# Official Journal C 4/2018

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 4 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 616 January 2018 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 4

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 616 January 2018

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions |
| | OPINIONS |
| | European Commission |
| 2018/C 4/01 | Commission Opinion of 4 January 2018 relating to the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste arising from the decommissioning and the dismantling of the Grafenrheinfeld KKG Nuclear Power Plant, located in the land of Bavaria, Germany | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

OPINIONS

European Commission

2018/C 4/01

Commission Opinion of 4 January 2018 relating to the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste arising from the decommissioning and the dismantling of the Grafenrheinfeld KKG Nuclear Power Plant, located in the land of Bavaria, Germany

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | Council |
| 2018/C 4/02 | Council Conclusions on the way forward of developing customs IT systems | 3 |
| | European Commission |
| 2018/C 4/03 | Euro exchange rates | 6 |
| 2018/C 4/04 | Commission Implementing Decision of 5 January 2018 on the publication in the Official Journal of the European Union of an application to amend the specification for a name in the wine sector in accordance with Article 105 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council — Haut-Montravel (PDO) | 7 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Council

2018/C 4/02

Council Conclusions on the way forward of developing customs IT systems

3

European Commission

2018/C 4/03

Euro exchange rates

6

2018/C 4/04

Commission Implementing Decision of 5 January 2018 on the publication in the Official Journal of the European Union of an application to amend the specification for a name in the wine sector in accordance with Article 105 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council — Haut-Montravel (PDO)

Official Journal of the European Union

7

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2018/C 4/05 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8758 — BayWa/Clean Energy Trading) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 13 |
| 2018/C 4/06 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8746 — EG Group/ESSO Germany Business) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 15 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2018/C 4/05

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8758 — BayWa/Clean Energy Trading) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

13

2018/C 4/06

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8746 — EG Group/ESSO Germany Business) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

15

---

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

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

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

EN

---

I Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

OPINIONS

European Commission

| 6.1.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 4/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.1.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 4/1

---

COMMISSION OPINION

of 4 January 2018

relating to the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste arising from the decommissioning and the dismantling of the Grafenrheinfeld KKG Nuclear Power Plant, located in the land of Bavaria, Germany

(only the German text is authentic)

(2018/C 4/01)

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 11 April 2017, the European Commission received from the Government of Germany, 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 decommissioning and the dismantling of the Grafenrheinfeld KKG Nuclear Power Plant.

On the basis of these data and additional information requested by the Commission on 13 July 2017 and provided by the German authorities on 8 August 2017, and following consultation with the Group of Experts, the Commission has drawn up the following opinion:

| 1. | The distance between the site and the nearest border with another Member State, in this case the Czech Republic is 140 km. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The distance between the site and the nearest border with another Member State, in this case the Czech Republic is 140 km.

| 2. | During normal decommissioning and dismantling operations of the Grafenrheinfeld KKG nuclear power plant, the discharges of liquid and gaseous 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.

During normal decommissioning and dismantling operations of the Grafenrheinfeld KKG nuclear power plant, the discharges of liquid and gaseous 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. | Solid radioactive waste is temporarily stored on site before shipment to licensed treatment or disposal facilities located in Germany.
  Non-radioactive solid waste and residual materials in compliance with clearance levels will be released from regulatory control for disposal as conventional waste or for reuse or recycling. This will be done in compliance with the criteria laid down in the Basic Safety Standards Directives. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Solid radioactive waste is temporarily stored on site before shipment to licensed treatment or disposal facilities located in Germany.

Non-radioactive solid waste and residual materials in compliance with clearance levels will be released from regulatory control for disposal as conventional waste or for reuse or recycling. This will be done in compliance with the criteria laid down in the Basic Safety Standards Directives.

| 4. | 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 of 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 that may follow the accidents of the type and magnitude considered in the General Data, the doses likely to be received by the population of 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 for the disposal of radioactive waste in whatever form, arising from the decommissioning and the dismantling of the Grafenrheinfeld KKG nuclear power plant, located in the land of Bavaria in, Germany, both in normal operation and in the event of the 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, 4 January 2018.

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 (OJ L 13, 17.1.2014, p. 1) with effect from 6 February 2018.

3

---

IV Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Council

| 6.1.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 4/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.1.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 4/3

---

Council Conclusions on the way forward of developing customs IT systems

(2018/C 4/02)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

RECALLING:

| — | the Council Conclusions of 17 June 2016 on the follow-up of the Union Customs Code (1), in which the Council acknowledged that the Union Customs Code (UCC) and related legislation (2) had become applicable from 1 May 2016 and stressed the importance that the work to be completed in the transitional period until 2020, in particular on IT systems, should be based on realistic costs and time planning, and should explore ways to keep costs for customs and trade at a minimum, e.g. by adopting common IT solutions; |
| --- | --- |

—

the Council Conclusions of 17 June 2016 on the follow-up of the Union Customs Code (1), in which the Council acknowledged that the Union Customs Code (UCC) and related legislation (2) had become applicable from 1 May 2016 and stressed the importance that the work to be completed in the transitional period until 2020, in particular on IT systems, should be based on realistic costs and time planning, and should explore ways to keep costs for customs and trade at a minimum, e.g. by adopting common IT solutions;

| — | the Council Conclusions on Developing the EU Customs Union and its Governance (3), in which the Council invited Member States and the Commission to implement the UCC as a top-priority and to develop a comprehensive mid- and long-term strategy for customs IT systems, considering, inter alia, the use of a permanent structure to manage the IT infrastructure, while taking into consideration the already developed or deployed IT systems; |
| --- | --- |

