23.6.2017

Official Journal of the European Union

C 200/4

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION

of 21 June 2017

on the publication in the Official Journal of the European Union of a request for amendment of a specification for a name in the wine sector referred to in Article 105 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Rosé des Riceys (PDO))

(2017/C 200/06)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

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

Whereas:

(1)	France has sent an application for amendment of the specification for the name ‘Rosé des Riceys’ in accordance with Article 105 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013.

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

(3)	In order to allow for the presentation of statements of opposition in accordance with Article 98 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, the application for amendment of the specification for the name ‘Rosé des Riceys’ should be published in the Official Journal of the European Union,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Sole Article

The application for amendment of the specification for the name ‘Rosé des Riceys’ (PDO), in accordance with Article 105 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, is contained in the Annex to this Decision.

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

Done at Brussels, 21 June 2017.

For the Commission

Phil HOGAN

Member of the Commission

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

ANNEX

‘ROSE DES RICEYS’

PDO-FR-A1363-AM01

Date of submission of the application: 22 December 2014

Application to amend the specification

1. Rules applicable to the amendment

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

2. Description of and reasons for the amendment

2.1. Winemaking practices

The following sentence has been added to point VI ‘Vineyard layout’, 1. ‘training systems’, a) ‘planting density’ of the specification: ‘Specific provisions: In order to enable the passage of suitable machinery, parcels with a slope of more than 35 % or a slope of more than 25 % and a cant of more than 10 % may have alleys 1,50 to 3 metres wide for every sixth row at the most. In this case, the sum of the spacing between the other rows and the spacing between plants in the same row may not exceed 2,30 metres’.

Certain parcels of the vineyard are steep-sloping and work cannot be carried out with ordinary agricultural machinery. Since the use of helicopters is banned in treatments, it is necessary to rely on machinery suited to steep slopes that requires passageways that are wider than the maximum authorised spacing. Under the new provision, it is authorised to plant vines with alleys 1,50 to 3 m wide in the case of steep slopes (a slope of more than 35 % or a slope of more than 25 % and a cant of more than 10 %).

The sum of the spacing (spacing between plants + spacing between rows) is reduced from 2,50 to 2,30 m for the other rows.

This point appears in point 5, ‘Wine-making practices’, of the Single Document, under the title ‘planting density/specific provisions’.

In point IX ‘Processing, winemaking, winegrowing, market preparation, storage’, 1. ‘general provisions’, c) ‘oenological practices and physical treatments’ of the specification, the word ‘oak’ has been removed so as not to restrict the ban on using wood chips to ‘oak wood’ chips.

This point appears in point 5, ‘Wine-making practices’, of the Single Document, under the title ‘specific oenological practice’.

2.2. Presentation and labelling rules

In point XII ‘Presentation and labelling rules’ of the specification, a point (b) has been added authorising a reference on wine labels to a smaller geographical unit, in accordance with Article 120(1)(g) of abovementioned Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013. The conditions of use of this reference have been specified.

This point appears in point 9, ‘Essential further conditions’, of the Single Document, under the title ‘additional names/additional provisions relating to labelling’.

2.3. Vineyard layout

In point VI ‘Vineyard layout’, 1. ‘training systems’, b) ‘pruning rules’ of the specification, asymmetric Guyot pruning, previously referred to only as a variant of the other pruning methods, has been described in order to facilitate checks thereon. The earlier reference to permanent cordon pruning has been removed. It appears that that pruning method is a variant of the Royat cordon method (described in the specification), the only difference being the rate of rejuvenation. Therefore a specific description of that pruning method is not required.

This provision does not affect the Single Document.

In point VI ‘Vineyard layout’, 1. ‘training systems’ of the specification, a point (g) ‘maximum average number of vines per parcel’ has been added after point (f) ‘height of the foliage’, with points g) and h) renumbered as h) and i). That new point permanently sets the maximum average number of vines per parcel at 19 700 kg of grapes per hectare and 17 bunches per square metre following the trial period for yields in Champagne and on the basis of the results observed.

This provision does not affect the Single Document.

In point VI ‘Vineyard layout’, 2. ‘other cultivation practices’ of the specification, it is specified that ‘any substantial alteration of the morphology, subsoil or elements guaranteeing the integrity and sustainability of the soils of a parcel intended for the production of the protected designation of origin is prohibited, with the exception of ordinary trench ploughing’. The purpose of this provision is to prohibit work that will substantially alter the soil, as excesses in this respect have sometimes been observed.

This provision does not affect the Single Document.

2.4. Yields — Age when the vines start producing

In point VIII, ‘Yields — Age when the vines start producing’, 1. ‘Yields’ of Chapter I of the specification, the yield has been permanently set to 12 400 kg of grapes per hectare following the trial period (from the 2007 harvest to the end of the 2011/2012 marketing year) and on the basis of the results observed. Consequently the yield has been increased from 10 400 kg of grapes/ha to 12 400 kg of grapes/ha.

A re-evaluation of the yield in the specification appeared necessary because of the rise in the agronomic yield as a result of improved plant material, better plant health, cultivation practices ensuring the longevity of the vine and changes in the climate. This increase has not had a negative effect on the quality of the wines. It should be noted that the Single Document only refers to the cut-off yield.

In point VIII, ‘Yields — Age when the vines start producing’, 4. ‘special provisions’ of the specification, the following sentence has been introduced: ‘For a specific harvest and taking into account, in particular, its characteristics, this volume may be reduced by an interministerial order’. In accordance with French legislation (last subparagraph of Article R. 642-7 of the Rural and Maritime Fisheries Code), its purpose is to enable a decrease of the authorised volume of racked must obtained from pressing 160 kg for a specific marketing year.

This provision does not affect the Single Document.

2.5. Other amendments

Point I ‘Declaration obligations’ of Chapter II of the specification has been supplemented with two new declarations:

—

in point 2., ‘Declaration regarding adaptation of the planting density in accordance with particular provisions’: this declaration makes it possible to ensure the monitoring of the provision introduced in point VI ‘Vineyard layout’, 1. ‘training systems’, a) ‘planting density’, ‘specific provisions’.

This amendment does not affect the Single Document.

—	in point 3., ‘Declaration regarding work to create parcels’: this declaration makes it possible to ensure the monitoring of the provision introduced in point VI ‘Vineyard layout’, 2. ‘other cultivation practices’, c). This amendment does not affect the Single Document.

The table of the principal points to be checked and the evaluation methods, contained in Chapter III of the specification, has been supplemented with a point concerning work to create parcels, keeping in mind how important preserving the characteristics of the parcels is for the specificity of the product.

This amendment does not affect the Single Document.

In point II of Chapter III of the specification, the reference concerning the inspection body has been supplemented and the address of the National Institute of Origin and Quality (INAO) has been updated.

This information has been included under the ‘other information’ section of the application to amend the specification.

Redrafting:

—

in point IX ‘Processing, winemaking, winegrowing, market preparation, storage’ of Chapter I of the specification, the provisions on the destruction of the by-products of winemaking have been aligned with the regulations on the disposal of such products. The following sentence in 2(b) has been amended: ‘When making wine, 1,5 % of the racked must produced as a by-product of winemaking must be disposed of before 31 July of the year following the year of harvest’;

—

in point XI ‘Transitional measures’ of Chapter I of the specification, following the expiry of the trial period, the provisions on the yield and the maximum average number of vines per parcel in 2. ‘yield and maximum average number of vines per parcel’ have been withdrawn.

This amendment does not affect the Single Document.

e)	Other amendments In connection with this amendment application, the Single Document has been updated according to the new input rules of the e-Ambrosia software.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

1. Name(s)

Rosé des Riceys (FR)

2. Type of geographical indication

PDO — Protected Designation of Origin

3. Categories of grapevine products

Wine

4. Description of the wine(s)

Still rosé wines

The wines have a minimum natural alcoholic strength per volume of 10 %.

