21.6.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/1

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance)

2011/C 180/01

Date of adoption of the decision

26.1.2011

Reference number of State Aid

N 240/10

Member State

Sweden

Region

Västernorrlands Län

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Stöd för Domsjö-projektet

Legal basis

Förordning (1988:764) om statligt stöd till näringslivet

Förordning (2008:761) om statligt stöd till forskning, utveckling och innovation på energiområdet

Type of measure

Individual aid

Objective

Research and development

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

Overall budget: SEK 500 million

Intensity

21 %

Duration (period)

Until 2020

Economic sectors

Manufacturing industry

Name and address of the granting authority

Statens energimyndighet

Box 310

SE-631 04 Eskilstuna

SVERIGE

Other information

—

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

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

Date of adoption of the decision

5.4.2011

Reference number of State Aid

N 405/10

Member State

Italy

Region

Sicilia

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

3 Sun Srl

Legal basis

D.M. 24.1.2008 GURI n. 56 del 6 marzo 2008

Type of measure

Individual aid

Objective

Regional development

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

Overall budget: EUR 49 million

Intensity

13 %

Duration (period)

Until 31.12.2012

Economic sectors

Electrical and optical equipment

Name and address of the granting authority

Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico

Via Molise 2

00187 Roma RM

ITALIA

Other information

—

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

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

Date of adoption of the decision

9.3.2011

Reference number of State Aid

N 494/10

Member State

Italy

Region

Veneto

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

POR 2007-2013 FESR — Ob. «Competitività Regionale e Occupazione» Asse 2 «Energia» Az. 2.1.2. Finanziamento di reti di teleriscaldamento

Legal basis

Deliberazione della Giunta Regionale del Veneto n. 3131 del 9 ottobre 2007 [presa d'atto della decisione della Commissione europea di adozione del POR FESR (2007-2013)]; Deliberazione della Giunta Regionale del Veneto n. 919 del 23 marzo 2010 (approvazione avviso pubblico per manifestazioni di interesse per il finanziamento di reti di teleriscaldamento)

Type of measure

Aid scheme

Objective

Environmental protection, Energy saving, Regional development

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

Annual budget: EUR 18,95 million

Overall budget: EUR 18,95 million

Intensity

50 %

Duration (period)

Until 31.12.2015

Economic sectors

All sectors

Name and address of the granting authority

Regione del Veneto

U.P.Energia

F.ta S. Lucia

Cannaregio 23

30121 Venezia VE

ITALIA

Other information

—

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

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

Date of adoption of the decision	23.2.2011
Reference number of State Aid	N 495/10
Member State	France
Region	France
Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)	Aide à la protection sociale complémentaire des agents de la fonction publique territoriale
Legal basis	Article 39 de la loi no 2007-148, du 2 février 2007 de modernisation de la fonction publique — Article 22 bis de la loi no 83-634, du 13 juillet 1983 portant droits et obligations des fonctionnaires Projet de décret relatif à la participation des collectivités territoriales et de leurs établissements publics au financement de la protection sociale complémentaire de leurs agents
Type of measure	Aid scheme
Objective	Social support to individual consumers
Form of aid	Direct grants
Budget	Annual budget: EUR 56,7 million
Intensity	—
Duration (period)	6 years
Economic sectors	Other services — Insurance
Name and address of the granting authority	Collectivités territoriales et leurs établissements publics
Other information	—

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

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

Date of adoption of the decision

15.3.2011

Reference number of State Aid

SA.31107 (11/N)

Member State

Finland

Region

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Tuki tuulivoimaan ja biokaasuun perustuvalle energiantuotannolle/Driftstöd till elproduktion från vindkraft och biogas

Legal basis

Laki uusiutuvilla energialähteillä tuotetun sähkön tuotantotuesta (1396/2010)/Lagen om stöd till produktion av el från förnybara energikällor (1396/2010)

Type of measure

Aid scheme

Objective

Environmental protection

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

Overall budget: EUR 1 363 million

Intensity

—

Duration (period)

Until 1.4.2021

Economic sectors

Energy

Name and address of the granting authority

Energiamarkkinavirasto

Lintulahdenkuja 4

FI-00530 Helsinki

SUOMI/FINLAND

Other information

—

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

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

21.6.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/5

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I to the Treaty)

2011/C 180/02

Date of adoption of the decision

13.5.2011

Reference number of State aid

SA.31863 (N 507/10)

Member State

Italy

Region

Friuli-Venezia Giulia

Mixed

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Regolamento provinciale per la concessione di contributi per l'incremento della produzione legnosa, ai sensi dell'art. 12, comma 2, lettera e) della legge regionale 27 novembre 2006, n. 24

Legal basis

Articolo 12, comma 2, lettera e) della Legge regionale 27 novembre 2006, n. 24 «Conferimento di funzioni e compiti amministrativi agli Enti locali in materia di agricoltura, foreste, ambiente, energia, pianificazione territoriale e urbanistica, mobilita', trasporto pubblico locale, cultura, sport»

