# Official Journal C 321/2017

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 321 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6028 September 2017 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 321

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6028 September 2017

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions |
| | OPINIONS |
| | European Commission |
| 2017/C 321/01 | Commission Opinion of 27 September 2017 relating to the plan to modify the disposal of radioactive waste arising from the Sellafield Magnox Swarf Storage Silo, located in the United Kingdom | 1 |
| 2017/C 321/02 | Commission Opinion of 27 September 2017 relating to the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste arising from the Radiana National Disposal Facility, located adjacent to the Kozloduy Nuclear Power Plant site in Bulgaria | 3 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

OPINIONS

European Commission

2017/C 321/01

Commission Opinion of 27 September 2017 relating to the plan to modify the disposal of radioactive waste arising from the Sellafield Magnox Swarf Storage Silo, located in the United Kingdom

1

2017/C 321/02

Commission Opinion of 27 September 2017 relating to the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste arising from the Radiana National Disposal Facility, located adjacent to the Kozloduy Nuclear Power Plant site in Bulgaria

3

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2017/C 321/03 | Euro exchange rates | 5 |
| 2017/C 321/04 | Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union | 6 |
| 2017/C 321/05 | New national side of euro coins intended for circulation | 7 |
| 2017/C 321/06 | New national side of euro coins intended for circulation | 8 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2017/C 321/03

Euro exchange rates

5

2017/C 321/04

Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union

6

2017/C 321/05

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

7

2017/C 321/06

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

8

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) |
| 2017/C 321/07 | Notice of Open Competition | 9 |
| | COURT PROCEEDINGS |
| | EFTA Court |
| 2017/C 321/08 | Judgment of the Court of 16 May 2017 in Case E-8/16 — Netfonds Holding ASA, Netfonds Bank AS, and Netfonds Livsforsikring AS v The Norwegian Government (Freedom of establishment — Article 31 EEA — Directive 2000/12/EC — Directive 2002/83/EC — Directive 2006/48/EC — Directive 2007/44/EC — Credit institutions — Assurance undertakings — Qualifying holdings — Proportionality — Suitability — Necessity) | 10 |
| 2017/C 321/09 | Judgment of the Court of 7 June 2017 in Case E-17/16 — EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland (Failure by an EFTA State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to implement — Directive 2009/127/EC amending Directive 2006/42/EC with regard to machinery for pesticide application) | 11 |
| 2017/C 321/10 | Judgment of the Court of 7 June 2017 in Case E-18/16 — EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland (Failure by an EFTA State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to implement — Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 on the marketing and use of explosives precursors) | 11 |

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

2017/C 321/07

Notice of Open Competition

9

COURT PROCEEDINGS

EFTA Court

2017/C 321/08

Judgment of the Court of 16 May 2017 in Case E-8/16 — Netfonds Holding ASA, Netfonds Bank AS, and Netfonds Livsforsikring AS v The Norwegian Government (Freedom of establishment — Article 31 EEA — Directive 2000/12/EC — Directive 2002/83/EC — Directive 2006/48/EC — Directive 2007/44/EC — Credit institutions — Assurance undertakings — Qualifying holdings — Proportionality — Suitability — Necessity)

(Freedom of establishment — Article 31 EEA — Directive 2000/12/EC — Directive 2002/83/EC — Directive 2006/48/EC — Directive 2007/44/EC — Credit institutions — Assurance undertakings — Qualifying holdings — Proportionality — Suitability — Necessity)

10

2017/C 321/09

Judgment of the Court of 7 June 2017 in Case E-17/16 — EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland (Failure by an EFTA State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to implement — Directive 2009/127/EC amending Directive 2006/42/EC with regard to machinery for pesticide application)

(Failure by an EFTA State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to implement — Directive 2009/127/EC amending Directive 2006/42/EC with regard to machinery for pesticide application)

11

2017/C 321/10

Judgment of the Court of 7 June 2017 in Case E-18/16 — EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland (Failure by an EFTA State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to implement — Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 on the marketing and use of explosives precursors)

(Failure by an EFTA State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to implement — Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 on the marketing and use of explosives precursors)

11

---

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

EN

---

I Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

OPINIONS

European Commission

| 28.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 321/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 321/1

---

COMMISSION OPINION

of 27 September 2017

relating to the plan to modify the disposal of radioactive waste arising from the Sellafield Magnox Swarf Storage Silo, located in the United Kingdom

(Only the English text is authentic)

(2017/C 321/01)

The assessment below is carried out under the provisions of the Euratom Treaty, without prejudice to any additional assessments to be carried out under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the obligations stemming from it and from secondary legislation (1).