After enrichment, the wines’ total alcoholic strength by volume may not exceed 13 %.

The wines have a fermentable sugar content (glucose and fructose) not exceeding 3 grams per litre.

The standards provided for in general regulations apply to the maximum total alcoholic strength, the minimum actual alcoholic strength, the minimum total acidity, the maximum volatile acidity and the maximum total sulphur dioxide content.

Visually its luminous and intense colour varies from light salmon to madder red. It is a fine and delicate wine with good persistence in the mouth. When young, the wine may have red fruit aromas. After several years of ageing, it develops a complex bouquet frequently characterised by aromas of dried fruit and spices, sometimes candied fruit, depending on the vintage. Generally speaking, the wine is characterised by its finesse, balance of flavour and harmony.

5. Winemaking practices

a. Essential oenological practices

Charcoal

Specific oenological practice

It is forbidden to use charcoal, whether alone or mixed in preparations, for oenological purposes. The use of wood chips is forbidden.

During the enrichment process, the increase in the volume of the fermenting grape must used may not exceed 1,12 % for every 1 % increase in the alcoholic strength.

In addition to the above provisions, the oenological practices applied to these wines must meet the requirements laid down at EU level and in the Rural Code.

Planting density — General provisions

Cultivation practice

The vines are planted so that the spacing between rows does not exceed 1,50 m. The spacing between plants in the same row ranges from 0,90 to 1,50 m. The sum of the spacing between rows and the spacing between plants in the same row may not exceed 2,50 m.

Planting density — Special provisions

Cultivation practice

In order to allow the passage of suitable machinery, parcels with

—	either a slope of more than 35 %

—	or a slope of more than 25 % and a cant of more than 10 %

may have alleys 1,50 to 3 m wide for every sixth row at the most. In this case, the sum of the spacing between the other rows and the spacing between plants in the same row may not exceed 2,30 m.

Pruning rules

Cultivation practice

Plants may not overlap each other nor may branches overlap fruit. The number of buds may not exceed 18 per square metre. Pruning is carried out at the latest before phenological stage (F)(Lorenz stage 12), or four unfolded leaves. The vines are pruned according to the following techniques:

—	Royat cordon pruning

—	simple Guyot, double Guyot or asymmetric Guyot pruning

b. Maximum yields

15 500 kg of grapes per hectare

6. Demarcated area

a)	The grapes are harvested and the wines made, developed and aged on the territory of the following municipality of the department of Aube: Les Riceys.

b)	The wines are made, developed and aged also on the territory of the following municipalities of the department of Aube: Avirey-Lingey, Bagneux-la-Fosse, Balnot-sur-Laignes, Bragelogne-Beauvoir, Gyé-sur-Seine, Mussy-sur-Seine, Neuville-sur-Seine.

7. Main wine grapes

Pinot noir N

8. Description of the link(s)

1. Information on the geographical area

Description of the natural factors relevant to the link

The geographical area extends over eight municipalities in the south of the department of Aube. The landscape of Les Riceys belongs to the geological sequence of the Côte des Bar. The Kimmeridgian makes up most of the geological substrate, deeply carved in the centre by the Laignes Valley and a number of peripheral dells. The Kimmeridgian, characterised by alternating marl and calcareous banks, is the source of the best soils of the vineyards, which are composed of grey clay-limestone colluviums covering the slopes and enclose a multitude of small stones that help warm the ground. The vines, planted in precisely demarcated parcels, are located on the steepest, highest and sunniest east- and south-facing hillsides. The northern location means a rather cold climate, but the circular layout of the vineyard, which is embedded in the dells, provides it with a very favourable mesoclimate.

Description of the human factors relevant to the link

The attested origin of the Les Riceys vineyard can be traced to the 8th century using documents proving that vines grew on the territory of the municipality. At the beginning of the 18th century, Les Riceys wines started being sold on a large scale to the Netherlands, Belgium, the Paris region and northern France, as can be seen from the shipment statistics drawn up by the treaty offices of the province of Champagne. In 1875 the vineyard was prosperous. Les Riceys wines were marketed by nearly 35 traders. That prosperity was weakened by the Phylloxera crisis and the rise of the textile industry in Aube, which absorbed the rural workforce. The vineyard rebuilt itself in part when Aube was integrated in the wine-growing Champagne region in 1927, but the situation remained difficult. A few ‘handlers’ remained, and their perseverance was rewarded when the ‘Rosé de Riceys’ Protected Designation of Origin was recognised on 8 December 1947. With the establishment of a number of young winegrowers in the 1960s, winemaking operations picked up and wine started being produced once again. The winemakers’ union Syndicat des Producteurs de l’AOC Rosé des Riceys was founded on 26 September 1968.

2. Information on the quality and characteristics of the product

‘Rosé des Riceys’ is a still wine with an obligatory indication of vintage. Visually its luminous and intense colour varies from light salmon to madder red. It is a fine and delicate wine with good persistence in the mouth. When young, the wine may have red fruit aromas. After several years of ageing, it develops a complex bouquet frequently characterised by aromas of dried fruit and spices, sometimes candied fruit, depending on the vintage. Generally speaking, the wine is characterised by its finesse, balance of flavour and harmony.

3. Causal interactions

The stony soils of the most exposed south- and east-facing slopes and of the steepest slopes have an optimal light level and warm up well, thus enabling early plant growth in the spring, optimising photosynthesis and guaranteeing the ripening of the berries. The high altitude of the winegrowing hillsides prevents contact with the cold air stagnating at the bottom of the dells, and the forest covering the upper parts of the slopes and the numerous pockets of trees throughout the territory offer good protection against the masses of cold air arriving from the plateaus. The incline of the winegrowing slopes ensures optimal natural drainage, which is also guaranteed by the crack formation in the Kimmeridgian limestone. The marl found between the calcareous banks supply the necessary water in the summer, mainly in warm and dry years. Finally, the warm summer temperatures together with the heat from the sunrays reverberating from the Kimmeridgian stones endow the wine with its typical notes of candied fruit and spices as it ages. The grape variety pinot noir N was considered the best variety for making Les Riceys wine already by Jules Guyot in the 19th century. The entire crop of grapes must be placed in the vat in order to fully respect the aromas of the grape variety pinot noir N and, in particular, their development during vatting, the duration of which is determined with precision by the skilled and experienced winemakers. According to V. Rendu, ‘aux Riceys, on réserve les plans fins pour les premières cuvées. On évite les longues cuvaisons afin de conserver à ce vin la finesse et la franchise de goût qui caractérise le vin des Riceys’. In other words, the first cuvées of Les Riceys wine are prepared with care, avoiding lengthy vatting so as to protect the finesse and frank taste of this wine.

9. Essential further conditions

Reference to the vintage

Legal framework:

National legislation

Type of further condition:

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition:

Indication of the vintage is obligatory in the presentation of the wines.

Additional names

Legal framework:

National legislation

Type of further condition:

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition:

The PDO ‘Rosé des Riceys’ may be supplemented with the name of a smaller geographical unit in line with the provisions of the specification.

Reference to publication of the specification

https://info.agriculture.gouv.fr/gedei/site/bo-agri/document_administratif-0e6797aa-7711-4406-975b-1ca510a31f66

23.6.2017

Official Journal of the European Union

C 200/10

Summary of the Opinion on the Proposal for a Directive on certain aspects concerning contracts for the supply of digital content

(The full text of this Opinion can be found in English, French and German on the EDPS website www.edps.europa.eu)

(2017/C 200/07)

The EDPS acknowledges the importance of the data-driven economy for the growth in the EU and its prominence in the digital environment as set out in the Digital Single Market strategy. We have argued consistently for the synergies and complementarity between consumer and data protection law. We therefore support the aim of the Commission’s proposal of December 2015 Directive on certain aspects concerning contracts for the supply of digital content to enhance the protection of consumers who are required to disclose data as a condition for the supply of ‘digital goods’.

