----

----

I Information

Commission

----

Euro exchange rates (1)

28 September 2005

(2005/C 239/01)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

----

----

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.3935 — Jefferson Smurfit/Kappa)

(2005/C 239/02)

(Text with EEA relevance)

----

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

----

----

Binding tariff information

(2005/C 239/03)

List of customs authorities designated by Member States for the purposes of receiving applications for, or issuing binding tariff information, adopted in accordance with Article 6(5) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 883/2005 (2).

----

(1)OJ L 253, 11.10.1993, p. 1.

(2)OJ L 148, 11.6.2005, pp. 5-24.

----

----

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.3916 — T-Mobile Austria/Tele.Ring)

(2005/C 239/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

----

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

----

----

Notice of initiation of an expiry review of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of television camera systems and parts thereof originating in Japan

(2005/C 239/05)

Following the publication of a notice of impending expiry (1) of the anti-dumping measures in force on imports of television camera systems originating in Japan, (‘country concerned’), the Commission has received a request for review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 on protection against dumped imports from countries non members of the European Community (‘the basic Regulation’) (2), as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 461/2004 (3).

1.   Request for review

The request was lodged on 29 June 2005 by Grass Valley (‘the applicant’) on behalf of producers representing a major proportion, in this case more than 60 %, of the total Community production of television camera systems.

2.   Product

The product under review is television camera systems and parts thereof originating in Japan (‘the product concerned’), currently classifiable within CN codes ex 8525 30 90 (TARIC Code 8525309010), ex 8537 10 91 (TARIC Code 8537109191), ex 8537 10 99 (TARIC Code 8537109991), ex 8529 90 81 (TARIC Code 8529908138), ex 8529 90 88 (TARIC Code 8529908832), ex 8543 89 95 (TARIC Code 8543899539), ex 8528 21 14 (TARIC Code 8528211410), ex 8528 21 16 (TARIC Code 8528211610) and ex 8528 21 90 (TARIC Code 8528219010). These CN codes are given only for information.

3.   Existing measures

The measures currently in force are definitive anti-dumping duties imposed by Council Regulation (EC) No 2042/2000 (4).

4.   Grounds for the review

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

The allegation of continuation of dumping in respect of Japan is based on a comparison of normal value, established on the basis of domestic prices, with the export prices of the product concerned to the Community.

On this basis, the dumping margin calculated is significant.

With regard to the recurrence of dumping, it is also alleged that the exports to other third countries, i.e. China and India, are made at dumped prices.

In addition, it is alleged that assembly of cameras by certain Japanese companies in the EU has occurred mainly due to the existence of measures and that the lapsing thereof would in all likelihood lead to a replacement of such cameras by imports from Japan. These imports could allegedly follow the same price patterns as those currently applicable to cameras assembled in the EU. Such prices would in all likelihood be dumped as alleged by the applicant.

The applicant further alleges the likelihood of further injurious dumping. In this respect the applicant presents evidence that, should measures be allowed to lapse, the current import level of the product concerned is likely to increase due to the existence of unused capacity and the potential of the manufacturing facilities of the exporting producers in the country concerned.

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

5.   Procedure

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

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

The investigation will determine whether the expiry of the measures would be likely, or unlikely, to lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury.

(a)   Questionnaires

In order to obtain the information it deems necessary for its investigation, the Commission will send questionnaires to the Community industry and to any association of producers in the Community, to the exporters/producers in Japan, to any association of exporters/producers, to the importers, to any association of importers named in the request or which cooperated in the investigation leading to the measures subject to the present review, and to the authorities of the exporting country concerned.

In any event, all interested parties should contact the Commission forthwith by fax in order to fin out whether they are listed in the request and, if necessary, request a questionnaire within the time limit set in point 6(a), given that the time limit set in point 6(b) applies to all interested parties.

(b)   Collection of information and holding of hearings

All interested parties are hereby invited to make their views known, submit information other than questionnaire replies and to provide supporting evidence. This information and supporting evidence must reach the Commission within the time limit set in point 6(b). Furthermore, the Commission may hear interested parties, provided that they make a request showing that there are particular reasons why they should be heard. This request must be made within the time limit set in point 6(c).

