title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2323 of 11 December 2015 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/220 laying down rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1217/2009

text:
               12.12.2015

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 328/97

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/2323
   of 11 December 2015
   amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/220 laying down rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1217/2009
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1217/2009 of 30 November 2009 setting up a network for the collection of accountancy data on the incomes and business operation of agricultural holdings in the European Union (1), and in particular Article 5a(2) and (4), the third subparagraph of Article 8(3) and Article 19(3) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Annex II to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/220 (2) sets out the number of returning holdings per Member State and per Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN) division. Due to a structural change of agriculture in Finland which has led to a decrease in the number of holdings, it is appropriate to decrease accordingly the number of returning holdings for Finland laid down in that Annex.

               (2)

               In accordance with Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1217/2009, Croatia constitutes a single FADN division for the 3 years following its accession to the Union. As that period is due to expire, it is necessary to fix in Annex II to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/220 the number of returning holdings per FADN division for that Member State.

               (3)

               In view of the changes provided for in this Regulation Finland and Croatia should be allowed to revise their respective selection plans for the accounting year 2016.

               (4)

               Annex VIII to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/220 sets out the form and layout of the farm return. For the sake of clarity, that Annex should provide for additional information relating to certain instructions and definitions.

               (5)

               The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Farm Accountancy Data Network,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/220 is amended as follows:

               (1)

               in Article 3(2), the following subparagraph is added:
               ‘Finland and Croatia may revise the respective selection plans they notified for the accounting year 2016. They shall notify their respective revised selection plans for that accounting year to the Commission by 31 March 2016.’;

               (2)

               Annexes II and VIII are amended in accordance with the Annex to this Regulation.

         Article 2
   This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
   It shall apply from the accounting year 2016.

      This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
      Done at Brussels, 11 December 2015.

            For the Commission

            The President

         Jean-Claude JUNCKER

      (1)  OJ L 328, 15.12.2009, p. 27.

      (2)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/220 of 3 February 2015 laying down rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1217/2009 setting up a network for the collection of accountancy data on the incomes and business operation of agricultural holdings in the European Union (OJ L 46, 19.2.2015, p. 1).

      ANNEX
      Annexes II and VIII to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/220 are amended as follows:

                  (1)

                  Annex II is amended as follows:

                              (a)

                              the row concerning Croatia is replaced by the following:

                                          ‘CROATIA

                                          861

                                          Jadranska Hrvatska

                                          329

                                          862

                                          Kontinentalna Hrvatska

                                          922

                                          Total Croatia

                                          1 251’

                              (b)

                              the rows concerning Finland are replaced by the following:

                                          ‘FINLAND

                                          670

                                          Etelä-Suomi

                                          403

                                          680

                                          Sisä-Suomi

                                          229

                                          690

                                          Pohjanmaa

                                          208

                                          700

                                          Pohjois-Suomi

                                          110

                                          Total Finland

                                          950’

                  (2)

                  Annex VIII is amended as follows:

                              (a)

                              in the seventh paragraph, the third indent relating to the degrees of accuracy of the farm return data is replaced by the following:

                                          ‘—

                                          areas: in ares (1 a = 100 m2), except in the case of mushrooms which will be expressed in square metres of total cropped area and except in Table M “Subsidies”, where basic units are to be registered in ha.’;

                              (b)

                              under Table A, in Section ‘A.CL. Classes’, the first sentence relating to the category A.CL.180.C. is replaced by the following:
                              ‘A.CL.180.C. Structural Funds area: it shall be indicated in which one of the regions referred to in points (a), (b) or (c) of Article 90(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) the majority of the utilised agricultural area of the holding is situated.

                                 (1)  Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320).’;"

                              (c)

                              under Table B, in Section ‘B.UT. UAA for tenant farming’, the first paragraph of the category B.UT.20.A is replaced by the following:
                              ‘B.UT.20.A UAA (arable land, permanent grassland, permanent crops and kitchen gardens) worked by a person other than the owner, tenant for life or leaseholder, holding a tenancy on the said area (the rent is payable in cash and/or in kind; being generally fixed in advance, it does not normally vary with the farming results) and/or UAA farmed on similar terms of tenure.’;

                              (d)

                              in Table H, the row of category 5062 is replaced by the following:

                                          ‘5062

                                             FO

                                          Taxes and other charges on land and buildings

                                          —’

                              (e)

                              under Table H, the first sentence of the first paragraph is replaced by the following:
                              ‘Provision of the data referred to in codes 3031-3033 is optional for the accounting years 2014-2016 for those Member States which used in the past the possibility under Article 3 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 385/2012 (2).

