11.3.2008

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/3

Euro exchange rates (1)

10 March 2008

(2008/C 65/05)

1 euro=

	Currency	Exchange rate
USD	US dollar	1,5340
JPY	Japanese yen	156,87
DKK	Danish krone	7,4576
GBP	Pound sterling	0,76050
SEK	Swedish krona	9,3918
CHF	Swiss franc	1,5696
ISK	Iceland króna	104,93
NOK	Norwegian krone	7,8855
BGN	Bulgarian lev	1,9558
CZK	Czech koruna	25,041
EEK	Estonian kroon	15,6466
HUF	Hungarian forint	263,47
LTL	Lithuanian litas	3,4528
LVL	Latvian lats	0,6967
PLN	Polish zloty	3,5635
RON	Romanian leu	3,7129
SKK	Slovak koruna	32,379
TRY	Turkish lira	1,9044
AUD	Australian dollar	1,6601
CAD	Canadian dollar	1,5194
HKD	Hong Kong dollar	11,9477
NZD	New Zealand dollar	1,9314
SGD	Singapore dollar	2,1303
KRW	South Korean won	1 481,38
ZAR	South African rand	12,1895
CNY	Chinese yuan renminbi	10,8958
HRK	Croatian kuna	7,2784
IDR	Indonesian rupiah	14 082,12
MYR	Malaysian ringgit	4,9088
PHP	Philippine peso	62,817
RUB	Russian rouble	36,6180
THB	Thai baht	48,344
BRL	Brazilian real	2,5839
MXN	Mexican peso	16,6094

(1)

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

11.3.2008

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/4

Call for proposals 2008 — Civil Protection Financial Instrument — Cooperation projects on preparedness and prevention

(2008/C 65/06)

The European Commission, Directorate-General for Environment, Civil Protection Unit, is launching a Call for Proposals with the aim of identifying cooperation projects on preparedness and prevention which might be eligible for financial support in the framework of the Council Decision 2007/162/EC, Euratom establishing a Civil Protection Financial Instrument. This financial support will take the form of grants.

The fields concerned, the nature and content of the actions and the financing conditions are set out in the relevant Grant Application Guide, which also contains detailed instructions on where and when to submit a proposal. The guide, as well as the relevant grant application forms can be downloaded from the Europa website at:

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/funding/intro_en.htm

Proposals must be sent to the Commission to the address indicated in the Grant Application Guide by 30 April 2008. Proposals must be submitted by post or private courier no later than 30 April 2008 (evidence shall be constituted by the date of dispatch, the postmark or the date of the deposit slip). They may also be delivered by hand to the specific address indicated in the Guide no later than 30 April 2008 at 17.00 (evidence shall be the acknowledgement of receipt dated and signed by the responsible official).

Proposals sent by the fixed deadline but received by the Commission after 16 May 2008 (final receipt date) will not be considered eligible. It is the duty of the applicant organisation to ensure that the necessary precautions are taken to respect this deadline.

Proposals submitted by fax, electronic mail, incomplete applications, or applications sent in several parts will not be accepted.

The procedure for the award of grants is scheduled as follows:

—	receipt, recording and acknowledgement of receipt by the Commission,

—	appraisal of the proposals by the Commission,

—	award decision and notification of the result to the applicants.

Beneficiaries will be selected on the basis of the criteria set out in the guide mentioned in point 2 and within the limits of the available budget.

In the event of approval by the Commission, a grant agreement (made out in euro) will be concluded between the Commission and the party submitting the proposal.

The procedure is strictly confidential.

11.3.2008

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/5

Notice of initiation of an examination procedure concerning obstacles to trade within the meaning of Council Regulation (EC) No 3286/94 consisting of the US ban on foreign internet gambling and its enforcement

(2008/C 65/07)

On 20 December 2007, the Commission received a complaint under Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3286/94 (1) (hereinafter ‘the Regulation’). The period of time referred to in Article 5(4) of the Regulation was suspended with the agreement of the complainant until 15 January 2008.