However, one aspect of the Proposal is problematic, since it will be applicable to situations where a price is paid for the digital content, but also where digital content is supplied in exchange for a counter-performance other than money in the form of personal data or any other data. The EDPS warns against any new provision introducing the idea that people can pay with their data the same way as they do with money. Fundamental rights such as the right to the protection of personal data cannot be reduced to simple consumer interests, and personal data cannot be considered as a mere commodity.

The recently adopted data protection framework (the ‘GDPR’) is not yet fully applicable and the proposal for new e-Privacy legislation is currently under discussions. The EU should avoid therefore any new proposals that upset the careful balance negotiated by the EU legislator on data protection rules. Overlapping initiatives could inadvertently put at risk the coherence of the Digital Single Market, resulting in regulatory fragmentation and legal uncertainty. The EDPS recommends that the EU apply the GDPR as the means for regulating use of use of personal data in the digital economy.

The notion of ‘data as counter-performance’ - left undefined in the proposal — could cause confusion as to the precise function of the data in a given transaction. The lack of clear information from the suppliers in this regard may add further difficulties. We therefore suggest considering, as a way of resolving this problem, using the definition of services under the TFEU or the provision used by the GDPR to define its territorial scope.

This Opinion examines the proposal’s several potential interactions with the GDPR.

First, the broad definition of ‘personal data’ under data protection legislation may well have the effect that all data subject to the Proposed Directive be considered as ‘personal data’ under the GDPR.

Second, the strict conditions under which a processing can take place are already set down in the GDPR and do not require amendment or addition under the proposed directive. While the proposal seems to consider as legitimate the use of data as a counter-performance, the GDPR provides, for example, a new set of conditions to assess the validity of consent and to determine whether it can be considered as freely-given in the context of digital transactions.

Finally, the proposed rights given to the consumers to obtain their data from the supplier at the termination of the contract and the obligation for the supplier to refrain from using data potentially overlap with the rights of access and to portability and with obligation of the supplier to refrain from using the data and data controller obligations under the GDPR. This might unintentionally lead to confusion regarding the regime applicable.

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1.1. The consultation of the EDPS by the Council

On 9 December 2015, the European Commission presented two legislative proposals for new contractual rules for online sales. The proposed digital contract rules include two draft pieces of legislation:

—	a Proposal for a Directive on certain aspects concerning contracts for the supply of digital content (1);

—	a Proposal for a Directive on certain aspects concerning contracts for the online sales of (tangible) goods (2).

The two proposals are to be seen as a package with common objectives, notably to remove the main obstacles to cross-border e-commerce in the EU (3). As regards more specifically the Proposal for a Directive on contracts for supply of digital content to consumers (hereinafter ‘the Proposal’), its intention is to have a single set of rules covering contracts for the sale and renting of digital content as well as contracts for digital services (4). At the time of the adoption of the Proposal, the EDPS was not consulted by the Commission.

On 21 November 2016, the LIBE Committee issued an Opinion on the Proposal (5). The European Parliament Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee (IMCO) and the Legal Affairs Committee (JURI) issued a draft joint report on the Proposal on 7 November 2016 (6).

The Council is currently discussing the Proposal within the Working party on Civil Law Matters (Contract law). In this context, on 10 January 2017, the Council decided to consult the EDPS on the Proposal. The EDPS welcomes the initiative of the Council to consult the EDPS on this important legislative which raises many questions in relation to the Union law on the protection of personal data. The present Opinion is the EDPS’ response to the request of the Council.

1.2. The Proposal

Currently, the supply of digital content at EU level is partly regulated by the Consumer Rights Directive (7), Unfair Terms Directive (8) and e-Commerce Directive (9). The Consumer Sales Directive is not applicable, as the definition of ‘consumer goods’ in that Directive extends only to ‘tangible moving items’.

Several Member States have already adopted specific rules for digital content, creating differences in scope and content between the national rules governing these contracts (10). The Proposal therefore intends to provide for a harmonised protection of the consumers so far as digital content is concerned. In this context, the Proposal envisages a maximum level of harmonisation.

As to the scope of the Proposal, it would cover not only digital goods (such as films or music, computer programs, mobile applications, ebooks) but also digital services (such as social media platforms and cloud computing services). For a digital contract to fall within the scope of the proposed directive, it must either provide for a price to be paid by the consumer, or the consumer must ‘actively provide personal data or other data as counter-performance’ (11).

The Proposal introduces a ‘hierarchy of remedies’ in case of lack of conformity of the digital content or service provided by the seller, and provides for the consumer’s right to retrieve the data at the termination of the contract in a ‘commonly used data format’ (12). The Proposal also imposes the obligation for suppliers to refrain from the use of the data provided as counter-performance after the termination of the contract (13).

The Proposal refers to the concept of personal data in three situations:

—	the use of data (including personal data) as a ‘counter-performance other than money’ (14);

—	a reference to data which is ‘strictly necessary for the performance of the contract’ (15);

—	a reference to ‘other data produced or generated through the consumer’s use of the digital content’ (16).

10.

The reference to the concept of personal data creates a potential interaction between the Proposal and the data protection rules, as laid down, among others, in the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC (17) and the GDPR (18). Furthermore, as stated in the Proposal, the Directive is intended to be without prejudice to the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data (19). This Opinion will therefore address the interplay between the Proposal and the current and future EU data protection framework (20).

CONCLUSION

79.

The EDPS welcomes the initiative of the Commission which intends to give a broad protection to consumers in the EU, by extending this protection to ‘digital goods’, and by including the cases where consumers do not pay a price with money.

80.

The EDPS recognises the importance of having clear and up-to-date rules which can accompany and foster the development of the digital economy. In this respect, the EDPS continues to follow actively the initiatives of the Commission regarding the Digital Single Market since the importance of data as a source of growth and innovation is at the core of these initiatives.

81.

In this context, we welcome the initiative of the Council to consult the EDPS. This is for the EDPS an opportunity to address several recommendations and messages to the legislators, when discussing the Proposal submitted to the EDPS.

82.

On the interplay of the Proposal with data protection law:

—	the Proposal raises a number of issues given the fundamental rights nature of these data and the specific protection granted to these data under the EU data protection framework;

—	the Proposal should avoid including provisions which may impact the data protection framework, since the Proposal is based on Article 114 TFEU, which is no longer the appropriate basis to regulate data processing;

—	by no means should the Proposal change the balance found by the GDPR regarding the circumstances under which the processing of personal data may take place in the digital market.

83.

On the use of data as a counter-performance:

—	the EDPS considers that the term ‘data as a counter-performance’ should be avoided;

—

to this effect the EDPS offers alternatives:

—	the use of the notion of ‘services’ in EU law may be useful in considering how to encompass services where a price is not paid;

—	the GDPR scope covering the offering of goods and services irrespective of whether a payment is required may also be a useful consideration.

84.

On the interplay of the Proposal with the GDPR:

—	considering the broad definition of personal data, it is likely that almost all data provided by the consumer to the provider of the digital content will be considered as personal data;

—	the EDPS recommends avoiding referring to data (actively) provided by the consumer since it contradicts the existing and future rules on data protection;

—	the Proposal should state explicitly that data processed by the suppliers shall only be used insofar this is in line with the EU data protection framework, including the GDPR and the e-Privacy legislation;

—

the EDPS recommends that Articles 13 and 16 of the Proposal refer to the GDPR when it comes to the rights to erasure and the right to access one’s data, to the extent that personal data are concerned. Should non-personal data (‘other data’) be processed, the EDPS recommends that the provisions of Article 13 and 16 should be aligned with the regime provided in the GDPR for the sake of consistency.

Brussels, 14 March 2017.