                                 (2)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 385/2012 of 30 April 2012 on the farm return to be used for determining the incomes of agricultural holdings and analysing the business operation of such holdings (OJ L 127, 15.5.2012, p. 1).’;"

                              (f)

                              under the title ‘GROUPS OF INFORMATION IN TABLE K’, after the third paragraph, under the term ‘Quantity (column Q)’, the second sentence is replaced by the following:
                              ‘In the case of products of bee-keeping other than honey (code 700), the quantity is expressed in quintals of “honey equivalents”.’;

                              (g)

                              under the title ‘GROUPS OF INFORMATION IN TABLE L’, in Section ‘L.SA Sales’, the last paragraph is replaced by the following:
                              ‘Grants and subsidies received for products during the accounting year are not included in the total for sales; they are entered in Table M “Subsidies” in the appropriate category (codes between 2110 and 2900). When marketing costs, if any, are known, they are not deducted from the sales total, but are given in Table H “Inputs” in the appropriate category of specific OGA costs (codes 4010 to 4090).’


title: Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 443/2011 of 5 May 2011 extending the definitive countervailing duty imposed by Regulation (EC) No 598/2009 on imports of biodiesel originating in the United States of America to imports of biodiesel consigned from Canada, whether declared as originating in Canada or not, and extending the definitive countervailing duty imposed by Regulation (EC) No 598/2009 to imports of biodiesel in a blend containing by weight 20 % or less of biodiesel originating in the United States of America, and terminating the investigation in respect of imports consigned from Singapore

text:
               11.5.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 122/1

         COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 443/2011
   of 5 May 2011
   extending the definitive countervailing duty imposed by Regulation (EC) No 598/2009 on imports of biodiesel originating in the United States of America to imports of biodiesel consigned from Canada, whether declared as originating in Canada or not, and extending the definitive countervailing duty imposed by Regulation (EC) No 598/2009 to imports of biodiesel in a blend containing by weight 20 % or less of biodiesel originating in the United States of America, and terminating the investigation in respect of imports consigned from Singapore
   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 597/2009 of 11 June 2009 on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European Community (1) (‘the basic Regulation’), and in particular Article 23(4) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal submitted by the European Commission after having consulted the Advisory Committee,
   Whereas:
   1.   PROCEDURE

   1.1.   Existing measures

               (1)

               The Commission, by Regulation (EC) No 194/2009 (2) imposed a provisional countervailing duty on imports of biodiesel originating in the United States of America(‘USA’).

               (2)

               By Regulation (EC) No 598/2009 (3) (the ‘definitive Regulation’), the Council imposed a definitive countervailing duty ranging from EUR 211,2 to EUR 237 per tonne on imports of biodiesel, as defined in Article 1(1) of the said Regulation (‘the product concerned’) originating in the USA (‘the existing measures’). The investigation leading to the adoption of the definitive Regulation is hereafter referred to as ‘the original investigation’.

               (3)

               It should also be noted that by Regulation (EC) No 599/2009 (4), the Council imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty ranging from EUR 0 to EUR 198 per tonne on imports of the product concerned.

         1.2.   Request

               (4)

               On 30 June 2010, the Commission received a request pursuant to Article 23(4) of the basic Regulation to investigate the possible circumvention of the countervailing measures imposed on imports of the product concerned. The request was submitted by the European Biodiesel Board (‘EBB’) on behalf of the Union producers of biodiesel.

               (5)

               The request alleged that the countervailing measures on imports of the product concerned were being circumvented by means of transhipment via Canada and Singapore and by exports of biodiesel in a blend containing by weight 20 % or less of biodiesel.

               (6)

               The request alleged that a significant change in pattern of trade involving exports from the USA, Canada and Singapore has taken place following the imposition of measures on the product concerned, and that there is insufficient due cause or justification other than the imposition of the duty for this change. This change in pattern of trade stemmed allegedly from the transhipment of the product concerned via Canada and Singapore.

               (7)

               The request further alleged that following the imposition of the measures, exports of biodiesel in blends containing 20 % or less of biodiesel from the USA had begun to arrive in the Union, allegedly taking advantage of the biodiesel content threshold set in the description of the product concerned.

               (8)

               Furthermore, the request alleged that the remedial effects of the existing countervailing measures on the product concerned were being undermined both in terms of quantity and price. It was alleged that significant volumes of imports of biodiesel in pure form or in a blend containing by weight more than 20 % of biodiesel from Canada and Singapore and of biodiesel in blends containing 20 % or less of biodiesel, appeared to have replaced imports of the product concerned. In addition, there was sufficient evidence that this increased volume of imports were made at prices well below the non-injurious price established in the investigation that led to the existing measures.

               (9)

               Finally, the request alleged that the prices of the product concerned continue to be subsidised as previously established.