Deliberazione del Consiglio provinciale n. 41 del 28 luglio 2010«Approvazione regolamento provinciale per la concessione di contributi per l'incremento della produzione legnosa»

Type of measure

Scheme

—

Objective

Forestry

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

Overall budget: EUR 0,84 million

Intensity

40 %

Duration (period)

Until 31.12.2013

Economic sectors

Forestry and logging

Name and address of the granting authority

Provincia di Udine

Via della Prefettura 16

33100 Udine UD

ITALIA

Other information

—

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

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

Date of adoption of the decision	13.5.2011
Reference number of State aid	SA.32469 (11/N)
Member State	Italy
Region	—
Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)	Metodo di calcolo dell'ESL connessa a prestiti agevolati erogati da ISMEA tramite il proprio Fondo di credito
Legal basis	—
Type of measure	Scheme	—
Objective	—
Form of aid	Soft loan (including details of how the loan is secured)
Budget	—
Intensity	0 %
Duration (period)	1.6.2011-1.6.2020
Economic sectors	Agriculture, forestry and fishing
Name and address of the granting authority	Ministero delle Politiche Agricole Alimentari e Forestali
Other information	—

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

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

Date of adoption of the decision

11.5.2011

Reference number of State aid

SA.32713 (11/N)

Member State

Netherlands

Region

Nederland

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Staatssteunmelding Productschap Tuinbouw, sector Groenten en Fruit

Legal basis

Verordening PT bijzondere heffing verduurzaamde groenten en fruit 2009

Verordening PT heffing eetbare paddenstoelen en uitgangsmateriaal van groenten 2009

Verordening PT heffing glasgroenten en fruit 2009

Verordening PT bijzondere heffing teelt glasgroenten 2009

Verordening PT bijzondere heffing handel groenten en fruit 2009, zoals gewijzigd d.d. 6 juli 2010 (bijlage)

Verordening PT bijzondere heffing teelt groenten en fruit 2009

Wijziging III Verordening Div. heffingsverordeningen groenten en fruit 2009.

Type of measure

Scheme

—

Objective

Advertising (AGRI)

Form of aid

Subsidised services

Budget

Annual budget: EUR 59 million

Intensity

100 %

Duration (period)

1.9.2011-1.9.2017

Economic sectors

Agriculture, forestry and fishing

Name and address of the granting authority

Productschap Tuinbouw

Louis Pasteurlaan 6

2719 EE Zoetermeer

NEDERLAND

Other information

—

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

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

21.6.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/10

Euro exchange rates (1)

20 June 2011

2011/C 180/05

1 euro =

	Currency	Exchange rate
USD	US dollar	1,4235
JPY	Japanese yen	114,24
DKK	Danish krone	7,4594
GBP	Pound sterling	0,87950
SEK	Swedish krona	9,1708
CHF	Swiss franc	1,2039
ISK	Iceland króna
NOK	Norwegian krone	7,9265
BGN	Bulgarian lev	1,9558
CZK	Czech koruna	24,125
HUF	Hungarian forint	269,00
LTL	Lithuanian litas	3,4528
LVL	Latvian lats	0,7090
PLN	Polish zloty	3,9898
RON	Romanian leu	4,2710
TRY	Turkish lira	2,2940
AUD	Australian dollar	1,3528
CAD	Canadian dollar	1,4004
HKD	Hong Kong dollar	11,0946
NZD	New Zealand dollar	1,7662
SGD	Singapore dollar	1,7617
KRW	South Korean won	1 545,80
ZAR	South African rand	9,6628
CNY	Chinese yuan renminbi	9,2216
HRK	Croatian kuna	7,3850
IDR	Indonesian rupiah	12 267,45
MYR	Malaysian ringgit	4,3267
PHP	Philippine peso	62,193
RUB	Russian rouble	40,1025
THB	Thai baht	43,559
BRL	Brazilian real	2,2869
MXN	Mexican peso	16,9910
INR	Indian rupee	64,0680

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

21.6.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/11

COMMISSION DECISION

of 17 June 2011

amending the Commission Decision of 16 December 2008 on the Early Warning System for the use of authorising officers of the Commission and the executive agencies

2011/C 180/06

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (1),

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 215/2008 of 18 February 2008 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the 10th European Development Fund (2),

Whereas:

(1)

The definition of authorising officer by delegation responsible for decision-making in Article 2 of the Commission Decision of 16 December 2008 on the Early Warning System (‘EWS’) for the use of authorising officers of the Commission and the executive agencies includes authorising officers by subdelegation within the meaning of Article 59 of the Financial Regulation exercising the function of director.

(2)

Since the heads of Union delegations may act as authorising officers by subdelegation for the implementation of appropriations from the Commission Section entrusted to them by subdelegation, they must be included in the definition of authorising officer by delegation responsible for decision-making in the EWS as Commission authorising officers by subdelegation,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The Commission Decision of 16 December 2008 on the Early Warning System for the use of authorising officers of the Commission and the executive agencies is amended as follows:

The second indent of Article 2 is replaced by the following:

‘—

“AOD responsible” means authorising officer by delegation of the Commission within the meaning of Article 59 of the Financial Regulation responsible in accordance with the internal rules for the implementation of the general budget of the European Communities (hereinafter “the budget”), including directors of executive agencies, authorising officers by subdelegation within the meaning of Article 59 of the Financial Regulation exercising the function of director, and the heads of Union Delegations acting as Commission authorising officers by subdelegation in accordance with Article 59(2) of the Financial Regulation.’