—

the Council Conclusions on Developing the EU Customs Union and its Governance (3), in which the Council invited Member States and the Commission to implement the UCC as a top-priority and to develop a comprehensive mid- and long-term strategy for customs IT systems, considering, inter alia, the use of a permanent structure to manage the IT infrastructure, while taking into consideration the already developed or deployed IT systems;

| — | the Council Conclusions on the way forward to improve information exchange and ensure the interoperability of EU information systems (4), in which the highest political priority has been given to interoperability of the security and border management systems with the customs systems; |
| --- | --- |

—

the Council Conclusions on the way forward to improve information exchange and ensure the interoperability of EU information systems (4), in which the highest political priority has been given to interoperability of the security and border management systems with the customs systems;

| — | the Council Conclusions on Customs Funding (5) in which the Council underlined the need to promote the consistent and coherent application of the customs legislation and modern approaches to customs controls while allowing, where appropriate, common customs IT infrastructure and invited the Commission by the end of 2017 to develop a strategy for the architecture, development, management and funding of customs IT systems, taking into account responsibilities between the Commission and the Member States for the development of IT systems required for the implementation of the EU legislation; |
| --- | --- |

—

the Council Conclusions on Customs Funding (5) in which the Council underlined the need to promote the consistent and coherent application of the customs legislation and modern approaches to customs controls while allowing, where appropriate, common customs IT infrastructure and invited the Commission by the end of 2017 to develop a strategy for the architecture, development, management and funding of customs IT systems, taking into account responsibilities between the Commission and the Member States for the development of IT systems required for the implementation of the EU legislation;

| — | the Commission Communication on Developing the EU Customs Union and Its Governance where the Commission notices the divergence of views among Member States on the services which need to be developed and maintained at EU level; |
| --- | --- |

—

the Commission Communication on Developing the EU Customs Union and Its Governance where the Commission notices the divergence of views among Member States on the services which need to be developed and maintained at EU level;

ACKNOWLEDGING:

| — | the effort and progress that is being made by the Member States and the Commission in the preparation of IT systems to implement UCC; |
| --- | --- |

—

the effort and progress that is being made by the Member States and the Commission in the preparation of IT systems to implement UCC;

| — | the need for a long-term IT strategy on development of customs IT systems; |
| --- | --- |

—

the need for a long-term IT strategy on development of customs IT systems;

NOTING THAT:

| — | as the role of customs has enhanced from the collection of customs duties to safety and security of the Union and in some Member States to collection of VAT and excise duties, it is essential that the Customs Union better uses its potential and resources, achieves a higher level of cooperation and builds more efficient and cost-effective processes; |
| --- | --- |

—

as the role of customs has enhanced from the collection of customs duties to safety and security of the Union and in some Member States to collection of VAT and excise duties, it is essential that the Customs Union better uses its potential and resources, achieves a higher level of cooperation and builds more efficient and cost-effective processes;

| — | today’s society requires speed and response capabilities of customs services, which calls for a timely implementation of the customs legislation and related IT systems; |
| --- | --- |

—

today’s society requires speed and response capabilities of customs services, which calls for a timely implementation of the customs legislation and related IT systems;

| — | businesses have expressed favourable views about a need for more coherent approach to customs IT in order to reduce costs and workload (6); |
| --- | --- |

—

businesses have expressed favourable views about a need for more coherent approach to customs IT in order to reduce costs and workload (6);

| — | future generation of customs IT systems should further improve the uniform application of the EU customs legislation and risk management, inter-agency cooperation between customs and border guard, and cooperation with other agencies and third countries, and ensure that IT systems adapt to rapidly changing IT technology; |
| --- | --- |

—

future generation of customs IT systems should further improve the uniform application of the EU customs legislation and risk management, inter-agency cooperation between customs and border guard, and cooperation with other agencies and third countries, and ensure that IT systems adapt to rapidly changing IT technology;

UNDERLINING THE NEED:

| — | to explore and agree on how and when to use EU-wide pooling of resources or pooling of resources between Member States for developing future customs IT systems taking into account the purpose and functionality of each system, enabling the Customs Union to reach its full potential and fully exploit its resources, in order to achieve a higher level of cooperation and build more efficient and cost-effective processes for the development and maintenance of customs IT systems; |
| --- | --- |

—

to explore and agree on how and when to use EU-wide pooling of resources or pooling of resources between Member States for developing future customs IT systems taking into account the purpose and functionality of each system, enabling the Customs Union to reach its full potential and fully exploit its resources, in order to achieve a higher level of cooperation and build more efficient and cost-effective processes for the development and maintenance of customs IT systems;

| — | to identify, where required, appropriate funding streams to finance new approaches to develop and operate future customs IT systems; |
| --- | --- |