1. Complainant

The complaint was lodged by the Remote Gambling Association (hereinafter ‘RGA’).

RGA is a London-based trade association including in its membership most of the world's largest internet gambling companies. Nine of the top ten Community suppliers belong to the RGA, as well as 16 of the first 20. It therefore represents a substantial proportion of the Community internet gambling industry.

The RGA is therefore an association acting on behalf of one or more Community enterprises within the meaning of Articles 4(1) and 2(6) of the Regulation.

2. Service concerned

The complaint concerns the supply of commercial gambling and betting services delivered via remote communication and primarily the internet.

The service is identified as falling under sub sector 96492 ‘gambling and betting services’, sector 964 ‘Sporting and other recreational services’ of the ‘Services sectoral classification list’ (the so called ‘W/120 list’) used in the GATS context.

There is no specific EU legislation, although a number of EU jurisdictions do licence internet gambling operators (Austria, Ireland, Italy, Malta, the United Kingdom and Gibraltar) on the basis of national legislation or regulation.

3. Subject

The complaint focuses on US (i) legislation imposing a ban on internet gambling; (ii) measures taken to enforce that legislation; (iii) the fact that the legislation is enforced in a discriminatory way.

In this respect, the complaint explicitly identifies the relevant provisions in the US Wire Act and the safe harbour allegedly created by the Interstate Horse Racing Act (IHA); the Travel Act; the Illegal Gambling Business Act (IGBA); the Wagering Paraphernalia Act, and Federal anti-money laundering legislation; prohibitions contained in State laws; the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA); and the differential and discriminatory treatment of EU suppliers compared to US suppliers based on these laws.

4. Allegations of obstacles to Trade

The complainant considers that the measures described in Section 3 constitute an obstacle to trade within the meaning of Article 2(1) of the Regulation.

The complainant alleges that the measures described in Section 3 are inconsistent with several provisions of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (hereinafter ‘GATS’).

The complainant alleges that, by maintaining the Wire Act, the Travel Act and the IGBA — which were found to violate Article XVI of the GATS in the US-Gambling dispute (WT/DS285) — and by taking enforcement measures against foreign service suppliers, the US is denying market access inconsistently with Article XVI of the GATS. Moreover, the complainant argues that the adoption of UIGEA, in which the US Congress recognises that internet gambling can be regulated, and the selective enforcement of the law, notably through possible criminal sanctions, against foreign service providers but not against US based providers, both make the violation of Article XVI GATS more clear cut and undermine very considerably the US position with regard to a possible Article XVI defence.

Second, the complainant alleges that the measures described in Section 3 are inconsistent with Article XVII of the GATS. The complaint argues that US based operators of internet horse race betting and non-US based operators of internet gambling are like service suppliers or like services, and that the US violates Article XVII of the GATS by applying less favourable treatment to non-US based operators of internet gambling. The complaint claims that the fact that some EU operators did not offer gambling on horse racing is entirely related to the regulatory measures applied by the US, distorting the competitive relationship between US-based operators and non-US based operators. Moreover, it is argued that the selective enforcement of the prohibition to provide remote gambling services against foreign service providers but not against US-based providers, notably through possible criminal sanctions, constitutes a clear instance of discrimination which is inconsistent with Article XVII of the GATS.

The complainant gives consideration as well to the fact that the relevant GATS legal framework is expected to undergo significant changes in the coming months as a result of the intention of the US to withdraw its GATS commitments on gambling and betting services. The complainant argues that this withdrawal would not have retroactive effects, and would therefore not affect the US obligations in respect of any act or fact occurred while the commitment was still in place. Given that the only relevant trade (‘act or fact’) at issue in the complaint is the remote gambling that a number of EU based operators offered to persons in the US prior to their withdrawal from the US market, and therefore while the US commitments were in place, the US would according to the complainant be under the obligation not to take or continue any measure that would constitute a violation of its obligations in relation to such past trade.