Giovanni BUTTARELLI

European Data Protection Supervisor

(1) Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain aspects concerning contracts for the supply of digital content, COM/2015/0634, Available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1450431933547&uri=CELEX:52015PC0634

(2) Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain aspects concerning contracts for the online and other distance sales of goods, COM/2015/0635 final.

(3) For more information, see http://ec.europa.eu/justice/contract/digital-contract-rules/index_en.htm

(4) In this context, an attempts was already made by the Commission: see Proposal for a Regulation of the European parliament and of the Council on a Common European Sales Law, COM/2011/0635 final; this proposal was abandoned by the Commission.

(5) Available at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fNONSGML%2bCOMPARL%2bPE-582.370%2b03%2bDOC%2bPDF%2bV0%2f%2fEN

(6) Available at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fNONSGML%2bCOMPARL%2bPE-592.444%2b01%2bDOC%2bPDF%2bV0%2f%2fEN

(7) Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 304, 22.11.2011, p. 64).

(8) Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ L 95, 21.4.1993, p. 29).

(9) Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (‘Directive on electronic commerce’) (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1).

(10) See Explanatory Memorandum of the Proposal, page 3.

(11) See Article 3(1) of the Proposal.

(12) See Article 13(2)(c) of the Proposal.

(13) See Article 13(2)(b) of the Proposal.

(14) See Article 3(1) and (4), Article 13(2)(b), Article 15(2)(c) and Article 16(4)(a) of the Proposal.

(15) See Article 3(4) of the Proposal.

(16) Article 13(2)(b) and Article 16(4)(b) of the Proposal.

(17) Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31).

(18) Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).

(19) Article 3(8) of the Proposal.

(20) Currently, in the context of the analysis of the Proposal, the main texts applicable are the Directive 95/46/EC which will be repealed and replaced by the Regulation (EU) 2016/679, and the Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications) (OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37) (also called ‘e-Privacy Directive’). The e-Privacy Directive should be repealed by the recent Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the respect for private life and the protection of personal data in electronic communications and repealing Directive 2002/58/EC, 10 January 2017, COM (2017) 10 final (Regulation on Privacy and Electronic Communications).

23.6.2017

Official Journal of the European Union

C 200/14

Summary of the opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the new legal basis of the Schengen Information System

(The full text of this opinion can be found in English, French and German on the EDPS website www.edps.europa.eu)

(2017/C 200/08)

The Schengen Information System (‘SIS’) is one of the biggest and the longest-existing large-scale information systems which support external border control and law enforcement cooperation in the Schengen States. After the three years of the operation of its second generation the Commission conducted the overall evaluation. As a result on 21 December 2016 the legislative package repealing the current legal basis of SIS was presented. Those legal changes are also the part of a wider process of the enhancement of the external border management and the internal security in the European Union to respond to the challenges brought by the terrorism threats and the significant influx of migrants.

The EDPS notes the ongoing reflections on the interoperability of EU large-scale information systems, including the SIS, which have been created to address specific needs at a given time. This has led to a complex legal framework in the field of migration, border management and police cooperation. In this respect, the EDPS would like to encourage the legislator to further reflect, beyond the current proposals, on a more consistent, coherent and comprehensive legal framework for EU large-scale information systems for border management and security in full compliance with data protection principles.

The legislative package is composed of three draft regulations on: police and judicial cooperation, border checks and return. Those proposals aim mainly to better support European Union’s return and counter-terrorism policies, to harmonise national procedures to use SIS and to improve the security of the system.

The EDPS, having in mind his role as the supervisory authority of the central SIS system, welcomes the attention paid to the data protection in the proposals and the consistency with other data-protection-related legal acts.

The EDPS considers that the introduction of new categories of data, including new biometric identifiers, raises the question of the necessity and proportionality of proposed changes and for this reason the proposals should be complemented with the impact assessment on the right of privacy and the right to data protection enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.

Moreover the increase number of authorities having access to the system raises concerns regarding the final responsibility and accountability for the processing of personal data by different actors. The proposals should better specify in some cases the access rights to different kind of alerts in SIS. In this regard special attention should be paid to the division of roles, responsibilities and access rights of different users having access to the system.

Finally, the EDPS asks for better justification of the extension of the data retention period of alerts on persons and proposes a series of additional recommendations to further improve the proposals.

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

The Schengen Information System (hereinafter ‘SIS’) was established in 1995 by Article 92 of the Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement (1). The second generation of the Schengen Information System (hereinafter ‘SIS II’) entered into operation on 9 April 2013 on the basis of the following legal instruments:

—	Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 (2) related to the use of SIS II in checks on third-country nationals who do not fulfil the conditions of entry or stay in Schengen area,

—	Council Decision 2007/533/JHA (3) related to the use of SIS II for police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, and

—	Regulation (EC) No 1986/2006 (4) regarding access to the SIS II by the services in the Member States responsible for vehicle registration (5).

In 2016, the Commission carried out an evaluation of SIS after three years of operation of its second generation (6). As a result the need of improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the system was identified. In this context on 21 December 2016 the Commission issued three proposals for regulations as a first legislative package on the Schengen Information System:

—

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of border checks, amending Regulation (EU) No 515/2014 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 (hereinafter ‘the SIS Proposal on border checks’) (7),

—

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment, operation and use of the Schengen Information System (SIS) in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, amending Regulation (EU) No 515/2014 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1986/2006, Council Decision 2007/533/JHA and Commission Decision 2010/261/EU (hereinafter ‘the SIS Proposal on police and judicial cooperation’) (8), and

—	Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the use of the Schengen Information System for the return of illegally staying third country nationals (hereinafter ‘the SIS Proposal on return’) (9).

It is worth mentioning in this context that the Commission intends to issue in the coming months a second set of legislative proposals on SIS to improve its interoperability with other large-scale IT systems in the EU on the basis of the findings of the High Level Expert Group on Information Systems and Interoperability (10).

The EDPS notes that the SIS as well as other existing (and proposed new) large-scale EU information systems are part of a broader reflection launched by the Commission on how to make the management and use of data, both for border management and security purposes, more effective and efficient. The EDPS understands that the objectives of such a reflection are to maximise the benefits of existing information systems and develop new and complementary actions to address gaps. One way identified by the Commission to achieve these objectives is developing interoperability between EU information systems, including the SIS (11).

The EDPS notes that the multiplicity of large-scale EU information systems is the result of the specific needs addressed on the basis of evolving institutional, policy and legal contexts. This has led to complexity of legal frameworks and governance models.

In this context, the EDPS encourages the legislator to reflect, beyond the current proposals, on a more consistent, coherent and comprehensive legal framework where EU databases for border management and for law enforcement better embed a modern set of core data protection principles such as: purpose limitation, use of state-of-the-art security, proportionate data retention periods, data quality, data protection by design, traceability, effective supervision and dissuasive sanctions for misuse.

As regards the current proposal, the EDPS welcomes that he was informally consulted by the Commission services before the adoption of the legislative package regarding SIS II. However, he regrets that due to the tight deadline, the complexity and the length of the proposals, it was not possible to provide a contribution at that time.

5. CONCLUSION

52.

As a general observation, the EDPS notes the complexity of the existing landscape of EU information systems and would like to encourage the legislator to reflect, beyond the current proposals, on a more consistent, coherent and comprehensive legal framework for EU large-scale information systems for border management and law enforcement purposes in full compliance with the data protection principles.

53.

The EDPS welcomes the attention paid to data protection throughout the proposals on SIS. Nevertheless he sees room for improvement on the following issues

54.

The EDPS would like to underline that the lack of a (data protection) impact assessment does not make it possible to fully assess the necessity and proportionality of changes proposed to the current legal basis for SIS II. In particular, in view of the risks posed by the introduction of new categories of data, in particular the new biometric identifiers, in the system, the EDPS recommends conducting an assessment of the need to collect and use such data in the SIS and of the proportionality of their collection.

55.