5.2.   Procedure for the assessment of Community interest

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

6.   Time limits

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

All interested parties who did not cooperate in the investigation leading to the measures subject to the present review should request a questionnaire as soon as possible, but not later than 15 days after the publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union.

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

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

(c)   Hearings

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

7.   Written submissions, questionnaire replies and correspondence

All submissions and requests made by interested parties must be made in writing (not in electronic format, unless otherwise specified) and must indicate the name, address, e-mail address, telephone and fax, and/or telex numbers of the interested party. All written submissions, including the information requested in this notice, questionnaire replies and correspondence provided by interested parties on a confidential basis shall be labelled as ‘Limited’ (5) and, in accordance with Article 19(2) of the basic Regulation, shall be accompanied by a non-confidential version, which will be labelled ‘FOR INSPECTION BY INTERESTED PARTIES’.

Commission address for correspondence:

8.   Non-cooperation

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

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

9.   Schedule of the investigation

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

----

(1)OJ C 309, 15.12.2004, p. 2.

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

(3)OJ L 77, 13.3.2004, p.12.

(4)OJ L 244, 29.9.2000, p. 38.

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

----

----

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3732 — Procter & Gamble/Gillette)

(2005/C 239/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 15 July 2005, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

----

----

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3924 — Apax/Panrico)

(2005/C 239/07)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 19 September 2005, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

----

----

Information procedure — Technical rules

(2005/C 239/08)

(Text with EEA relevance)

Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations and of rules on Information Society services. (OJ L 204, 21.7.1998, p. 37; OJ L 217, 5.8.1998, p. 18).

Notifications of draft national technical rules received by the Commission

The Commission draws attention to the judgement delivered on 30 April 1996 in the ‘CIA Security’ case (C-194/94 — ECR I, p. 2201), in which the Court of Justice ruled that Articles 8 and 9 of Directive 98/34/EC (formerly 83/189/EEC) are to be interpreted as meaning that individuals may rely on them before national courts which must decline to apply a national technical regulation which has not been notified in accordance with the Directive.

This judgement confirms the Commission's communication of 1 October 1986 (OJ C 245, 1.10.1986, p. 4).

Accordingly, breach of the obligation to notify renders the technical regulations concerned inapplicable, and consequently unenforceable against individuals.

For more information on the notification procedure, please write to:

Also consult the website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/tris/

If you require any further information on these notifications, please contact the national departments listed below:

LIST OF NATIONAL DEPARTMENTS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF DIRECTIVE 98/34/EC

BELGIUM

CZECH REPUBLIC

DENMARK

GERMANY

ESTONIA

GREECE

SPAIN

FRANCE

IRELAND

ITALY

CYPRUS

LATVIA

LITHUANIA

LUXEMBOURG

HUNGARY

MALTA

NETHERLANDS

AUSTRIA

POLAND

PORTUGAL

SLOVENIA

SLOVAKIA

FINLAND

SWEDEN

UNITED KINGDOM

EFTA - ESA

TURKEY

----

(1)  Year — registration number — Member State of origin.

(2)  Period during which the draft may not be adopted.

(3)  No standstill period since the Commission accepts the grounds of urgent adoption invoked by the notifying Member State.

(4)  No standstill period since the measure concerns technical specifications or other requirements or rules on services linked to fiscal or financial measures, pursuant to the third indent of the second paragraph of Article 1(11) of Directive 98/34/EC.

(5)  Information procedure closed.

----

----

Final report of the Hearing Officer in case COMP/39.116 — Coca-Cola

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

(2005/C 239/09)

(Text with EEA relevance)

The draft decision concerns the supply of carbonated soft drinks in the EC, Iceland and Norway through the distribution channels for consumption at home and consumption on the premises. It is addressed to The Coca-Cola Company (‘TCCC’) and its three anchor bottlers, Bottling Holdings (Luxembourg) sarl, Coca-Cola Erfrischungsgetränke AG and Coca-Cola Hellenic Bottling Company SA (hereinafter ‘the Parties’).

The Commission received complaints in 1996, 1999 and 2001 under Article 3 of Council Regulation No 17 of 6 February 1962, which alleged an abuse of a dominant position by TCCC and its bottlers. The Commission undertook inspections pursuant to Article 14(3) of Regulation No 17 on the Parties' premises located in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Germany and the United Kingdom in 1999 and 2000.

