# Official Journal C 200/2010

| | ISSN 1725-2423
  doi:10.3000/17252423.C_2010.200.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 200 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5322 July 2010 |

ISSN 1725-2423

doi:10.3000/17252423.C_2010.200.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 200

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5322 July 2010

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions |
| | RECOMMENDATIONS |
| | European Commission |
| 2010/C 200/01 | Commission Recommendation of 13 July 2010 on guidelines for the development of national co-existence measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

RECOMMENDATIONS

European Commission

2010/C 200/01

Commission Recommendation of 13 July 2010 on guidelines for the development of national co-existence measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops

1

| | II   Information |
| --- | --- |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2010/C 200/02 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.5840 — Otto/Quelle Schweiz Assets) (
  1
  ) | 6 |

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2010/C 200/02

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.5840 — Otto/Quelle Schweiz Assets) (
  1
  )

1

6

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2010/C 200/03 | Euro exchange rates | 7 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2010/C 200/03

Euro exchange rates

7

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Commission |
| 2010/C 200/04 | Call for proposals — EACEA/22/10 for the implementation of Erasmus Mundus 2009-2013 — Action 2 — Partnerships | 8 |
| | Community Plant Variety Office |
| 2010/C 200/05 | Call for expression of interest for the posts of members of the Board of Appeal of the Community Plant Variety Office | 11 |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2010/C 200/06 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5935 — VION/Weyl) (
  1
  ) | 13 |

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Commission

2010/C 200/04

Call for proposals — EACEA/22/10 for the implementation of Erasmus Mundus 2009-2013 — Action 2 — Partnerships

8

Community Plant Variety Office

2010/C 200/05

Call for expression of interest for the posts of members of the Board of Appeal of the Community Plant Variety Office

11

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2010/C 200/06

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5935 — VION/Weyl) (
  1
  )

1

13

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

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

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

EN

---

I Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

RECOMMENDATIONS

European Commission

| 22.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 200/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 200/1

---

COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION

of 13 July 2010

on guidelines for the development of national co-existence measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops

2010/C 200/01

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (EU), and in particular Article 292 thereof,

Having regard to Article 26a, second paragraph, of Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EC (1),

Whereas:

| (1) | Article 26a of Directive 2001/18/EC provides that Member States may take appropriate measures to avoid the unintended presence of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in other products. This applies in particular to avoiding the presence of GMOs in other crops, such as conventional or organic. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Article 26a of Directive 2001/18/EC provides that Member States may take appropriate measures to avoid the unintended presence of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in other products. This applies in particular to avoiding the presence of GMOs in other crops, such as conventional or organic.

| (2) | Farm structures and farming systems, and the economic and natural conditions under which farmers in the European Union operate, are extremely diverse. The diversity of farming systems and natural and economic conditions in the EU needs to be taken into consideration when designing measures to avoid the unintended presence of GM crops in other crops. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Farm structures and farming systems, and the economic and natural conditions under which farmers in the European Union operate, are extremely diverse. The diversity of farming systems and natural and economic conditions in the EU needs to be taken into consideration when designing measures to avoid the unintended presence of GM crops in other crops.

| (3) | It may be necessary for Member States’ public authorities to define, in the areas where GMOs are cultivated, appropriate measures to allow consumers and producers a choice between conventional, organic and GM production (hereinafter referred to as ‘co-existence measures’). |
| --- | --- |

(3)

It may be necessary for Member States’ public authorities to define, in the areas where GMOs are cultivated, appropriate measures to allow consumers and producers a choice between conventional, organic and GM production (hereinafter referred to as ‘co-existence measures’).

| (4) | The objective of co-existence measures in areas where GMOs are cultivated is to avoid unintended presence of GMOs in other products, preventing the potential economic loss and impact of the admixture of GM and non-GM crops (including organic crops). |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The objective of co-existence measures in areas where GMOs are cultivated is to avoid unintended presence of GMOs in other products, preventing the potential economic loss and impact of the admixture of GM and non-GM crops (including organic crops).