On 18 January 2017, the European Commission received from the Government of the United Kingdom, in accordance with Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty, General Data relating to the plan to modify the disposal of radioactive waste (2) arising from the Sellafield Magnox Swarf Storage Silo.

On the basis of these data and additional information requested by the Commission on 14 March 2017 and provided by the United Kingdom authorities on 18 May 2017, and following consultation with the Group of Experts, the Commission has drawn up the following opinion:

| 1. | The distance from the site to the nearest border of another Member State, in this case Ireland, is 180 km. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The distance from the site to the nearest border of another Member State, in this case Ireland, is 180 km.

| 2. | Under normal operating conditions, the discharges of gaseous and liquid radioactive effluents are not liable to cause an exposure of the population in another Member State that would be significant from the point of view of health, in respect of the dose limits laid down in the Basic Safety Standards Directives (3). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Under normal operating conditions, the discharges of gaseous and liquid radioactive effluents are not liable to cause an exposure of the population in another Member State that would be significant from the point of view of health, in respect of the dose limits laid down in the Basic Safety Standards Directives (3).

| 3. | Operational as well as secondary radioactive waste will be transferred to on-site treatment and conditioning facilities. Conditioned low-level waste will shipped to the nearby licensed Drigg disposal facility. Conditioned intermediate-level waste will be temporarily stored on-site, awaiting the availability of an adequate repository on the United Kingdom territory. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Operational as well as secondary radioactive waste will be transferred to on-site treatment and conditioning facilities. Conditioned low-level waste will shipped to the nearby licensed Drigg disposal facility. Conditioned intermediate-level waste will be temporarily stored on-site, awaiting the availability of an adequate repository on the United Kingdom territory.

| 4. | In the event of unplanned releases of radioactive effluents, which may follow the accident of the type and magnitude considered in the General Data, the doses likely to be received by the population in another Member State would not be significant from the point of view of health, in respect of the reference levels laid down in the Basic Safety Standards Directives. |
| --- | --- |

4.

In the event of unplanned releases of radioactive effluents, which may follow the accident of the type and magnitude considered in the General Data, the doses likely to be received by the population in another Member State would not be significant from the point of view of health, in respect of the reference levels laid down in the Basic Safety Standards Directives.

In conclusion, the Commission is of the opinion that the implementation of the plan to modify the disposal of radioactive waste in whatever form, arising from the Sellafield Magnox Swarf Storage Silo, located in the United Kingdom, both in normal operation and in the event of the accident of the type and magnitude considered in the General Data, is not liable to result in a radioactive contamination, significant from the point of view of health, of the water, soil or airspace of another Member State, in respect of the provisions laid down in the Basic Safety Standards Directives.

Done at Brussels, 27 September 2017.

For the Commission

Miguel ARIAS CAÑETE

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  For instance, under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, environmental aspects should be further assessed. Indicatively, the Commission would like to draw attention to the provisions of Directive 2011/92/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU; to Directive 2001/42/EC on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment, as well as to Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora and to Directive 2000/60/EC establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy.

1

(2)  The disposal of radioactive waste in the meaning of point 1 of Commission Recommendation 2010/635/Euratom of 11 October 2010 on the application of Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty (OJ L 279, 23.10.2010, p. 36).

2

(3)  Council Directive 96/29/Euratom of 13 May 1996 laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation (OJ L 159, 29.6.1996, p. 1) and Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom of 5 December 2013 laying down basic safety standards for protection against the dangers arising from exposure to ionising radiation; repealing Directives 89/618/Euratom, 90/641/Euratom, 96/29/Euratom, 97/43/Euratom and 2003/122/Euratom with effect from 6 February 2018 (OJ L 13, 17.1.2014, p. 1).

