationnels pour la mise en œuvre des objectifs «compétitivité régionale et emploi» et «coopération territoriale», contrats de projet «État-région» |
| Type of measure | Aid scheme |
| Objective | Environmental protection |
| Form of aid | Direct grant, Soft loan, Interest subsidy |
| Budget | Annual budget: EUR 20 million |
| Intensity | — |
| Duration | Until 31.12.2008 |
| Economic sectors | All sectors |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Agence de l'environnement et de la maîtrise de l'énergie (ADEME), collectivités publiques décentralisées (régions, départements, communes et leurs groupements) |
| Other information | — |

Date of adoption of the decision

6.3.2008

Reference number of the aid

N 66/08

Member State

France

Region

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Prolongation du régime cadre existant d'aide aux entreprises pour la protection de l'environnement

Legal basis

Programmes opérationnels pour la mise en œuvre des objectifs «compétitivité régionale et emploi» et «coopération territoriale», contrats de projet «État-région»

Type of measure

Aid scheme

Objective

Environmental protection

Form of aid

Direct grant, Soft loan, Interest subsidy

Budget

Annual budget: EUR 20 million

Intensity

—

Duration

Until 31.12.2008

Economic sectors

All sectors

Name and address of the granting authority

Agence de l'environnement et de la maîtrise de l'énergie (ADEME), collectivités publiques décentralisées (régions, départements, communes et leurs groupements)

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

---

| 29.5.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 131/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 131/6

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 131/03)

| Date of adoption of the decision | 2.4.2008 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of the aid | N 582/07 |
| Member State | Germany |
| Region | Brandenburg-Nordost |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Propapier PM 2 KG |
| Legal basis | — | Investitionszulagengesetz 2007 vom 15. Juli 2006 in der Fassung der Bekanntmachung vom 23. Februar 2007 (BGBl. 2007 I S. 282) |

Date of adoption of the decision

2.4.2008

Reference number of the aid

N 582/07

Member State

Germany

Region

Brandenburg-Nordost

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Propapier PM 2 KG

Legal basis

—

Investitionszulagengesetz 2007 vom 15. Juli 2006 in der Fassung der Bekanntmachung vom 23. Februar 2007 (BGBl. 2007 I S. 282)

| — | Gesetz über die Gemeinschaftsaufgabe „Verbesserung der regionalen Wirtschaftsstruktur“ vom 6.10.1969 (BGBl. I S. 1861), zuletzt geändert durch Art. 102 der Verordnung vom 25.11.2003 (BGBl. I S. 2304), in Verbindung mit dem 36. Rahmenplan der Gemeinschaftsaufgabe „Verbesserung der regionalen Wirtschaftsstruktur“ (GA) für den Zeitraum 2007 bis 2010 (BT-Drs. 16/5215 vom 27.4.2007) |
| --- | --- |

—

Gesetz über die Gemeinschaftsaufgabe „Verbesserung der regionalen Wirtschaftsstruktur“ vom 6.10.1969 (BGBl. I S. 1861), zuletzt geändert durch Art. 102 der Verordnung vom 25.11.2003 (BGBl. I S. 2304), in Verbindung mit dem 36. Rahmenplan der Gemeinschaftsaufgabe „Verbesserung der regionalen Wirtschaftsstruktur“ (GA) für den Zeitraum 2007 bis 2010 (BT-Drs. 16/5215 vom 27.4.2007)

| — | Richtlinie des Ministeriums für Wirtschaft zur Förderung der gewerblichen Wirtschaft im Rahmen der Gemeinschaftsaufgabe „Verbesserung der regionalen Wirtschaftsstruktur“ — GA — (GA-G) vom 7.12.2006 (ABl. für Brandenburg Nr. 51 vom 27.12.2006, S. 798) |
| --- | --- |