| (5) | In some cases, depending on economic and natural conditions, it may be necessary to exclude GMO cultivation from large areas. This possibility should rest on the demonstration by the Member States that, for those areas, other measures are not sufficient to prevent the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional or organic crops. Moreover the restriction measures needs to be proportionate to the objective (i.e. protection of particular needs of conventional or organic farmers). |
| --- | --- |

(5)

In some cases, depending on economic and natural conditions, it may be necessary to exclude GMO cultivation from large areas. This possibility should rest on the demonstration by the Member States that, for those areas, other measures are not sufficient to prevent the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional or organic crops. Moreover the restriction measures needs to be proportionate to the objective (i.e. protection of particular needs of conventional or organic farmers).

| (6) | In the context of combining the European Union authorisation system, based on science, with freedom for Member States to decide whether or not they wish to cultivate GM crops on their territory, the Commission considers that measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops should be established at Member State level. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

In the context of combining the European Union authorisation system, based on science, with freedom for Member States to decide whether or not they wish to cultivate GM crops on their territory, the Commission considers that measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops should be established at Member State level.

| (7) | It is necessary to replace Recommendation 2003/556/EC (2) to better reflect the possibility provided by Article 26a for Member States to establish measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops. Accordingly, the current guidelines limit their content to the main general principles for the development of co-existence measures, recognising that Member States need sufficient flexibility to take into account their regional and national specificities and the particular local needs of conventional, organic and other types of crops and products. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

It is necessary to replace Recommendation 2003/556/EC (2) to better reflect the possibility provided by Article 26a for Member States to establish measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops. Accordingly, the current guidelines limit their content to the main general principles for the development of co-existence measures, recognising that Member States need sufficient flexibility to take into account their regional and national specificities and the particular local needs of conventional, organic and other types of crops and products.

| (8) | The European Coexistence Bureau (ECoB) will continue to develop together with Member States best practices for co-existence as well as technical guidelines on related issues, |
| --- | --- |

(8)

The European Coexistence Bureau (ECoB) will continue to develop together with Member States best practices for co-existence as well as technical guidelines on related issues,

HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:

| 1. | In developing national measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops Member States should follow the guidelines provided in the Annex to this Recommendation. |
| --- | --- |

1.

In developing national measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops Member States should follow the guidelines provided in the Annex to this Recommendation.

| 2. | Recommendation 2003/556/EC is repealed. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Recommendation 2003/556/EC is repealed.

| 3. | This Recommendation is addressed to the Member States. |
| --- | --- |

3.

This Recommendation is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 13 July 2010.

For the Commission

John DALLI

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  OJ L 106, 17.4.2001, p. 1.

1

(2)  Commission Recommendation on guidelines for the development of national strategies and best practices to ensure the co-existence of genetically modified crops with conventional and organic farming (OJ L 189, 29.7.2003, p. 36).

2

---

ANNEX

1.   Introduction

1.1.   National co-existence measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops

The cultivation of GMOs in the EU has implications for the organisation of agricultural production. On the one hand, the possibility of the unintended presence of genetically modified (GM) crops in non-GM crops (conventional and organic), raises the question as to how producer choice for the different production types can be ensured. In principle, farmers should be able to cultivate the types of agricultural crops they choose — be it GM crops, conventional or organic crops. This possibility should be combined with the wish of some farmers and operators to ensure that their crops have the lowest possible presence of GMOs.

On the other hand, the issue is also linked to consumer choice. To provide European consumers with a choice between GM food and non-GM food , there should not only be a traceability and labelling system that functions properly, but also an agricultural sector that can provide the different types of products. The ability of the food industry to deliver a high degree of consumer choice goes hand in hand with the ability of the agricultural sector to maintain different production systems.

The adventitious presence of GMOs above the tolerance threshold set out in EU legislation triggers the need for a crop that was intended to be a non-GMO crop, to be labelled as containing GMOs (1). This could cause a loss of income, due to a lower market price of the GM crop or difficulties in selling it. Moreover, additional costs might incur to farmers if they have to adopt monitoring systems and measures to minimise the admixture of GM and non-GM crops.