On 29 September 2004 the Commission opened proceedings with a view to adopting a decision under Chapter III of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.

In the preliminary assessment issued on 15 October 2004 pursuant to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, the Commission raised competition concerns against certain business practices of TCCC and its bottlers in the supply of carbonated soft drinks relating to exclusive supply, growth and target rebates and leveraging of market power between various product categories.

On 19 October 2004 the Parties submitted commitments to the Commission in response to its preliminary assessment.

On 26 November 2004 a notice according to Article 27(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 was published in the Official Journal of the European Union, which, summarising the case and the commitments submitted by the Parties, invited interested third parties to give their observations on the commitments within one month following the publication date (‘the market test’) (1). The notice informed the public of the Commission's perceived competition concerns, the corresponding remedies, and invited interested parties to submit comments. In response to the notice, the Commission received 33 observations from interested third parties, of which 19 from on-premise and take-home operators and 14 from beverage suppliers. The observations received were overall positive, as they confirmed the effectiveness of the commitments in addressing the Commission's concerns. They did not make the Commission reconsider its concerns as stated in the preliminary assessment and did not give rise to identification of new concerns.

On 21 January 2005 the Commission informed the Parties of the observations received from the interested third parties during the market test. On 25 February 2005 the Parties submitted an amended commitment proposal.

The Commission has now come to the conclusion that, in view of the undertakings proposed by the Parties in response to the preliminary assessment and as later amended to take account of the relevant observations by interested third parties and without prejudice to Article 9(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, there are no longer grounds for action.

No queries were raised before the Hearing Officer by the Parties or other companies as to the market test. No requests for additional information were made. The Parties confirmed that the Commission Services provided them with sufficient facts to develop commitments that address the matters raised in the preliminary assessment.

In the light of the above, the case does not call for any particular comments as regards the right to be heard.

Brussels, 26 May 2005.

Serge DURANDE

----

(1)OJ C 289, 26.11.2004, p. 10.

----

----

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its 390th meeting on 20 may 2005 concerning a draft decision in case COMP/A.39.116/B2 — Coca-Cola

(2005/C 239/10)

(Text with EEA relevance)

----

EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA

EFTA Surveillance Authority

----

Information communicated by EFTA States regarding State aid granted under Annex XV, point 1d to the EEA Agreement incorporating Commission Regulation (EC) No 68/2001 of 12 January 2001, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 363/2004 of 25 February 2004, on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to training aid

(2005/C 239/11)

----

----

Information communicated by EFTA States regarding State aid granted under Annex XV, point 1f to the EEA Agreement, incorporating Commission Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 of 12 January 2001, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 364/2004 of 25 February 2004, on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises

(2005/C 239/12)

----

III Notices

Commission

----

FI-Helsinki: operation of a scheduled air service

Invitation to tender issued by Finland pursuant to Article 4(1)(d) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 for the operation of scheduled air services on the Helsinki – Mikkeli – Savonlinna route

(2005/C 239/13)

(Text with EEA relevance)

1.   Introduction: On 16 May 2005, the Finnish Government (Ministry of Transport and Communications) decided, pursuant to Article 4(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 of 23 July 1992 on access for Community air carriers to intra-Community air routes, to impose a public service obligation in respect of scheduled air services on the Helsinki-Mikkeli-Savonlinna route from 1 November 2005.

The public service obligation has been published in the Official Journal of the European Communities C 238 of 28 September 2005.

If, by 1 October 2005, no air carrier has begun to operate nor announced its intention to begin to operate scheduled services on the Helsinki-Mikkeli-Savonlinna route in accordance with the public service obligation without requiring financial compensation, the Ministry of Transport and Communications will restrict access to this route to a single carrier. The right to operate on the route will, in that case, be granted on the basis of an invitation to tender under Article 4(1)(d) of the abovementioned Regulation. The Ministry of Transport and Communications decided to launch the invitation to tender on 16 May 2005.

2.   Subject of the invitation to tender: Scheduled air services on the Helsinki-Mikkeli-Savonlinna route from 1 November 2005 to 31 October 2006, excluding the periods from 30 June 2006 to 31 July 2006.