         1.3.   Initiation

               (10)

               Having determined, after consulting the Advisory Committee, that sufficient prima facie evidence existed for the initiation of an investigation pursuant to Article 23 of the basic Regulation, the Commission initiated an investigation by Regulation (EU) No 721/2010 (5) (the ‘initiation Regulation’). Pursuant to Article 24(5) of the basic Regulation, the Commission, by the initiation Regulation, also directed the customs authorities to register imports consigned from Canada and Singapore as well as imports originating in the USA of biodiesel in a blend containing by weight 20 % or less of fatty-acid mono-alkyl esters and/or paraffinic gasoil obtained from synthesis and/or hydro-treatment, of non-fossil origin.

               (11)

               The Commission also initiated a parallel investigation by Regulation (EU) No 720/2010 (6) concerning the possible circumvention of anti-dumping measures on imports of biodiesel originating in the USA by imports of biodiesel consigned from Canada and Singapore and by imports of biodiesel in a blend containing by weight 20 % or less of biodiesel originating in the USA.

         1.4.   Investigation

               (12)

               The Commission officially advised the authorities of the USA, Canada and Singapore. Questionnaires were sent to known producers/exporters in the USA, Canada and Singapore. Interested parties were given the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing within the time limit set in the initiation Regulation.

               (13)

               The following companies submitted replies to the questionnaires and verification visits were subsequently carried out at their premises:

                           Producers/exporters in Canada:

                                       —

                                       BIOX Corporation

                                       —

                                       Rothsay Biodiesel

                           Traders in Singapore:

                                       —

                                       Trafigura Pte Ltd

                                       —

                                       Wilmar Trading Pte Ltd

                           Producers/exporters in the USA:

                                       —

                                       Archer Daniels Midland Company

                                       —

                                       BP Products North America Inc

                                       —

                                       Louis Dreyfus Corporation

                           Related importers:

                                       —

                                       BP Oil International Ltd

                                       —

                                       Cargill BV

               (14)

               Moreover, visits were made to the relevant competent authorities of the Government of Canada and the Government of Singapore.

         1.5.   Investigation period

               (15)

               The investigation period covered the period from 1 April 2009 to 30 June 2010 (the ‘IP’). Data was collected for the period from 2008 up to the end of the IP to investigate the alleged change in the pattern of trade.

         2.   PRODUCT FORMING THE OBJECT OF THE CIRCUMVENTION INVESTIGATION

               (16)

               The product concerned by the possible circumvention, i.e. the product at issue in the original investigation, is fatty-acid mono-alkyl esters and/or paraffinic gasoil obtained from synthesis and/or hydro-treatment, of non-fossil origin, commonly known as ‘biodiesel’, in pure form or in a blend containing by weight more than 20 % of fatty-acid mono-alkyl esters and/or paraffinic gasoil obtained from synthesis and/or hydro-treatment, of non-fossil origin, currently falling within CN codes ex 1516 20 98, ex 1518 00 91, ex 1518 00 99, ex 2710 19 41, 3824 90 91, ex 3824 90 97, and originating in the USA.

               (17)

               The product forming the object of the circumvention investigation is twofold. Firstly, regarding the allegations of transhipment through Canada and Singapore, it is identical to the product at issue in the original investigation, as described in the previous paragraph. Regarding shipments directly from the USA, the product under investigation is biodiesel in a blend containing by weight 20 % or less of fatty-acid mono-alkyl esters and/or paraffinic gasoil obtained from synthesis and/or hydro-treatment, of non-fossil origin, originating in the USA.

         3.   IMPORTS OF BIODIESEL INTO THE UNION VS. EXPORTS FROM THE USA

               (18)

               Following the imposition of provisional countervailing measures in March 2009, imports of the product concerned have practically ceased. The below table summarises the situation:

                  Imports of biodiesel and certain biodiesel blends into the European Union

                  under CN code 3824 90 91 (in tonnes)

                           2008

                           share

                           2009

                           share

                           IP

                           share

                           USA

                           1 487 790

                           83,62 %

                           381 227

                           22,29 %

                           24

                           0,00 %

                           Canada

                           1 725

                           0,10 %

                           140 043

                           8,19 %

                           197 772

                           9,28 %

                           Singapore

                           179

                           0,01 %

                           20 486

                           1,20 %

                           32 078

                           1,50 %

                              Source: Eurostat.

               (19)

               The above Eurostat data cover all biodiesel containing 96,5 % or more of esters.

               (20)

               In comparison, the USA report exports of biodiesel and biodiesel blends under code HTS 3824 90 40 00 (mixtures of fatty substances, animal or vegetable origin) as follows:

                  US exports of biodiesel and biodiesel blends

                  under code HTS 3824 90 40 00 (in tonnes)

                           2008

                           2009

                           IP

                           European Union

                           2 241 473

                           335 577

                           358 291

                           Canada

                           967

                           128 233

                           161 841

                           Singapore

                           311

                           42 056

                           27 415

                           2 242 751

                           505 866

                           547 547

                              Source: US Department of Commerce.