However, the potential loss of income for producers of particular agriculture products such as organic products is not necessarily limited to exceeding the labelling threshold set out in EU legislation at 0,9 %. In certain cases, and depending on market demand and on the respective provisions of national legislations (e.g. some Member States have developed national standards for different types of ‘GM-free’ labelling), the presence of traces of GMOs in particular food crops — even at a level below 0,9 % — may cause economic damages to operators who would wish to market them as non-containing GMOs.

Moreover, the admixture of GMOs has specific implications for producers of particular products such as organic farmers (2), impacting also the final consumer (3). Since such production is often more costly, stricter segregation efforts to avoid GMO presence may be necessary to guarantee the associated price premium. In addition, local constraints and characteristics may render these particular segregation needs very difficult and costly to be met efficiently in some geographical areas.

It is therefore necessary to recognise that Member States need sufficient flexibility to take into consideration their particular regional and local needs with regard to GMO cultivation in order to achieve the lowest possible presence of GMOs in organic and other crops, when sufficient levels of purity cannot be achieved by other means.

1.2.   Distinction between economic aspects of GMO cultivation and scientific aspects covered by the environmental risk assessment

It is important to make a clear distinction between the economic aspects of GMO cultivation and the environmental risk assessment aspects dealt with under the authorisation procedures of Directive 2001/18/EC and of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on GM food and feed.

According to the procedure laid down in Directive 2001/18/EC and in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, the authorisation to release GMOs into the environment is subject to a comprehensive health and environmental risk assessment. The outcome of the risk assessment can be one of the following:

| — | a risk of an adverse effect to the environment or health that cannot be managed is identified, in which case authorisation is refused, |
| --- | --- |

—

a risk of an adverse effect to the environment or health that cannot be managed is identified, in which case authorisation is refused,

| — | no risk of adverse effects on the environment or health is identified, in which case authorisation is granted without requiring any additional management measures other than those specifically prescribed in the legislation, |
| --- | --- |

—

no risk of adverse effects on the environment or health is identified, in which case authorisation is granted without requiring any additional management measures other than those specifically prescribed in the legislation,

| — | risks are identified, but they can be managed with appropriate measures (e.g. physical separation and/or monitoring); in this case the authorisation will carry the obligation to implement environmental risk management measures. |
| --- | --- |

—

risks are identified, but they can be managed with appropriate measures (e.g. physical separation and/or monitoring); in this case the authorisation will carry the obligation to implement environmental risk management measures.

If a risk to the environment or health is identified after the authorisation has been granted, a procedure for the termination or modification of the EU consent or authorisation is provided respectively by Directive 2001/18/EC (Article 20.3) and Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (Articles 10 and 22). Moreover, Member States may invoke the special safeguard clause of Directive 2001/18/EC (Article 23) or the emergency measure of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (Article 34) to provisionally restrict or prohibit the cultivation of GMOs on the basis of new or additional information concerning risks for health or the environment.

Since only authorised GMOs can be cultivated in the EU (4) and the environmental and health aspects are already covered by the environmental risk assessment of the EU authorisation process, the pending issues still to be addressed in the context of co-existence concern the economic aspects associated with the admixture of GM and non-GM crops.

1.3.   Recognition of diverse farming conditions in the EU

European farmers work under extremely diverse conditions. Farm and field sizes, production systems, crop rotations and cropping patterns, as well as natural conditions, vary across Europe. This variability needs to be taken into account when devising, implementing, and monitoring national measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops. The measures that are applied must be specific to the farm structures, farming systems, cropping patterns and natural conditions in a region.

Strategies and best practices for GMO cultivation may need to be developed and implemented at national or regional level, with the participation of farmers and other stakeholders and taking account of national, regional and local factors.

Therefore it is appropriate that measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops should be developed at national and sometimes regional or local level.

1.4.   Purpose and scope of the guidelines

The present guidelines take the form of non-binding recommendations addressed to the Member States. They are intended to provide general principles for the development of national measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops. It is recognised that many of the factors that are important in this context are specific to national, regional and local conditions.