3

---

| 28.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 321/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 321/3

---

COMMISSION OPINION

of 27 September 2017

relating to the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste arising from the Radiana National Disposal Facility, located adjacent to the Kozloduy Nuclear Power Plant site in Bulgaria

(Only the Bulgarian text is authentic)

(2017/C 321/02)

The assessment below is carried out under the provisions of the Euratom Treaty, without prejudice to any additional assessments to be carried out under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the obligations stemming from it and from secondary legislation (1).

On 6 April 2017, the European Commission received from the Government of Bulgaria, in accordance with Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty, General Data relating to the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste (2) arising from the Radiana National Disposal Facility.

On the basis of these data and additional information requested by the Commission on 22 May 2017 and provided by the Bulgarian authorities on 21 June 2017, and following consultation with the Group of Experts, the Commission has drawn up the following opinion:

| 1. | The distance between the disposal facility and the nearest point of another Member State, in this case Romania is 5 km. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The distance between the disposal facility and the nearest point of another Member State, in this case Romania is 5 km.

| 2. | During the disposal facility’s operational period:






  — | Radioactive waste will be emplaced without intention of retrieval. |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

During the disposal facility’s operational period:

—

Radioactive waste will be emplaced without intention of retrieval.

| — | The disposal facility will not be subjected to a discharge authorisation for airborne and liquid radioactive effluents. Under normal operating conditions the disposal facility will not release airborne nor liquid radioactive effluents. |
| --- | --- |

—

The disposal facility will not be subjected to a discharge authorisation for airborne and liquid radioactive effluents. Under normal operating conditions the disposal facility will not release airborne nor liquid radioactive effluents.

| — | In the event of unplanned releases of radioactive effluents, that may follow the accidents of the type and magnitude considered in the General Data, the doses likely to be received by the population in another Member State would not be significant from the point of view of health, in respect of the reference levels laid down in the Basic Safety Standards Directives (3). |
| --- | --- |

—

In the event of unplanned releases of radioactive effluents, that may follow the accidents of the type and magnitude considered in the General Data, the doses likely to be received by the population in another Member State would not be significant from the point of view of health, in respect of the reference levels laid down in the Basic Safety Standards Directives (3).

| 3. | Beyond the disposal facility’s operational period:
  The measures envisaged for the final closure of the disposal facility as described in the General Data provide reliance that the conclusions under point 2 above will remain valid in the long term. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Beyond the disposal facility’s operational period:

The measures envisaged for the final closure of the disposal facility as described in the General Data provide reliance that the conclusions under point 2 above will remain valid in the long term.

In conclusion, the Commission is of the opinion that the implementation of the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste in whatever form, arising from the Radiana National Disposal Facility located adjacent to the Kozloduy nuclear power plant site in Bulgaria, during its normal operational life and after its final closure, as well as in the event of accidents of the type and magnitude considered in the General Data, is not liable to result in a radioactive contamination significant from the point of view of health, of the water, soil or airspace of another Member State, in respect of the provisions laid down in the Basic Safety Standards Directives.

Done at Brussels, 27 September 2017.

For the Commission

Miguel ARIAS CAÑETE

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  For instance, under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, environmental aspects should be further assessed. Indicatively, the Commission would like to draw attention to the provisions of Directive 2011/92/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU; to Directive 2001/42/EC on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment, as well as to Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora and to Directive 2000/60/EC establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy.

1

(2)  The disposal of radioactive waste in the meaning of point 1 of Commission Recommendation 2010/635/Euratom of 11 October 2010 on the application of Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty (OJ L 279, 23.10.2010, p. 36).

2

(3)  Council Directive 96/29/Euratom of 13 May 1996 laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation (OJ L 159, 29.6.1996, p. 1) and Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom of 5 December 2013 laying down basic safety standards for protection against the dangers arising from exposure to ionising radiation and repealing Directives 89/618/Euratom, 90/641/Euratom, 96/29/Euratom, 97/43/Euratom and 2003/122/Euratom with effect from 6 February 2018 (OJ L 13, 17.1.2014, p. 1).

