ISSN 1977-0677 doi:10.3000/19770677.L_2014.043.eng |
||
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 43 |
|
![]() |
||
English edition |
Legislation |
Volume 57 |
|
|
|
(1) Text with EEA relevance |
EN |
Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period. The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
II Non-legislative acts
REGULATIONS
13.2.2014 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 43/1 |
COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 135/2014
of 11 February 2014
repealing the anti-dumping duty on imports of dicyandiamide originating in the People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (1) (‘the basic Regulation’), and in particular Articles 11(2), 11(6) and 9 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission after consulting the Advisory Committee,
Whereas:
1. PROCEDURE
1.1. Measures in force
(1) |
The Council, following an anti-dumping investigation (‘the original investigation’), imposed by Regulation (EC) No 1331/2007 (2) a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of 1-cyanoguanidine (dicyandiamide) originating in the People’s Republic of China (‘China’ or ‘the country concerned’) (‘the definitive anti-dumping measures’). The measures took the form of an ad valorem duty at the level of 49,1 %. |
1.2. Request for an expiry review
(2) |
Following the publication of a notice of impending expiry of the definitive anti-dumping measures in force (3), the Commission received on 14 August 2012 a request for the initiation of an expiry review of these measures pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation. The request was lodged by AlzChem AG (‘the applicant’), representing 100 % of the total Union production of dicyandiamide. |
(3) |
The application submitted was based on the grounds that the expiry of the definitive anti-dumping measures would be likely to result in continuation of dumping and recurrence of injury to the Union industry. |
1.3. Initiation of an expiry review
(4) |
Having determined, after consulting the Advisory Committee, that sufficient evidence existed for the initiation of an expiry review, the Commission announced on 15 November 2012, by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union (4) (‘the Notice of initiation’), the initiation of an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation. |
1.4. Investigation
1.4.1. Review investigation period and period considered
(5) |
The investigation of a continuation of dumping covered the period from 1 October 2011 to 30 September 2012 (‘the review investigation period’ or ‘RIP’). The examination of the trends relevant for the assessment of the likelihood of recurrence of injury covered the period from 1 January 2009 to the end of the review investigation period (‘the period considered’). |
(6) |
After final disclosure, the applicant argued that the period considered should have started in 2008 because 2009 would result in unrepresentative findings. It should firstly be noted that the Commission enjoys a broad discretion when determining the period to be taken into account for the purpose of verifying injury. Secondly, the applicant has made this claim at a stage too late to change the period. The period considered was announced early in the process, but the applicant did not contest it then. The period cannot be changed at such a late stage of the process for practical reasons and because a modification on the basis of the collected evidence would be against the impartial conduct of an investigation. The claim was, therefore, rejected. |
1.4.2. Parties concerned by the investigation
(7) |
The Commission officially advised the applicant, exporting producers in the country concerned, unrelated importers, users in the Union known to be concerned, and the representatives of the exporting country of the initiation of the expiry review. Interested parties were given the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing within the time limit set out in the Notice of initiation. |
(8) |
In view of the apparent large number of exporting producers in the country concerned and unrelated importers, it was considered appropriate, in accordance with Article 17 of the basic Regulation, to examine whether sampling should be used. In order to enable the Commission to decide whether sampling would be necessary and, if so, to select a sample, those parties were requested, pursuant to Article 17 of the basic Regulation, to make themselves known within 15 days of the initiation of the review and to provide the Commission with the information requested in the Notice of initiation. |
(9) |
Twelve known exporting producers in Chinawere contacted. As only one exporting producer from Chinacame forward with the requested information it was not necessary to select a sample of exporting producers. |
(10) |
With regard to importers, some 10 unrelated importers of dicyandiamide in the Union were identified and invited to provide sampling information. Only two of them came forward and were willing to cooperate in the current review. Consequently, no sampling was necessary for unrelated importers. |
(11) |
The Commission sent questionnaires to all parties known to be concerned and to those who made themselves known within the deadlines set in the Notice of initiation. Replies were received from the Union producer, the cooperating exporting producer in China, two unrelated importers and one user in the Union. |
(12) |
Additional representations were received from two unrelated importers/traders and three users in the Union. |
(13) |
The Commission sought and verified all the information it deemed necessary for a determination of the likelihood of a continuation of dumping and likelihood of recurrence of injury and of the Union interest. Verification visits were carried out at the premises of the following interested parties:
|
2. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT
2.1. Product concerned
(14) |
The product concerned by this review is the same as the one in the original investigation, i.e. 1-cyanoguanidine (dicyandiamide) (‘DCD’) originating in the People’s Republic of China (‘the product concerned’), currently falling within CN code 2926 20 00. It is produced from quick lime and carbon black, and appears after several production steps. It is a solid substance in the form of a fine, white, crystalline powder, usually odourless. |
(15) |
DCD is usually used as an intermediate to produce a broad range of other chemical intermediates, such as pharmaceuticals, various industrial applications — water, pulp and paper, textile, leather — and diverse fields of epoxy applications. It is a key element of the nitrogen — carbon — nitrogen (NCN) chain, with niche end-products such as guanidine nitrate and other NCN derivatives. |
(16) |
Most of the DCD sold on the Union market is standard. Only a limited amount is of a smaller particle size (the so-called micro DCD). The cooperating Chinese exporting producer provided data for the standard type only. |
2.2. Like product
(17) |
One user questioned whether Union DCD and Chinese DCD were unlike products on the basis that the standard type of DCD produced by the Union industry is, allegedly, of higher quality than that produced by the Chinese exporting producers. In particular, this user claimed that the water content of the Chinese DCD would be significantly higher and more volatile compared to the water content of the DCD produced in the Union. Moreover, Chinese DCD would also have a higher content of impurities. |
(18) |
As in the original investigation, the investigation showed, however, that while there may be certain quality differences, these cannot be quantified and moreover, they do not affect the basic chemical, physical and technical characteristics of DCD produced and sold by the Union industry in the Union and the product concerned, which were found to be the same and to have the same end-uses. |
(19) |
Another user argued that micro DCD should be excluded from the product scope of the anti-dumping measures due to the alleged differences in physical characteristics, end-uses and prices from standard DCD. |
(20) |
The investigation showed, however, that both types share the basic chemical, physical and technical characteristics. The further processing of standard DCD to produce micro DCD involves a straightforward physical process (milling), but no chemical processing. In addition, even though the prices of micro DCD are higher than those of standard DCD, both types have the same basic end-uses and can normally be interchanged. |
(21) |
The investigation confirmed that, as in the original investigation, the product concerned and the products manufactured and sold on the domestic market in China, as well as those manufactured and sold in the Union by the Union producer, have the same basic physical and technical characteristics as well as the same uses and are, therefore, considered to be like products within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation. |
3. LIKELIHOOD OF CONTINUATION OF DUMPING
3.1. Preliminary remarks
(22) |
In accordance with Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, it was examined whether the expiry of the existing measures would be likely to lead to a continuation of dumping. |
(23) |
As mentioned in recital 9, due to the fact that only one company cooperated, it was not necessary to select a sample of exporting producers in China. This company covered more than 35 % of the imports of product concerned from China to the Union during the RIP. This company did not export during the IP of the original investigation and therefore did not cooperate in the original investigation. |
3.2. Dumping of imports during the RIP
3.2.1. Analogue country
(24) |
In accordance with Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation, normal value had to be determined on the basis of the prices or constructed value in an appropriate market economy third country (the ‘analogue country’), or the price from such a third country to other countries, including the Union, or, where those are not possible, on any other reasonable basis, including the price actually paid or payable in the Union for the like product, duly adjusted if necessary to include a reasonable profit margin. |
(25) |
In the absence of production of the product concerned outside the Union and China, the Commission indicated in the Notice of initiation its intention to base the normal value on the prices actually paid or payable in the Union for the like product, as had also been done in the original investigation. |
(26) |
The like product was sold by the Union industry in representative quantities. However, the Union industry’s domestic sales were loss-making, albeit close to break even. Therefore, the normal value was based on the Union industry’s manufacturing costs plus a reasonable amount for selling, general and administrative costs (SGA) and profit. SGA and profit were determined using the same method as in the original investigation. Pursuant to Article 11(9), adjustments were made on the Union industry’s manufacturing costs so as to offset the additional transport costs due to the physical separation between production units, no direct access to raw materials, which must be transported from remote production sites and disposal of the by-product (black lime). These adjustments were also made in the original investigation. |