2.   General principles for the development of national co-existence measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops

2.1.   Transparency, cross-border co-operation and stakeholder involvement

National measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops should be developed in cooperation with all relevant stakeholders and in a transparent manner. Member States should ensure cross-border co-operation with neighbouring countries to guarantee the effective functioning of co-existence measures in border areas. In this respect they should provide and ensure adequate and timely information about the measures that they decide to put in place.

2.2.   Proportionality

Measures to avoid unintended presence of GMOs in other crops should be proportionate to the objective which is pursued (protection of the particular needs of conventional or organic farmers). Co-existence measures should avoid any unnecessary burden for farmers, seed producers, cooperatives and other operators associated with any production type. The choice of measures should take into account the regional and local constraints and characteristics, such as the shape and size of the fields in a region, the fragmentation and geographical dispersion of fields belonging to individual farms and regional farm management practices.

2.3.   Levels of admixture to be attained through national co-existence measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops

National measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops should take into account available knowledge on the probability and sources of admixture between GM and non-GM crops. These measures should be proportionate to the level of admixture to be pursued, which will depend on regional and national specificities and the particular local needs of conventional, organic and other types of crops and production.

| 2.3.1. | In some cases, the presence of GMO traces in food and feed has an economic effect only when they exceed the 0,9 % labelling threshold. In these cases, Member States should consider that measures to ensure compliance with the 0,9 % labelling threshold would be sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

2.3.1.

In some cases, the presence of GMO traces in food and feed has an economic effect only when they exceed the 0,9 % labelling threshold. In these cases, Member States should consider that measures to ensure compliance with the 0,9 % labelling threshold would be sufficient.

| 2.3.2. | Member States should consider that there may be no need to pursue specific levels of admixture where labelling a crop as GM has no economic implications. |
| --- | --- |

2.3.2.

Member States should consider that there may be no need to pursue specific levels of admixture where labelling a crop as GM has no economic implications.

| 2.3.3. | In several other cases, the potential loss of income for organic and some conventional producers (e.g. certain food producers) may be due to the presence of GMO traces at levels lower than 0,9 %. In those cases, and in the interest of protecting particular types of production, concerned Member States may define measures that aim at reaching levels of presence of GMOs in other crops lower than 0,9 %. |
| --- | --- |

2.3.3.

In several other cases, the potential loss of income for organic and some conventional producers (e.g. certain food producers) may be due to the presence of GMO traces at levels lower than 0,9 %. In those cases, and in the interest of protecting particular types of production, concerned Member States may define measures that aim at reaching levels of presence of GMOs in other crops lower than 0,9 %.

Regardless of the level of admixture to be pursued through co-existence measures, the thresholds established in the EU legislation (5) will continue to apply for the labelling of GMO presence in food, feed and products intended for direct processing.

2.4.   Measures to exclude GMO cultivation from large areas (‘GM-free areas’)

Differences in regional aspects, such as climatic conditions (that influence the activity of pollinators and the transport of airborne pollen), topography, cropping patterns and crop rotation systems or farm structures (including surrounding structures, such as hedges, forests, uncultivated areas and the spatial arrangement of fields) may influence the degree of admixture between GM and conventional and organic crops and the measures necessary to avoid unintended presence of GMOs in other crops.

Under certain economic and natural conditions, Member States should consider the possibility to exclude GMO cultivation from large areas of their territory to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops. Such exclusion should rest on the demonstration by Member States that, for those areas, other measures are not enough to achieve sufficient levels of purity. Moreover, the restriction measures should be proportionate to the objective pursued (i.e. protection of particular needs of conventional and/or organic farming).

2.5.   Liability rules

Matters concerning financial compensation or liability for economic damage are the exclusive competence of Member States.

3.   Exchange of information at EU level

The Commission will continue gathering and coordinating relevant information based on on-going studies at EU and national level and offering technical advice to assist interested Member States in establishing national approaches to co-existence.

The ongoing coordination through COEX-NET (6) and technical advice by the European Coexistence Bureau (ECoB) (7) will continue. ECoB will keep up to date an indicative catalogue of measures as well as a list of agronomic, natural and crop-specific factors to be considered when developing national measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in conventional and organic crops. Member States should continue to contribute to the technical work of ECoB.