In light of the factual information available and the evidence submitted, the Commission is satisfied that the complaint contains sufficient prima facie evidence of the existence of obstacles to trade within the meaning of Article 2(1) of the Regulation.

5. Allegation of adverse trade effects

The complainant claims that the obstacles to trade identified in the complaint have forced their total withdrawal from the US market and have significant additional negative effects on their business outside the US. It points out therefore that the obstacles to trade can be considered as causing and threatening to cause adverse trade effects.

The complaint contains information and evidence showing that the impact of the measures has been serious both on the services trade between the EU and the US and on the Community gambling sector, with potential significant impact on the economy of the Community. It further maintains that the existing threats in the form of possible criminal sanctions may have further serious impact on the affected companies and the gambling sector. The main relevant indicators referred to in the complaint are a loss of revenue for one financial year in the US for the three main EU companies of USD 3 billion; a loss of stock market value of more than USD 11 billion for the same three companies following the adoption of UIGEA and their withdrawal from the US market; the payment of substantial fines in settlements with the US Department of Justice; reference to the potential impact of possible sanctions on the ability of the companies to operate their business under normal conditions outside the US; and knock-on effects on sectors that supply services to the gambling sector as well as on banks that have provided payment services.

The Commission considers that the complaint contains sufficient prima facie evidence of the adverse trade effects of the measure on the complainant and a sector or sectors of economic activity in the Community within the meaning of Article 2(4) of the Regulation.

6. Community interest

The complainant indicates that the EU has developed the world's leading internet gaming business and has a strong lead over the US in this sector. Many of the world's largest companies are licensed in and operate from the United Kingdom, Gibraltar, Malta, Ireland and Austria. There are significant back office operations providing technology, marketing and customer service support in Sweden, Cyprus, Bulgaria and Estonia. The complaint remarks that accurate statistics on this fast growing e-commerce sector are not readily available, but offers some indicators of the economic significance of the sector including an estimate of 15 000 staff employed by the internet gaming industry in the EU, with a proportion of high value knowledge jobs higher than in many other industries. It further points out that the internet gaming sector has a significant indirect economic impact on other sectors of the economy which are involved in providing the infrastructure that an internet business requires (primarily financial services, information technology and professional services).

The Global Europe Communication from October 2006 is also an important factor to take into account. This Communication states that that rejection of protectionism at home must be accompanied by activism in creating open markets and fair conditions for trade abroad. Its most relevant section is the Action Plan for EU External Competitiveness, which includes plans for a renewed Market Access Strategy, building on the one launched in 1996 to help enforce multilateral and bilateral trade deals and open third country markets. It is important in this respect to ensure that other WTO Members abide by their WTO commitments.

In view of the above, it is considered to be in the Community's interest to initiate an examination procedure.

7. Procedure

Having decided, after due consultation of the Advisory Committee established by the Regulation, that there is sufficient evidence to justify initiating an examination procedure for the purpose of considering the legal and factual issues involved, and that this is in the interest of the Community, the Commission has commenced an examination in accordance with Article 8 of the Regulation.

Interested parties may make themselves known and make known their views in writing on specific issues raised by the complaint, providing supporting evidence.

Furthermore, the Commission will hear the parties who so request in writing when they make themselves known, provided that they are primarily concerned by the result of the procedure.

This notice is published in accordance with Article 8(1)(a) of the Regulation.

8. Time limit

Any information relating to the matter and any request for a hearing should reach the Commission not later than 30 days following the date of publication of this notice and should be sent in writing to:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Trade

Mr Jean-François Brakeland, DG Trade F.2

CHAR 9/74

B-1049 Brussels

Fax (32-2) 299 32 64.