Article 2

This Decision shall apply from the time of its adoption.

Article 3

This Decision shall be published for information purposes in the Official Journal of the European Union.

It shall be annexed to the Internal Rules for the implementation of the general budget of the European Communities.

Done at Brussels, 17 June 2011.

For the Commission

The President

José Manuel BARROSO

(1) OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 78, 19.3.2008, p. 1.

21.6.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/12

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its meeting of 7 May 2010 concerning a preliminary draft decision relating to Case COMP/38.511 — DRAMs

Rapporteur: Czech Republic

2011/C 180/07

1.	The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the addressees of the draft decision have participated in an agreement and/or concerted practice within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.

2.	The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment of the product and geographic scope of the agreement and/or concerted practice contained in the draft decision.

3.	The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the addressees of the draft decision have participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.

4.	The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the object of the agreement and/or concerted practice was to restrict competition within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.

5.	The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the agreement and/or concerted practice has been capable of appreciably affecting trade between Member States of the EU.

6.	The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment as regards the duration of the infringement.

7.	The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that there are no aggravating circumstances applicable in this case.

8.	The Advisory Committee agree with the Commission's assessment as regards the mitigating circumstances.

9.	The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the application of the 2002 Leniency Notice.

10.	The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amounts of the fines.

11.	The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the specific increase of the basic amount of the fines, for three of the addressees of the Decision, so as to ensure a sufficiently deterrent effect.

12.	The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the decrease of the basic amount of the fines, for three of the addressees of the Decision, on the basis of a mitigating circumstance.

13.	The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the amounts of reductions of the fines based on the 2002 Commission Notice on immunity from fines and reduction of fines in cartel cases.

14.	The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines.

15.	The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its Opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

21.6.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/13

Final report of the Hearing Officer (1)

COMP/38.511 — DRAMs

2011/C 180/08

This case concerns a cartel between 10 undertakings producing memory chips (2). The undertakings are alleged to have coordinated and monitored prices for DRAMs (Dynamic Random Access Memory) and for R-DRAMs (Rambus Dynamic Random Access Memory) sold to major PC/server Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs). The overall cartel infringement started as from 1 July 1998 and lasted until 15 June 2002 (3).

It is the first case in which the Commission adopts an infringement decision pursuant to the settlement procedure (4).

Background

The case was triggered by an immunity application submitted in August 2002 by Micron Technology Inc., which was granted conditional immunity on 16 December 2002. Subsequently, between December 2003 and February 2006, Infineon, Hynix, Samsung, Elpida and NEC applied for leniency. No inspections were carried out.

The Commission initiated proceedings against Micron, Infineon, Hynix, Samsung, Elpida, NEC, Hitachi, Mitsubishi, Toshiba and Nanya on 10 February 2009 pursuant to Article 11(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (5). Subsequently, on 13 February 2009, the parties were invited to indicate in writing whether they were prepared to engage in discussions with a view to introduce settlement submissions (6). All parties accepted the invitation and bilateral settlement discussions followed suit with the Directorate-General for Competition.

The settlement procedure

The settlement discussions were organised in three main phases between April and November 2009 during which period three rounds of formal bilateral meetings took place between the Commission and each of the parties. Generally, the Commission was represented at these meetings by the case team led by a senior official and a member of the Hearing Office as well as the Legal Service.

During the first round of meetings, the parties were orally informed of the objections that the Commission envisaged to raise against them as well as evidence supporting those objections. The parties were also informed of the identity of the other parties, whether or not those parties are leniency applicants, and the fact that they were also involved in settlement discussions. Following this first meeting, the parties were given access at the Directorate-General for Competition's premises to the relevant evidence and oral statements. Parties were also given access to the list of all documents in the Commission’s file in order to enable them to request further access should they so deem necessary to be able to ascertain, notably, their respective position regarding a time period or any other aspect of the cartel. Two parties requested further access to the Commission's file, which was considered justified and granted. However, at this stage no evidence could be taken away from the Commission premises.

A second round was then organised at which the envisaged objections were further discussed in light of the evidence to which access had been granted. The purpose of the second round of meetings was to reach a common understanding between the Commission and the parties with regard to, in particular, the scope and duration of the alleged cartel. By the end of this second round of meetings all parties concerned considered that there was sufficient common understanding with regard to the potential scope and duration of the cartel to continue the settlement discussions. The parties were hence provided with a CD-Rom containing the relevant evidence for review, as well as the list of all documents in the Commission's investigation file.

During the third round, the parties were informed of the range of likely fines to be imposed by the Commission within the framework of the settlement procedure. More particularly, each party was informed, in general terms, of the practical application of the Fining Guidelines in this case. In addition, the parties were given a deadline to introduce their settlement submissions.