—

to identify, where required, appropriate funding streams to finance new approaches to develop and operate future customs IT systems;

| — | to find a balanced approach for amending or replacing the current development model, taking into account the significant investments made by Member States and the Commission, and the lifespan of existing customs IT systems as well as their functionalities, such as the inter-operability with other national IT systems; |
| --- | --- |

—

to find a balanced approach for amending or replacing the current development model, taking into account the significant investments made by Member States and the Commission, and the lifespan of existing customs IT systems as well as their functionalities, such as the inter-operability with other national IT systems;

| — | to evaluate the legal framework needed to pave the way for new approaches to the development of future customs IT systems, while respecting the division of competencies between the Member States and the EU; |
| --- | --- |

—

to evaluate the legal framework needed to pave the way for new approaches to the development of future customs IT systems, while respecting the division of competencies between the Member States and the EU;

WELCOMES:

| — | the priority given to a step by step approach which should provide an effective and cost-efficient solution for next generation of customs IT systems from 2025 onwards, based on an architecture agreed upon by the stakeholders; |
| --- | --- |

—

the priority given to a step by step approach which should provide an effective and cost-efficient solution for next generation of customs IT systems from 2025 onwards, based on an architecture agreed upon by the stakeholders;

| — | the commitment of interested Member States and the Commission to study new approaches to develop and operate customs IT systems more thoroughly, including through the launch of a pilot project; |
| --- | --- |

—

the commitment of interested Member States and the Commission to study new approaches to develop and operate customs IT systems more thoroughly, including through the launch of a pilot project;

INVITES THE COMMISSION AND THE MEMBER STATES:

| — | to implement the UCC IT Work Programme as a top priority, and where appropriate to develop these IT systems in cooperation in order to ensure the full implementation of the UCC; |
| --- | --- |

—

to implement the UCC IT Work Programme as a top priority, and where appropriate to develop these IT systems in cooperation in order to ensure the full implementation of the UCC;

| — | in cooperation with the relevant stakeholders, to explore new approaches to develop and operate future customs IT systems bearing in mind that any consideration of new approaches should be preceded by a more thorough study of the idea, including, inter alia, the scope of a pilot, stakeholders, financing and possible involvement of a permanent structure or shared supplier for IT, in line with the Tallinn Declaration, laid down in the Annex. |
| --- | --- |

—

in cooperation with the relevant stakeholders, to explore new approaches to develop and operate future customs IT systems bearing in mind that any consideration of new approaches should be preceded by a more thorough study of the idea, including, inter alia, the scope of a pilot, stakeholders, financing and possible involvement of a permanent structure or shared supplier for IT, in line with the Tallinn Declaration, laid down in the Annex.

| — | to carry out cost-benefit analyses, including a specific analysis of the cost-efficiency of new approaches towards future customs IT systems and their impact on authorities, trade, and businesses. |
| --- | --- |

—

to carry out cost-benefit analyses, including a specific analysis of the cost-efficiency of new approaches towards future customs IT systems and their impact on authorities, trade, and businesses.

---

(1)  OJ C 357, 29.9.2016, p. 2.

(2)  Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and the Council of 9 October 2013, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/2446 of 28 July 2015, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/341 of 17 December 2015, Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2447 of 24 November 2015 and Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/578 of 11 April 2016.

(3)  Doc. 7585/1/17 REV 1

(4)  Doc. 10151/17

(5)  Doc. 7586/2017

(6)  2013 external study, with participation of over 1 000 businesses: Study on the Evaluation of the EU Customs Union (Specific Contract No 13 implementing Framework Contract No TAXUD/2010/CC/101);T ISBN 978-92-79-33136-7

---

ANNEX

TALLINN DECLARATION ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FUTURE CUSTOMS IT SYSTEMS

The Participants of the High-Level Customs IT Seminar for the Heads of Customs Administrations from the EU Member States, Participating Candidate Countries, and the European Commission at the Seminar held on 28-29 September 2017 in Tallinn

ACKNOWLEDGING THE NEED TO:

| — | develop necessary IT systems based on a long-term customs IT strategy that meets the needs of economic operators, customs authorities and other stakeholders, and will accompany further harmonisation of the customs processes; |
| --- | --- |

—

develop necessary IT systems based on a long-term customs IT strategy that meets the needs of economic operators, customs authorities and other stakeholders, and will accompany further harmonisation of the customs processes;

| — | look for timely, modern and cost-effective development and operation of the customs IT systems in the future, and to avoid unnecessary multiplication of efforts by MSs and the Commission; |
| --- | --- |

—

look for timely, modern and cost-effective development and operation of the customs IT systems in the future, and to avoid unnecessary multiplication of efforts by MSs and the Commission;

DECLARE THAT:

| — | it is necessary to continue work on a long-term customs IT strategy based on a clear vision of future needs, and addressing issues beyond the constraints of current approaches while at the same time maintaining priority for implementation of the UCC; |
| --- | --- |

—

it is necessary to continue work on a long-term customs IT strategy based on a clear vision of future needs, and addressing issues beyond the constraints of current approaches while at the same time maintaining priority for implementation of the UCC;

| — | the potential of a more centralised or a collaborative development and maintenance of future customs IT systems should be further explored as a means to increase efficiency and effectiveness, taking note of the lessons of former collaboration initiatives, and of current initiatives which should be continued to identify the full potential of the collaboration model; |
| --- | --- |