3.   Participation in the tendering procedure: Bids may be submitted by any air carriers holding a valid operating licence within the meaning of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92 of 23 July 1992.

4.   Tendering procedure: The tendering procedure will be conducted in accordance with Article 4(1)(d) to (i) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 of 23 July 1992.

The client may reject all offers if the price is too high or if circumstances or the requirements for organising the service change significantly, in such a way as to make it unfeasible or impossible to implement the planned service in the way described in the call for tender.

Until a contract is signed, the Ministry of Transport and Communications will retain the right to defer the start date of the planned service. If the start date is deferred, the end date will also be deferred correspondingly.

5.   Tender documents: A full set of tender documents, comprising an invitation to tender, the tender conditions, the contract, a description of the public service obligation and the tender forms, may be obtained from:

Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriö, Kirjaamo, PL 31, FI-00023, Valtioneuvosto, Helsinki.

The documents may also be ordered by e-mail: (kirjaamo@mintc.fi) or fax (No (358-9) 160 28619).

6.   Financial compensation: Bids must clearly specify, in euros, the amount of compensation required for the service in question. The compensation required should be based on an estimate of actual costs and revenue, taking account of the minimum requirements imposed by the public service obligation. The compensation may cover only actual services and costs incurred at the Helsinki-Vantaa, Mikkeli and Savonlinna airports in connection with operation on this route only. The compensation shall not include costs incurred on other routes or at other airports.

All compensation and costs must be specified in euros.

7.   Ticket prices: The tender will specify ticket prices and the conditions for their validity as well as the various types of ticket in the price system. Prices must be in keeping with the public service obligation imposed on this route.

8.   Selection criteria: Selection shall be among the bids that meet the requirements set out in the invitation to tender and the tender documents. In accordance with Article 4(1)(f) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92, selection of the air carrier shall be made taking into consideration the adequacy of the service, particularly including the prices and conditions which can be quoted to users, and the cost of the compensation required, if any.

9.   Period of validity of the contract: The contract shall apply from the date on which it is concluded to 31 October 2006. Services shall start on 1 November 2005 and end on 31 October 2006.

If the Ministry of Transport and Communications has to defer the start date for the services, the end date of the services and of the contract will also be deferred correspondingly.

10.   Amendment or termination of the contract: The contract may be amended only if the amendments will not lead to a situation in which the requirements under the public service obligation will no longer be met on this route. Amendments to the contract must be made in writing. The parties shall have the right to terminate the contract if there is reason to do so under the terms of the contract.

11.   Penalties in the event of failure to comply with the contract: The air carrier shall be responsible for meeting the obligations set out in the contract. If the carrier fails to meet the obligations or meets them inadequately, the client may reduce the compensation payable.

12.   Deadline for submission of bids: Bids must be submitted not later than 31 days after the publication of this notice in the Official Journal of the European Union.

13.   Submission of bids: Bids must reach the Ministry of Transport and Communications by 16.15 on the date specified in point 12 at the latest. The envelope must be marked: ‘Tarjous, Savonlinnan ja Mikkelin lentoliikenne (bid, Savonlinna and Mikkeli air service), 808/79/2005’. Bids may be sent by post to the address given in point 5 or to the Registrar's Office at the Ministry of Transport and Communications (Liikenne- ja Viestintäministeriö, Kirjaamo, Eteläesplanadi 16, Helsinki). The Registrar's Office is open Monday to Friday from 08.00 to 16.15.

The price of the bid must be specified in a separate sealed envelope, bearing the name of the tenderer.

Bids shall be valid until 31 December 2005.

14.   Validity of invitation to tender: In accordance with Article 4(1)(d) of Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92, the Ministry of Transport and Communications has the right to suspend the tendering procedure and/or reject all bids if a Community air carrier notifies Finland's Civil Aviation Administration before 1 October of its wish to begin the operation of scheduled services on the route in question as from 1 November 2005 in accordance with the public service obligation without sole rights and without receiving financial compensation.

A tender may be selected only if the state budget allocates sufficient funds to the project in question and if the Itä-Savo federation of municipalities and the city of Mikkeli undertake to finance it.

----