Subsequently, all parties introduced formal settlement submissions in which they clearly and unequivocally acknowledged their respective liability for an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. In the settlement submissions, the parties also confirmed (i) that they had been sufficiently informed of the objections the Commission envisaged raising against them and that they had been given sufficient opportunity make their views known thereupon, (ii) that they did not envisage requesting access to file or to be heard in an oral hearing, subject to the condition that the Statement of Objections and the final Decision would reflect their settlement submissions and (iii) that they agreed to receive the Statement of Objections (SO) and the final decision in English.

The Commission adopted, on 4 February 2010, an SO reflecting the parties’ settlement submissions, which was notified to the parties at the Directorate-General for Competition’s premises. Subsequently, and due to a clerical error, the parties were notified of a correction to the SO that had been adopted on 16 February 2010.

All parties confirmed in their reply that the SO corresponded to the content of their settlement submissions and that they remain committed to the settlement procedure. The Commission could therefore proceed directly to a decision pursuant to Articles 7 and 13 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.

The draft decision

The draft decision retains the objections raised in the Statement of Objections and reflects hence also the parties’ respective settlement submissions. Accordingly, the draft decision relates only to objections in respect of which the parties have been afforded the opportunity to make known their views.

In view of the above and taking into account that the parties have not addressed any issues concerning access to file or their rights of defence to me or to the member of the Hearing Office attending the settlement meetings, I consider that the right to be heard of all participants to the proceedings has been respected in this case.

Brussels, 10 May 2010.

Michael ALBERS

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

(2) Elpida, Hitachi, Hynix, Infineon, Micron, Mitsubishi, Nanya, NEC, Samsung and Toshiba (each undertaking forms a group of company).

(3) With regard to R-DRAMs, the cartel started on 9 April 2001.

(4) Commission Regulation (EC) No 622/2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 as regards the conduct of settlement procedures in cartel cases (OJ L 171, 1.7.2008, p. 3), and Commission Notice on the conduct of settlement procedures in view of the adoption of Decisions pursuant to Article 7 and Article 23 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 in cartel cases (OJ C 167, 2.7.2008, p. 1).

(5) Proceedings were also formally initiated against relevant subsidiaries of the undertakings concerned on 8 April 2009.

(6) Article 10(a)(1) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 18).

21.6.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/15

Summary of Commission Decision

of 19 May 2010

relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of TFEU (1) and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement

(Case COMP/38.511 — DRAMs)

(notified under document C(2010) 3152 final)

(Only the English, German and French texts versions are authentic)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2011/C 180/09

On 19 May 2010, the Commission adopted a decision relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement. In accordance with the provisions of Article 30 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (2), the Commission herewith publishes the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed, having regard to the legitimate interest of undertakings in the protection of their business secrets. A non-confidential version of the decision is available on the Competition Directorate General website at the following address:

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/cases/

INTRODUCTION

(1)	The Decision is addressed to 10 undertakings and relates to a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.

1. CASE DESCRIPTION

1.1. Procedure

(2)

This case was triggered by an immunity application submitted on 29 August 2002 by Micron. Conditional immunity was granted to Micron in December 2002. Between December 2003 and February 2006, Infineon, Hynix, Samsung, Elpida and NEC applied for leniency to the Commission. The first request for information was sent in March 2003 and a series of requests for information were sent at later stages.

(3)

The settlement procedure allows the Commission to settle cases through a simplified procedure and was created in June 2008 (3). The settlement discussions in this case took place as from March 2009 after the companies indicated that they were prepared to engage in such discussions. Subsequently, in December 2009, they all introduced formal settlement submissions in which they clearly and unequivocally acknowledged their respective liability for the infringement. A Statement of Objections reflecting the parties’ submissions was notified to them on 8 February this year and the parties all confirmed that its content reflected their submissions and they remained interested in the settlement procedure. The Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions issued a favourable opinion on 7 May 2010 and the Commission adopted the Decision on 19 May 2010.

1.2. Summary of the infringement

(4)

The Decision concerns a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement in the EEA. Parties to the infringement entered into a scheme and/or network of contacts and secret information sharing by which they coordinated their conduct on general pricing levels and quotations to major PC/server Original Equipment Manufacturers (‘OEMs’), ultimately amounting to price coordination vis-à-vis such clients. This was done with the aim of restricting competition in respect of major PC/server OEMs with regard to the sale of Dynamic Random Access Memory (all 10 undertakings) and also for the sale of Rambus DRAMs (only Toshiba, Samsung and Elpida), from 1 July 1998 until 15 June 2002 in respect of DRAMs and from 9 April 2001 until 15 June 2002 in respect of Rambus DRAMs.