—

Richtlinie des Ministeriums für Wirtschaft zur Förderung der gewerblichen Wirtschaft im Rahmen der Gemeinschaftsaufgabe „Verbesserung der regionalen Wirtschaftsstruktur“ — GA — (GA-G) vom 7.12.2006 (ABl. für Brandenburg Nr. 51 vom 27.12.2006, S. 798)

| — | Landeshaushaltsordnung (LHO) vom 21.4.1999 (GVBl. I/99, S. 106) mit den dazugehörigen Verwaltungsvorschriften (VV-LHO) |
| --- | --- |

—

Landeshaushaltsordnung (LHO) vom 21.4.1999 (GVBl. I/99, S. 106) mit den dazugehörigen Verwaltungsvorschriften (VV-LHO)

Type of measure

Individual aid

Objective

Regional development, Employment

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

Overall budget: EUR 72 million

Intensity

12 %

Duration

2008-2010

Economic sectors

Manufacturing industry

Name and address of the granting authority

Finanzamt Frankfurt (Oder); Investitionsbank des Landes Brandenburg

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

---

| 29.5.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 131/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 131/7

---

Communication from the Commission on the results of the risk evaluation of chlorodifluoromethane, bis(pentabromophenyl)ether and methenamine and on the risk reduction strategy for the substance methenamine

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 131/04)

Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 of 23 March 1993 on the evaluation and control of the risks of existing substances (1) involves the data reporting, priority setting, risk evaluation and, where necessary, development of strategies for limiting the risks of existing substances.

In the framework of Regulation (EEC) No 793/93, the following substances have been identified as priority substances for evaluation in accordance with Commission Regulations (EC) No 1179/94 (2) and (EC) No 2268/95 (3) respectively concerning the first and the second list of priority substances as foreseen under Regulation (EEC) No 793/93:

| — | chlorodifluoromethane, |
| --- | --- |

—

chlorodifluoromethane,

| — | bis(pentabromophenyl)ether, |
| --- | --- |

—

bis(pentabromophenyl)ether,

| — | methenamine. |
| --- | --- |

—

methenamine.

The rapporteur Member States designated pursuant to those Regulations have completed the risk evaluation activities with regard to man and the environment for those substances in accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 of 28 June 1994 laying down the principles for the assessment of risks to man and the environment of existing substances (4) and have suggested a strategy for limiting the risks in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 793/93.

The Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment (SCTEE) and the Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER) respectively have been consulted and have issued an opinion with respect to the risk evaluations carried out by the rapporteurs. These opinions can be found on the website of the Scientific Committees.

Article 11(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 stipulates that the results of the risk evaluation and the recommended strategy for limiting the risks shall be adopted at Community level and published by the Commission. This Communication provides the results of risk evaluations (5) of chlorodifluoromethane, bis(pentabromophenyl)ether and methenamine and the strategy for limiting the risks for methenamine.

The results of the risk evaluation and the strategy for limiting the risks set out in this communication are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee set up pursuant to Article 15(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 793/93.

---

(1)  OJ L 84, 5.4.1993, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 131, 26.5.1994, p. 3.

(3)  OJ L 231, 28.9.1995, p. 18.

(4)  OJ L 161, 29.6.1994, p. 3.

(5)  The comprehensive Risk Assessment Report, as well as a summary thereof, can be found on the Internet site of the European Chemicals Bureau:

http://ecb.jrc.it/existing-substances/

---

ANNEX

PART 1

| CAS No: 75-45-6 | | Einecs No: 200-871-9 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Structural formula: | |
| Einecs name: | Chlorodifluoromethane |
| IUPAC name: | Chlorodifluoromethane |
| Rapporteur: | Italy |
| Classification (1): | None |

CAS No: 75-45-6

Einecs No: 200-871-9

Structural formula:

Image

Einecs name:

Chlorodifluoromethane

IUPAC name:

Chlorodifluoromethane

Rapporteur:

Italy

Classification (1):

None

The risk assessment is based on current practices related to the life-cycle of the substance produced in or imported into the European Community as described in the risk assessment forwarded to the Commission by the Member State Rapporteur.