3

---

IV Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

| 28.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 321/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 321/5

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

27 September 2017

(2017/C 321/03)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1741 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 132,60 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4414 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,87565 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,5885 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,1451 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,3355 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,045 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 311,15 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3027 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5986 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 4,1902 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4954 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4554 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,1714 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6305 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5964 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 341,10 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,9062 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,7984 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4994 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 779,90 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,9565 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 59,890 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 68,2670 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,109 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,7357 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 21,2435 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 77,1530 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1741

JPY

Japanese yen

132,60

DKK

Danish krone

7,4414

GBP

Pound sterling

0,87565

SEK

Swedish krona

9,5885

CHF

Swiss franc

1,1451

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,3355

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,045

HUF

Hungarian forint

311,15

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3027

RON

Romanian leu

4,5986

TRY

Turkish lira

4,1902

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4954

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4554

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,1714

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6305

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5964

KRW

South Korean won

1 341,10

ZAR

South African rand

15,9062

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,7984

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4994

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 779,90

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,9565

PHP

Philippine peso

59,890

RUB

Russian rouble

68,2670

THB

Thai baht

39,109

BRL

Brazilian real

3,7357

MXN

Mexican peso

21,2435

INR

Indian rupee

77,1530

---

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

---

| 28.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 321/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 321/6

---

Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union

(2017/C 321/04)

Pursuant to Article 9(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 (1), the Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union (2) are hereby amended as follows:

On page 54, the Explanatory note to CN subheading ‘0805 10 20 Sweet oranges, fresh’ is replaced by the following:

| ‘0805 10 22 to 0805 10 28 | Sweet oranges, fresh

  These subheadings cover only oranges of the species Citrus sinensis. |
| --- | --- |
| 0805 10 22 | Navel oranges

  Navel oranges are characterised by the growth of a second fruit at the apex, which protrudes slightly and resembles a human navel. They are sweet, large, seedless oranges which have a rich and juicy flavour.
  This subheading includes varieties such as “Navel”, “Navels sanguinas”, “Lane late”, “Navelate”, “Navelina”, “Thomson”, “Washington”. |
| 0805 10 24 | White oranges

  White oranges are also called “common oranges” and they are frequently used in the juice industry.
  This subheading includes varieties such as “Salustiana”, “Valencia”, “Valencia late”, “Delta seedless”, “Midknight”, “Shamouti”. |
| 0805 10 28 | Other

  This subheading includes blood (“sanguine”) or pigmented oranges.
  The flesh and juice (and sometimes also the skin) of blood oranges have a pigmentation due to the presence of anthocyanins.
  Blood oranges include “Maltaise”, “Moro”, “Sanguinelli” / “Sanguinello”, “Tarocco”, “Blood ovals”, “Sanguinas redondas”, “Doubles fines”, “Washington sanguines” or “Improved doubles fines” or “Large sanguines” and “Portuguese”.’ |

‘0805 10 22 to 0805 10 28

Sweet oranges, fresh

These subheadings cover only oranges of the species Citrus sinensis.

0805 10 22

Navel oranges

Navel oranges are characterised by the growth of a second fruit at the apex, which protrudes slightly and resembles a human navel. They are sweet, large, seedless oranges which have a rich and juicy flavour.

This subheading includes varieties such as “Navel”, “Navels sanguinas”, “Lane late”, “Navelate”, “Navelina”, “Thomson”, “Washington”.

0805 10 24

White oranges

White oranges are also called “common oranges” and they are frequently used in the juice industry.

This subheading includes varieties such as “Salustiana”, “Valencia”, “Valencia late”, “Delta seedless”, “Midknight”, “Shamouti”.

0805 10 28

Other

This subheading includes blood (“sanguine”) or pigmented oranges.

The flesh and juice (and sometimes also the skin) of blood oranges have a pigmentation due to the presence of anthocyanins.

Blood oranges include “Maltaise”, “Moro”, “Sanguinelli” / “Sanguinello”, “Tarocco”, “Blood ovals”, “Sanguinas redondas”, “Doubles fines”, “Washington sanguines” or “Improved doubles fines” or “Large sanguines” and “Portuguese”.’

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ L 256, 7.9.1987, p. 1).

1

(2)  OJ C 76, 4.3.2015, p. 1.

2

---

| 28.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 321/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 321/7

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

(2017/C 321/05)

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuance of euro coins are authorised to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, one of these being that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national side features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

Issuing country
  : The Principality of Andorra

Subject of commemoration
  : Andorra — The Pyrenean country

Description of the design
  : The design reproduces on its upper part a triangle, consisting of three undulating strips representing a simplified version of the map of the country, with the inscriptions ‘Andorra’ and ‘EL PAÍS DELS PIRINEUS’ (the Pyrenean country).