As regard access to the SIS by the EBCG Teams, teams of staff involved in return-related tasks and members of the migration management support teams, the EDPS stresses that the large number of different actors involved in the data processing should not lead to a blurring of accountability between the EBCG Agency and Member States. Therefore, he recommends specifying in the proposals that the final responsibility and accountability for the processing of personal data will be with the relevant Member States authorities, which will be considered as ‘controllers’ in accordance with EU data protection law.

56.

Furthermore the EBCG Teams, teams of staff involved in return-related tasks and members of the migration management support teams should not have access to all categories of alerts in the SIS but only to those relevant for the mission of the given team. Simultaneously the proposals should clearly specify that the access to the SIS need to be restricted only to the representatives of the authorised bodies.

57.

The EDPS would also like to draw the attention of the legislator on the need to fully justify the proportionality of the extension of the data retention period of alerts on person from three years in the current legal basis to five years in the proposed legislative package.

58.

In addition to the main concerns identified above, the recommendations of the EDPS in the present opinion relate to the following aspects of the proposals:

—	the reporting of the security incidents,

—	the information campaign,

—	the architecture of the system,

—	the use of the automatic number plate recognition systems,

—	the statistics generated by the system.

59.

The EDPS remains available to provide further advice on the proposals, also in relation to any delegated or implementing act adopted pursuant to the proposed regulations, which might have an impact on the processing of personal data.

Brussels, 3 May 2017.

Giovanni BUTTARELLI

European Data Protection Supervisor

(1) Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985 between the Government of the States of the Benelux Economic Union, the Federal Republic of Germany and the French Republic on the gradual abolition of checks at their common borders, 19 June 1990 (OJ L 239, 22.9.2000, p. 19).

(2) Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on the establishment, operation and use of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) (OJ L 381, 28.12.2006, p. 4).

(3) Council Decision 2007/533/JHA of 12 June 2007 on the establishment operation and use of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) (OJ L 205, 7.8.2007, p. 63).

(4) OJ L 381, 28.12.2006, p. 1.

(5) Those legal acts are complemented by the Regulation (EU) No 515/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 establishing, as part of the Internal Security Fund, the instrument for financial support for external borders and visa and repealing Decision No 574/2007/EC (OJ L 150, 20.5.2014, p. 143), which established financial support for the creation of SIS II.

(6) Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the evaluation of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) in accordance with Article 24(5), 43 (3) and 50 (5) of Regulation (EC) no 1987/2006 and Article 59(3) and 66 (5) of Decision 2007/533/JHA, COM(2016) 880 final.

(7) COM(2016) 882 final.

(8) COM(2016) 883 final.

(9) COM(2016) 881 final.

(10) Commission Decision 2016/C 257/03 of 17.6.2016, further information available: http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regexpert/index.cfm?do=groupDetail.groupDetail&groupID=3435

(11) Communication of 6 April 2016 on ‘Stronger and Smarter Information Systems for Borders and Security’, COM(2016)205.

23.6.2017

Official Journal of the European Union

C 200/17

Notice of initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of Low Carbon Ferro-Chrome originating in the People's Republic of China, Russia and Turkey

(2017/C 200/09)

The European Commission (‘the Commission’) has received a complaint pursuant to Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union (1) (‘the basic Regulation’), alleging that imports of Low Carbon Ferro-Chrome, originating in the People's Republic of China, Russia and Turkey, are being dumped and are thereby causing material injury to the Union industry.

1. Complaint

The complaint was lodged on 10 May 2017 by the Association of European ferro-alloy producers (‘Euroalliages’) on behalf of the sole EU producer of Low Carbon Ferro-Chrome in the Union, Elektrowerk Weisweiler GmbH (‘the complainant’). The complainant represents 100 % of Union production of Low Carbon Ferro-Chrome.

2. Product under investigation

The product subject to this investigation is ferro-chromium, containing by weight more than 0,05 % but not more than 0,5 % of carbon (‘the product under investigation’).

3. Allegation of dumping

The product allegedly being dumped is the product under investigation, originating in the People's Republic of China, Russia and Turkey (‘the countries concerned’), currently falling within CN code 7202 49 50. This CN code is given for information only.

The information available to the Commission contains a comparison of the normal value with the export price (at ex-works level) of the product under investigation when sold for export to the Union.

On this basis the dumping margins calculated are significant for all the countries concerned.

4. Allegation of injury and causation

The complainant has provided evidence that imports of the product under investigation from the countries concerned have increased overall in absolute terms and in terms of market share.

The prima facie evidence provided by the complainant shows that the volume and the prices of the imported product under investigation have had, among other consequences, a negative impact on the quantities sold, the level of prices charged and the market share held by the Union industry, resulting in substantial adverse effects on the overall performance of the Union industry.

5. Procedure

Having determined, after informing the Member States, that the complaint has been lodged by or on behalf of the Union industry and that there is sufficient evidence to justify the initiation of a proceeding, the Commission hereby initiates an investigation pursuant to Article 5 of the basic Regulation.

The investigation will determine whether the product under investigation originating in the countries concerned is being dumped and whether the dumped imports have caused injury to the Union industry. If the conclusions are affirmative, the investigation will examine whether the imposition of measures would not be against the Union interest.

5.1. Investigation period and period considered

The investigation of dumping and injury will cover the period from 1 April 2016 to 31 March 2017 (‘the investigation period’). The examination of trends relevant for the assessment of injury will cover the period from 1 January 2014 to the end of the investigation period (‘the period considered’).

5.2. Procedure for the determination of dumping

Exporting producers (2) of the product under investigation from the countries concerned are invited to participate in the Commission investigation.

5.2.1. Investigating exporting producers

5.2.1.1. Procedure for selecting exporting producers to be investigated in the People's Republic of China and Russia

(a) Sampling

In view of the potentially large number of exporting producers in the People's Republic of China and Russia involved in this proceeding and in order to complete the investigation within the statutory time limits, the Commission may limit the exporting producers to be investigated to a reasonable number by selecting a sample (this process is also referred to as ‘sampling’). The sampling will be carried out in accordance with Article 17 of the basic Regulation.

In order to enable the Commission to decide whether sampling is necessary, and if so, to select a sample, all exporting producers, or representatives acting on their behalf, are hereby requested to make themselves known to the Commission. These parties have to do so within 15 days of the date of publication of this Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union, unless otherwise specified, by providing the Commission with information on their companies requested in Annex I to this Notice.

In order to obtain information it deems necessary for the selection of the sample of exporting producers, the Commission will also contact the authorities of the People's Republic of China and Russia and may contact any known associations of exporting producers.

All interested parties wishing to submit any other relevant information regarding the selection of the sample, excluding the information requested above, must do so within 21 days of the publication of this Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union, unless otherwise specified.

If a sample is necessary, the exporting producers may be selected based on the largest representative volume of exports to the Union which can reasonably be investigated within the time available. All known exporting producers, the authorities of the People's Republic of China and Russia and associations of exporting producers will be notified by the Commission, via the authorities of the People's Republic of China and Russia if appropriate, of the companies selected to be in the sample.

In order to obtain information it deems necessary for its investigation with regard to exporting producers, the Commission will send questionnaires to the exporting producers selected to be in the sample, to any known association of exporting producers, and to the authorities of the People's Republic of China and Russia.

All exporting producers selected to be in the sample will have to submit a completed questionnaire within 37 days from the date of notification of the sample selection, unless otherwise specified.

Without prejudice to the possible application of Article 18 of the basic Regulation, companies that have agreed to their possible inclusion in the sample but are not selected to be in the sample will be considered to be cooperating (‘non-sampled cooperating exporting producers’). Without prejudice to section (b) below, the anti-dumping duty that may be applied to imports from non-sampled cooperating exporting producers will not exceed the weighted average margin of dumping established for the exporting producers in the sample (3).