               (21)

               Comparing the two above tables leads to the conclusion that the 358 291 tonnes exported to the Union during the IP are blends with a biodiesel content of 96,5 % and below.

         4.   CANADA

   4.1.   General considerations

               (22)

               There was a high level of cooperation by producers/exporters in Canada. Two producers representing approximately 90 % of Canadian production of biodiesel submitted a questionnaire reply and fully cooperated with the investigation. Moreover, the Canadian Renewable Fuels Association and relevant authorities of the Government of Canada cooperated with the investigation.

               (23)

               In accordance with Article 23(3) of the basic Regulation, the assessment of the existence of circumvention should be made by analysing successively whether there was a change in the pattern of trade between USA, Canada and the Union, if this change stemmed from a practice, process or work for which there was insufficient due cause or economic justification other than the imposition of the duty, if there was evidence of injury or that the remedial effects of the duty were being undermined in terms of the prices and/or quantities of the like product, and that the imported like product still benefits from the subsidy.

         4.2.   Change in patterns of trade

   4.2.1.   Imports into the Union

               (24)

               Imports of biodiesel from the USA dropped from 1 487 790 tonnes in 2008, to 381 227 tonnes in 2009 and to close to zero during the IP.

               (25)

               On the other hand, according to Eurostat data total imports of biodiesel from Canada to the Union increased significantly between 2008 and the IP from 1 725 tonnes in 2008 to 140 043 tonnes in 2009 and 197 772 tonnes during the IP.

         4.2.2.   US exports of biodiesel to Canada

               (26)

               There are no customs duties applicable for sales of biodiesel between the USA and Canada or other kinds of imports restrictions.

               (27)

               According the USA statistics, exports of biodiesel from the USA to Canada increased from 967 tonnes in 2008 to 128 233 tonnes in 2009 and 161 841 tonnes during the IP.

               (28)

               A comparison of the export statistics provided by the US authorities with the import statistics provided on-spot by the Canadian authorities showed significant discrepancies on a monthly basis. According to the Canadian statistics, imports of US biodiesel increased from 11 757 tonnes in 2008 to 18 673 tonnes in 2009 and 174 574 tonnes during the IP.

               (29)

               According to the Canadian authorities, there is no specific code to declare biodiesel. They noted that Canada and the USA exchange import data for use as their respective export data. As such, at the six-digit level Canadian import data and US export data should match, which they do quite closely under HTS 38.24.90. However, beyond six digits they each have their own classification systems. Also it should be noted that the Canadian statistics only cover imports which have been customs cleared in Canada and not transhipped goods.

               (30)

               In conclusion, despite the discrepancies between the two data sources, it is clear that US export of biodiesel to Canada increased from 2008 to the IP, and in particular following the imposition of countervailing measures. The Canadian biodiesel market is currently not able to absorb such quantities of biodiesel. Genuine Canadian biodiesel producers are in fact export oriented.

         4.2.3.   Production in Canada and sales of genuine Canadian biodiesel to the Union

               (31)

               The two cooperating producers in Canada did not purchase any biodiesel from the USA or from any other sources during the IP.

               (32)

               Production of biodiesel in Canada is an infant industry. Some six production facilities were in place during the IP, but the two facilities in Eastern Canada, which are in fact owned and run by the two cooperating producers, alone account for approximately 90 % of total production.

               (33)

               From the production volumes sold by the cooperating producers, sales where end-customers were certainly in North America, i.e. in the USA or Canada were determined. The remainder of the sales were sold to customers who either traded the goods and/or blended the goods with other biodiesel. The two companies did not know whether the customers sold the products to the Union as Canadian biodiesel, whether they blended it, or whether the biodiesel was sold to end customers in the USA or in Canada.

               (34)

               Even if in an extreme case it was assumed that all genuine Canadian biodiesel ended up in the Union, this would account for only 20 % of total imports into the Union from Canada during the IP.

         4.3.   Conclusion on the change in the pattern of trade

               (35)

               The reconciliation of statistics with the data obtained from the cooperating producers showed that Canadian biodiesel producers could not have produced the volume exported from Canada into the Union. This therefore strongly suggests that the surge of imports from Canada into the Union relates to exports of US biodiesel consigned from Canada.

               (36)

               The overall decrease of US exports to the Union as from 2008 and the parallel increase of exports from Canada to the Union and of exports from the USA to Canada after the imposition of the original measures can thus be considered as a change in the pattern of trade.