These three elements make up the brand owned by the Government of Andorra, which is used to provide a uniform, consistent and coordinated image to all graphic communication and, at the same time, achieve an unmistakable and instant identification.

The lower part of the design depicts the year of issuance ‘2017’.

The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Number of coins to be issued
  :

Date of issue
  : December 2017

---

(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for the national sides of all the coins issued in 2002.

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).

---

| 28.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 321/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 321/8

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

(2017/C 321/06)

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

Issuing country
  : The Vatican City State

Subject of commemoration
  : Centenary of the Fatima apparitions

Description of the design
  : The design features the three young shepherds to whom Mary appeared, on the background the Sanctuary of Fatima. At the top is the inscription ‘CITTÀ DEL VATICANO’ in semi-circle and right under is the year ‘1917’. Underneath the year, from left to right, is the inscription ‘FATIMA 2017’. At the left side is the mintmark ‘R’ and at the bottom the name of the designer ‘O.ROSSI’.

The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Number of coins to be issued
  :

Date of issue
  : October 2017

---

(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for the national faces of all the coins issued in 2002.

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).

---

V Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

| 28.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 321/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 321/9

---

NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITION

(2017/C 321/07)

The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising the following open competition:

EPSO/AST/142/17 — PROOFREADERS/LANGUAGE EDITORS (AST 3) for the following languages:

Danish (DA), Croatian (HR), Maltese (MT), Dutch (NL), Slovenian (SL) and Swedish (SV)

The competition notice is published in 24 languages in
  Official Journal of the European Union C 321 A of 28 September 2017.

Further information can be found on the EPSO website: https://epso.europa.eu/

---

COURT PROCEEDINGS

EFTA Court

| 28.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 321/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 321/10

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 16 May 2017

in Case E-8/16

Netfonds Holding ASA, Netfonds Bank AS, and Netfonds Livsforsikring AS v The Norwegian Government

(Freedom of establishment — Article 31 EEA — Directive 2000/12/EC — Directive 2002/83/EC — Directive 2006/48/EC — Directive 2007/44/EC — Credit institutions — Assurance undertakings — Qualifying holdings — Proportionality — Suitability — Necessity)

(2017/C 321/08)

In Case E-8/16, Netfonds Holding ASA, Netfonds Bank AS, and Netfonds Livsforsikring AS v The Norwegian Government — REQUEST to the Court under Article 34 of the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice by Oslo District Court (Oslo tingrett) concerning the interpretation of Articles 31, 36 and 40 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area in the context of the rules and practices applicable to the ownership of Norwegian companies at the time of their application for authorisation as banks or insurance companies, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen and Páll Hreinsson (Judge-Rapporteur), Judges, gave judgment on 16 May 2017, the operative part of which is as follows:

| 1. | At the material time, Directive 2000/12/EC, Directive 2006/48/EC and Directive 2002/83/EC, also as amended by Directive 2007/44/EC, did not prevent the EEA States from maintaining stricter rules concerning the procedure for the authorisation of banks and insurance companies. Nonetheless, such rules must be compatible with the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

1.

At the material time, Directive 2000/12/EC, Directive 2006/48/EC and Directive 2002/83/EC, also as amended by Directive 2007/44/EC, did not prevent the EEA States from maintaining stricter rules concerning the procedure for the authorisation of banks and insurance companies. Nonetheless, such rules must be compatible with the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the EEA Agreement.

| 2. | Legislation as described in Questions 1 and 2 and administrative practice as described in Question 3 constitute restrictions that appear to fall predominantly within the scope of Article 31 EEA. Whether this is the case is for the referring court to assess. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Legislation as described in Questions 1 and 2 and administrative practice as described in Question 3 constitute restrictions that appear to fall predominantly within the scope of Article 31 EEA. Whether this is the case is for the referring court to assess.

| 3. | The objective of reducing excessive risk incentives of owners of banks or insurance companies, particularly in relation to the risk of misuse of power, reflects overriding reasons in the general interest capable of justifying national measures which restrict the freedom of establishment as guaranteed by Article 31 EEA. It is for the referring court to identify the objectives which are in fact pursued by the national measures, as well as to determine whether the legitimate aims are pursued in a suitable and consistent manner. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The objective of reducing excessive risk incentives of owners of banks or insurance companies, particularly in relation to the risk of misuse of power, reflects overriding reasons in the general interest capable of justifying national measures which restrict the freedom of establishment as guaranteed by Article 31 EEA. It is for the referring court to identify the objectives which are in fact pursued by the national measures, as well as to determine whether the legitimate aims are pursued in a suitable and consistent manner.