---

(1)  In accordance with Articles 12 and 24 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, the labelling obligation does not apply to foods/feed containing material which contains, consists of or is produced from GMOs in a proportion no higher than 0,9 % of: (i) the food ingredients considered individually; or (ii) food consisting of a single ingredient; or (iii) the feed and of each feed of which it is composed, provided that this presence is adventitious or technically unavoidable.

(2)  In accordance with Article Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products, GMOs shall not be used in organic production, including as seeds, food or feed (Article 9(1)). The aim is to have the lowest possible presence of GMOs in organic products (see recital 10).

(3)  COM(2009) 153 — Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the coexistence of genetically modified crops with conventional and organic farming.

(4)  In order to be cultivated in the EU, the GMO must have been authorised for cultivation under the Directive 2001/18/EC or under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003.

(5)  Articles 12 and 24 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 and 21.3 of Directive 2001/18/EC.

(6)  The Network Group for the Exchange and Coordination of Information concerning Coexistence of Genetically Modified, Conventional and Organic Crops (COEX-NET) is aimed at facilitating the exchange of information among the Member States and the Commission.

(7)  The ECoB develops crop-specific Best Practice Documents for technical coexistence measures. The ECoB consists of a Secretariat and crop-specific Technical Working Groups comprised of technical representatives of Member States.

---

II Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

| 22.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 200/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 200/6

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5840 — Otto/Quelle Schweiz Assets)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2010/C 200/02

On 10 May 2010, 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 German and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M5840. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M5840. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---

IV Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

| 22.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 200/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 200/7

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

21 July 2010

2010/C 200/03

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2817 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 111,52 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4519 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,83945 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,4595 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,3440 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,0135 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,346 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 284,90 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7088 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,0986 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,2610 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,9586 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4487 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3284 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,9646 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7831 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,7607 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 543,65 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,6572 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,6860 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,2380 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 613,14 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,1225 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 59,557 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 39,0437 |
| THB | Thai baht | 41,387 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,2691 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,3218 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 60,4510 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2817

JPY

Japanese yen

111,52

DKK

Danish krone

7,4519

GBP

Pound sterling

0,83945

SEK

Swedish krona

9,4595

CHF

Swiss franc

1,3440

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,0135

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,346

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

284,90

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7088

PLN

Polish zloty

4,0986

RON

Romanian leu

4,2610

TRY

Turkish lira

1,9586

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4487

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3284

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,9646

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7831

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,7607

KRW

South Korean won

1 543,65

ZAR

South African rand

9,6572

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,6860

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,2380

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 613,14

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,1225

PHP

Philippine peso

59,557

RUB

Russian rouble

39,0437

THB

Thai baht

41,387

BRL

Brazilian real

2,2691

MXN

Mexican peso

16,3218

INR

Indian rupee

60,4510

---

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

---

V Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Commission

| 22.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 200/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 200/8

---

Call for proposals — EACEA/22/10 for the implementation of Erasmus Mundus 2009-2013

Action 2 — Partnerships

2010/C 200/04

This call for proposals applies to the cooperation between European and third country higher education institutions from the South Mediterranean Region (Egypt, Israel and occupied Palestinian Territory), the Central Asian Republics and the Western Balkans (Action 2 Strand 1).

PROGRAMME OBJECTIVES

The Erasmus Mundus programme's overall aim is to promote European higher education, to help improve and enhance the career prospects of students and to promote intercultural understanding through cooperation with third countries, in accordance with EU external policy objectives in order to contribute to the sustainable development of third countries in the field of higher education.