         4.4.   Insufficient due cause or economic justification other than the imposition of the countervailing duty

               (37)

               The investigation did not bring to light any other due cause or economic justification for the transhipment than the avoidance of the payment of the countervailing duty in force on biodiesel originating in the USA.

         4.5.   Undermining the remedial effect of the countervailing duty

               (38)

               Eurostat data was used to assess whether the imported products had, in terms of quantities, undermined the remedial effects of the countervailing measures in force on imports of biodiesel from the USA. The quantities and prices of exports from Canada were compared with the injury elimination level established in the original investigation.

               (39)

               As mentioned above, imports from Canada into the Union increased from 1 725 tonnes in 2008 to 197 772 tonnes during the IP, the latter representing a share of imports of 9,2 %. The increase of imports from Canada could not be considered to be insignificant bearing in mind the size of the Union market as determined in the original investigation. Considering the non-injurious price level established in the original investigation, Canadian imports into the Union during the IP showed underselling in the region of 50 %, while undercutting the Union producers’ sales prices by approximately 40 %.

               (40)

               It was therefore concluded that the measures are being undermined in terms of quantities and prices.

         4.6.   Evidence of subsidisation

               (41)

               Regarding subsidisation, it should be noted that the US biodiesel tax credit, the main subsidy scheme found in the original investigation, was retroactively reinstated in December 2010. On this basis, it is concluded that the imported like product still benefited from subsidies during the IP.

         4.7.   Conclusion

               (42)

               The investigation concluded that the definitive countervailing duties imposed on imports of biodiesel originating in the USA were circumvented by transhipment via Canada pursuant to Article 23 of the basic Regulation.

         5.   SINGAPORE

               (43)

               Two traders located in Singapore cooperated with the investigation. In addition, cooperation was received from the relevant authorities of the Government of Singapore.

               (44)

               The criteria for the assessment of the existence of circumvention have been described in recital 23 above.

               (45)

               According to Eurostat figures total exports of biodiesel from Singapore to the Union increased from 179 tonnes in 2008 to 20 486 tonnes in 2009 and to 32 078 tonnes during the IP. Exports from the USA to Singapore have also increased over the same period.

               (46)

               According to the relevant authorities of the Government of Singapore the biodiesel produced locally is sold mostly within Singapore to cater to domestic demand. However, they do note a growing industry in Singapore with the recent construction of new production facilities.

               (47)

               Exports from Singapore have traditionally been low. Imports of biodiesel into the Union were closely examined in the Article 14(6) database and checked with the relevant national customs authorities. It appears that imports have arrived in a few spikes. The analysis showed that the majority of these imports were genuine Singaporean origin. However, not all imports could be accounted for.

               (48)

               Compared to the Union consumption established in the original investigation the import volumes from Singapore to the Union which could not be accounted for were found to be extremely low. Furthermore, their share of Union consumption, taking account of EBB’s estimation of the considerable increase in Union consumption since the original investigation, would be negligible.

               (49)

               In view of the above, it can be concluded that the remedial effects of the countervailing measures have not been undermined in terms of quantities from Singapore.

               (50)

               Regarding transhipment, it is well-known that Singapore is a huge shipping hub in Asia where regional ships arrive and unload goods which are later reloaded to ships sailing, among others, to Europe. In this investigation, one of the cooperating traders transhipped biodiesel with Malaysian or Indonesian origin through Singapore with a final destination in the Union. During the IP, this trader alone exported a significant quantity of biodiesel to the Union via transhipment in Singapore and customs cleared the biodiesel in the Union as Malaysian or Indonesian origin. The verification did not reveal indications to put in question the declared Indonesian or Malaysian origin.

               (51)

               In the light of the above, the investigation concerning the possible circumvention of countervailing measures by imports of biodiesel consigned from Singapore should be terminated.

         6.   USA

   6.1.   Preliminary remarks

               (52)

               Five US producers of biodiesel or biodiesel blends cooperated in the investigation, three of which were included in the sample of the original investigation. The US Government cooperated by providing exports statistics and their interpretation of the statistics.

               (53)

               All three producers which were included in the sample in the original investigation had stopped exporting biodiesel after the imposition of definitive measures.

               (54)

               Only one of the five cooperating companies, BP North America which did not cooperate in the original investigation, exported biodiesel blends containing by weight 20 % or less of biodiesel (‘B20 and below’) to the Union during the IP.

               (55)

               The National Biodiesel Board (‘NBB’) which represents the US biodiesel industry argued that a product which was according to them explicitly found to be outside of the product scope of the existing measures cannot become subject to countervailing measures without a de novo anti-subsidy investigation. NBB argued that the definitive Regulation in explicit terms established the ‘product concerned’ and ‘like product’ at the level of biodiesel or biodiesel in blends with biodiesel representing more than 20 %. According to NBB, this was not an artificial threshold but corresponded to the market reality found during the original investigation. It was, e.g. found that the threshold of 20 % was appropriate to allow a clear distinction between the various types of blends which were available on the US market.