—

the potential of a more centralised or a collaborative development and maintenance of future customs IT systems should be further explored as a means to increase efficiency and effectiveness, taking note of the lessons of former collaboration initiatives, and of current initiatives which should be continued to identify the full potential of the collaboration model;

| — | cost savings and efficiency may be achieved by a greater pooling of resources (EU-wide or between Member States); |
| --- | --- |

—

cost savings and efficiency may be achieved by a greater pooling of resources (EU-wide or between Member States);

| — | any pooling of resources should be based on clear business cases, cost-benefit analyses and supported by an appropriate legal framework; |
| --- | --- |

—

any pooling of resources should be based on clear business cases, cost-benefit analyses and supported by an appropriate legal framework;

| — | it is necessary to define how new approaches of IT system development and operation should be funded keeping in mind objectives of cost-saving and efficiency; |
| --- | --- |

—

it is necessary to define how new approaches of IT system development and operation should be funded keeping in mind objectives of cost-saving and efficiency;

| — | customs IT systems should be developed with a view to deliver the best service to the stakeholders, exploiting the potential of new technologies; |
| --- | --- |

—

customs IT systems should be developed with a view to deliver the best service to the stakeholders, exploiting the potential of new technologies;

| — | experience of common procurement, development and operations in other policy areas should be further explored and taken into account; |
| --- | --- |

—

experience of common procurement, development and operations in other policy areas should be further explored and taken into account;

| — | further consideration of new approaches to develop and operate customs IT systems should be preceded by a more thorough study of the idea (including the scope of a pilot, stakeholders, financing, possibly involving a permanent structure for IT, etc.); this can be taken forward by a working group consisting of interested Member States and the Commission taking into account the need to identify future operating models. |
| --- | --- |

—

further consideration of new approaches to develop and operate customs IT systems should be preceded by a more thorough study of the idea (including the scope of a pilot, stakeholders, financing, possibly involving a permanent structure for IT, etc.); this can be taken forward by a working group consisting of interested Member States and the Commission taking into account the need to identify future operating models.

---

European Commission

| 6.1.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 4/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.1.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 4/6

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

5 January 2018

(2018/C 4/03)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2045 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 136,45 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4459 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,88883 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,8318 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,1757 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,7418 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,594 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 308,77 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1554 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,6351 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 4,5127 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5361 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5068 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,4188 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6837 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5993 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 281,20 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 14,8886 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,8151 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4350 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 164,39 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8180 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 60,065 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 68,7724 |
| THB | Thai baht | 38,773 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,9057 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 23,3267 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 76,3290 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2045

JPY

Japanese yen

136,45

DKK

Danish krone

7,4459

GBP

Pound sterling

0,88883

SEK

Swedish krona

9,8318

CHF

Swiss franc

1,1757

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,7418

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,594

HUF

Hungarian forint

308,77

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1554

RON

Romanian leu

4,6351

TRY

Turkish lira

4,5127

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5361

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5068

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,4188

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6837

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5993

KRW

South Korean won

1 281,20

ZAR

South African rand

14,8886

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,8151

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4350

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 164,39

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8180

PHP

Philippine peso

60,065

RUB

Russian rouble

68,7724

THB

Thai baht

38,773

BRL

Brazilian real

3,9057

MXN

Mexican peso

23,3267

INR

Indian rupee

76,3290

---

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

---

| 6.1.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 4/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.1.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 4/7

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION

of 5 January 2018

on the publication in the Official Journal of the European Union of an application to amend the specification for a name in the wine sector in accordance with Article 105 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council

Haut-Montravel (PDO)

(2018/C 4/04)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1), and in particular Article 97(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | France submitted an application to amend the specification for the name ‘Haut-Montravel’ in accordance with Article 105 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

France submitted an application to amend the specification for the name ‘Haut-Montravel’ in accordance with Article 105 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013.

| (2) | The Commission examined that application and found that the conditions laid down in Articles 93 to 96, 97(1), 100, 101 and 102 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 had been met. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The Commission examined that application and found that the conditions laid down in Articles 93 to 96, 97(1), 100, 101 and 102 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 had been met.

| (3) | In order to allow statements of objection to be submitted in accordance with Article 98 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the application to amend the specification for the name ‘Haut-Montravel’ should be published in the Official Journal of the European Union, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In order to allow statements of objection to be submitted in accordance with Article 98 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the application to amend the specification for the name ‘Haut-Montravel’ should be published in the Official Journal of the European Union,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Sole Article

The application to amend the specification for the name ‘Haut-Montravel’ (PDO) in accordance with Article 105 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 is contained in the Annex to this Decision.

In accordance with Article 98 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the publication of this Decision in the Official Journal of the European Union confers the right to oppose the amendment of the specification referred to in the first paragraph of this Article within 2 months.

Done at Brussels, 5 January 2018.