The risk assessment has, based on the available information, determined that in the European Community the substance is mainly used as raw material feedstock for other chemicals such as fluoropolymers and as end product predominantly as working fluid in vapour compression refrigeration cycles.

Other uses are foam blowing with HCFC-22 which has been banned since 1 January 2004 (2). Emissions deriving from this use are not considered in the risk assessment.

RISK ASSESSMENT

A.   Human health

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

WORKERS, CONSUMERS and HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

HUMAN HEALTH (physico-chemical properties)

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

B.   Environment

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to the

ATMOSPHERE, AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM and TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEM

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

MICRO-ORGANISMS IN THE SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

PART 2

| CAS No: 1163-19-5 | | Einecs No: 214-604-9 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Structural formula: | |
| Einecs name: | Bis(pentabromophenyl)ether |
| IUPAC name: | Bis(pentabromophenyl)ether |
| Rapporteur: | France (Human Health) and United Kingdom (Environment) |
| Classification: | None |

CAS No: 1163-19-5

Einecs No: 214-604-9

Structural formula:

Image

Einecs name:

Bis(pentabromophenyl)ether

IUPAC name:

Bis(pentabromophenyl)ether

Rapporteur:

France (Human Health) and United Kingdom (Environment)

Classification:

None

The risk assessment is based on current practices related to the life-cycle of the substance produced in or imported into the European Community as described in the risk assessment forwarded to the Commission by the Member State Rapporteurs (3).

The risk assessment has, based on the available information, determined that in the European Community the substance is mainly used as a flame retardant additive in the manufacture of polymers, mainly for use in electrical equipment, and drapery and upholstery textiles. Other minor uses reported are as a flame retardant additive in styrenic rubbers, polycarbonates, polyamides and terephthalates and in hot melt adhesives.

It was not possible to obtain information on the use of the total volume of substance produced in or imported into the European Community, therefore, some uses may exist which are not covered by this risk assessment.

RISK ASSESSMENT

A.   Human health

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

WORKERS

is that there is a need for further information and/or testing. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | there is a need for better information to adequately characterise the risks regarding developmental neurotoxic effects of the substance. |
| --- | --- |

—

there is a need for better information to adequately characterise the risks regarding developmental neurotoxic effects of the substance.

The information requirements are:

| — | a further developmental neurotoxicity study in mice or rats. |
| --- | --- |

—

a further developmental neurotoxicity study in mice or rats.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

CONSUMERS

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied already.

This conclusion was reached in the risk assessment report because consumer exposure was considered negligible. While recent information indicates that consumers may be exposed to bis(pentabromophenyl)ether released from consumer products, this exposure has not yet been quantified and considered in the risk assessment based on the current hazard profile available.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT

is that there is a need for further information and/or testing. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | there is a need for better information to adequately characterise human exposure and the risks regarding developmental neurotoxic effects of the substance. |
| --- | --- |

—

there is a need for better information to adequately characterise human exposure and the risks regarding developmental neurotoxic effects of the substance.

The information requirements are:

| — | a suitable human bio-monitoring programme, including breast milk and blood, and the need for a trend analysis with annual reporting over a ten year time period, |
| --- | --- |

—

a suitable human bio-monitoring programme, including breast milk and blood, and the need for a trend analysis with annual reporting over a ten year time period,

| — | further developmental neurotoxicity study in mice or rats. |
| --- | --- |

—

further developmental neurotoxicity study in mice or rats.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

HUMANS HEALTH (physico-chemical properties)

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

B.   Environment

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to the

AQUATIC AND TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEM

is that there is a need for further information and/or testing. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | there is a need for better information to adequately characterise the concerns regarding the persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic properties of the substance. |
| --- | --- |

—

there is a need for better information to adequately characterise the concerns regarding the persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic properties of the substance.