1.3. Addressees and duration in the infringements

(5)

The following undertakings infringed Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement by participating, during the periods indicated below, in anti-competitive courses of conduct amounting to price coordination in respect of major PC/server OEMs respectively for DRAM and Rambus DRAM products:

(a)	Micron Technology, Inc. from 1 July 1998 until 15 June 2002;

(b)	Micron Europe Limited from 1 July 1998 until 15 June 2002;

(c)	Micron Semiconductor (Deutschland) GmbH from 1 July 1998 until 15 June 2002;

(d)	Infineon Technologies AG from 14 November 1998 until 15 June 2002;

(e)	Hynix Semiconductor Inc. from 1 July 1998 until 15 June 2002;

(f)	Hynix Semiconductor Europe Holding Ltd. from 1 July 1998 until 15 June 2002;

(g)	Hynix Semiconductor Deutschland GmbH from 1 July 1998 until 15 June 2002;

(h)	Hynix Semiconductor United Kingdom, Ltd. from 1 July 1998 until 15 June 2002;

(i)	Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. from 1 July 1998 until 15 June 2002 for DRAMs (and from 9 April 2001 until 15 June 2002 for Rambus DRAMs);

(j)	Samsung Semiconductor Europe GmbH from 1 July 1998 until 15 June 2002 for DRAMs (and from 9 April 2001 until 15 June 2002 for Rambus DRAMs);

(k)	Samsung Semiconductor Europe Ltd. from 1 July 1998 until 15 June 2002 for DRAMs (and from 9 April 2001 until 15 June 2002 for Rambus DRAMs);

(l)	Samsung Semiconductor France Sarl from 1 July 1998 until 15 June 2002 for DRAMs (and from 9 April 2001 until 15 June 2002 for Rambus DRAMs);

(m)	NEC Corporation from 1 July 1998 until 28 February 2001 and indirectly through Elpida as from 1 March 2001 until 15 June 2002;

(n)	Renesas Electronics Europe GmbH (formerly NEC Electronics (Europe) GmbH until 1 April 2010) from 1 July 1998 until 28 February 2001;

(o)	NEC Electronics (UK) Ltd. from 1 July 1998 until 28 February 2001;

(p)	Hitachi Ltd. from 9 November 1998 until 28 February 2001 and indirectly through Elpida as from 1 March 2001 until 15 June 2002;

(q)	Hitachi Europe Ltd. from 9 November 1998 until 28 February 2001;

(r)	Mitsubishi Electric Corp. from 24 November 1998 until 15 June 2002;

(s)	Mitsubishi Electric Europe BV from 24 November 1998 until 15 June 2002;

(t)	Toshiba Corp. from 1 July 1998 until 22 April 2002 for DRAMs (and from 9 April 2001 until 22 April 2002 for Rambus DRAMs);

(u)	Toshiba Electronics Europe GmbH from 1 July 1998 until 22 April 2002 for DRAMs (and from 9 April 2001 until 22 April 2002 for Rambus DRAMs);

(v)	Elpida Memory Inc. from 1 March 2001 until 15 June 2002 for DRAMs (and from 9 April 2001 until 15 June 2002 for Rambus DRAMs);

(w)	Elpida Memory (Europe) GmbH from 1 March 2001 until 15 June 2002 for DRAMs (and from 9 April 2001 until 15 June 2002 for Rambus DRAMs); and

(x)	Nanya Technology Corp. from 12 October 2001 until 15 June 2002.

1.4. Remedies

(6)

The Decision applies the 2006 Guidelines on Fines (4). With the exception of Micron Technology, Inc., Micron Europe Limited and Micron Semiconductor (Deutschland) GmbH, the Decision imposes fines on all companies listed under recital (5) above. However, the Decision does not take into account Samsung's Rambus DRAMs sales when setting the fine to be imposed on Samsung as set out in recital (13) below.

1.4.1. Basic amount of the fine

(7)	The basic amount of fine is set at 16 % of the undertakings’ sales of DRAMs (including Rambus DRAMs where applicable) (5) to major PC/server OEMs in the EEA.

(8)	The basic amount is multiplied by the number of years of participation in the infringement in order to take fully into account the duration of the participation for each undertaking in the infringement individually.

1.4.2. Adjustments to the basic amount

1.4.2.1. Aggravating circumstances

(9)	There are no aggravating circumstances in this case.

1.4.2.2. Mitigating circumstances

(10)

Due to mitigating circumstances, the fine for three (out of 10) undertakings were reduced. Hynix received a reduction of 5 % as a result of the very specific circumstances applicable to the undertaking during 2001 (6). Toshiba and Mitsubishi received a reduction of 10 % each as the involvement of both Toshiba and Mitsubishi was much lower than that of other suppliers throughout the relevant period.

1.4.2.3. Specific increase for deterrence

(11)	Based on the size of the undertakings concerned, it is appropriate to apply a multiplier factor to the fines imposed. On that basis, the fine for Hitachi is multiplied by 1.2 while the fine for Samsung and Toshiba is multiplied by 1.1.

1.4.3. Application of the 10 % turnover limit

(12)	It is not required to adjust the amounts in the light of the undertakings’ turnover in this case.

1.4.4. Application of the 2002 Leniency Notice

(13)

Micron is granted immunity from fines, Infineon is granted a 45 % reduction of fine, Hynix is granted a 27 % reduction of fine and Samsung, Elpida and NEC are each granted a 18 % reduction of fine. In addition, Samsung is granted a ‘de facto’ immunity in relation to Rambus DRAMs, on top of the reduction within its leniency band in relation to DRAMs.