For the Commission

Phil HOGAN

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

1

---

ANNEX

‘HAUT-MONTRAVEL’

PDO-FR-A0152-AM01

Date of submission of the application: 15 September 2014

APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT OF THE SPECIFICATION

1.   Rules applicable to the amendment

Article 105 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 – non-minor amendment

2.   Description of and reasons for the amendment

2.1.   Geographical production area

The geographical production area described under point IV of chapter 1 of the specification is expanded to include the territory of eight municipalities: Bonneville-et-Saint-Avit-de-Fumadières, Lamothe-Montravel, Montcaret, Montazeau, Montpeyroux, Saint-Méard-de-Gurçon, Saint-Michel-de-Montaigne and Saint-Vivien. These municipalities, which are also situated in the production area for the ‘Côtes de Montravel’ PDO, have identical soil and climate characteristics to those of the geographical production area initially defined for the ‘Haut-Montravel’ PDO, and have similar vine varieties. This amendment goes hand in hand with a gradual change in the production conditions to maintain the dessert nature of the white wines of the ‘Haut-Montravel’ PDO.

These amendments are in line with those made in parallel to the specification for the ‘Côtes de Montravel’ PDO. From now on, the areas for these two PDOs are the same but for different products: the wines under the ‘Côtes de Montravel’ PDO are semi-sweet white wines. This clarifies the situation.

The municipalities added to the geographical area were previously part of the area in immediate proximity. That area has consequently been amended to remove them (point IV(3) of chapter 1 of the specification).

The date on which the relevant national authority approved the amendment to the demarcated parcel area within the newly defined geographical production area has been added to point IV(2) of chapter 1. This point does not affect the Single Document.

2.2.   Link to the origin

The link to the origin under point X of the specification is amended in conjunction with the amendments made to the specification.

The summary of the link under point 7 of the Single Document has been revised accordingly and in accordance with the maximum number of characters allowed by e-ambrosia.

2.3.   Editorial changes

| — | Under point VI(1)(b) of chapter 1, the word ‘buds’ is replaced by the words ‘fruit-bearing buds’ – this is an editorial improvement and does not alter the sense of the original text.
  This point of the Single Document is amended: the expression ‘10 buds’ is replaced by ‘10 fruit-bearing buds’. |
| --- | --- |

—

Under point VI(1)(b) of chapter 1, the word ‘buds’ is replaced by the words ‘fruit-bearing buds’ – this is an editorial improvement and does not alter the sense of the original text.

This point of the Single Document is amended: the expression ‘10 buds’ is replaced by ‘10 fruit-bearing buds’.

| — | Under point XI of chapter 1 regarding transitional measures, paragraph 2 ‘Analytical standards – total alcoholic strength by volume’ is deleted, as this provision only applied up to and including the 2011 harvest. |
| --- | --- |

—

Under point XI of chapter 1 regarding transitional measures, paragraph 2 ‘Analytical standards – total alcoholic strength by volume’ is deleted, as this provision only applied up to and including the 2011 harvest.

This is an editorial update that does not affect the Single Document.

2.4.   Yields

| — | Under point VIII(1) of chapter 1 of the specification, the provisions regarding yields are amended: the yield is reduced from 50 hl/ha to 25 hl/ha and the maximum yield is also reduced from 60 hl/ha to 30 hl/ha.
  Point 5(b) of the Single Document is amended accordingly. |
| --- | --- |

—

Under point VIII(1) of chapter 1 of the specification, the provisions regarding yields are amended: the yield is reduced from 50 hl/ha to 25 hl/ha and the maximum yield is also reduced from 60 hl/ha to 30 hl/ha.

Point 5(b) of the Single Document is amended accordingly.

| — | Under point VI(1)(d) of chapter 1, the maximum average density per parcel is reduced from 8 000 kg/ha to 7 000 kg/ha in line with the amendments to the yields.
  This amendment does not affect the Single Document. |
| --- | --- |

—

Under point VI(1)(d) of chapter 1, the maximum average density per parcel is reduced from 8 000 kg/ha to 7 000 kg/ha in line with the amendments to the yields.

This amendment does not affect the Single Document.

| — | A paragraph 4 is added under point VIII of the specification that provides for the controlled designation of origin ‘Haut-Montravel’ and the controlled designation of origin ‘Côtes de Montravel’ to be claimed simultaneously on a defined area of vines in production.
  In this case, the quantity declared for the controlled designation of origin ‘Côtes de Montravel’ may not exceed the difference between the authorised annual yield for the controlled designation of origin ‘Côtes de Montravel’ and the quantity declared for the controlled designation of origin ‘Haut-Montravel’, subject to a coefficient k. The coefficient k is equal to the quotient of the authorised annual yield for the controlled designation of origin ‘Côtes de Montravel’ divided by the authorised annual yield for the controlled designation of origin ‘Haut-Montravel’.
  This amendment does not affect the Single Document. |
| --- | --- |

—

A paragraph 4 is added under point VIII of the specification that provides for the controlled designation of origin ‘Haut-Montravel’ and the controlled designation of origin ‘Côtes de Montravel’ to be claimed simultaneously on a defined area of vines in production.

In this case, the quantity declared for the controlled designation of origin ‘Côtes de Montravel’ may not exceed the difference between the authorised annual yield for the controlled designation of origin ‘Côtes de Montravel’ and the quantity declared for the controlled designation of origin ‘Haut-Montravel’, subject to a coefficient k. The coefficient k is equal to the quotient of the authorised annual yield for the controlled designation of origin ‘Côtes de Montravel’ divided by the authorised annual yield for the controlled designation of origin ‘Haut-Montravel’.

This amendment does not affect the Single Document.