The information requirements are:

| — | environmental monitoring, programme including birds, sewage sludge, sediment, and air to establish the trends in levels of contamination for the substance and its more toxic and bioaccumulative degradation products, with annual reporting over a 10 year time period. |
| --- | --- |

—

environmental monitoring, programme including birds, sewage sludge, sediment, and air to establish the trends in levels of contamination for the substance and its more toxic and bioaccumulative degradation products, with annual reporting over a 10 year time period.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to the

ATMOSPHERE

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

MICRO-ORGANISMS IN THE SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

PART 3

| CAS No: 100-97-0 | | Einecs No: 202-905-8 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Structural formula: | |
| Molecular formula: | C6H12N4 |
| Einecs name: | Methenamine |
| IUPAC name: | 1,3,5,7-tetraazatricyclo(3.3.1.13,7)decane |
| Rapporteur: | Germany |
| Classification (4): | F; R11
  R42/43 |

CAS No: 100-97-0

Einecs No: 202-905-8

Structural formula:

Image

Molecular formula:

C6H12N4

Einecs name:

Methenamine

IUPAC name:

1,3,5,7-tetraazatricyclo(3.3.1.13,7)decane

Rapporteur:

Germany

Classification (4):

F; R11

R42/43

The risk assessment is based on current practices related to the life-cycle of the substance produced in or imported into the European Community as described in the risk assessment forwarded to the Commission by the Member State Rapporteur (3).

The risk assessment has, based on the available information, determined that in the European Community the substance is mainly used to produce resins and rubber. Other minor uses include fuel tablets for camping stoves.

RISK ASSESSMENT

A.   Human health

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

WORKERS

is that there is a need for specific measures to limit the risks. This conclusion is reached because of:

| — | concerns for skin sensitisation as a consequence of dermal exposure arising in all scenarios, |
| --- | --- |

—

concerns for skin sensitisation as a consequence of dermal exposure arising in all scenarios,

| — | concerns for systemic toxicity as a consequence of repeated dermal exposure arising from formulation of phenolic resin systems, |
| --- | --- |

—

concerns for systemic toxicity as a consequence of repeated dermal exposure arising from formulation of phenolic resin systems,

| — | concerns for developmental toxicity as a consequence of repeated dermal exposure arising from formulation of phenolic resin systems, from production of fuel tablets, and from production of formulations used in corrosion prevention and as photo chemicals. |
| --- | --- |

—

concerns for developmental toxicity as a consequence of repeated dermal exposure arising from formulation of phenolic resin systems, from production of fuel tablets, and from production of formulations used in corrosion prevention and as photo chemicals.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

CONSUMERS

is that there is a need for specific measures to limit the risks. This conclusion is reached because of:

| — | concerns for skin sensitisation as a consequence of dermal exposure arising from cosmetics, even at low concentrations, and from application (handling/breaking) of solid fuel tablets. |
| --- | --- |

—

concerns for skin sensitisation as a consequence of dermal exposure arising from cosmetics, even at low concentrations, and from application (handling/breaking) of solid fuel tablets.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

HUMANS EXPOSED VIA THE ENVIRONMENT

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

HUMAN HEALTH (physico-chemical properties)

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

B.   Environment

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to the

ATMOSPHERE, the AQUATIC and TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

The conclusion of the assessment of the risks to

MICRO-ORGANISMS IN THE SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT

is that there is at present no need for further information and/or testing or for risk reduction measures beyond those which are being applied. This conclusion is reached because:

| — | the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

—

the risk assessment shows that risks are not expected. Risk reduction measures already being applied are considered sufficient.

STRATEGY FOR LIMITING RISKS

For WORKERS

The legislation for workers' protection currently in force at Community level is generally considered to give an adequate framework to limit the risks of the substance to workers to the extent needed and shall apply.

For CONSUMERS

The existing legislative measures for the protection of consumers, in particular the provisions under Council Directive 76/768/EEC (5) as regards cosmetics and Directive 2001/95/EC as regards products, are considered sufficient to address identified risks to consumers.

---

(1)  This chemical substance is currently not included in the Annex I of Directive 67/548/EEC.

(2)  Regulation (EC) No 2037/2000 on substances that deplete the ozone layer.