3.2.2. Export price
(27) |
All export sales of the cooperating exporting producer to the Union were made directly to independent customers established in the Union. In accordance with Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation the export price was established on the basis of the prices actually paid or payable. |
3.2.3. Comparison
(28) |
The comparison between normal value and export price was made on an ex-works basis. |
(29) |
For the purpose of ensuring a fair comparison between the normal value and the export price of the cooperating exporting producer, and in accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation, due allowance in the form of adjustments was made with regard to differences in transport, insurance, taxes and credit costs which affected prices and price comparability. |
3.2.4. Dumping margin
(30) |
As provided for under Article 2(11) of the basic Regulation, the dumping margin was established on the basis of a comparison of the weighted average normal value with the weighted average export price. |
(31) |
For the cooperating exporting producer that comparison showed the existence of dumping although significantly lower than the level of dumping established in the original investigation. |
3.3. Development of imports should measures be repealed
3.3.1. Preliminary remark
(32) |
Further to the finding of the existence of dumping during the RIP, the likelihood of continuation of dumping should measures be repealed was investigated and the following elements were analysed: production capacity and spare capacity in China; volume and prices of dumped imports from China; the attractiveness of the Union market in relation to imports from China. |
(33) |
In this regard, it should be noted that the cooperating exporting producer represented more than 30 % of the total production of Chinaduring the RIP. |
3.3.2. Production capacity and spare capacity of the Chinese producers
(34) |
Since little public information is available about the Chinese DCD industry, conclusions in relation to spare capacity relied mainly on the information contained in the request for review and on information obtained from the single cooperating producer, cross-checked where possible against publicly available information. |
(35) |
On this basis, it is assumed that total installed capacity in Chinaincreased between 2007 and 2012. Actual production during the RIP was however limited to 80 000 tonnes, indicating that some spare capacity may be available. The Chinese installed capacity during the RIP represents more than the global demand for DCD and spare capacity may represent more than the total Union consumption during the RIP while the domestic Chinese consumption during the RIP amounted only to 40 000 tonnes, i.e. half of actual Chinese production. |
(36) |
In relation to spare capacity, the information gathered on spot during the investigation shows that the single cooperating producer, representing more than 20 % of the total installed capacity of Chinain 2012, has been granted approval to expand its capacity by 50 % in 2014. It is expected that this new capacity will, inter alia, further serve this producer’s own production processes (captive use of DCD) and the Chinese domestic market, which during the RIP absorbed around half of the DCD production of the single cooperating producer. Information obtained from the single cooperating producer showed that future investments in capacity will be used to supply, inter alia, the Chinese domestic market which is large and rapidly growing. |
(37) |
Chinais thus in a position to produce large quantities for export, in particular because there are no indications that the domestic market could absorb all the spare capacity. |
3.3.3. Volume and prices of dumped imports from China
(38) |
According to Eurostat and verified import data, the volume of imports from China sharply decreased when the measures were introduced in 2007 and started increasing again slightly between 2009 and the end of the RIP, but never reached the level of 2007. This is also reflected in the market share of the Chinese imports which dropped from 40-45 % in 2007 to 10-15 % in 2009 and reached again a level of 15-20 % at the end of the RIP, despite the increase in Chinese prices by 73 %. |
3.3.4. Attractiveness of the Union market
(39) |
The Union market is a relatively large market accounting for around 18 % of the world consumption of DCD, but it is not necessarily the most attractive or the only attractive market in terms of sale segments and prices (see recital 74). Indeed, the information available suggests that Chinese producers anticipate a growing demand from the pharmaceutical industry, e.g. in India, that uses DCD for instance as an input for the production of a diabetes medicine (metformin). Therefore, this new demand will potentially be able to absorb a large part of Chinese spare capacity. Based on the above, it is considered that the Union market is not the only attractive market for Chinese exporters. |
3.3.5. Conclusion of the likelihood of continuation of dumping
(40) |
The investigation has confirmed that Chinese imports continued to enter the Union market at dumped prices during the RIP. Given the continued dumping, the fact that the Union market is a large market which was quite attractive for the Chinese exporters in the past, as well as the spare capacities available in China, going beyond the total Union consumption, it can be concluded there is a likelihood of continuation of dumping should measures be removed. It should however be noted that the current level of dumping is significantly lower than that established in the original investigation. |
4. SITUATION IN THE UNION MARKET
4.1. Preliminary remark
(41) |
As the analysis concerns only one company, for reasons of confidentiality most indicators are given in indexed form or ranges. |
4.2. Union industry
(42) |
The production of the Union producer AlzChem AG represents 100 % of the DCD produced in the Union. It is therefore considered that AlzChem AG constitutes the Union industry within the meaning of Articles 4(1) and 5(4) of the basic Regulation. |
4.3. Consumption in the Union market
(43) |
Union consumption was established on the basis of the non-captive sales volumes of the Union industry on the Union market and import data from Eurostat, cross-checked with other statistical sources. Over the period considered it developed as follows: Table 1
|
(44) |
Apart from the free market consumption presented above, it is noted that over the period considered the captive use of DCD by the Union industry ranged between 10 % and 20 % of the Union production and developed as follows: Table 2
|
4.4. Imports into the Union from China
(45) |
Bearing in mind that only one exporter cooperated with the investigation, it was found that the Eurostat data were the best information source for import volumes and prices. The Eurostat data refers to EU27 and was cross-checked to other sources such as Chinese exports statistics, Article 14(6) database and cooperating importer/user data. |
(46) |
Deliveries of DCD from Chinawere imported under two customs regimes. Under the normal regime both the normal customs tariff and the anti-dumping duty were payable. Under the inward processing regime none of these duties were payable because the material was used in the production of downstream products that were exported outside the Union. As shown in the table below, the inward processing regime covered around two thirds of imports in the RIP. |
4.4.1. Volume and market share
(47) |
Following the imposition of the anti-dumping measures in 2007, the volume of Chinese imports decreased significantly. Their overall market share was some 15 % to 20 % during the RIP. This notwithstanding, over the period considered the volume of imports under the normal customs regime originating in Chinafluctuated, whereas Chinese imports carried out under the inward processing relief more than doubled. Taking both regimes into account, import volumes increased over the period but they are well below the levels seen prior to the imposition of measures (over 6 000 tonnes). Table 3
|
4.4.2. Price
(48) |
As reflected in the table above, over the period considered the prices of Chinese imports increased substantially. |
(49) |
The Union industry claimed that the price development cannot be explained by the development of prices of the main cost drivers, i.e. raw materials and energy costs. However, it did not provide any alternative explanation or conclusive evidence to support the claim. |
4.4.3. Price undercutting
(50) |
For the purpose of analysing price undercutting, the weighted average sales prices of the Union industry to unrelated customers on the Union market were compared to the corresponding weighted average CIF prices of imports from China (standard DCD only). The sales prices of the Union industry were adjusted in particular for delivery costs and commissions to an ex-works level. The CIF prices of the exports from Chinawere obtained from Eurostat and cross-checked with the Article 14(6) database and they excluded those imports which were subject to inward processing. These CIF prices were adjusted to cover costs related to customs clearance, namely customs tariff and post-importation costs. Undercutting in respect of imports which were subject to inward processing is analysed in recital 83. |
(51) |
The comparison showed that during the RIP the imports of the product concerned did not undercut the Union industry’s prices. |
4.5. Imports into the Union from other third countries
(52) |
There were no major imports from other third countries. |
(53) |
Over the period considered the volume of imports from the USAnever held a market share of more than 2 %. The investigation revealed that in fact these imports were of standard DCD which had originally been produced in China and then micronised in the USA. Table 4
|
4.6. Economic situation of the Union industry
(54) |
Pursuant to Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation, the examination of the impact of the dumped imports on the Union industry included an evaluation of all economic factors and indices having a bearing on the state of the Union industry during the period considered. |
4.6.1. Production, production capacity and capacity utilisation
(55) |
The Union industry operated an integrated production chain incorporating not only DCD but upstream and downstream products. Since 2009 the Union production capacity of DCD did not change. Over the period considered, the Union producer increased production largely because of increased demand on the Union market as demonstrated at Table 1 above. Since 2010 the Union producer has operated rather at full capacity. This was less the case in 2009 when production and sales were affected by the financial crisis. Table 5
|
4.6.2. Stocks
(56) |
The Union producer maintained a small stock throughout the period considered and this was not considered to be an important factor in the assessment of the situation of the Union industry. Table 6
|
4.6.3. Sales volume, market shares and average unit prices in the Union
(57) |
The sales by the Union industry on the Union market to unrelated customers increased by 26 % during the period considered, whereas its sales prices went up by 7 %. |