The amendments to the production conditions are part of the desire to better identify the wine ‘Haut-Montravel’ as a sweet dessert wine made from overripe grapes harvested by hand in successive selections.

2.5.   Ripeness of the grapes and analytical standards

| — | Under point VII(1) of chapter 1 of the specification, the provisions regarding harvesting are amended to specify that the grapes are harvested when overripe with or without the effect of noble rot. |
| --- | --- |

—

Under point VII(1) of chapter 1 of the specification, the provisions regarding harvesting are amended to specify that the grapes are harvested when overripe with or without the effect of noble rot.

| — | It is also added that the grapes are harvested by hand in successive selections. |
| --- | --- |

—

It is also added that the grapes are harvested by hand in successive selections.

| — | Under point VII(2) of chapter 1 of the specification, the provisions regarding the ripeness of the grapes are revised upwards as follows: the sugar content of the grapes and the natural and actual alcoholic strength by volume are adjusted, increasing from 198 g/l to 225 g/l, from 12,5 % to 17 %, and from 10,5 % to 12 % respectively. |
| --- | --- |

—

Under point VII(2) of chapter 1 of the specification, the provisions regarding the ripeness of the grapes are revised upwards as follows: the sugar content of the grapes and the natural and actual alcoholic strength by volume are adjusted, increasing from 198 g/l to 225 g/l, from 12,5 % to 17 %, and from 10,5 % to 12 % respectively.

| — | Point 3 of the Single Document is amended with regard to the minimum actual alcoholic strength and the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume. |
| --- | --- |

—

Point 3 of the Single Document is amended with regard to the minimum actual alcoholic strength and the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume.

| — | Under point IX(b) of chapter 1 regarding the analytical standards, the fermentable sugar content is increased from between 25 and 51 g/l to 85 g/l. |
| --- | --- |

—

Under point IX(b) of chapter 1 regarding the analytical standards, the fermentable sugar content is increased from between 25 and 51 g/l to 85 g/l.

| — | It is also added that, by way of derogation, the wines have a volatile acid content before packaging (bulk wine) laid down by joint order of the Minister for Consumer Affairs and the Minister for Agriculture. |
| --- | --- |

—

It is also added that, by way of derogation, the wines have a volatile acid content before packaging (bulk wine) laid down by joint order of the Minister for Consumer Affairs and the Minister for Agriculture.

The amendments to the production conditions are part of the desire to better identify the wine ‘Haut-Montravel’ as a sweet dessert wine made from overripe grapes harvested by hand in successive selections.

2.6.   Vine varieties and blending

| — | The following phrase is inserted into point V(2) of chapter 1 on the rules on the proportions of the various vine varieties to be planted: ‘the proportion of the Sémillon B variety must be greater than or equal to 50 % of the vines planted’. This variety, which accounts for the large majority of vines in the production area, is highly suited to over-ripening in the oceanic climate enjoyed by the production area.
  This amendment does not affect the Single Document. |
| --- | --- |

—

The following phrase is inserted into point V(2) of chapter 1 on the rules on the proportions of the various vine varieties to be planted: ‘the proportion of the Sémillon B variety must be greater than or equal to 50 % of the vines planted’. This variety, which accounts for the large majority of vines in the production area, is highly suited to over-ripening in the oceanic climate enjoyed by the production area.

This amendment does not affect the Single Document.

| — | Under point IX(1)(a) of chapter 1, the provisions on the blending of varieties are revised to specify that the minimum proportion of the Sémillon B variety is greater than or equal to 50 %.
  This amendment does not affect the Single Document. |
| --- | --- |

—

Under point IX(1)(a) of chapter 1, the provisions on the blending of varieties are revised to specify that the minimum proportion of the Sémillon B variety is greater than or equal to 50 %.

This amendment does not affect the Single Document.

These amendments are part of the characterisation of the wines of the ‘Haut-Montravel’ PDO and the emphasis of the dessert nature of the wines produced.

2.7.   Oenological practices

Point IX(1)(c) of chapter 1 on oenological practices is amended to add that enrichment is prohibited for the wines of the ‘Haut-Montravel’ PDO.

Point 4 of the Single Document, ‘Wine-making practices’, is amended accordingly.

2.8.   Placing of the wines on the market for consumers

An ageing period (extension of the length of ageing) is inserted into point IX(4) of chapter 1 of the specification, under which the wines are not placed on the market for consumers until, at the earliest, 1 September of the year following the year of harvest.

The amendments to the production conditions are part of the desire to better identify the wine ‘Haut-Montravel’ as a sweet dessert wine made from overripe grapes harvested by hand in successive selections.

This amendment does not affect the Single Document.

2.9.   Monitoring

Description and reasons

Point I of chapter II of the specification on compulsory declarations is amended.

The date of submission of the production waiver declaration is amended to be before the harvest begins.

The withdrawal declaration is removed.

Point II of chapter II of the specification on record-keeping is amended to insert an obligation to record daily harvests in order to gather information on the land-registry references of the parcels harvested, the date, volume harvested and sugar content of the batches.

The table of main points to check under point I of chapter III of the specification is amended to insert a check on harvesting by hand in successive selections.