               (56)

               In the view of NBB and other interested parties, an anti-circumvention investigation can only extend countervailing measures on a product concerned to a like product that is only a slightly modified product compared to the product concerned. Again, NBB argued that the Council itself in the definitive Regulation had established that biodiesel in blends with a volume of biodiesel of 20 % or less is not a like product. Therefore, according to NBB, in the structure of the provisions of the basic Regulation there is no other option but to initiate a new investigation in order to determine whether these blends should become subject to measures.

               (57)

               In reply to these arguments, it should first of all be noted that the purpose of the anti-circumvention provisions in Article 23 of the basic Regulation is to counteract any alleged attempts to evade the measures in force. If sufficient prima facie evidence exists showing that circumvention is taking place within the meaning of Article 23(3) of the basic Regulation, the Commission will initiate an investigation in order to determine whether circumvention takes place. In accordance with Article 23(3) of the basic Regulation, the assessment of the existence of circumvention should be made, e.g. by analysing successively whether there was a change in the pattern of trade between USA and the Union, if this change stemmed from a practice, process or work for which there was insufficient due cause or economic justification other than the imposition of the duty and if there was evidence of injury or that the remedial effects of the duty were being undermined in terms of the prices and/or quantities.

               (58)

               It should also be recalled that an anti-circumvention investigation is not a review of the product scope based on Article 19 of the basic Regulation and does not change the definition of the product concerned and the like product. The provisions under Article 23 of the basic Regulation provide for the relevant legal basis for an investigation of whether there is circumvention with regard to a product subject to measures.

               (59)

               In this respect, the request the Commission received pursuant to Article 23(4) of the basic Regulation alleged that following the imposition of the measures, exports of biodiesel in blends containing 20 % or less biodiesel from the USA had begun to arrive in the Union, allegedly taking advantage of the biodiesel content threshold set in the description of the product concerned and the like product. The investigation examined whether such practice could be considered as circumvention pursuant to the provisions of Article 23 of the basic Regulation. Finally, it should be noted that alleged circumvention practices can only be examined under Article 23 of the basic Regulation.

         6.2.   Exports of B20 and below from the USA to the Union

               (60)

               As mentioned above in recital 20, the US HTS code 3824 90 40 00 contains also blends with a biodiesel content of 96,5 % and below. According to the US export statistics a total quantity of 358 291 tonnes of this type of blend was exported to the Union during the IP.

               (61)

               BP Products North America (‘BPNA’) during the IP exported a significant proportion of the above-mentioned quantity.

               (62)

               BPNA did not participate in the original investigation because it started up its biodiesel activities only in the beginning of 2009 in anticipation of a growing biodiesel market in the future, in response to government mandates both in the USA and abroad. BPNA started to export to the Union in December 2009. In this respect it is recalled that definitive measures were imposed in July 2009.

               (63)

               In the Union, BP sold US origin biodiesel blend containing by weight 15 % or less of biodiesel (‘B15’) in the UK, France and the Netherlands. In all cases, the product is further blended in order to respect the relevant legislation in force in certain Member States to promote the consumption of biofuels at the pump because they are currently considered environmentally sustainable.

               (64)

               BPNA argued that blends less than 15 % are not a like product for the product concerned. The characteristics and market realities are very different. The logistics involved (including shipping restrictions) in the production and importing of lower blends are very different to those of higher grades. According to BPNA, when transporting blends less than 15 %, such products are classified as a petroleum product for shipping as opposed to a chemical product which makes the shipment less costly. BPNA also argued that there are differences in performance between higher and lower grade biodiesel blends when used in diesel engines.

               (65)

               The objective of a circumvention investigation is to establish whether biodiesel in a blend containing by weight 20 % or less of biodiesel has circumvented the measures in force. It may well be the case that lower blends attract lower shipping costs. However, it should be noted that a blend of B20 and below is effectively only a different composition of the blend, in comparison to the process of producing biodiesel in a blend above B20. It is a simple process to change the composition of a blend. Putting into existence B20 and below is considered to be merely a slight modification of the product concerned, the only difference being the biodiesel proportion in the blend. It should also be noted that the product concerned as well as B20 and below ultimately are destined for the same uses in the Union. Furthermore, biodiesel in blends of B20 and below as well as biodiesel in blends above B20 have the same essential characteristics.

         6.3.   Change in patterns of trade

               (66)

               Imports of the product concerned from the USA dropped from 1 487 790 tonnes in 2008 to 381 227 tonnes in 2009 and to close to zero during the IP.