It is also noted that if interested parties consider that they are encountering difficulties in the exercise of their rights of defence, they may request the intervention of the Hearing Officer of DG Trade. He acts as an interface between the interested parties and the Commission services, offering, where necessary, mediation on procedural matters affecting the protection of their interests in this proceeding, in particular, with regard to issues concerning access to the file, confidentiality, extension of time limits and the treatment of written and/or oral submission of views. For further information and contact details, interested parties may consult the Hearing Officer's web pages on the website of DG Trade (http://ec.europa.eu/trade).

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 3286/94 of 22 December 1994 laying down Community procedures in the field of the common commercial policy in order to ensure the exercise of the Community's rights under international trade rules, in particular those established under the auspices of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) (OJ L 349, 31.12.1994, p. 71). Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 125/2008 (OJ L 40, 14.2.2008, p. 1).

11.3.2008

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/8

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.5061 — Renault/Russian Technologies/AvtoVaz)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 65/08)

On 29 February 2008, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking Renault s.a.s. (‘Renault’, France, controlled by Renault SA (France)) and Rosoboronexport/Russian Technologies (‘Russian Technologies’, Russia) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation joint control of the undertaking AvtoVaz (Russia) by way of agreement.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—	for Renault: vehicle manufacturer,

—	for Russian Technologies: Russian State intermediary agency for export and import of military and dual-purpose products, technologies and services,

—	for AvtoVaz: passenger car manufacturer.

3.	On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax ((32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5061 — Renault/Russian Technologies/AvtoVaz, to the following address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

J-70

B-1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

(1) OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

11.3.2008

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/9

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.5025 — SABMiller/Molson Coors/JV)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 65/09)

On 26 February 2008, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertakings SABMiller plc (‘SABMiller’, United Kingdom) and Molson Coors Brewing Company (‘Molson Coors’, USA) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation joint control of a newly created company constituting a joint venture (‘JV’, USA) by way of transfer of assets.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—	for SABMiller: worldwide production, distribution and sake of beer and other beverages,

—	for Molson Coors: worldwide production, distribution and sale of beer and other beverages,

—	for JV: production, distribution and sale of beer in the United States and Puerto Rico.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax ((32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5025 — SABMiller/Molson Coors/JV, to the following address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

J-70

B-1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

(1) OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

(2) OJ C 56, 5.3.2005, p. 32.

11.3.2008

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/11

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.5072 — AMSSC/BE group/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 65/11)

On 4 March 2008, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertakings ArcelorMittal Steel Service Centres SAS (‘AMSSC’), belonging to the ArcelorMittal group (‘ArcelorMittal’, Luxembourg) and BE Sverige AB (‘BE group’, Sweden) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation joint control of a newly created company constituting a joint venture (JV) which will combine the steel service centre activities of both parties in Sweden.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—	for AMSSC: specialized in flat carbon steel processing and logistics,

—	for BE group: steel distribution company,

—	for JV: active in the sector of steel service centres in Sweden.

3.	On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax ((32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference number COMP/M.5072 — AMSSC/BE group/JV, to the following address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

J-70

B-1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

(1) OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

11.3.2008

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/12

Notice for the attention of the persons and entities on the lists provided for in Articles 7, 11 and 15 of Council Regulation (EC) No 194/2008 renewing and strengthening the restrictive measures in respect of Burma/Myanmar and repealing Regulation (EC) No 817/2006

(2008/C 65/12)

The Council of the European Union has determined that:

The enterprises, legal persons, entities or bodies listed in Annex V of the above-mentioned Regulation are:

(a)

enterprises in Burma/Myanmar engaged in the following industries:

—	logging and timber processing,

—	mining of coal, gold, silver, iron, tin, copper, tungsten, lead, manganese, nickel and zinc,

—	mining and processing of precious and semi-precious stones, including diamonds, rubies, sapphires, jade and emeralds; or

(b)	legal persons, entities or bodies owned or controlled by, or acting for or on behalf of, enterprises owned or controlled by, or acting for or on behalf of, such enterprises.

The persons and entities listed in Annex VI of the Regulation are:

(a)	individual members of the Government of Burma/Myanmar; or

(b)	natural or legal persons, entities or bodies associated with them.