(3)  The comprehensive Risk Assessment Report, as well as a summary thereof, can be found on the Internet site of the European Chemicals Bureau:

http://ecb.jrc.it/existing-substances/

(4)  Commission Directive 96/54/EC of 30 July 1996, adapting to technical progress for the 22nd time Council Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances (OJ L 248, 30.9.1996, p. 3).

(5)  A Commission Proposal for a recast of the Directive 76/768/EEC was adopted on 5 February 2008.

---

IV Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES

Commission

| 29.5.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 131/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 131/13

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

28 May 2008

(2008/C 131/05)

1 euro=

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,5656 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 164,07 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4597 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,79315 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,322 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,6255 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 115,07 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,8655 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,209 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 243,79 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7012 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,3956 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,6682 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 30,662 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,923 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6339 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5578 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 12,2185 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,9946 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,1358 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 615,7 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 12,0089 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,8722 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,2505 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 560,08 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 5,0725 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 68,393 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 36,95 |
| THB | Thai baht | 50,71 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,6033 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,2206 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,5656

JPY

Japanese yen

164,07

DKK

Danish krone

7,4597

GBP

Pound sterling

0,79315

SEK

Swedish krona

9,322

CHF

Swiss franc

1,6255

ISK

Iceland króna

115,07

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,8655

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,209

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

243,79

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7012

PLN

Polish zloty

3,3956

RON

Romanian leu

3,6682

SKK

Slovak koruna

30,662

TRY

Turkish lira

1,923

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6339

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5578

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

12,2185

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,9946

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,1358

KRW

South Korean won

1 615,7

ZAR

South African rand

12,0089

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,8722

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,2505

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 560,08

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

5,0725

PHP

Philippine peso

68,393

RUB

Russian rouble

36,95

THB

Thai baht

50,71

BRL

Brazilian real

2,6033

MXN

Mexican peso

16,2206

---

(1)

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

| 29.5.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 131/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 131/14

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1628/2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to national regional investment aid

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 131/06)

| Aid No | XR 193/07 |
| --- | --- |
| Member State | Spain |
| Region | Cataluña |
| Title of aid scheme or the name of the undertaking receiving ad hoc aid supplement | Incentivos a proyectos de inversión empresarial en activos fijos considerados estratégicos para la economía catalana |
| Legal basis | Resolución IUE/3212/2007, de 27 de septiembre, por la que se aprueban las bases reguladoras de los incentivos a proyectos de inversión empresarial en activos fijos considerados estratégicos para la economía catalana para el período 2007-2008 y se abre la convocatoria para el año 2007 (DOGC no 4998 de 30 de octubre de 2007) |
| Type of measure | Aid scheme |
| Annual budget | EUR 1,2 million |
| Maximum aid intensity | 15 % |
| In conformity with Article 4 of the Regulation |
| Date of implementation | 31.10.2007 |
| Duration | 31.12.2008 |
| Economic sectors | All sectors eligible for regional investment aid |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Centro de Innovación y Desarrollo Empresarial (CIDEM) |
| Paseo de Gracia no 129 |
| E-08008 Barcelona |
| Tel. (34) 934 76 72 00 |
| Correo electrónico: cidem@cidem.gencat.net |

Aid No

XR 193/07

Member State

Spain

Region

Cataluña

Title of aid scheme or the name of the undertaking receiving ad hoc aid supplement

Incentivos a proyectos de inversión empresarial en activos fijos considerados estratégicos para la economía catalana

Legal basis

Resolución IUE/3212/2007, de 27 de septiembre, por la que se aprueban las bases reguladoras de los incentivos a proyectos de inversión empresarial en activos fijos considerados estratégicos para la economía catalana para el período 2007-2008 y se abre la convocatoria para el año 2007 (DOGC no 4998 de 30 de octubre de 2007)