2. FINES IMPOSED BY THE DECISION

(14)

For the single and continuous infringement dealt with in this Decision, the following fines are imposed:

(a)	Jointly and severally on Micron Technology Inc., Micron Europe Limited and Micron Semiconductor (Deutschland) GmbH: EUR 0;

(b)	On Infineon Technology AG: EUR 56 700 000;

(c)	Jointly and severally on Hynix Semiconductor Inc., Hynix Semiconductor Europe Holding Ltd., Hynix Semiconductor Deutschland GmbH and Hynix Semiconductor United Kingdom, Ltd: EUR 51 471 000;

(d)	Jointly and severally on Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Semiconductor Europe GmbH, Samsung Semiconductor Europe Ltd. and Samsung Semiconductor France Sarl: EUR 145 728 000;

(e)	Jointly and severally on NEC Corporation, Renesas Electronics Europe GmbH (formerly NEC Electronics (Europe) GmbH until 1 April 2010) and NEC Electronics (UK) Ltd.: EUR 10 296 000;

(f)	Jointly and severally on Hitachi Ltd. and Hitachi Europe Ltd: EUR 20 412 000;

(g)	Jointly and severally on Mitsubishi Electric Corp. and Mitsubishi Electric Europe BV: EUR 16 605 000;

(h)	Jointly and severally on Toshiba Corp. and Toshiba Electronics Europe GmbH: EUR 17 641 800;

(i)	Jointly and severally on Elpida Memory, Inc. and Elpida Memory (Europe) GmbH, NEC Corporation and Hitachi Ltd: EUR 8 496 000;

(j)	On Nanya Technology Corp.: EUR 1 800 000; and

(k)	Jointly and severally on NEC Corporation and Hitachi Ltd.: EUR 2 124 000.

(1) With effect from 1 December 2009, Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty have become Articles 101 and, respectively, 102 of the TFEU. The two sets of provisions are in substance identical. For the purposes of this Decision references to Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty should be now understood as references to Articles 101 and 102 of the TFEU when appropriate.

(2) OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 411/2004 (OJ L 68, 6.3.2004, p. 1). With effect from 1 December 2009, Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty have become Articles 101 and, respectively, 102 of the TFEU. The two sets of provisions are in substance identical. For the purposes of this Decision references to Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty should be now understood as references to Articles 101 and 102 of the TFEU when appropriate.

(3) Commission Regulation (EC) No 622/2008 of 30 June 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 773/2004, as regards the conduct of settlement procedures in cartel cases (OJ L 171, 1.7.2008, p. 3) and Commission Notice on the conduct of settlement procedures in view of the adoption of Decisions pursuant to Article 7 and Article 23 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 in cartel cases (OJ C 167, 2.7.2008, pp. 1-6).

(4) OJ C 210, 1.9.2006, p. 2.

(5) For the calculation of the fine to be imposed on Micron, Hynix, Infineon, Mitsubishi and Nanya, account was taken only of the value of sales of DRAMs products to the exclusion of Rambus DRAMs products if any. As mentioned, Samsung's Rambus DRAMs sales were moreover not taken into account when calculating the fine to be imposed on Samsung.

(6) As established in earlier Commission proceedings on anti-subsidies in the EU, please refer to Commission Regulation (EC) No 708/2003 of 23.4.2003, para 148 and ff., confirmed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1408/2003 of 11.8.2003.

21.6.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/18

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products and amending Regulation (EC) No 70/2001

2011/C 180/10

Aid No: SA.33067 (11/XA)

Member State: Spain

Region: Comunidad Valenciana

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving an individual aid: Prestación servicios a PYMES para la realización del Plan de control de calidad de producción láctea en la Comunitat Valenciana.

Legal basis: Resolución de 2011, de la Cosellera de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación, por lo que se concede una subvención nominativa al Centro de Apoyo Tecnológico Lácteo (CEATEL)

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme: EUR 0,05 million

Maximum aid intensity: 100 %

Date of implementation: —

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: 1 June 2011-31 December 2011

Objective of aid: Livestock sector (Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006), Production of quality agricultural products (Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006), Technical support (Article 15 of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006)

Sector(s) concerned: Raising of dairy cattle, Raising of sheep and goats

Name and address of the granting authority:

Dir. Gral. Prod. Agraria

Conselleria Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación

C/ Amadeo de Saboya, 2

46010 Valencia

ESPAÑA

Website: http://www.agricultura.gva.es/web/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=adc20f42-0e6b-47b4-b0b6-9ba95ed27ce4&groupId=16

Other information: —

Aid No: SA.33086 (11/XA)

Member State: Netherlands

Region: Limburg (NL)

Title of aid scheme or name of company receiving an individual aid: Veldmakelaars groenblauwe diensten (paragraaf uit de subsidieverordening inrichting landelijk gebied Limburg)