These amendments concerning the monitoring of compliance with the specification do not affect the Single Document.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

1.   Name(s)

Haut-Montravel

2.   Type of geographical indication

PDO — Protected Designation of Origin

3.   Categories of grapevine products

| 1. | Wine |
| --- | --- |

1.

Wine

4.   Description of the wine(s)

They are highly concentrated fine, smooth white wines. Their ‘sweet’ character is more pronounced when the grapes are affected by ‘noble rot’ (the effect of botrytis cinerea). They are very well suited to ageing. Very high in fermentable sugars (content > 85 g/l) and with a certain roundness in the mouth, these sweet white wines have flavours of stewed or candied fruits, sometimes with notes of honey.

No enrichment. Minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume = 17 %.

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume): 12 %

By way of derogation, the wines have a volatile acid content before packaging laid down by joint order of the Minister for Consumer Affairs and the Minister for Agriculture.

5.   Wine-making practices

a.   
  Essential oenological practices

Specific oenological practice

Any enrichment is prohibited.

Any heat treatment of the wine harvest where the temperature falls below – 5 °C and any use of drying tunnels or chambers are prohibited. The use of wood chips and the addition of tannins are prohibited. In addition to the above provisions, the oenological practices applied to these wines must meet the requirements laid down at EU level and in the Rural Code.

Cultivation method

The minimum planting density of the vines is 5 000 plants per hectare.

The spacing between the rows may not exceed 2 metres, and the spacing between plants in the same row may not be less than 0,80 metres.

The vines are pruned according to the following techniques: ‘Guyot’ pruning method, ‘Cordon de Royat’ pruning method, or using short pruning.

Each vine shall have a maximum of 10 fruit-bearing buds. Irrigation is prohibited.

b.   
  Maximum yields

30 hectolitres per hectare

6.   Demarcated area

The grapes are harvested and the wines made and developed in the following municipalities in the department of Dordogne: Bonneville-et-Saint-Avit-de-Fumadières, Fougueyrolles, Lamothe-Montravel, Montcaret, Montazeau, Montpeyroux, Nastringues, Port-Sainte-Foy-et-Ponchapt, Saint-Antoine-de-Breuilh, Saint-Méard-de-Gurçon, Saint-Michel-de-Montaigne, Saint-Vivien and Vélines.

7.   Main wine grapes

| | Muscadelle B |
| --- | --- |

Muscadelle B

| | Semillon B |
| --- | --- |

Semillon B

| | Sauvignon gris G |
| --- | --- |

Sauvignon gris G

| | Sauvignon B |
| --- | --- |

Sauvignon B

8.   Description of the link(s)

The geographical area of the controlled designation of origin ‘Haut-Montravel’ is included in the geographical area of the control designation of origin ‘Montravel’. Delimited to the south by the valley of the Dordogne and to the north by the Forêt du Landais, it is located in the western part of the department of Dordogne and covers the territory of 13 municipalities.

In terms of geomorphology, the geographical area of ‘Haut-Montravel’ constitutes a unique area in Bergeracois with a fairly narrow table landscape, surrounded by the valleys of the Lidoire and the Dordogne.

Carefully selected to obtain optimal grape quality, the demarcated parcel area is mostly composed of well-drained clay-limestone plots on the plateau and fully south-facing slopes. These vineyard parcels have thin, leached soils but with sufficient clay content not to suffer the effects of drought in summer.

This demarcation requires careful management of training techniques, which results in a minimum planting density of 5 000 vines per hectare, and a low harvest rate per vine. This careful management ensures sufficient and early maturity of the grapes in order to enable a good concentration and in particular for the local varieties from the region such as the Muscadelle B, Sauvignon B and Sauvignon gris G, the Ondenc B to a lesser extent, and in particular the Sémillon B, which is often the predominant variety and is highly suited to over-ripening in the oceanic climate.

The concentration of the grapes must be achieved naturally and concentration techniques using low temperatures or drying tunnels are prohibited. Likewise, in order to preserve the grapes before pressing, any use of continuous presses or auto-draining trailers with vane pumps is prohibited.

Furthermore, the specific climate conditions associated with the valley of the Dordogne and the Forêt du Landais encourage the formation of morning mists followed by sunny afternoons in autumn. When these conditions are combined, the wine-growers harvest, in successive rounds, the overripe grapes with a very high sugar content affected by ‘noble rot’ caused by botrytis cinerea. The wines obtained are highly concentrated fine, smooth white wines with a fermentable sugar content of over 85 grams per litre and a total alcoholic strength by volume greater than 14,5 %, without any use of enrichment. These ‘sweet’ wines have a certain roundness in the mouth and flavours of stewed or candied fruits, sometimes with notes of honey, that demonstrate the range of possibilities offered by this region, and are very well suited to ageing.

Finally, the wine-growers’ expertise comes from a long tradition of wine production with residual sugar and preservation of the wines, which were sometimes consumed a long way from their place of origin (in northern Europe in particular).

Before the arrival of phylloxera, there is little record of the ‘Haut-Montravel’ wines, with reference only being made to the ‘Montravel’ wines in general without specifying whether dry wines or wines with fermentable sugars were meant.