(58) |
The Union industry managed to increase its EU sales due to the increase in consumption shown above in Table 1. The Union industry maintained a very large share of the Union market. Table 7
|
4.6.4. Profitability and cash flow
(59) |
During the period considered the profitability of the Union industry improved significantly as it could increase its sales volume and its sales price on the Union market to unrelated customers. The strong improvement in profitability is even more pronounced if compared with the industry’s heavy loss making situation in the original IP (– 20 % to – 30 %). Table 8
|
(60) |
The profitability of the captive transactions was comparatively good. |
(61) |
During the period considered the cash flow was always negative with the exception of the RIP, in line with the development of the overall profitability. Table 9
|
4.6.5. Investment, return on investments and ability to raise capital
(62) |
During the period considered the Union industry made investments for the maintenance of and optimisation of the existing production machinery. In 2009 it made a significant new investment linked to micro DCD. Table 10
|
(63) |
The return on investments during the period considered remained negative, in line with the above-mentioned profitability. Table 11
|
(64) |
The Union industry did not claim to have encountered any difficulty to raise capital during the period considered. |
4.6.6. Employment, productivity, growth and wages
(65) |
The investments made during the period considered contributed to increase the number of qualified employees. The average wage levels increased by 15 % over the period considered. |
(66) |
The increase in employment and productivity reflect the increased production in 2010. Table 12
|
4.6.7. Magnitude of dumping and recovery from past dumping
(67) |
Dumping continued during the RIP, as explained under the point 3.2 above. |
(68) |
The impact of the magnitude of the actual dumping margin on the Union industry, given the volume of the dumped imports from China, cannot be regarded as very great. As compared to the original investigation, the situation of the Union industry improved significantly — it was well on track to recovery from past dumping, in particular in terms of profitability, sales and market share. |
4.6.8. Conclusion
(69) |
Even if some positive developments referred to above are relatively recent, it is considered that the situation of the Union industry improved significantly in the period considered. All the financial indicators were positive or close to positive by the end of the RIP. |
(70) |
The imposition of the anti-dumping measures in 2007 allowed the Union industry to steadily recover from the injurious effects of the dumping, further exploiting its potential onto the Union market and non-EU countries. The fact that the Union industry benefited from the measures is mostly illustrated by its high production levels, capacity utilisation and increased EU sales prices and profitability. During the RIP, no material injury resulting from Chinese imports was taking place anymore. |
(71) |
Following disclosure, the applicant argued that the fact that in the framework of the original investigation certain injury indicators showed a positive trend did not prevent the Commission from confirming the existence of material injury at the time. This claim must be rejected. Regulation (EC) No 1331/2007 was a response to different circumstances with, in particular, a less profitable Union industry. Moreover, an expiry review completely differs from an investigation under Article 5 of the basic Regulation. Whereas the latter focuses on whether the dumping causes injury to the domestic industry, the former is a forward-looking exercise analysing what is likely to occur should the measures lapse. |
5. LIKELIHOOD OF RECURRENCE OF INJURY
(72) |
As demonstrated above, the Union industry did not suffer material injury during the RIP. In accordance with Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, it was therefore examined whether the expiry of the measures in force would be likely to result in a recurrence of injury. |
5.1. Impact of the spare capacity in China
(73) |
The investigation has revealed that there are large production capacities in China (see recitals 34 to 37). However, there are no reasonable grounds to conclude that the spare capacities in question are likely to lead to significant imports into the Union. |
(74) |
The Union is one of many markets where the Chinese exporting producers sell. In terms of prices, data from the Union industry, the cooperating Chinese exporting producer and from the Chinese export statistics confirm that several non-EU markets are at least as attractive as that of the Union. |
(75) |
As concerns the Union industry export sales, these were often made at higher prices than sales within the Union. Subsequent to disclosure, the applicant argued that its higher export prices had nothing to do with the relative attractiveness of such markets but should rather be explained by the fact that these sales concerned small volume sales only. This argument should be rejected as the EU industry’s overall sales volumes to export markets were still significant in the RIP (between 20 % and 30 % of the Union industry’s production). It was also not substantiated that sales transactions to customers were in significantly lower volumes. |
(76) |
Nor do statistical data on Chinese export prices of DCD to the different markets point at a distinguishing attractiveness of the EU market as compared to other export markets. Substantial spare capacity existed already during the RIP but did not translate into an injurious pricing behaviour by the Chinese exporters. The fact that spare capacity will further increase is not in this case an indication of a likelihood of recurring injury. Indiais, by far, the world’s biggest market of DCD. Chinese export statistics show that Chinese sales volumes to the EU represented only around 10 % of the sales volumes made to India and that Chinese average EU sale prices per tonne were rather equivalent to Chinese sales prices to India. In other words, the prevailing market prices in the important Indian market (which have increased over the period considered by 65 % on average) are equally attractive to the DCD producers. There is no indication that spare capacities in China will translate into huge imports into the Union. For the time being it can be expected that at least part of such spare capacities will not be used in the near future. This conclusion is based on the past developments since data submitted by the applicant suggest that whereas between 2008 and the RIP Chinaincreased its capacity by some 50 %, it increased its overall production by only some 20 %. Projections made by the applicant up to 2016 indicate that Chinese capacities will be well in excess of global demand and, therefore, will remain idle for the time being. The country-wide excess capacity would be less if projections are made on the basis of sales data from the cooperating Chinese exporting producer. In any case, the fact that, unlike the EU production, (see recital 55 above) Chinese DCD production is not part of a fully integrated production chain, means that it is less costly to leave capacities unused. |
(77) |
Moreover, certain growing demand in particular for the pharmaceutical industry in countries such as India (see recital 39) will probably be able to absorb a further part of Chinese overcapacity. Furthermore, the investigation concluded that AlzChem’s DCD products were considered more attractive to EU users due, inter alia, to geographical location and reliability of supply. This gives a certain advantage over Chinese producers in respect of key users in the EU which purchase significant amounts of DCD. Therefore, in view of this context, the large production capacities in Chinaare not as such a reason to conclude that there is a likelihood of recurrence of injury. The mere fact that the Union industry has lost share in terms of global production capacity cannot overturn this conclusion. |
5.2. Impact of the projected market growth
(78) |
Several parties mentioned the expected significant growth of the DCD market worldwide, mainly driven by well-established applications in the pharmaceutical and agricultural industry. This is because of the increase in production of anti-diabetes medicine predominantly in India. This growth is already announced by the increase in EU consumption in Table 1 above. |
(79) |
In respect of the EU market, further growth is also expected but to a more limited degree. This is because a large pharmaceutical producer selling worldwide is located in the Union. |
(80) |
Following disclosure, the applicant contested the extent of the growth. However, it is noted that its representations are contradictory in this respect and that several sources point at solid EU demand and a significant worldwide growth. Sales data from the cooperating Chinese exporting producer point at a rapidly increasing consumption in the Chinese domestic market. Therefore, nothing on file could substantiate the claim by the applicant, that demand is or will be flat. |
(81) |
Subsequent to disclosure, the applicant also emphasised that it had lost sales volumes and market share on non-EU markets. In this respect, it should be noted that the EU industry has worked at almost full capacity with negligible stocks, while the EU consumption of DCD continued growing. Therefore, it is rather because of the fact that the EU industry had decided to focus more on the EU market without substantially increasing its production capacity that it could not take full advantage of the growth in the other markets. This situation could change, however, if its expansion plans materialise. It is therefore expected that even if import volumes of Chinese DCD into the Union increase in the near future, this would not automatically result in a recurrence of injury. The Union industry will, like Chinese producers, benefit from an increase in worldwide demand. |
(82) |
In this respect, as mentioned above, the Union producer is very well rated in the market and appears to be the preferred supplier to several key customers, at least for certain DCD applications. The quality and reliability of its DCD products in the Union means that it is able to secure large contracts with key EU customers and this situation is expected to continue regardless of whether the measures are repealed or not. Post disclosure, a significant EU user stated that it would continue to source the product covered by the proceeding from the Union industry even if the anti-dumping measures were repealed. |
5.3. Other considerations
(83) |
As explained in recitals 50 to 51, the Chinese import prices did not undercut the prices of the Union industry during the RIP. Undercutting was not present in respect of the normal regime (around one third of import volumes). A very low level of undercutting existed when the inward processing regime was also taken into account (the other two thirds of imports during the RIP). This situation differed from the substantial undercutting found in the original investigation and resulted from an overall gradual increase in import prices since measures were imposed, although this increase did not occur steadily. In fact, the CIF EU border price of Chinese imports rose by 73 % during the period 2009 up to the end of the RIP. |