| 4. | The issue rules, as described in Questions 1 and 2, do not seem suitable to achieve the legitimate objective that the Court has identified. The administrative practice, as described in Question 3, appears suitable to achieve that objective to the extent that it applies to applications for authorisation as a bank or an insurance company and not to secondary acquisitions after the granting of authorisation. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The issue rules, as described in Questions 1 and 2, do not seem suitable to achieve the legitimate objective that the Court has identified. The administrative practice, as described in Question 3, appears suitable to achieve that objective to the extent that it applies to applications for authorisation as a bank or an insurance company and not to secondary acquisitions after the granting of authorisation.

| 5. | If the referring court finds one or more of the national measures suitable for attaining a legitimate objective, it must also assess whether they go beyond what is necessary in order to attain that objective. In the present proceedings, it appears that measures other than those contested are less restrictive while equally effective in attaining the legitimate objective identified. |
| --- | --- |

5.

If the referring court finds one or more of the national measures suitable for attaining a legitimate objective, it must also assess whether they go beyond what is necessary in order to attain that objective. In the present proceedings, it appears that measures other than those contested are less restrictive while equally effective in attaining the legitimate objective identified.

---

| 28.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 321/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 321/11

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 7 June 2017

in Case E-17/16

EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland

(Failure by an EFTA State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to implement — Directive 2009/127/EC amending Directive 2006/42/EC with regard to machinery for pesticide application)

(2017/C 321/09)

In Case E-17/16, EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland — APPLICATION for a declaration that Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act referred to at point 1c of Chapter XXIV of Annex II to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2009/127/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 amending Directive 2006/42/EC with regard to machinery for pesticide application) as adapted by way of Protocol 1 thereto and under Article 7 of the Agreement, by failing to adopt the measures necessary to implement the Act within the time prescribed, or in any event, by failing to inform the EFTA Surveillance Authority thereof, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Benedikt Bogason (ad hoc), Judges, gave judgment on 7 June 2017, the operative part of which is as follows:

The Court hereby:

| 1. | Declares that Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act referred to at point 1c of Chapter XXIV of Annex II to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2009/127/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 amending Directive 2006/42/EC with regard to machinery for pesticide application) as adapted by way of Protocol 1 thereto and under Article 7 of the Agreement, by failing to adopt the measures necessary to implement the Act within the time prescribed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act referred to at point 1c of Chapter XXIV of Annex II to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2009/127/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 amending Directive 2006/42/EC with regard to machinery for pesticide application) as adapted by way of Protocol 1 thereto and under Article 7 of the Agreement, by failing to adopt the measures necessary to implement the Act within the time prescribed.

| 2. | Orders Iceland to bear the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Iceland to bear the costs of the proceedings.

---

| 28.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 321/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 321/11

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 7 June 2017

in Case E-18/16

EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland

(Failure by an EFTA State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to implement — Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 on the marketing and use of explosives precursors)

(2017/C 321/10)

In Case E-18/16, EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland — APPLICATION for a declaration that Iceland has failed to adopt the measures necessary to make the Act referred to at point 12zzq of Chapter XV of Annex II to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2013 on the marketing and use of explosives precursors), as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, part of its internal legal order as required by Article 7 of the Agreement, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Benedikt Bogason (ad hoc), Judges, gave judgment on 7 June 2017, the operative part of which is as follows:

The Court hereby:

| 1. | Declares that Iceland has failed to adopt the measures necessary to make the Act referred to at point 12zzq of Chapter XV of Annex II to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2013 on the marketing and use of explosives precursors), as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, part of its internal legal order as required by Article 7 of the Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that Iceland has failed to adopt the measures necessary to make the Act referred to at point 12zzq of Chapter XV of Annex II to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2013 on the marketing and use of explosives precursors), as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, part of its internal legal order as required by Article 7 of the Agreement.

| 2. | Orders Iceland to bear the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Iceland to bear the costs of the proceedings.

---