(b) Individual dumping margin for companies not included in the sample

Non-sampled cooperating exporting producers may request, pursuant to Article 17(3) of the basic Regulation, that the Commission establish their individual dumping margins (‘individual dumping margin’). The exporting producers wishing to claim an individual dumping margin must request a questionnaire and return it duly completed within 37 days of the date of notification of the sample selection, unless otherwise specified. The Commission will examine whether they can be granted an individual duty in accordance with Article 9(5) of the basic Regulation. Those exporting producers who consider that market economy conditions prevail for them in respect of the manufacture and sale of the product under investigation, may submit a properly substantiated market economy treatment claim to this effect (‘MET claim’) and return it duly completed within the deadlines specified in section 5.2.2.2 below.

However, exporting producers claiming an individual dumping margin should be aware that the Commission may nonetheless decide not to determine their individual dumping margin if, for instance, the number of exporting producers is so large that such determination would be unduly burdensome and would prevent the timely completion of the investigation.

5.2.1.2. Procedure for exporting producers to be investigated in Turkey

All exporting producers and associations of exporting producers in Turkey are invited to contact the Commission, preferably by email, immediately but no later than 15 days after the publication of this Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union, unless otherwise specified, in order to make themselves known and request a questionnaire. In order to obtain information it deems necessary for its investigation with regard to exporting producers, the Commission will send questionnaires to known exporting producers in Turkey, to any known association of exporting producers, and to the authorities of Turkey.

The exporting producers and, where applicable, the associations of exporting producers must submit the completed questionnaire within 37 days of the date of publication of this Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union, unless otherwise specified.

5.2.2. Additional procedure with regard to exporting producers in the People's Republic of China

In accordance with Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation, normal value for imports from the People's Republic of China is normally determined on the basis of the price or constructed value in an analogue country. For that purpose, the Commission will select an appropriate analogue country. The Commission has provisionally chosen Russia. According to the information available to the Commission, other market economy producers are, inter alia, Brazil, South Africa, Turkey, Taiwan and the United States of America. With the aim of finally selecting the analogue country, the Commission will examine whether there is production and sales of the product under investigation in those market economy third countries for which there are indications that the production of the product under investigation is taking place. Interested parties are hereby invited to comment on the appropriateness of the choice of the analogue country within 10 days of the date of publication of this Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union.

In accordance with Article 2(7)(b) of the basic Regulation, individual exporting producers, which consider that market economy conditions prevail for them, may submit a properly substantiated market economy treatment claim to this effect (‘MET claim’). MET will be granted if the assessment of the MET claim shows that the criteria laid down in Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation (4) are fulfilled. The dumping margin of the exporting producers granted MET will be calculated, to the extent possible and without prejudice to the use of facts available pursuant to Article 18 of the basic Regulation, by using their own normal value and export prices in accordance with Article 2(7)(b) of the basic Regulation.

The Commission will send MET claim forms to all the exporting producers in the People's Republic of China selected to be in the sample and to non-sampled cooperating exporting producers that wish to apply for an individual dumping margin, to any known association of exporting producers, and to the authorities of the People's Republic of China. The Commission will assess only MET claim forms submitted by the exporting producers in the People's Republic of China selected to be in the sample and by the non-sampled cooperating exporting producers whose request for an individual dumping margin has been accepted.

All exporting producers claiming MET must submit a completed MET claim form within 21 days of the date of the notification of the sample selection or of the decision not to select a sample, unless otherwise specified.

5.2.3. Investigating unrelated importers (5) (6)

Unrelated importers of the product under investigation from the People's Republic of China, Russia and Turkey to the Union are invited to participate in this investigation.

In view of the potentially large number of unrelated importers involved in this proceeding and in order to complete the investigation within the statutory time limits, the Commission may limit to a reasonable number the unrelated importers that will be investigated by selecting a sample (this process is also referred to as ‘sampling’). The sampling will be carried out in accordance with Article 17 of the basic Regulation.

In order to enable the Commission to decide whether sampling is necessary and, if so, to select a sample, all unrelated importers, or representatives acting on their behalf, are hereby requested to make themselves known to the Commission. These parties must do so within 15 days of the date of publication of this Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union, unless otherwise specified, by providing the Commission with the information on their companies requested in Annex II to this Notice.

In order to obtain information it deems necessary for the selection of the sample of unrelated importers, the Commission may also contact any known associations of importers.

If a sample is necessary, the importers may be selected based on the largest representative volume of sales of the product under investigation in the Union which can reasonably be investigated within the time available. All known unrelated importers and associations of importers will be notified by the Commission of the companies selected to be in the sample.

In order to obtain information it deems necessary for its investigation, the Commission will send questionnaires to the sampled unrelated importers and to any known association of importers. These parties must submit a completed questionnaire within 37 days from the date of the notification of the sample selection, unless otherwise specified.

5.3. Procedure for the determination of injury and investigating Union producers

A determination of injury is based on positive evidence and involves an objective examination of the volume of the dumped imports, their effect on prices on the Union market and the consequent impact of those imports on the Union industry. In order to establish whether the Union industry is injured, Union producers of the product under investigation are invited to participate in the Commission investigation.

In order to obtain information it deems necessary for its investigation with regard to Union producers the Commission will send questionnaires to the known Union producer or representative Union producer and to the association of Union producers, namely to Elektrowerk Weisweiler GmbH and Euroalliages.

The aforementioned Union producer and the association of Union producers must submit the completed questionnaire within 37 days of the date of publication of this Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union, unless otherwise specified.

Any Union producer and association of Union producers not listed above is invited to contact the Commission, preferably by email, immediately but no later than 15 days after the publication of this Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union, unless otherwise specified, in order to make itself known and request a questionnaire.

5.4. Procedure for the assessment of Union interest

Should the existence of dumping and injury caused thereby be established, a decision will be reached, pursuant to Article 21 of the basic Regulation, as to whether the adoption of anti-dumping measures would not be against the Union interest. Union producers, importers and their representative associations, users and their representative associations, and representative consumer organisations are invited to make themselves known within 15 days of the date of publication of this Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union, unless otherwise specified. In order to participate in the investigation, the representative consumer organisations have to demonstrate, within the same deadline, that there is an objective link between their activities and the product under investigation.

Parties that make themselves known within the above deadline may provide the Commission with information on the Union interest within 37 days of the date of publication of this Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union, unless otherwise specified. This information may be provided either in a free format or by completing a questionnaire prepared by the Commission. In any case, information submitted pursuant to Article 21 will only be taken into account if supported by factual evidence at the time of submission.

5.5. Other written submissions

Subject to the provisions of this Notice, all interested parties are hereby invited to make their views known, submit information and provide supporting evidence. Unless otherwise specified, this information and supporting evidence must reach the Commission within 37 days of the date of publication of this Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union.

5.6. Possibility to be heard by the Commission investigation services

All interested parties may request to be heard by the Commission investigation services. Any request to be heard should be made in writing and should specify the reasons for the request. For hearings on issues pertaining to the initial stage of the investigation the request must be submitted within 15 days of the date of publication of this Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union. Thereafter, a request to be heard must be submitted within the specific deadlines set by the Commission in its communication with the parties.

5.7. Instructions for making written submissions and sending completed questionnaires and correspondence

Information submitted to the Commission for the purpose of trade defence investigations shall be free from copyrights. Interested parties, before submitting to the Commission information and/or data which is subject to third party copyrights, must request specific permission to the copyright holder explicitly allowing (a) the Commission to use the information and data for the purpose of this trade defence proceeding and (b) to provide the information and/or data to interested parties to this investigation in a form that allows them to exercise their rights of defence.

All written submissions, including the information requested in this Notice, completed questionnaires and correspondence provided by interested parties for which confidential treatment is requested shall be labelled ‘Limited’ (7).