               (67)

               In this regard, it should be noted that though there was mandatory blending of, e.g. B5 in the Union during the original investigation, exports of B20 and below from the USA to the Union only came into existence following the imposition of definitive measures. During the original investigation, mainly exports of B99,9 were exported to the Union according to the data obtained from the sampled cooperating exporting producers. The reason for this was that it maximised the subsidy on the exported goods (USD 1 biodiesel tax credit per gallon).

               (68)

               It is therefore difficult to see what the economic justification would be for starting to export B20 and below other than the avoidance of the countervailing measures in place.

               (69)

               The proportion of biodiesel in the blend is still subsidised and the importer avoids the payment of the countervailing duty due. In this respect, it should be noted that the countervailing duty on blends is applicable in proportion to the biodiesel in the blend, i.e. in the case of imports of B15 the countervailing duty not paid would be up to around EUR 35 per tonne.

         6.4.   Insufficient due cause or economic justification other than the imposition of the countervailing duty

               (70)

               According to BNPA, the creation of less than B15 biodiesel was not created specifically to avoid duties. The company argued that it did not participate in the original investigation because it started up its biodiesel activities beginning of 2009 in anticipation of a future active biodiesel market in response to government mandates, both in the USA and abroad. The specific structure of the company, its activity as a petroleum company and its logistic presence in the USA, made blending in the USA and exporting to the Union a logical commercial decision. The blend exported was always B15 and below, because of the less stringent security measures: up to B15 the blend is not considered a chemical product according to maritime regulations.

               (71)

               It is noted that this company’s activity in regard to exports to the Union only started after the imposition of measures. It is considered that there is insufficient due cause or economic justification other than the avoidance of the payment of the countervailing duty in force on biodiesel originating in the USA.

         6.5.   Undermining the remedial effect of the countervailing duty

               (72)

               Considering the non-injurious price level of the original investigation, US imports of B20 and below into the Union during the IP showed both undercutting and underselling. The imports of B20 and below only came into existence following the imposition of definitive measures and the quantities involved are not insignificant.

               (73)

               It was therefore concluded that the measures are being undermined in terms of quantities and prices.

         6.6.   Evidence of subsidisation

               (74)

               Regarding subsidisation, it should be noted that the US biodiesel tax credit, the main subsidy scheme found in the original investigation, was retroactively reinstated in December 2010. On this basis, it is concluded that the imported like product still benefited from subsidies during the IP.

         6.7.   Conclusion

               (75)

               The investigation concluded that the definitive countervailing duties imposed on imports of biodiesel originating in the USA were circumvented by imports into the Union of biodiesel in a blend containing by weight 20 % or less of biodiesel.

               (76)

               It was concluded that the only economic justification for exporting blends of B20 and below was prompted by the subsidisation in the USA on the one hand, and the avoidance of paying any countervailing duties when importing into the Union on the other hand.

               (77)

               BPNA requested an exemption from the possible extended measures. However, as the investigation clearly showed that imports of B20 and below were only done in order to circumvent the measures in force, such exemption cannot be granted. Pursuant to the provisions of Article 23(6) of the basic Regulation, exemptions may be granted to producers of the product concerned who can show that they are not related to any producer subject to measures and that they are found not to be engaged in circumvention practices. In these investigations, it was found that BPNA is involved in the circumvention practices by starting to export B20 and below after the imposition of anti-dumping and countervailing measures without sufficient due cause or economic justification other than the imposition of the measures. Moreover, there is evidence that the effects of the measures are being undermined in terms of prices and quantities, and the imported product is still being subsidised.

               (78)

               Some biodiesel producers cooperating in the original investigations requested exemptions from any extended measures due to circumvention. It was found that these US producers did not produce or sell B20 and below. Pursuant to Article 23(6) of the basic Regulation, only producers’ request for exemption can be considered in the course of an anti-circumvention investigation. However, it should be noted that Article 23 of the basic Regulation contains new-comer provisions.

         7.   MEASURES

   7.1.   Canada

               (79)

               Given the above, it was concluded that the definitive countervailing duty imposed on imports of biodiesel originating in the USA was circumvented by transhipment via Canada pursuant to Article 23 of the basic Regulation.

               (80)

               In accordance with the first sentence of Article 23(1) of the basic Regulation, the measures in force on imports of the product concerned originating in the USA, should be therefore extended to imports of the same product consigned from Canada, whether declared as originating in Canada or not.

               (81)

               In order to avoid evasion of the duty by unverifiable allegations that the product transhipped through Canada has been produced by a company subject to an individual duty in the definitive Regulation, the measure to be extended should be the one established for ‘All other companies’ in Article 1(2) of Regulation (EC) No 598/2009, which is a definitive countervailing duty of EUR 237 per tonne.