(84) |
The EU industry has shown that it remains competitive even in the absence of measures given its substantial exports (between 20 % and 30 % of production during the RIP) to non-EU countries where no measures are in force and where it has faced the Chinese competition without the support of anti-dumping measures. The decreasing export volume depicted below has to be seen in conjunction with the increasing sales volume into the Union and unchanged production capacity of the Union industry which has in principle been fully utilised. Table 13
|
(85) |
Prices of Chinese imports during the eight months following the RIP were also analysed in view of a submission made by the Union industry. The Union industry had submitted that severe price pressure caused by Chinese imports had recommenced shortly after the RIP. Based on Article 6(1) of the basic Regulation in conjunction with Article 11(5) thereof, information relating to a period subsequent to the RIP is normally not to be taken into account. However, even if this information were to be taken into account, at this stage no conclusions could be drawn from it as it is not clear whether these changed prices, if confirmed, are of a lasting nature. For instance although prices fell from the end of the RIP to May 2013 in June 2013 they rose again by 10 %. Given that these post RIP prices were still considerably higher than those observed in the original investigation, the prospects that in the nearer future they can significantly undermine the current situation of the Union industry, which is not suffering from material injury, do not reach the likelihood threshold. |
(86) |
Finally, there is no indication that a repeal of the measures would have an impact on market prices in the short- to medium term. It should be noted that a large share of the DCD sold in the Union is subject to contracts running for several years and for the user industry a reliable and steady supply from a trusted producer seems to be of high importance. Moreover, two thirds of imports during the RIP were made under the inward processing regime whereby no import or anti-dumping duties are payable. In summary, while it cannot be ruled out that some contracts will be renegotiated and landed import prices may decrease, it is not likely that this will occur to injurious levels if duties are repealed. |
5.4. Conclusion on likelihood a recurrence of injury
(87) |
In view of the foregoing, it is not likely that the Union industry, if measures were repealed, would have to decrease its sales and production volumes and/or prices of DCD to an extent such that its profitability and overall position would be materially affected. |
(88) |
On the contrary, in view of the worldwide growth in consumption, the Chinese import volumes and prices during the RIP and the prices on other markets, it is expected that, in the absence of measures, the Union industry’s DCD sales will continue to remain strong and also to contribute positively to its DCD-chain and NCN-chain of activities. |
(89) |
The Union industry is expected to remain at full capacity whether the measures are repealed or not. Moreover, the Union industry completed the preliminary work for an expansion programme this year. In autumn 2013 it agreed in principle to substantially increase its DCD production capacity. The market, including important EU-based customers, welcomed this expansion plan. The expansion plan suggests that the Union industry believes worldwide demand to be strong and that AlzChem should be benefitting from this growth. |
(90) |
Even if the Union industry is subject to some price pressure from Chinese imports in the near future, the effects in terms of prices and profitability are not expected to be major given that the Union industry has a large market share, advantages in terms of quality and reliability of supply and the capability of securing large contracts. The effects would therefore not meet a ‘likelihood of injury’ threshold within the meaning of Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation. |
(91) |
The Commission concludes that there is no likelihood of recurrence of injury to the Union industry were the existing measures to be repealed. |
6. UNION INTEREST
(92) |
As it has been concluded that there is no likelihood of recurrence of injury, no findings on Union interest are necessary. |
7. REPEAL OF ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES
(93) |
All parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it was intended to recommend that the existing measures be repealed. They were also granted a period to submit comments subsequent to that disclosure. The submissions and comments were, where warranted, duly taken into consideration, but none could alter the conclusions set out above. |
(94) |
It follows from the above that, as provided for by Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of DCD originating in China should be repealed and the proceeding terminated. |
(95) |
Given certain circumstances described above, namely the existence of spare capacity in Chinaand the possible existence of undercutting post RIP, the Commission will monitor the imports of the product concerned with a view to facilitating swift appropriate action should the situation so require. The monitoring will be limited to a period of two years after the publication of this Regulation, |
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The anti-dumping duty on imports of 1-cyanoguanidine (dicyandiamide), currently falling within CN code 2926 20 00 and originating in the People’s Republic of Chinais hereby repealed and the proceeding concerning these imports is terminated.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 11 February 2014.
For the Council
The President
E. VENIZELOS
(1) OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.
(2) OJ L 296, 15.11.2007, p. 1.
13.2.2014 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 43/12 |
COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 136/2014
of 11 February 2014
amending Directive 2007/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Regulation (EC) No 692/2008 as regards emissions from light passenger and commercial vehicles (Euro 5 and Euro 6) and Commission Regulation (EU) No 582/2011 as regards emissions from heavy duty vehicles (Euro VI)
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Directive 2007/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 September 2007 establishing a framework for the approval of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles (Framework Directive) (1), and in particular Article 39(2) thereof.
Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2007 on type-approval of motor vehicles with respect to emissions from light passenger and commercial vehicles (Euro 5 and Euro 6) and on access to vehicle repair and maintenance information (2), and in particular Article 5(3) thereof.
Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 595/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2009 on type-approval of motor vehicles and engines with respect to emissions from heavy duty vehicles (Euro VI) and on access to vehicle repair and maintenance information and amending Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 and Directive 2007/46/EC and repealing Directives 80/1269/EEC, 2005/55/EC and 2005/78/EC, and in particular Article 5(4) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) |
Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 692/2008 of 18 July 2008 implementing and amending Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council on type-approval of motor vehicles with respect to emissions from light passenger and commercial vehicles (Euro 5 and Euro 6) and on access to vehicle repair and maintenance information (3) establish common technical requirements for the type-approval of motor vehicles and replacement parts with regard to their emissions and lay down rules for in-service conformity, durability of pollution control devices, on-board diagnostic (OBD) systems, measurement of fuel consumption and accessibility of vehicle repair and maintenance information. |
(2) |
Directive 2007/46/EC of 5 September 2007 establishes a framework for the approval of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles. It sets out the format of the type-approval documents and specifies the bases for outlining engine characteristics, including values of engine power and power-related parameters. |
(3) |
The EC type-approval number issued pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 692/2008 includes alphabetical characters (Euro 5 and Euro 6 steps), which indicate the emission limit values and OBD requirements in accordance with which the approval was granted. Each step, identified by an alphabetical character, contains a mandatory implementation date for the certification of new types of vehicles and for all new vehicles, as well as a last date of registration. |
(4) |
Vehicle manufacturers may request a type-approval of vehicles with more stringent requirements before those requirements become mandatory. New Euro 6 steps will enable certification of vehicles with lower emission levels before those emission levels enter into force. |
(5) |
Regulation (EC) No 595/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2009 on type-approval of motor vehicles and engines with respect to emissions from heavy duty vehicles (Euro VI) and on access to vehicle repair and maintenance information and amending Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 and Directive 2007/46/EC (4), repealed Council Directive 80/1269/EEC of 16 December 1980 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the engine power of motor vehicles (5) with effect from 31 December 2013. Therefore, it is necessary to carry over the provisions of Directive 80/1269/EEC into Regulation (EC) No 715/2007. |
(6) |
Regulation (EC) No 692/2008 and Regulation (EU) No 582/2011 specify the reference fuels which should be used by vehicle manufacturers to perform emission tests in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 and Regulation (EC) No 595/2009. The characteristics of reference fuels reflect the characteristics of fuels most commonly used in the market at the time Regulation (EC) No 692/2008 was adopted. However, due to the increasing usage of biofuels in the market in recent years, specifications of reference fuels should be adapted to correspond to the fuels available currently and in the foreseeable future on the Union market. |
(7) |
The reference fuels in Regulation (EC) No 692/2008 and Regulation (EU) No 582/2011 need to be aligned in order to harmonize procedures for light and heavy-duty vehicles and therefore reduce costs related to type-approval. |
(8) |
Directive 2007/46/EC, Regulation (EC) No 692/2008 and Regulation (EU) No 582/2011 should therefore be amended accordingly. |
(9) |
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Technical Committee – Motor Vehicles, |
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Amendments to Directive 2007/46/EC
Annexes I, III, IV, IX, and XI to Directive 2007/46/EC are amended in accordance with Annex I to this Regulation.