Interested parties providing ‘Limited’ information are required to furnish non-confidential summaries of it pursuant to Article 19(2) of the basic Regulation, which will be labelled ‘For inspection by interested parties’. These summaries should be sufficiently detailed to permit a reasonable understanding of the substance of the information submitted in confidence. If an interested party providing confidential information does not furnish a non-confidential summary of it in the requested format and quality, such information may be disregarded.

Interested parties are invited to make all submissions and requests by email including scanned powers of attorney and certification sheets, with the exception of voluminous replies which shall be submitted on a CD-ROM or DVD by hand or by registered mail. By using email, interested parties express their agreement with the rules applicable to electronic submissions contained in the document ‘CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION IN TRADE DEFENCE CASES’ published on the website of the Directorate-General for Trade: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2011/june/tradoc_148003.pdf The interested parties must indicate their name, address, telephone and a valid email address and they should ensure that the provided email address is a functioning official business email which is checked on a daily basis. Once contact details are provided, the Commission will communicate with interested parties by email only, unless they explicitly request to receive all documents from the Commission by another means of communication or unless the nature of the document to be sent requires the use of a registered mail. For further rules and information concerning correspondence with the Commission including principles that apply to submissions by email, interested parties should consult the communication instructions with interested parties referred to above.

Commission address for correspondence:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Trade

Directorate H

Office: CHAR 04/039

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

E-mail

TRADE-AD638-DUMPING-CHINA@ec.europa.eu

TRADE-AD638-DUMPING-RUSSIA@ec.europa.eu

TRADE-AD638-DUMPING-TURKEY@ec.europa.eu

TRADE-AD638-INJURY@ec.europa.eu

6. Non-cooperation

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

Where it is found that any interested party has supplied false or misleading information, the information may be disregarded and use may be made of facts available.

If an interested party does not cooperate or cooperates only partially and findings are therefore based on facts available in accordance with Article 18 of the basic Regulation, the result may be less favourable to that party than if it had cooperated.

Failure to give a computerised response shall not be deemed to constitute non-cooperation, provided that the interested party shows that presenting the response as requested would result in an unreasonable extra burden or unreasonable additional cost. The interested party should immediately contact the Commission.

7. Hearing Officer

Interested parties may request the intervention of the Hearing Officer in trade proceedings. The Hearing Officer acts as an interface between the interested parties and the Commission investigation services. The Hearing Officer reviews requests for access to the file, disputes regarding the confidentiality of documents, requests for extension of time limits and requests by third parties to be heard. The Hearing Officer may organise a hearing with an individual interested party and mediate to ensure that the interested parties' rights of defence are being fully exercised.

A request for a hearing with the Hearing Officer should be made in writing and should specify the reasons for the request. For hearings on issues pertaining to the initial stage of the investigation the request must be submitted within 15 days of the date of publication of this Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union. Thereafter, a request to be heard must be submitted within specific deadlines set by the Commission in its communication with the parties.

The Hearing Officer will also provide opportunities for a hearing involving parties to take place which would allow different views to be presented and rebuttal arguments offered on issues pertaining, among other things, to dumping, injury, causal link and Union interest. Such a hearing would, as a rule, take place at the latest at the end of the fourth week following the disclosure of provisional findings.

For further information and contact details interested parties may consult the Hearing Officer's web pages on DG Trade's website: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/trade-policy-and-you/contacts/hearing-officer/

8. Schedule of the investigation

The investigation will be concluded, pursuant to Article 6(9) of the basic Regulation within 15 months of the date of the publication of this Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union. In accordance with Article 7(1) of the basic Regulation, provisional measures may be imposed no later than nine months from the publication of this Notice in the Official Journal of the European Union.

9. Processing of personal data

Any personal data collected in this investigation will be treated in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data (8).

(1) OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21.

(2) An exporting producer is any company in the countries concerned which produces and exports the product under investigation to the Union market, either directly or via a third party, including any of its related companies involved in the production, domestic sales or exports of the product under investigation.

(3) Pursuant to Article 9(6) of the basic Regulation, any zero and de minimis margins, and margins established in accordance with the circumstances described in Article 18 of the basic Regulation will be disregarded.

(4) The exporting producers have to demonstrate in particular that: (i) business decisions and costs are made in response to market conditions and without significant State interference; (ii) firms have one clear set of basic accounting records which are independently audited in line with international accounting standards and are applied for all purposes; (iii) there are no significant distortions carried over from the former non-market economy system; (iv) bankruptcy and property laws guarantee legal certainty and stability and (v) exchange rate conversions are carried out at market rates.

(5) Only importers not related to exporting producers can be sampled. Importers that are related to exporting producers have to fill in Annex I to the questionnaire for these exporting producers. In accordance with Article 127 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2447 of 24 November 2015 laying down detailed rules for implementing certain provisions of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the Union Customs Code, two persons shall be deemed to be related if: (a) they are officers or directors of the other person's business; (b) they are legally recognised partners in business; (c) they are employer and employee; (d) a third party directly or indirectly owns, controls or holds 5 % or more of the outstanding voting stock or shares of both of them; (e) one of them directly or indirectly controls the other; (f) both of them are directly or indirectly controlled by a third person; (g) together they control a third person directly or indirectly; or (h) they are members of the same family (OJ L 343, 29.12.2015, p. 558). Persons shall be deemed to be members of the same family only if they stand in any of the following relationships to one another: (i) husband and wife, (ii) parent and child, (iii) brother and sister (whether by whole or half blood), (iv) grandparent and grandchild, (v) uncle or aunt and nephew or niece, (vi) parent-in-law and son-in-law or daughter-in-law, (vii) brother-in-law and sister-in-law. In accordance with Article 5(4) of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the Union Customs Code, ‘person’ means a natural person, a legal person, and any association of persons which is not a legal person but which is recognised under Union or national law as having the capacity to perform legal acts (OJ L 269, 10.10.2013, p. 1).

(6) The data provided by unrelated importers may also be used in relation to aspects of this investigation other than the determination of dumping.

(7) A ‘Limited’ document is a document which is considered confidential pursuant to Article 19 of the basic Regulation and Article 6 of the WTO Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994 (Anti-Dumping Agreement). It is also a document protected pursuant to Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43).

(8) OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1.

ANNEX I

Text of image

☐ ‘Limited version’ (1)

☐ Version ‘For inspection by interested parties’

(tick the appropriate box)

ANTI-DUMPING PROCEEDING CONCERNING IMPORTS OF LOW CARBON FERRO-CHROME ORIGINATING IN THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA, RUSSIA AND TURKEY

INFORMATION FOR THE SELECTION OF THE SAMPLE OF EXPORTING PRODUCERS IN THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA AND RUSSIA

This form is designed to assist exporting producers in the People’s Republic of China and Russia in responding to the request for sampling information made in point 5.2.1.1.(a) of the notice of initiation.

Both the ‘Limited’ version and the version ‘For inspection by interested parties’ should be returned to the Commission as set out in the notice of initiation.

1. IDENTITY AND CONTACT DETAILS

Supply the following details about your company:

Company name

Address

Contact person

Email address

Telephone

Fax

2. TURNOVER AND SALES VOLUME

Indicate the turnover in the accounting currency of the company during the investigation period (export sales to the Union for each of the 28 Member States (2) separately and in total and domestic sales) of Low Carbon Ferro-Chrome as defined in the notice of initiation and the corresponding weight or volume. State the unit of weight or volume and the currency used.

Specify the unit of measurement

Value in accounting currency

Specify the currency used

Export sales to the Union, for each of the 28 Member States separately and in total, of the product under investigation, manufactured by your company

Total:

Name each Member State (1):

Domestic sales of the product under investigation, manufactured by your company

(1) Add additional rows where necessary.

(1) This document is for internal use only. It is protected pursuant to Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43). It is a confidential document pursuant to Article 19 of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union (OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21) and Article 6 of the WTO Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994 (Anti-Dumping Agreement).

(2) The 28 Member States of the European Union are: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.