The programme's specific objectives are:

| — | to promote structured cooperation between higher education institutions and an offer of enhanced quality in higher education with a distinct European added value, attractive both within the European Union and beyond its borders, with a view to creating centres of excellence, |
| --- | --- |

—

to promote structured cooperation between higher education institutions and an offer of enhanced quality in higher education with a distinct European added value, attractive both within the European Union and beyond its borders, with a view to creating centres of excellence,

| — | to contribute to the mutual enrichment of societies by developing the qualifications of women/men so that they possess appropriate skills, particularly as regards the labour market, and are open-minded and internationally experienced through promoting mobility for the most talented students and academics from third countries to obtain qualifications and/or experience in the European Union and for the most talented European students and academics towards third countries, |
| --- | --- |

—

to contribute to the mutual enrichment of societies by developing the qualifications of women/men so that they possess appropriate skills, particularly as regards the labour market, and are open-minded and internationally experienced through promoting mobility for the most talented students and academics from third countries to obtain qualifications and/or experience in the European Union and for the most talented European students and academics towards third countries,

| — | to contribute towards the development of human resources and the international cooperation capacity of higher education institutions in third countries through increased mobility streams between the European Union and third countries, |
| --- | --- |

—

to contribute towards the development of human resources and the international cooperation capacity of higher education institutions in third countries through increased mobility streams between the European Union and third countries,

| — | to improve accessibility and enhance the profile and visibility of European higher education in the world as well as its attractiveness for third country nationals and citizens of the Union. |
| --- | --- |

—

to improve accessibility and enhance the profile and visibility of European higher education in the world as well as its attractiveness for third country nationals and citizens of the Union.

The Erasmus Mundus Programme Guide and the relevant application form are available at the following address: http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/erasmus_mundus/funding/higher_education_institutions_en.php

ACTION 2 — ERASMUS MUNDUS PARTNERSHIPS

This action aims at fostering structured cooperation between European and third-country higher education institutions through the promotion of mobility at all level of studies for students (undergraduate and masters), doctoral candidates, researchers, academic and administrative staff (not all regions and lots may include all mobility flows).

Action 2 — Erasmus Mundus Partnerships (EMA2) is divided into two strands:

| — | Erasmus Mundus Action 2 — STRAND 1 — Partnerships with countries covered by the ENPI, DCI, EDF and IPA instruments (1) (former External Cooperation Window), |
| --- | --- |

—

Erasmus Mundus Action 2 — STRAND 1 — Partnerships with countries covered by the ENPI, DCI, EDF and IPA instruments (1) (former External Cooperation Window),

| — | Erasmus Mundus Action 2 — STRAND 2 — Partnerships with countries and territories covered by the Industrialized Country Instrument (ICI). |
| --- | --- |

—

Erasmus Mundus Action 2 — STRAND 2 — Partnerships with countries and territories covered by the Industrialized Country Instrument (ICI).

1.   Eligible participants, countries and partnership composition

The conditions applicable to the eligible participants and to the composition of the partnerships for EMA2-STRAND 1 are specified in the Programme Guide under Section 6.1.2.a and in the Guidelines to the Call for proposals EACEA/22/10 under Sections 5.2, 5.3.

2.   Eligible activities

Eligible activities for EMA2-STRAND 1 are specified in the ‘Erasmus Mundus 2009-2013 Programme Guide’ under Section 6.1.2.b and in the ‘Guidelines to the Call for proposals EACEA/22/10’ under Section 5.3.

The planned duration of a project is specifically reported in the individual geographical window/lot and cannot exceed 48 months.

Eligible activities, including preparatory activities, can start as of 30 November 2010.

3.   Award criteria

Applications under will be assessed against the following award criteria:

| Criteria | Weight |
| --- | --- |
| 1. | Relevance |

Criteria

Weight

1.

Relevance

25 %

| 2. | Quality |
| --- | --- |

2.

Quality

65 %

| 2.1. | Partnership composition and cooperation mechanisms |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

Partnership composition and cooperation mechanisms

20 %

| 2.2. | Organisation and implementation of the mobility |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

Organisation and implementation of the mobility

25 %

| 2.3. | Students’/staff facilities and follow-up |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

Students’/staff facilities and follow-up

20 %

| 3. | Sustainability |
| --- | --- |

3.

Sustainability

10 %

Total

100 %

4.   Budget

The overall available amount under this call for proposals is EUR 15 200 000, aiming at a minimum mobility flow of 653 individuals.

5.   Submission deadline

The submission deadline for the Erasmus Mundus Action 2 — Partnerships is 15 October 2010.