The persons and entities listed in Annex VII are:

(a)	enterprises owned or controlled by the Government of Burma/Myanmar or the public bodies, corporations, including companies established under private law in which the public authorities have a majority stake, and agencies of that State;

(b)	enterprises owned or controlled by individual members of the Government of Burma/Myanmar or natural or legal persons, entities or bodies associated with them; or

(c)	legal persons, entities or bodies owned or controlled by, or acting for or on behalf of, enterprises referred to in point (a) or (b).

Consequently, the Council has decided to maintain on, or add, those persons and entities to the three lists.

Regulation (EC) No 194/2008 (1) provides for:

a prohibition on new investment in the enterprises, legal persons, entities or bodies listed in Annex V, and a ban on the provision to them of financing or financial assistance for any sale, supply, transfer or export of goods and technology listed in Annex III or for the provision of related technical assistance or training;

2.	the freezing of all funds, other financial assets and economic resources belonging to the persons, groups and entities listed in Annex VI and that no funds, other financial assets and economic resources may be made available to them, whether directly or indirectly; and

3.	a prohibition on new investment in the enterprises, legal persons, entities or bodies listed in Annex VII.

The attention of the persons and entities listed in Annex VI is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated in the websites listed in Annex IV to the Regulation in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for essential needs or specific payments in accordance with Article 13 of that Regulation.

The persons and entities concerned may submit at any time a request to the Council, together with any supporting documentation, that the decision to include and maintain them on the lists referred to above should be reconsidered, to the following address: Council of the European Union, rue de la Loi 175, B-1048 Brussels.

Such requests will be considered when they are received. In this respect, the attention of the persons and entities concerned is drawn to the regular review by the Council of the lists according to Article 9 of Common Position 2006/318/CFSP.

The attention of the persons and entities concerned is also drawn to the possibility of challenging the Council's decision before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 230(4) and (5) of the Treaty establishing the European Community.

(1) OJ L 66, 10.3.2008, p. 1.

		ISSN 1725-2423
Official Journal of the European Union		C 65

English edition	Information and Notices	Volume 51 11 March 2008

Notice No	Contents	page
	II Information
	INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES
	Commission
2008/C 065/01	Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.5052 — INEOS/BP VAM & EtAc Business) ( 1 )	1

2008/C 065/02	Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.5017 — Rank/Alcoa P&C) ( 1 )	1

2008/C 065/03	Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4962 — Sun Group/neckermann.de GmbH) ( 1 )	2

2008/C 065/04	Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4950 — Aviva/Bank Zachodni) ( 1 )	2

	IV Notices
	NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES
	Commission
2008/C 065/05	Euro exchange rates	3

	V Announcements
	ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
	Commission
2008/C 065/06	Call for proposals 2008 — Civil Protection Financial Instrument — Cooperation projects on preparedness and prevention	4

	PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMON COMMERCIAL POLICY
	Commission
2008/C 065/07	Notice of initiation of an examination procedure concerning obstacles to trade within the meaning of Council Regulation (EC) No 3286/94 consisting of the US ban on foreign internet gambling and its enforcement	5

	PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPETITION POLICY
	Commission
2008/C 065/08	Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5061 — Renault/Russian Technologies/AvtoVaz) ( 1 )	8

2008/C 065/09	Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5025 — SABMiller/Molson Coors/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure ( 1 )	9

2008/C 065/10	Publication of a list of measures considered by the Commission as existing aid, within the meaning of Article 88(1) of the EC Treaty, upon accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union ( 1 )	10

2008/C 065/11	Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.5072 — AMSSC/BE group/JV) ( 1 )	11

	OTHER ACTS
	Council
2008/C 065/12	Notice for the attention of the persons and entities on the lists provided for in Articles 7, 11 and 15 of Council Regulation (EC) No 194/2008 renewing and strengthening the restrictive measures in respect of Burma/Myanmar and repealing Regulation (EC) No 817/2006	12