Text of image

3. ACTIVITIES OF YOUR COMPANY AND RELATED COMPANIES (1)

Give details of the precise activities of the company and all related companies (please list them and state the relationship to your company) involved in the production and/or selling (export and/or domestic) of the product under investigation. Such activities could include but are not limited to purchasing the product under investigation or producing it under sub-contracting arrangements, or processing or trading the product under investigation.

Company name and location

Activities

Relationship

4. OTHER INFORMATION

Please provide any other relevant information which the company considers useful to assist the Commission in the selection of the sample.

5. INDIVIDUAL DUMPING MARGIN

The company declares that, in the event that it is not selected to be in the sample, it would like to receive a questionnaire and other claim forms in order to fill these in and thus claim an individual dumping margin in accordance with section 5.2.1.1.(b) of the notice of initiation.

☐ Yes

☐ No

6. CERTIFICATION

By providing the above information, the company agrees to its possible inclusion in the sample. If the company is selected to be part of the sample, this will involve completing a questionnaire and accepting a visit at its premises in order to verify its response. If the company indicates that it does not agree to its possible inclusion in the sample, it will be deemed not to have cooperated in the investigation. The Commission’s findings for non-cooperating exporting producers are based on facts available and the result may be less favourable to that company than if it had cooperated.

Signature of authorised official:

Name and title of authorised official:

Date

(1) In accordance with Article 127 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2447 of 24 November 2015 laying down detailed rules for implementing certain provisions of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the Union Customs Code, two persons shall be deemed to be related if: (a) they are officers or directors of the other person’s business; (b) they are legally recognised partners in business; (c) they are employer and employee; (d) a third party directly or indirectly owns, controls or holds 5 % or more of the outstanding voting stock or shares of both of them; (e) one of them directly or indirectly controls the other; (f) both of them are directly or indirectly controlled by a third person; (g) together they control a third person directly or indirectly; or (h) they are members of the same family (OJ L 343, 29.12.2015, p. 558). Persons shall be deemed to be members of the same family only if they stand in any of the following relationships to one another: (i) husband and wife, (ii) parent and child, (iii) brother and sister (whether by whole or half blood), (iv) grandparent and grandchild, (v) uncle or aunt and nephew or niece, (vi) parent-in-law and son-in-law or daughter-in-law, (vii) brother-in-law and sister-in-law. In accordance with Article 5(4) of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the Union Customs Code, ‘person’ means a natural person, a legal person, and any association of persons which is not a legal person but which is recognised under Union or national law as having the capacity to perform legal acts (OJ L 269, 10.10.2013, p. 1).

ANNEX II

Text of image

☐ ‘Limited version’ (1)

☐ Version ‘For inspection by interested parties’

(tick the appropriate box)

ANTI-DUMPING PROCEEDING CONCERNING IMPORTS OF LOW CARBON FERRO-CHROME ORIGINATING IN THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA, RUSSIA AND TURKEY

INFORMATION FOR THE SELECTION OF THE SAMPLE OF UNRELATED IMPORTERS

This form is designed to assist unrelated importers in responding to the request for sampling information made in point 5.2.3 of the notice of initiation.

Both the ‘Limited’ version and the version ‘For inspection by interested parties’ should be returned to the Commission as set out in the notice of initiation.

1. IDENTITY AND CONTACT DETAILS

Supply the following details about your company:

Company name

Address

Contact person

Email address

Telephone

Fax

2. TURNOVER AND SALES VOLUME

Indicate the total turnover in euros (EUR) of the company, and the turnover and weight or volume for imports into the Union (2) and resales on the Union market after importation from the People’s Republic of China, Russia and Turkey, during the investigation period, of the product concerned as defined in the notice of initiation and the corresponding weight or volume. State the unit of weight or volume used.

Specify the unit of measurement

Value in euros (EUR)

Total turnover of your company in euros (EUR)

Imports of the product under investigation into the Union

Resales on the Union market after importation from the People’s Republic of China, Russia and Turkey of the product under investigation

(2) The 28 Member States of the European Union are: Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Croatia, Ireland, Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, Malta, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.

Text of image

3. ACTIVITIES OF YOUR COMPANY AND RELATED COMPANIES (1)

Company name and location

Activities

Relationship

4. OTHER INFORMATION

Please provide any other relevant information which the company considers useful to assist the Commission in the selection of the sample.

5. CERTIFICATION

By providing the above information, the company agrees to its possible inclusion in the sample. If the company is selected to be part of the sample, this will involve completing a questionnaire and accepting a visit at its premises in order to verify its response. If the company indicates that it does not agree to its possible inclusion in the sample, it will be deemed not to have cooperated in the investigation. The Commission’s findings for non-cooperating importers are based on the facts available and the result may be less favourable to that company than if it had cooperated.

Signature of authorised official:

Name and title of authorised official:

Date:

		ISSN 1977-091X
Official Journal of the European Union		C 200

English edition	Information and Notices	Volume 60 23 June 2017

Notice No	Contents	page
	II Information
	INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES
	European Commission
2017/C 200/01	Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8502 — Softbank/Bharti/Hon Hai/SB Energy) ( 1 )	1
2017/C 200/02	Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8475 — Softbank Group/Fortress Investment Group) ( 1 )	1
2017/C 200/03	Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8494 — Ardian France/Lasalle Investment Management/Europa) ( 1 )	2
2017/C 200/04	Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8476 — Oaktree/Vitanas) ( 1 )	2

	V Announcements
	PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMON COMMERCIAL POLICY
	European Commission
2017/C 200/09	Notice of initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of Low Carbon Ferro-Chrome originating in the People's Republic of China, Russia and Turkey	17
	PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY
	European Commission
2017/C 200/10	Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8484 — Gasunie/Vopak/Oiltanking/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure ( 1 )	27
2017/C 200/11	Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8532 — Blackstone Group/Sponda) — Candidate case for simplified procedure ( 1 )	28
2017/C 200/12	Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8452 — SUEZ/GE Water & Process Technologies) ( 1 )	29

	Currency	Exchange rate
USD	US dollar	1,1169
JPY	Japanese yen	124,27
DKK	Danish krone	7,4388
GBP	Pound sterling	0,88168
SEK	Swedish krona	9,7683
CHF	Swiss franc	1,0867
ISK	Iceland króna
NOK	Norwegian krone	9,4855
BGN	Bulgarian lev	1,9558
CZK	Czech koruna	26,270
HUF	Hungarian forint	309,22
PLN	Polish zloty	4,2402
RON	Romanian leu	4,5823
TRY	Turkish lira	3,9277
AUD	Australian dollar	1,4812
CAD	Canadian dollar	1,4853
HKD	Hong Kong dollar	8,7127
NZD	New Zealand dollar	1,5395
SGD	Singapore dollar	1,5529
KRW	South Korean won	1 275,96
ZAR	South African rand	14,5204
CNY	Chinese yuan renminbi	7,6323
HRK	Croatian kuna	7,4215
IDR	Indonesian rupiah	14 885,48
MYR	Malaysian ringgit	4,8021
PHP	Philippine peso	56,234
RUB	Russian rouble	66,7825
THB	Thai baht	37,975
BRL	Brazilian real	3,7164
MXN	Mexican peso	20,2844
INR	Indian rupee	72,1515

	IV Notices
	NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES
	European Commission
2017/C 200/05	Euro exchange rates	3
2017/C 200/06	Commission Implementing Decision of 21 June 2017 on the publication in the Official Journal of the European Union of a request for amendment of a specification for a name in the wine sector referred to in Article 105 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Rosé des Riceys (PDO))	4
	European Data Protection Supervisor
2017/C 200/07	Summary of the Opinion on the Proposal for a Directive on certain aspects concerning contracts for the supply of digital content	10
2017/C 200/08	Summary of the opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the new legal basis of the Schengen Information System	14