The grant application shall be sent by registered mail to the following address:

| ‘Education, Audiovisual and Culture’ Executive Agency |
| --- |
| Call for proposals EACEA/22/10 — Action 2 |
| Att. Mr Joachim Fronia |
| BOUR 02/29 |
| Avenue du Bourget 1 |
| 1040 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

‘Education, Audiovisual and Culture’ Executive Agency

Call for proposals EACEA/22/10 — Action 2

Att. Mr Joachim Fronia

BOUR 02/29

Avenue du Bourget 1

1040 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Only applications submitted by the deadline and in accordance with the requirements specified on the application form will be accepted. Applications submitted by fax or email only will not be accepted.

Where an applicant sends several different applications, each one must be sent in a separate envelope.

---

ENPI— European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument.

DCI— Development Cooperation Instrument.

IPA— Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance.

EDF— The European Development Fund (EDF) is the main instrument for providing Community assistance for development cooperation under the Cotonou Agreement: ‘the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States of the one part and the European Community and its Member States of the other part’.

---

Community Plant Variety Office

| 22.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 200/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 200/11

---

Call for expression of interest for the posts of members of the Board of Appeal of the Community Plant Variety Office

2010/C 200/05

Description of the Office and its Board of Appeal

The Community Plant Variety Office, hereinafter called ‘the Office’, was established by Council Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 of 27 July 1994 on Community plant variety rights (1).

The purpose of the Office, a body with legal personality which has legal, administrative and financial autonomy, is to administer the Community system of plant variety rights, a specific type of industrial property right for new plant varieties. In particular, the Office has to take decisions on applications for the grant of such rights, which guarantee uniform protection throughout the Community. The Office is based in Angers, France.

A Board of Appeal was established by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1239/95 (2) and is responsible for deciding on appeals against decisions of the Office, concerning, inter alia, the grant or refusal of Community plant variety rights, on objections, on the nullity or cancellation of Community plant variety rights, or on the grant or refusal of compulsory licences.

The Board of Appeal consists of a Chairman and two other members, but may call up to two further members.

Description of tasks

The member (M/F) selected shall exercise the powers conferred on the Board of Appeal, in particular those of the Rapporteur, if he/she is appointed to such post.

Selection and appointment

The President of the CPVO will set-up a selection panel for the selection process. The panel will invite approximately twenty candidates with the best profiles, selected on the basis of their merits and the criteria set below, to an interview.

Following this interview, the President of the CPVO will adopt a short-list of candidates which will be presented to the Administrative Council. The latter will appoint members of the Board of Appeal from the said list, for a period of five years, starting on 23 February 2011.

Conditions of employment

The member (M/F) may continue his/her professional activities.

The member (M/F) will be chosen from the list by the Chairman of the Board of Appeal, as and when necessary, so that the Board consists of the three or five members required, as the case may be.

The member (M/F) chosen will perform his/her duties for the Board of Appeal on a part-time basis. He/she must be available at least ten days per calendar year.

By decision of the Administrative Council of 26 March 2003, the remuneration of the member appointed as Rapporteur is fixed at EUR 1 600 per case and that of the other member or members at EUR 800 per case. A sum of EUR 400 per member should be added to cover travel time, as the case may be. In addition, travel expenses, to and from Angers, will be reimbursed.

Qualifications (to be fulfilled by the closing date for applications)

| — | The candidate (M/F) must be a citizen of the European Union, |
| --- | --- |

—

The candidate (M/F) must be a citizen of the European Union,

| — | the candidate (M/F) must have a University degree or diploma:






  — | the candidate must have a level of education which corresponds to completed University studies, attested by a diploma when the normal period of University education is four years or more, or |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

the candidate (M/F) must have a University degree or diploma:

—

the candidate must have a level of education which corresponds to completed University studies, attested by a diploma when the normal period of University education is four years or more, or

| — | have a level of education which corresponds to completed University studies attested by a diploma and appropriate professional experience of at least one year when the normal period of University education is at least three years (this one year professional experience cannot be included in the post-graduate professional experience required below), |
| --- | --- |