Article 2
Amendments to Regulation (EC) No 692/2008
Regulation (EC) No 692/2008 is amended as follows:
(1) |
In Article 2, the following points 37, 38, 39 and 40 are added:
|
(2) |
In Article 3, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: ‘1. In order to receive an EC type-approval with regard to emissions and vehicle repair and maintenance information, the manufacturer shall demonstrate that the vehicles comply with the test procedures specified in Annexes III to VIII, X to XII, XIV, XVI and XX to this Regulation. The manufacturer shall also ensure compliance with the specifications of reference fuels set out in Annex IX to this Regulation.’. |
(3) |
In Article 6, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: ‘1. If all the relevant requirements are met, the approval authority shall grant an EC type-approval and issue a type-approval number in accordance with the numbering system set out in Annex VII to Directive 2007/46/EC. Without prejudice to the provisions of Annex VII to Directive 2007/46/EC, section 3 of the type-approval number shall be drawn up in accordance with Appendix 6 to Annex I to this Regulation. An approval authority shall not assign the same number to another vehicle type. For vehicles type approved to the Euro 5 emission limits given in Table 1 of Annex I of Regulation (EC) 715/2007 the relevant requirements shall be deemed to be met if all the following conditions are fulfilled:
In the case referred to in the fourth subparagraph Article 14 shall also apply.’. |
(4) |
Annexes I, III, IV, IX, XI and XII are amended in accordance with Annex II to this Regulation. |
(5) |
Annex XX is added, the text of which is set out in Annex III to this Regulation. |
Article 3
Amendments to Regulation (EU) No 582/2011
Annexes VIII and IX to Regulation (EU) No 582/2011 are amended in accordance with Annex IV to this Regulation.
Article 4
Transitional provisions
1. As from 1 January 2015 manufacturers shall deliver certificates of conformity which are in accordance with this Regulation.
2. For the purpose of compliance with Annex XX to Regulation (EC) No 692/2008, certificates granted by demonstrating compliance with Directive 80/1269/EEC and/or UNECE Regulation No 85 issued before the date of entry into force of this Regulation shall remain valid until 31 August 2018.
3. Annex IV to this Regulation shall apply as from the dates set out in row C of Table 1 of Appendix 9 to Annex I to Regulation (EU) No 582/2011.
Article 5
Entry into force
This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 11 February 2014.
For the Commission
The President
José Manuel BARROSO
(1) OJ L 263, 9.10.2007, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 171, 29.6.2007, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 199, 28.7.2008, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 188, 18.7.2009, p. 1.
ANNEX I
Amendments to Directive 2007/46/EC
Annexes I, III, IV, IX, and XI to Directive 2007/46/EC are amended as follows:
(1) |
Annex I is amended as follows:
|
(2) |
in Part I, A, of Annex III, the following points 3.3.1.1.1 and 3.3.1.1.2 are inserted:
|
(3) |
Annex IV is amended as follows:
|
(4) |
in the Appendix to Annex VI, item 40 of the table is deleted. |
(5) |
Annex IX is amended as follows:
|
ANNEX II
Amendments to Regulation (EC) No 692/2008
Regulation (EC) No 692/2008 is amended as follows:
(1) |
in the list of Annexes, the Annex XX is added: ‘ANNEX XX Measurement of net engine power’; |
(2) |
Annex I is amended as follows:
|
(3) |
Annex III is amended as follows:
|
(4) |
in Appendix 1 of Annex IV, point 2.2 is replaced by the following: 2.2. The atomic ratios specified in point 5.3.7.3 shall be understood as follows: Hcv= Atomic ratio of hydrogen to carbon
Ocv= Atomic ratio of oxygen to carbon
|
(5) |
Annex IX is amended as follows:
|
(6) |
Annex XI is amended as follows:
|
(7) |
Annex XII is amended as follows:
|
(7) Delete where not applicable.’ ’
(1) Specific test procedures for hydrogen and flex fuel biodiesel vehicles will be defined at a later stage.
(2) When a bi-fuel vehicle is combined with a flex fuel vehicle, both test requirements are applicable.
(3) This provision is temporary, further requirements for biodiesel shall be proposed later on.
(4) Test on petrol only before the dates set out in Article 10(6) of Regulation (EC) No 715/2007. The test will be performed on both fuels after these dates. The E75 test reference fuel specified in Annex IX, Section B, shall be used.
(5) Only NOx emissions shall be determined when the vehicle is running on hydrogen.
(6) Upon the choice of the manufacturer vehicles with positive and compression ignition engines may be tested with either E5 or E10 and either B5 or B7 fuels, respectively. However:
— |
Not later than sixteen months after the dates set out in Article 10(4) of Regulation (EC) No 715/2007, new type -approvals shall only be performed with E10 and B7 fuels, |
— |
Not later than three years after the dates set out in Article 10(5) of Regulation (EC) No 715/2007, all new vehicles shall be type-approved with E10 and B7 fuels.’ |
(8) The values quoted in the specifications are “true values”. In establishment of their limit values the terms of ISO 4259 Petroleum products - Determination and application of precision data in relation to methods of test have been applied and in fixing a minimum value, a minimum difference of 2R above zero has been taken into account; in fixing a maximum and minimum value, the minimum difference is 4R (R = reproducibility). Notwithstanding this measure, which is necessary for technical reasons, the manufacturer of fuels shall nevertheless aim at a zero value where the stipulated maximum value is 2R and at the mean value in the case of quotations of maximum and minimum limits. Should it be necessary to clarify whether a fuel meets the requirements of the specifications, the terms of ISO 4259 shall be applied.
(9) A correction factor of 0,2 for MON and RON shall be subtracted for the calculation of the final result in accordance with EN 228:2008.
(10) The fuel may contain oxidation inhibitors and metal deactivators normally used to stabilise refinery gasoline streams, but detergent/dispersive additives and solvent oils shall not be added.
(11) Ethanol is the only oxygenate that shall be intentionally added to the reference fuel. The Ethanol used shall conform to EN 15376.
(12) The actual sulphur content of the fuel used for the Type 1 test shall be reported.
(13) There shall be no intentional addition of compounds containing phosphorus, iron, manganese, or lead to this reference fuel.’
(14) The values quoted in the specifications are “true values”. In establishment of their limit values the terms of ISO 4259 Petroleum products – Determination and application of precision data in relation to methods of test have been applied and in fixing a minimum value, a minimum difference of 2R above zero has been taken into account; in fixing a maximum and minimum value, the minimum difference is 4R (R = reproducibility). Notwithstanding this measure, which is necessary for technical reasons, the manufacturer of fuels shall nevertheless aim at a zero value where the stipulated maximum value is 2R and at the mean value in the case of quotations of maximum and minimum limits. Should it be necessary to clarify whether a fuel meets the requirements of the specifications, the terms of ISO 4259 shall be applied.
(15) The range for cetane number is not in accordance with the requirements of a minimum range of 4R. However, in the case of a dispute between fuel supplier and fuel user, the terms of ISO 4259 may be used to resolve such disputes provided replicate measurements, of sufficient number to archive the necessary precision, are made in preference to single determinations.
(16) Even though oxidation stability is controlled, it is likely that shelf life will be limited. Advice shall be sought from the supplier as to storage conditions and life.
(17) FAME content to meet the specification of EN 14214.’
(18) The values quoted in the specifications are “true values”. In establishment of their limit values the terms of ISO 4259 Petroleum products - Determination and application of precision data in relation to methods of test have been applied and in fixing a minimum value, a minimum difference of 2R above zero has been taken into account; in fixing a maximum and minimum value, the minimum difference is 4R (R = reproducibility). Notwithstanding this measure, which is necessary for technical reasons, the manufacturer of fuels shall nevertheless aim at a zero value where the stipulated maximum value is 2R and at the mean value in the case of quotations of maximum and minimum limits. Should it be necessary to clarify whether a fuel meets the requirements of the specifications, the terms of ISO 4259 shall be applied.