Type of measure

Aid scheme

Annual budget

EUR 1,2 million

Maximum aid intensity

15 %

In conformity with Article 4 of the Regulation

Date of implementation

31.10.2007

Duration

31.12.2008

Economic sectors

All sectors eligible for regional investment aid

Name and address of the granting authority

Centro de Innovación y Desarrollo Empresarial (CIDEM)

Paseo de Gracia no 129

E-08008 Barcelona

Tel. (34) 934 76 72 00

Correo electrónico: cidem@cidem.gencat.net

Internet address of the publication of the aid scheme

https://www.gencat.net/eadop/imagenes/4998/07262055.pdf

Other information

—

---

V Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY

Commission

| 29.5.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 131/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 131/15

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.5105 — SEPI/CDTI/INTA/Abertis/Hispasat)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 131/07)

| 1. | On 22 May 2008, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertakings Sociedad Estatal de Participaciones Industriales (‘SEPI’, Spain), Centro de Desarrollo Tecnológico Industrial (‘CDTI’, Spain), Instituto Nacional de Técnica Aerospacial ‘Esteban Terradas’ (‘INTA’, Spain) and Abertis Telecom, SA (‘Abertis’, Spain) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation joint control of the undertaking Hispasat, SA (‘Hispasat’, Spain) by way of a contract of management. |
| --- | --- |

1.

On 22 May 2008, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertakings Sociedad Estatal de Participaciones Industriales (‘SEPI’, Spain), Centro de Desarrollo Tecnológico Industrial (‘CDTI’, Spain), Instituto Nacional de Técnica Aerospacial ‘Esteban Terradas’ (‘INTA’, Spain) and Abertis Telecom, SA (‘Abertis’, Spain) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation joint control of the undertaking Hispasat, SA (‘Hispasat’, Spain) by way of a contract of management.

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






  — | for SEPI: State-owned holding company of the Kingdom of Spain, |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—

for SEPI: State-owned holding company of the Kingdom of Spain,

| — | for CDTI: promotion of technological development and innovation for Spanish undertakings, |
| --- | --- |

—

for CDTI: promotion of technological development and innovation for Spanish undertakings,

| — | for INTA: research and technological development in the aerospace field, |
| --- | --- |

—

for INTA: research and technological development in the aerospace field,

| — | for Abertis: operation of toll road and parking concessions, logistics services, telecommunications infrastructure services, |
| --- | --- |

—

for Abertis: operation of toll road and parking concessions, logistics services, telecommunications infrastructure services,

| — | for Hispasat: operation of satellites for audiovisual and telecommunication services. |
| --- | --- |

—

for Hispasat: operation of satellites for audiovisual and telecommunication services.

| 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.5105 — SEPI/CDTI/INTA/Abertis/Hispasat, to the following address:





  European Commission |
| --- | --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| J-70 |
| B-1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |

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.5105 — SEPI/CDTI/INTA/Abertis/Hispasat, to the following address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

J-70

B-1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

---

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

---

| 29.5.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 131/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 131/16

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.5159 — Apax Partners/D+S europe)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 131/08)

| 1. | On 22 May 2008, 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 Apax Partners Worldwide LLP (‘Apax’, United Kingdom), through Apax Europe VII Fund, acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking D + S europe AG (‘D + S’, Germany), by way of public bid announced on 15 April 2008. |
| --- | --- |

1.

On 22 May 2008, 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 Apax Partners Worldwide LLP (‘Apax’, United Kingdom), through Apax Europe VII Fund, acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking D + S europe AG (‘D + S’, Germany), by way of public bid announced on 15 April 2008.

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






  — | for Apax: private equity fund, |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—

for Apax: private equity fund,

| — | for D + S: e-commerce and telecommunications services, integrated customer value added management. |
| --- | --- |

—

for D + S: e-commerce and telecommunications services, integrated customer value added management.

| 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.5159 — Apax Partners/D+S europe, to the following address:





  European Commission |
| --- | --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| J-70 |
| B-1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |

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.5159 — Apax Partners/D+S europe, to the following address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

J-70

B-1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

---

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

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

---