—

have a level of education which corresponds to completed University studies attested by a diploma and appropriate professional experience of at least one year when the normal period of University education is at least three years (this one year professional experience cannot be included in the post-graduate professional experience required below),

| — | the candidate (M/F) must have ten years professional experience acquired after the required qualifications referred to above were obtained. He/she must:






  — | be legally qualified and have proven experience in the field of intellectual property. Experience in the field of plant variety rights would be an advantage, |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

the candidate (M/F) must have ten years professional experience acquired after the required qualifications referred to above were obtained. He/she must:

—

be legally qualified and have proven experience in the field of intellectual property. Experience in the field of plant variety rights would be an advantage,

| — | be a qualified botanist or agronomist with proven experience in the field. Familiarity with the UPOV guidelines and DUS technical examinations would be an advantage, |
| --- | --- |

—

be a qualified botanist or agronomist with proven experience in the field. Familiarity with the UPOV guidelines and DUS technical examinations would be an advantage,

| — | the candidate (M/F) must have thorough knowledge of one of the EU languages and satisfactory knowledge of one other EU language. A good knowledge of English would be an advantage. |
| --- | --- |

—

the candidate (M/F) must have thorough knowledge of one of the EU languages and satisfactory knowledge of one other EU language. A good knowledge of English would be an advantage.

Independance and declaration of interests

The candidate must not be linked to a private company which has professional activities involved in proceedings before the CPVO.

The candidate will be required to make a declaration of commitment to act independently, in the public interest and to make a declaration in respect of any interest which might be considered prejudicial to his/her independence. The candidate must confirm his willingness to do so in his/her application.

The members of the Board of Appeal are independent. In making their decisions, they are not bound by any instructions. They may not perform any other duties in the Office.

Applications

Applications, accompanied by a detailed curriculum vitae (of which a translation into English, where applicable, would be appreciated), should be sent by 15 September 2010 at the latest (date as postmark) to the following address:

| Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO) |
| --- |
| Secretariat of the Board of Appeal |
| 3 Bvd Foch |
| BP 10121 |
| 49101 Angers Cedex 02 |
| FRANCE |
| doreau@cpvo.europa.eu |

Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO)

Secretariat of the Board of Appeal

3 Bvd Foch

BP 10121

49101 Angers Cedex 02

FRANCE

doreau@cpvo.europa.eu

Further information may be obtained from the same address by fax +33 0241256410 or by e-mail doreau@cpvo.europa.eu

---

(1)  OJ L 227, 1.9.1994, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 121, 1.6.1995, p. 37.

---

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

| 22.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 200/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 200/13

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.5935 — VION/Weyl)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2010/C 200/06

| 1. | On 15 July 2010 the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertakings VION Enschede B.V., Premium Fleischspezialitäten GmbH and VION Buchloe GmbH belonging to the VION Food Group (collectively ‘VION’, The Netherlands) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of all assets of Weyl Beef Products B.V. (‘Weyl’, The Netherlands) and certain of its group companies by way of purchase of assets. |
| --- | --- |

1.

On 15 July 2010 the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertakings VION Enschede B.V., Premium Fleischspezialitäten GmbH and VION Buchloe GmbH belonging to the VION Food Group (collectively ‘VION’, The Netherlands) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of all assets of Weyl Beef Products B.V. (‘Weyl’, The Netherlands) and certain of its group companies by way of purchase of assets.

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






  — | VION: international food company which is active in purchase and slaughtering of livestock; production and sale of meat products and derived convenience food products and ingredients, |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—

VION: international food company which is active in purchase and slaughtering of livestock; production and sale of meat products and derived convenience food products and ingredients,

| — | Weyl: international beef and calf processing company. |
| --- | --- |

—

Weyl: international beef and calf processing company.

| 3. | On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope the EC Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. |
| --- | --- |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope the EC Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

| 4. | The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
  Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by e-mail to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5935 — VION/Weyl, to the following address:





  European Commission |
| --- | --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| J-70 |
| 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. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by e-mail to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5935 — VION/Weyl, to the following address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

J-70

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

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

---