(19) A correction factor of 0,2 for MON and RON shall be subtracted for the calculation of the final result in accordance with EN 228:2008.
(20) The fuel may contain oxidation inhibitors and metal deactivators normally used to stabilise refinery gasoline streams, but detergent/dispersive additives and solvent oils shall not be added.
(21) Ethanol is the only oxygenate that shall be intentionally added to the reference fuel. The ethanol used shall conform to EN 15376.
(22) The actual sulphur content of the fuel used for the Type 6 test shall be reported.
(23) There shall be no intentional addition of compounds containing phosphorus, iron, manganese, or lead to this reference fuel.’
(24) Positive ignition particulate mass and number limits apply only to vehicles with direct injection engines.’
(25) Positive ignition particulate mass limits apply only to vehicles with direct injection engines.’
ANNEX III
‘ANNEX XX
MEASUREMENT OF NET ENGINE POWER, NET POWER AND THE MAXIMUM 30 MINUTES POWER OF ELECTRIC DRIVE TRAIN
1. INTRODUCTION
This Annex sets out requirements for measuring net engine power, net power and the maximum 30 minutes power of electric drive train.
2. GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS
2.1 The general specifications for conducting the tests and interpreting the results are those set out in paragraph 5 of UNECE Regulation No 85 (1), with the exceptions specified in this Annex.
2.2 Test fuel
Paragraphs 5.2.3.1., 5.2.3.2.1., 5.2.3.3.1., and 5.2.3.4. of UNECE Regulation No 85 shall be understood as follows:
The fuel used shall be the one available on the market. In any case of dispute, the fuel shall be the appropriate reference fuel specified in Annex IX to the Regulation (EC) No 692/2008.
2.3 Power correction factors
By way of derogation from paragraph 5.1 of Annex V to UNECE Regulation No 85, when a turbo-charged engine is fitted with a system which allows compensating the ambient conditions temperature and altitude, at the request of the manufacturer, the correction factors αa or αd shall be set to the value of 1.
ANNEX IV
Amendments to Regulation (EU) No 582/2011
Regulation (EU) No 582/2011 is amended as follows:
(1) |
Annex VIII is amended as follows:
|
(2) |
Annex IX is amended as follows:
|
(1) The values quoted in the specifications are “true values”. In establishment of their limit values the terms of ISO 4259 Petroleum products – Determination and application of precision data in relation to methods of test have been applied and in fixing a minimum value, a minimum difference of 2R above zero has been taken into account; in fixing a maximum and minimum value, the minimum difference is 4R (R = reproducibility). Notwithstanding this measure, which is necessary for technical reasons, the manufacturer of fuels shall nevertheless aim at a zero value where the stipulated maximum value is 2R and at the mean value in the case of quotations of maximum and minimum limits. Should it be necessary to clarify whether a fuel meets the requirements of the specifications, the terms of ISO 4259 shall be applied.
(2) The range for cetane number is not in accordance with the requirements of a minimum range of 4R. However, in the case of a dispute between fuel supplier and fuel user, the terms of ISO 4259 may be used to resolve such disputes provided replicate measurements, of sufficient number to archive the necessary precision, are made in preference to single determinations.
(3) Even though oxidation stability is controlled, it is likely that shelf life will be limited. Advice shall be sought from the supplier as to storage conditions and life.
(4) FAME content to meet the specification of EN 14214.’
(5) The values quoted in the specifications are “true values”. In establishment of their limit values the terms of ISO 4259 Petroleum products - Determination and application of precision data in relation to methods of test have been applied and in fixing a minimum value, a minimum difference of 2R above zero has been taken into account; in fixing a maximum and minimum value, the minimum difference is 4R (R = reproducibility). Notwithstanding this measure, which is necessary for technical reasons, the manufacturer of fuels shall nevertheless aim at a zero value where the stipulated maximum value is 2R and at the mean value in the case of quotations of maximum and minimum limits. Should it be necessary to clarify whether a fuel meets the requirements of the specifications, the terms of ISO 4259 shall be applied.
(6) A correction factor of 0,2 for MON and RON shall be subtracted for the calculation of the final result in accordance with EN 228:2008.
(7) The fuel may contain oxidation inhibitors and metal deactivators normally used to stabilise refinery gasoline streams, but detergent/dispersive additives and solvent oils shall not be added.
(8) Ethanol is the only oxygenate that shall be intentionally added to the reference fuel. The ethanol used shall conform to EN 15376.
(9) The actual sulphur content of the fuel used for the Type 6 test shall be reported.
(10) There shall be no intentional addition of compounds containing phosphorus, iron, manganese, or lead to this reference fuel.’
13.2.2014 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 43/47 |
COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 137/2014
of 12 February 2014
amending Regulation (EU) No 468/2010 establishing the EU list of vessels engaged in illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 of 29 September 2008 establishing a Community system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, amending Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1936/2001 and (EC) No 601/2004 and repealing Regulations (EC) No 1093/94 and (EC) No 1447/1999 (1), in particular Article 30 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) |
Chapter V of Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 lays down procedures for the identification of fishing vessels engaged in illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU fishing vessels) as well as procedures for establishing a Union list of such vessels. Article 37 of that Regulation provides for actions to be taken against fishing vessels included in that list. |
(2) |
The Union list of IUU fishing vessels was established by Commission Regulation (EU) No 468/2010 (2) and subsequently amended by Implementing Regulations (EU) No 724/2011 (3), (EU) No 1234/2012 (4) and (EU) No 672/2013 (5). |
(3) |
According to Article 30(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008, the Union list should comprise fishing vessels included in the IUU vessel lists adopted by regional fisheries management organisations. |
(4) |
All regional fishery management organisations provide for the establishment and regular up-date of IUU vessel lists in accordance with their respective rules (6). |
(5) |
According to Article 30 of Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008, upon the receipt from regional fisheries management organisations of the lists of fishing vessels presumed or confirmed to be involved in the IUU fishing, the Commission shall update the Union list. |
(6) |
The Commission has received the updated lists from the regional fisheries management organisations. |
(7) |
The vessel the ‘Marta Lucia R’, which was on the lists established or amended by Regulation (EU) No 468/2010 and Implementing Regulations (EU) No 724/2011, (EU) No 1234/2012 and (EU) No 672/2013, has been removed from their list by the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) at its meeting of 10 to 14 June 2013 and by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) by its circular letter of 20 August 2013. This vessel should be considered as removed from the Union list as of 20 August 2013. |
(8) |
The vessel the ‘RED’, which was on the lists established or amended by Regulation (EU) No 468/2010 and Implementing Regulations (EU) No 724/2011, (EU) No 1234/2012 and (EU) No 672/2013, has been removed from their list by the North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC) on 14 November 2012, by the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) on 21 December 2012 and by the South East Atlantic Fisheries Organisation (SEAFO) at its Compliance Committee Meeting of 11 December 2013. This vessel should be considered as removed from the Union list as of 11 December 2013. |
(9) |
Considering that the same vessel might be listed under different names and/or flags depending on the time of its inclusion on the regional fisheries management organisations lists, the updated Union list should include the different names and/or flags as established by the respective regional fisheries management organisations. |
(10) |
Regulation (EU) No 468/2010 should therefore be amended accordingly. |
(11) |
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for Fisheries and Aquaculture, |
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Part B of the Annex to Regulation (EU) No 468/2010 is replaced by the text in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 12 February 2014.
For the Commission
The President
José Manuel BARROSO
(1) OJ L 286, 29.10.2008, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 131, 29.5.2010, p. 22.
(3) OJ L 194, 26.7.2011, p. 14.
(4) OJ L 350, 20.12.2012, p. 38.
(5) OJ L 193, 16.7.2013, p. 6.
(6) Last updates: CCAMLR: 2013/2014 IUU list as adopted at annual meeting CCAMLR-XXXII 23 October-14 November 2013; SEAFO: SEAFO includes in its IUU list CCAMLR, NEAFC-B and NAFO lists (as adopted at its Compliance Committee on 11 December 2013); ICCAT: 2013 IUU List as adopted at annual meeting in November 2013 (Recommendation 11-18); IATTC: 2013 list as adopted in 85th meeting of IATTC in June 2013; NEAFC: IUU B list AM 2011-18 as maintained at 32nd annual meeting November 2013; NAFO: 2013 list as adopted at 35th annual meeting September 2013; WCPFC: WCPFC IUU vessel list for 2014, effective from 6 February 2014, 60 days after WCPFC10, IOTC: IOTC IUU Vessels List, reviewed at the 17th Session of the IOTC, 6-10 May 2013.