Legal basis: Subsidieverordening inrichting landelijk gebied Limburg

http://portal.prvlimburg.nl/psonline/popups/document.jsp?document=62254

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or overall amount of individual aid granted to the company: Annual overall amount of the budget planned under the scheme: EUR 0,10 million

Maximum aid intensity: 100 %

Date of implementation: —

Duration of scheme or individual aid award: 2 June 2011-31 December 2013

Objective of aid: Technical support (Article 15 of Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006)

Sector(s) concerned: Crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities

Name and address of the granting authority:

Provincie Limburg

Postbus 5700

6201 MA Maastricht

NEDERLAND

Website: http://www.limburg.nl/Beleid/Europa/Kennisgevingen_staatssteun

http://portal.prvlimburg.nl/psonline/popups/document.jsp?document=62254

Other information: —

21.6.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/20

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 736/2008 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production, processing and marketing of fisheries products

(Text with EEA relevance)

2011/C 180/11

Aid No: SA.32621 (11/XF)

Member State: Finland

Region/authority granting the aid: Regional fisheries authority (Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment)

Title of aid scheme/name of company receiving ad hoc aid: Ammattikalastajan vesiympäristön hoito-ohjelma

Legal basis: Laki valtion talousarviosta (423/1988); tuki myönnetään eduskunnan maa- ja metsätalousministeriölle valtion talousarviossa kyseiseen tarkoitukseen osoittamasta määrärahasta.

Tuen myöntämisessä, valvonnassa ja takaisinperinnässä noudatetaan valtionavustuslakia (688/2001).

Annual expenditure planned under the scheme or amount of ad hoc aid granted: A maximum of EUR 1 900 000

Maximum aid intensity: 100 % (aid is paid in the form of wages to those taking part in conserving the aquatic environment)

Date of entry into force: No earlier than 1 April 2011

Duration of the scheme or individual aid award (not later than 30 June 2014):

—	the expected date of the last instalment to be paid: Not later than 30 June 2014

Objective of the aid: Measures to manage fish stocks and the aquatic environment: To improve the conditions of the fisheries industry and the usability of water bodies by removing low-value fish; collecting data on fish stocks and water quality. To support the removal of as large a quantity of nutrients as possible (phosphorus and nitrogen) from waters affected by eutrophication and the elimination of by-catch discarding.

Indicate which of Article(s) 8 to 24 is used: Article 17 on collective actions (Article 37(a), (j) and (l) of and Annex II, Group 1 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006) and Article 20 on the development of new markets

Activity concerned: Fishing will remove low-value fish from the lakes and from Baltic coastal waters affected by eutrophication. The measures will remove nutrients (primarily phosphorus and nitrogen), thereby helping to improve water quality and meet the objectives of the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan. The measures will restore balance to the ecosystem by freeing up living space for high-value fish stocks. Improving the living conditions of economically valuable fish will create better conditions for both professional and recreational fishing and will raise productivity. Once water quality is improved, it will be easier to use water bodies also for other purposes (e.g. swimming). The state of the aquatic environment and fish stocks will be observed and reported on.

Name and address of the granting authority: The granting authority may be one or more of the following Centres for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment listed below:

Etelä-Savon elinkeino-, liikenne- ja ympäristökeskus

PL 164

FI-50101 Mikkeli

SUOMI/FINLAND

Hämeen elinkeino-, liikenne- ja ympäristökeskus

PL 131

FI-13101 Hämeenlinna

SUOMI/FINLAND

Kaakkois-Suomen elinkeino-, liikenne- ja ympäristökeskus

PL 1041

FI-45101 Kouvola

SUOMI/FINLAND

Kainuun elinkeino-, liikenne- ja ympäristökeskus

PL 115

FI-87101 Kajaani

SUOMI/FINLAND

Keski-Suomen elinkeino-, liikenne- ja ympäristökeskus

PL 250

FI-40101 Jyväskylä

SUOMI/FINLAND

Lapin elinkeino-, liikenne- ja ympäristökeskus

PL 8060

FI-96101 Rovaniemi

SUOMI/FINLAND

Pohjanmaan elinkeino-, liikenne- ja ympäristökeskus

PL 131

FI-65101 Vaasa

SUOMI/FINLAND

Pohjois-Karjalan elinkeino-, liikenne- ja ympäristökeskus

PL 69

FI-80101 Joensuu

SUOMI/FINLAND

Pohjois-Savon elinkeino-, liikenne- ja ympäristökeskus

PL 2000

FI-70101 Kuopio

SUOMI/FINLAND

Uudenmaan elinkeino-, liikenne- ja ympäristökeskus

PL 36

FI-00521 Helsinki

SUOMI/FINLAND

Varsinais-Suomen elinkeino-, liikenne- ja ympäristökeskus

PL 236

FI-20101 Turku

SUOMI/FINLAND

Web address where the full text of the scheme or the criteria and conditions under which ad hoc aid is granted outside of an aid scheme can be found: http://www.mmm.fi/fi/index/etusivu/kalastus_riista_porot/elinkeinokalatalous/ammattikalastus.html

http://www.mmm.fi/sv/index/amnesomraden/fiske_vilt_renar/Fiskerinaring/yrkesfiske.html

Motivation: It was decided at national level that Finland's operational programme, approved by Commission Decision C(2007) 3735 of 20 November 2007, could not use the financial support of the European Fisheries Fund for selective fishing projects aimed at managing stocks. Projects of this type can therefore only be financed wholly at national level through funds allocated specifically by the Finnish Parliament.