In 1903, Edouard Feret made a full inventory of the viticulture of Bergeracois in the work Bergerac et ses vins [Bergerac and its wines]. He noted that: ‘in the municipalities of Fougueyrolles, Nastringues and Saint-Antoine-de-Breuilh (among others), the best vintages rival the wines of Sainte-Foy. They are fine, mellow, sweet wines, often with a pleasant bouquet.’

With limited production sold exclusively in bottles, the wine-growers have demonstrated over time that they are able to expertly manage their vineyards and the wine production to obtain high-quality sweet white wines, despite the uncertainties of the climate.

At many local events (agricultural shows etc.), the term ‘Montravel’ is increasingly emphasised in order to maintain the reputation of this distinctive area of Bergeracois.

9.   Essential further conditions

Area in immediate proximity

Legal framework:

National legislation

Type of further condition:

Derogation concerning production in the demarcated geographical area

Description of the condition:

The area in immediate proximity, defined by derogation for the making and development of the wines, comprises the territory of the following municipalities:

—   Department of Dordogne: Bergerac, Le Fleix, Monfaucon, Saint-Laurent-des-Vignes.

—   Department of the Gironde: Gardegan-et-Tourtirac, Gensac, Landerrouat, Les Lèves-et-Thoumeyragues, Pineuilh, Saint-Avit-Saint-Nazaire and Saint-Emilion.

Labelling rules

Legal framework:

National legislation

Type of further condition:

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition:

Wines with the ‘Haut-Montravel’ controlled designation of origin may specify on their labels the broader geographical unit ‘Sud-Ouest [South-West]’. This broader geographical unit may also feature on any literature and containers. The size of the letters for the broader geographical unit must not be larger, either in height or width, than the size of the letters forming the name of the controlled designation of origin.

Reference to publication of the specification

https://info.agriculture.gouv.fr/gedei/site/bo-agri/document_administratif-c142e23c-3854-4c0e-bdb3-97c3b983b620

---

V Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

| 6.1.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 4/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.1.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 4/13

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.8758 — BayWa/Clean Energy Trading)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 4/05)

| 1. | On 22 December 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
  This notification concerns the following undertakings:






  — | BayWa r.e. renewable Energy GmbH (‘BayWa’, Germany), |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

On 22 December 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

—

BayWa r.e. renewable Energy GmbH (‘BayWa’, Germany),

| — | Clean Energy Trading GmbH (‘CET’, Germany). |
| --- | --- |

—

Clean Energy Trading GmbH (‘CET’, Germany).

BayWa acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of CET.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

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






  — | BayWa is active in the fields of solar energy, wind energy, bioenergy and geothermal energy, |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—

BayWa is active in the fields of solar energy, wind energy, bioenergy and geothermal energy,

| — | CET is active in the fields of direct marketing of electricity from renewable energy plants and the supply of electricity to end customers. |
| --- | --- |

—

CET is active in the fields of direct marketing of electricity from renewable energy plants and the supply of electricity to end customers.

| 3. | On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.
  Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the 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 the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the 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. The following reference should always be specified:
  M.8758 — BayWa/Clean Energy Trading
  Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:





  E-mail: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu |
| --- | --- |
| Fax: +32 22964301 |
| Postal address: |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

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. The following reference should always be specified:

M.8758 — BayWa/Clean Energy Trading

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

E-mail: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax: +32 22964301

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

---

| 6.1.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 4/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.1.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 4/15

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.8746 — EG Group/ESSO Germany Business)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 4/06)

| 1. | On 21 December 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
  This notification concerns the following undertakings:






  — | EG Group (UK), jointly controlled by TDR Capital LLP (50 %), a private equity firm, and two individuals (50 %), |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

On 21 December 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

—

EG Group (UK), jointly controlled by TDR Capital LLP (50 %), a private equity firm, and two individuals (50 %),

| — | ESSO Germany Business (Germany), belonging to Exxon Mobil Corporation. |
| --- | --- |

—

ESSO Germany Business (Germany), belonging to Exxon Mobil Corporation.

EG Group acquires, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation, control over parts of ESSO Deutschland GmbH, a wholly owned subsidiary of Exxon Mobil Corporation.

The concentration is accomplished by way of a purchase of shares.

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






  — | EG Group is a holding company operating under the ‘EG’ brand, active in the operation of fuel stations with ancillary backcourt convenience retail, car wash, fast food, restaurant and hotel offerings in the UK, Belgium, France, Luxembourg and the Netherlands, |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—

EG Group is a holding company operating under the ‘EG’ brand, active in the operation of fuel stations with ancillary backcourt convenience retail, car wash, fast food, restaurant and hotel offerings in the UK, Belgium, France, Luxembourg and the Netherlands,

| — | ESSO Germany Business is active in the retail sales of motor fuels via a nationwide network of fuel stations located in Germany. |
| --- | --- |

—

ESSO Germany Business is active in the retail sales of motor fuels via a nationwide network of fuel stations located in Germany.

| 3. | On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.
  Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the 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 the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the 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. The following reference should always be specified:
  M.8746 — EG Group/ESSO Germany Business
  Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:





  E-mail: |
| --- | --- |
| COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu |
| Fax |
| +32 22964301 |
| Postal address: |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

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. The following reference should always be specified:

M.8746 — EG Group/ESSO Germany Business

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

E-mail:

COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax

+32 22964301

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

---