ANNEX
‘PART B
Vessels listed in accordance with Article 30 of Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008
IMO (1) ship identification number/RFMO Reference |
Vessel’s name (previous name) (2) |
Flag State or Flag Territory [according to a RFMO] (2) |
Listed in RFMO (2) |
20060010 [ICCAT] |
ACROS No 2 |
Unknown (latest known flag: Honduras) |
ICCAT |
20060009 [ICCAT] |
ACROS No 3 |
Unknown (latest known flag: Honduras) |
ICCAT |
7306570 |
ALBORAN II (WHITE ENTERPRISE [NAFO, NEAFC]/WHITE, ENTERPRISE, ENXEMBRE, ATALAYA, REDA IV, ATALAYA DEL SUR [SEAFO]) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Panama, Saint Kitts and Nevis) [NAFO, NEAFC]/Panama (previous flags: Saint Kitts and Nevis, Gibraltar) [SEAFO] |
NEAFC, NAFO, SEAFO |
7424891 |
ALDABRA (OMOA I [CCAMLR]/OMOA 1 [SEAFO]) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Tanzania, Honduras) [CCAMLR]/Tanzania (previous flags: Honduras, Togo) [SEAFO] |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
7036345 |
AMORINN (ICEBERG II, LOME, NOEMI) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Togo, Belize) |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
8713392 |
BERBER (SNAKE, OCTOPUS I, PION, THE BIRD, CHU LIM, YIN PENG, THOR 33, ULYSES, GALE, SOUTH BOY, PISCIS) [CCAMLR]/SNAKE (OCTOPUS 1, PISCIS, SOUTH BOY, GALE, ULYSES, THOR 33, YIN PENG, CHU LIM, THE BIRD, PION) [SEAFO] |
Unknown (latest known flags: Libya, Mongolia, Honduras, North Korea (DPRK), Equatorial Guinea, Uruguay) [CCAMLR]/Libya (previous flag: Mongolia) [SEAFO] |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
12290 [IATTC]/20110011 [ICCAT] |
BHASKARA No 10 |
Unknown (latest known flag: Indonesia) |
IATTC, ICCAT |
12291 [IATTC]/20110012 [ICCAT] |
BHASKARA No 9 |
Unknown (latest known flag: Indonesia) |
IATTC, ICCAT |
20060001 [ICCAT] |
BIGEYE |
Unknown |
ICCAT |
20040005 [ICCAT] |
BRAVO |
Unknown |
ICCAT |
9407 [IATTC]/20110013 [ICCAT] |
CAMELOT |
Unknown |
IATTC, ICCAT |
6622642 |
CHALLENGE (PERSEVERANCE, MILA [CCAMLR]/MILA, ISLA, MONTANA CLARA, PERSEVERANCE [SEAFO]) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Panama, Equatorial Guinea, United Kingdom) |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
7322897 |
CHANG BAI (HOUGSHUI, HUANG HE 22, SIMA QIAN BARU 22, CORVUS, GALAXY, INA MAKA, BLACK MOON, RED MOON, EOLO, THULE, MAGNUS, DORITA [CCAMLR]/HUANG HE 22, SIMA QIAN BARU 22, DORITA, MAGNUS, THULE, EOLO, RED MOON, BLACK MOON, INA MAKA, GALAXY, CORVUS [SEAFO]) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Tanzania, North Korea (DPRK), Panama, Sierra Leone, Equatorial Guinea, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Uruguay) [CCAMLR]/Tanzania (previous flags: Uruguay, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Equatorial Guinea, North Korea (DPRK), Sierra Leone, Panama) [SEAFO] |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
9042001 |
CHENGDU (SHAANXI HENAN 33, XIONG NU BARU 33, DRACO I, LIBERTY, CHILBO SAN 33, HAMMER, SEO YANG No 88, CARRAN [CCAMLR]/SHAANXI HENAN 33, XIONG NU BARU 33, LIBERTY, CHILBO SAN 33, HAMMER, CARRAN, DRACO-1 [SEAFO]) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Tanzania, Panama, Sierra Leone, North Korea (DPRK), Togo, Republic of Korea, Uruguay [CCAMLR])/Tanzania (previous flags: Uruguay, Togo, North Korea (DPRK), Panama) [SEAFO] |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
125, 280020064 [IATTC]/20110014 [ICCAT] |
CHIA HAO No 66 |
Unknown (latest known flag: Belize) |
IATTC, ICCAT |
20080001 and previously AT000GUI000002 [ICCAT] |
DANIAA (CARLOS) |
Unknown (latest known flag: Republic of Guinea (Conakry)) |
ICCAT |
8422852 |
DOLPHIN (OGNEVKA) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Russia, Georgia [NAFO, NEAFC]) |
NEAFC, NAFO, SEAFO |
6163 [IATTC]/20130019 [ICCAT] |
DRAGON III |
Unknown |
IATTC, ICCAT |
8604668 |
EROS DOS (FURABOLOS) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Panama, Seychelles) [NAFO, NEAFC]/Panama [SEAFO] |
NEAFC, NAFO, SEAFO |
20130018 [ICCAT] |
FULL RICH |
Unknown (latest known flag: Belize) |
IOTC, ICCAT |
7355662/20130015 [ICCAT] |
FU LIEN No 1 |
Georgia |
WCPFC, ICCAT |
20130017 [ICCAT] |
FU HSIANG FA No 21 |
Unknown |
IOTC, ICCAT |
200800005 previously AT000LIB00041 [ICCAT] |
GALA I (MANARA II, ROAGAN) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Libya, Isle of Man) |
ICCAT |
6591 [IATTC]/20130020 [ICCAT] |
GOIDAU RUEY No 1 |
Unknown (latest known flag: Panama) |
IATTC, ICCAT |
7020126 |
GOOD HOPE (SEA RANGER V, TOTO [SEAFO]/TOTO [CCAMLR]) |
Nigeria (previous flag: Belize [SEAFO]) |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
6719419 [NEAFC, SEAFO]/6714919 [NAFO] |
GORILERO (GRAN SOL) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Sierra Leone, Panama [NAFO, NEAFC]) |
NEAFC, NAFO, SEAFO |
2009003 [ICCAT] |
GUNUAR MELYAN 21 |
Unknown |
IOTC, ICCAT |
7322926 |
HEAVY SEA (DUERO, JULIUS, KETA, SHERPA UNO [CCAMLR]/SHERPA UNO, KETA, DUERO [SEAFO]) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Panama, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Belize) [CCAMLR]/Panama (previous flag: Uruguay) [SEAFO] |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
201000004 [ICCAT] |
HOOM XIANG 11 |
Unknown (latest known flag: Malaysia) |
IOTC, ICCAT |
7332218 |
IANNIS 1 [NEAFC]/IANNIS I [NAFO, SEAFO] (MOANA MAR, CANOS DE MECA [SEAFO]) |
Unknown (latest known flag: Panama [NEAFC, NAFO]) |
NEAFC, NAFO, SEAFO |
6803961 |
ITZIAR II (Seabull 22, Carmela, Gold Dragon, Golden Sun, Notre Dame, Mare) |
Mali (previous flags: Nigeria, Togo, Equatorial Guinea, Bolivia, Namibia [CCAMLR]) |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
9505 [IATTC]/20130021 [ICCAT] |
JYI LIH 88 |
Unknown |
IATTC, ICCAT |
7905443 |
KOOSHA 4 (EGUZKIA [SEAFO]) |
Iran |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
9037537 |
LANA (ZEUS, TRITON I [CCAMLR]/KINSHO MARU No 18, TRITON-1, ZEUS [SEAFO]) |
Nigeria (previous flags: Mongolia, Togo, Sierra Leone) [CCAMLR]/Unknown (latest known flags: Japan, Sierra Leone, Togo, Mongolia) [SEAFO] |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
20060007 (ICCAT) |
LILA No 10 |
Unknown (latest known flag: Panama) |
ICCAT |
7388267 |