21.6.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/25

CALL FOR PROPOSALS — EAC/13/11

European Policy Network on the Implementation of Key Competences in School Education

2011/C 180/15

1. Objectives and description

The overall aim of this call is to establish a Europe-wide network of relevant organisations in countries participating in the Lifelong Learning Programme. The aim of the network is to develop policy advice for the implementation of the 2006 Recommendation on key competences for lifelong learning in schools. It should address the issues raised by the November 2009 Communication ‘Key Competences for a Changing World’ (1) and stimulate high-level cooperation between Member States’ policymakers responsible for the essential areas of school development.

The network should therefore bring together those organisations, researchers and stakeholder groups whose area of interest and expertise is on school curriculum development, teacher education, assessment and evaluation, learning support and any other area that is seen as crucial for the development of a coherent policy for the promotion of key competences.

The network should examine and bring forward recommendations on what policies can help schools better ensure that all students develop the key competences as set out by the above mentioned Recommendation.

2. Eligible applicants

This call for proposal is open to ministries of education and other public bodies, such as those responsible for curricula, teacher education, assessment and evaluation, research centres and universities, foundations and associations with legal personality and a registered office in one of the countries taking part in the Lifelong Learning Programme (2).

3. Budget and duration

The framework agreement will last from 2012 until 2014.

The total budget earmarked for the co-financing of this network amounts to EUR 500 000 for 2012. Financial assistance from the Commission cannot exceed 75 % of the total eligible costs.

The maximum duration of projects is 36 months.

4. Deadline

Applications must be sent to the Commission no later than 30 September 2011.

5. Further information

The full text of this call for proposals and the application forms are available in English on the following website:

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/calls/index_en.html

Applications must comply with the requirements set out in the full text and be submitted using the form provided.

(1) COM(2009) 640 final.

(2) Decision No 1720/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 November 2006 establishing an action programme in the field of lifelong learning.

		ISSN 1725-2423 doi:10.3000/17252423.C_2011.180.eng
Official Journal of the European Union		C 180

English edition	Information and Notices	Volume 54 21 June 2011

Notice No	Contents	page
	II Information
	INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES
	European Commission
2011/C 180/01	Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections ( 1 )	1

2011/C 180/02	Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections ( 2 )	5

2011/C 180/03	Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6227 — Caisse des Dépôts et Consignations/Predica/Scor/SCI BRP 1) ( 1 )	8

	V Announcements
	ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
	European Commission
2011/C 180/15	Call for proposals — EAC/13/11 — European Policy Network on the Implementation of Key Competences in School Education	25

2011/C 180/16	Call for proposals — MOVE/SUB/01-2011 on Road Safety	26

	PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY
	European Commission
2011/C 180/17	Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.6264 — Rhône Capital/Triton/Evonik carbon black business) ( 1 )	27

Date and time of closure	14.1.2011
Duration	14.1.2011-31.12.2011
Member State	Other Member States (AMS quota) (2), at the initiative of Spain
Stock or Group of stocks	PRA/N3L.
Species	Northern prawn (Pandalus borealis)
Zone	NAFO 3L
Type(s) of fishing vessels	—
Reference number	477973

	IV Notices
	NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES
	Council
2011/C 180/04	Notice for the attention of the persons and entities to which restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2010/639/CFSP, as amended by Decision 2011/357/CFSP, and in Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006, as amended by Regulation (EU) No 588/2011 concerning restrictive measures against Belarus apply	9

	European Commission
2011/C 180/05	Euro exchange rates	10

2011/C 180/06	Commission Decision of 17 June 2011 amending the Commission Decision of 16 December 2008 on the Early Warning System for the use of authorising officers of the Commission and the executive agencies	11

2011/C 180/07	Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its meeting of 7 May 2010 concerning a preliminary draft decision relating to Case COMP/38.511 — DRAMs — Rapporteur: Czech Republic	12

2011/C 180/08	Final report of the Hearing Officer — COMP/38.511 — DRAMs	13

2011/C 180/09	Summary of Commission Decision of 19 May 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/38.511 — DRAMs) (notified under document C(2010) 3152 final) ( 1 )	15

	NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES
2011/C 180/10	Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1857/2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production of agricultural products and amending Regulation (EC) No 70/2001	18

2011/C 180/11	Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 736/2008 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production, processing and marketing of fisheries products ( 1 )	20

2011/C 180/12	Information from Hungary concerning implementation of Directive 2008/68/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council	22

2011/C 180/13	Commission information notice pursuant to Article 16(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community — Public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services ( 1 )	23

2011/C 180/14	Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries	24


	(1) Text with EEA relevance
	(2) Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I to the Treaty