LIMPOPO (ROSS, ALOS, LENA, CAP GEORGE [CCAMLR]/ROSS, ALOS, LENA, CAP GEORGE, CONBAROYA, TERCERO [SEAFO]) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Togo, Ghana, Seychelles, France [CCAMLR]/Seychelles, Ghana, Togo [SEAFO]) |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
20040007 [ICCAT] |
MADURA 2 |
Unknown |
ICCAT |
20040008 [ICCAT] |
MADURA 3 |
Unknown |
ICCAT |
7325746 |
MAINE (GUINESPA I, MAPOSA NOVENO, [SEAFO]) |
Republic of Guinea (Conakry) |
NEAFC, NAFO, SEAFO |
20060002 [ICCAT] |
MARIA |
Unknown |
ICCAT |
20060005 [ICCAT] |
MELILLA No 101 |
Unknown (latest known flag: Panama) |
ICCAT |
20060004 [ICCAT] |
MELILLA No 103 |
Unknown (latest known flag: Panama) |
ICCAT |
7385174 |
MURTOSA |
Unknown (latest known flag: Togo [NAFO, NEAFC]/Portugal [SEAFO]) |
NEAFC, NAFO, SEAFO |
C-00545/14613 [IATTC]/20110003 [ICCAT] |
NEPTUNE |
Georgia |
IATTC, ICCAT, WCPFC |
9319856 |
NIHEWAN (HUIQUAN, WUTAISHAN ANHUI 44, YANGZI HUA 44, TROSKY, PALOMA V [CCAMLR]/WUTAISHA N ANHUI 44, YANGZI HUA 44, PALOMA V, JIAN YUAN, TROSKY [SEAFO]) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Tanzania, Mongolia, Namibia, Uruguay) |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
20060003 [ICCAT] |
No 101 GLORIA (GOLDEN LAKE) |
Unknown (latest known flag: Panama) |
ICCAT |
20060008 [ICCAT] |
No 2 CHOYU |
Unknown (latest known flag: Honduras) |
ICCAT |
20060011 [ICCAT] |
No 3 CHOYU |
Unknown (latest known flag: Honduras) |
ICCAT |
20040006 [ICCAT] |
OCEAN DIAMOND |
Unknown |
ICCAT |
7826233/20090001 [ICCAT] |
OCEAN LION |
Unknown (latest known flag: Equatorial Guinea) |
IOTC, ICCAT |
11369 [IATTC]/20130022 [ICCAT] |
ORCA |
Unknown (latest known flag: Belize) |
IATTC, ICCAT |
20060012 [ICCAT] |
ORIENTE No 7 |
Unknown (latest known flag: Honduras) |
ICCAT |
5062479 |
PERLON (CHERNE, BIGARO, HOKING, SARGO, LUGALPESCA) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Mongolia, Togo, Uruguay) |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
6607666 |
RAY (KILY, CONSTANT, TROPIC, ISLA GRACIOSA [CCAMLR]/KILLY, CONSTANT, TROPIC, ISLA GRACIOSA [SEAFO]) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Belize, Equatorial Guinea, South Africa) [CCAMLR]/Belize (previous flags: South Africa, Equatorial Guinea, Mongolia) [SEAFO] |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
95 [IATTC]/20130023 [ICCAT] |
REYMAR 6 |
Unknown (latest known flag: Belize) |
IATTC, ICCAT |
20130027 [ICCAT] |
SAMUDERA PASIFIK No 18 |
Indonesia |
ICCAT |
200800004 previously AT000LIB00039 [ICCAT] |
SHARON 1 (MANARA 1, POSEIDON) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Libya, United Kingdom) |
ICCAT |
20050001 [ICCAT] |
SOUTHERN STAR 136 (HSIANG CHANG) |
Unknown (latest known flag: Saint Vincent and the Grenadines) |
ICCAT |
9405 [IATTC]/20130024 [ICCAT] |
TA FU 1 |
Unknown |
IATTC, ICCAT |
6818930 |
TCHAW (REX, CONDOR, INCA, VIKING, CISNE AZUL [CCAMLR]/CONDOR, INCA, VIKING, CISNE AZUL, PESCAMEX III, AROSA CUARTO, REX [SEAFO]) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Togo, Belize, Seychelles) [CCAMLR]/Togo (previous flags: Belize, Seychelles, Togo) [SEAFO] |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
13568 [IATTC]/20130025 [ICCAT] |
TCHING YE No 6 (EL DIRIA I) |
Unknown (latest known flags: Belize, Costa Rica) |
IATTC, ICCAT |
6905408 |
THUNDER (WUHAN No 4, KUKO, TYPHOON I, RUBIN, ARCTIC RANGER [CCAMLR]/ARCTIC RANGER, RUBIN, TYPHOON-I, KUKO [SEAFO]) |
Nigeria (previous flags: Mongolia, Togo, Seychelles, United Kingdom [CCAMLR]) |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
7905039 |
TIANTAI (KESHAN, BAIYANGDIAN, PACIFIC DUCHESS) [CCAMLR]/KESHAN (BAIYANGDIAN, PACIFIC DUCHESS) [SEAFO] |
Unknown (latest known flags: Mongolia, Tanzania) [CCAMLR]/Mongolia (previous flag: Tanzania) [SEAFO] |
CCAMLR, SEAFO |
7321374, 7325930 [SEAFO] |
TRINITY (ENXEMBRE, YUCATAN BASIN, FONTENOVA, JAWHARA [NEAFC, NAFO]/YUCATAN BASIN, ENXEMBRE, FONTE NOVA, JAWHARA, UKOLA COREA [SEAFO]) |
Ghana (previous flags: Panama, Morocco [NEAFC, NAFO]/Panama, Gibraltar, Morocco [SEAFO]) |
NEAFC, NAFO, SEAFO |
8994295/129 [IATTC] 20130026 [ICCAT] |
WEN TENG No 688 (MAHKOIA ABADI No 196) |
Unknown (latest known flag: Belize) |
IATTC, ICCAT |
20130016 [ICCAT] |
YU FONG 168 |
Taiwan |
WCPFC, ICCAT |
2009002 [ICCAT] |
YU MAAN WON |
Unknown (latest known flag: Georgia) |
IOTC, ICCAT |
(1) International Maritime Organization.
(2) For any additional information consult the websites of the regional fisheries management organisations (RFMOs).’
13.2.2014 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 43/55 |
COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 138/2014
of 12 February 2014
establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) (1),
Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors (2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,
Whereas:
(1) |
Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto. |
(2) |
The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union, |
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 12 February 2014.
For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
Jerzy PLEWA
Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development
ANNEX
Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
(EUR/100 kg) |
||
CN code |
Third country code (1) |
Standard import value |
0702 00 00 |
IL |
107,2 |
MA |
55,5 |
|
TN |
72,1 |
|
TR |
111,6 |
|
ZZ |
86,6 |
|
0707 00 05 |
MA |
168,6 |
TR |
151,3 |
|
ZZ |
160,0 |
|
0709 91 00 |
EG |
176,4 |
ZZ |
176,4 |
|
0709 93 10 |
MA |
39,0 |
TR |
132,9 |
|
ZZ |
86,0 |
|
0805 10 20 |
EG |
45,1 |
IL |
66,4 |
|
MA |
56,4 |
|
TN |
52,4 |
|
TR |
72,7 |
|
ZZ |
58,6 |
|
0805 20 10 |
IL |
138,2 |
MA |
76,7 |
|
ZZ |
107,5 |
|
0805 20 30 , 0805 20 50 , 0805 20 70 , 0805 20 90 |
CN |
60,3 |
IL |
134,4 |
|
JM |
112,4 |
|
KR |
142,4 |
|
MA |
132,8 |
|
PK |
55,3 |
|
TR |
59,7 |
|
ZZ |
99,6 |
|
0805 50 10 |
AL |
43,6 |
MA |
71,7 |
|
TR |
56,3 |
|
ZZ |
57,2 |
|
0808 10 80 |
CN |
88,4 |
MK |
26,2 |
|
US |
160,4 |
|
ZZ |
91,7 |
|
0808 30 90 |
CL |
123,8 |
CN |
70,9 |
|
TR |
122,0 |
|
US |
197,2 |
|
ZA |
95,0 |
|
ZZ |
121,8 |
(1) Nomenclature of countries laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1833/2006 (OJ L 354, 14.12.2006, p. 19). Code ‘ ZZ ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.