               (82)

               The countervailing duty on blends shall be applicable in proportion,in the blend, by weight, of the total content of fatty-acid mono alkyl esters and of paraffinic gasoil obtained from synthesis and/or hydro-treatment, of non-fossil origin (biodiesel content).

               (83)

               In accordance with Articles 23(4) and 24(5) of the basic Regulation, which provide that any extended measure shall apply to imports which entered the Union under registration imposed by the initiation Regulation, duties should be collected on those registered imports of biodiesel consigned from Canada.

         7.2.   USA

               (84)

               Given the above, it was concluded that the definitive countervailing duty imposed on imports of biodiesel originating in the USA was circumvented by imports into the Union of B20 and below pursuant to Article 23 of the basic Regulation.

               (85)

               In accordance with the first sentence of Article 23(1) of the basic Regulation, the measures in force on imports of the product concerned originating in the USA should therefore be extended to imports of B20 and below.

               (86)

               The measures to be extended should be those established in Article 1(2) of Regulation (EC) No 598/2009.

               (87)

               The extended countervailing duty on blends shall be applicable in proportion, in the blend, by weight, of the total content of fatty-acid mono alkyl esters and of paraffinic gasoil obtained from synthesis and/or hydro-treatment, of non-fossil origin (biodiesel content).

               (88)

               In accordance with Articles 23(4) and 24(5) of the basic Regulation, which provides that any extended measure should apply to imports which entered the Union under registration imposed by the initiation Regulation, duties should be collected on those registered imports of B20 and below originating in the USA.

         8.   TERMINATION OF THE INVESTIGATION AGAINST SINGAPORE

               (89)

               In view of the findings regarding Singapore, the investigation concerning the possible circumvention of countervailing measures by imports of biodiesel consigned from Singapore should be terminated and the registration of imports of biodiesel consigned from Singapore, introduced by the initiation Regulation, should be discontinued.

         9.   REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION

               (90)

               The two cooperating companies in Canada submitting a questionnaire reply requested an exemption from the possible extended measures in accordance with Article 23(6) of the basic Regulation.

               (91)

               It was found that the two cooperating Canadian producers were not engaged in the circumvention practices which are subject of this investigation. Furthermore, these producers could demonstrate that they are not related to any of US producers/exporters of biodiesel. Therefore, their requests for exemption can be granted.

               (92)

               It is considered that special measures are needed in this case in order to ensure the proper application of such exemptions. These special measures consist in the presentation to the Customs authorities of the Member States of a valid commercial invoice, which shall conform to the requirements set out in the Annex to this Regulation. Imports not accompanied by such an invoice shall be made subject to the extended countervailing duty.

               (93)

               One cooperating party in the USA that submitted a questionnaire reply also requested an exemption from the possible extended measures in accordance with Article 23(6) of the basic Regulation.

               (94)

               As explained in recital 77 above, the investigation clearly showed that this party was engaged in the circumvention practices by importing B20 and below. Consequently, such exemption cannot be granted.

               (95)

               However, it should be underlined that, should any exporting producer(s) concerned not be availing from subsidisation anymore, such parties can request a review pursuant to Article 19 of the basic Regulation.

         10.   DISCLOSURE

               (96)

               All interested parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations leading to the above conclusions and were invited to comment. The oral and written comments submitted by the parties were considered,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   1.   The definitive countervailing duty imposed by Regulation (EC) No 598/2009 on imports of fatty-acid mono-alkyl esters and/or paraffinic gasoil obtained from synthesis and/or hydro-treatment, of non-fossil origin, commonly known as ‘biodiesel’, in pure form or in a blend containing by weight more than 20 % of fatty-acid mono-alkyl esters and/or paraffinic gasoil obtained from synthesis and/or hydro-treatment, of non-fossil origin, originating in the United States of America, is hereby extended to imports into the Union of fatty-acid mono-alkyl esters and/or paraffinic gasoil obtained from synthesis and/or hydro-treatment, of non-fossil origin, commonly known as ‘biodiesel’, in pure form or in a blend containing by weight more than 20 % of fatty-acid mono-alkyl esters and/or paraffinic gasoil obtained from synthesis and/or hydro-treatment, of non-fossil origin, consigned from Canada, whether declared as originating in Canada or not, currently falling within CN codes ex 1516 20 98 (TARIC code 1516209821), ex 1518 00 91 (TARIC code 1518009121), ex 1518 00 99 (TARIC code 1518009921), ex 2710 19 41 (TARIC code 2710194121), ex 3824 90 91 (TARIC code 3824909110) and ex 3824 90 97 (TARIC code 3824909701), with the exception of those produced by the companies listed below:

               Country

               Company

               TARIC additional code

               Canada

               BIOX Corporation, Oakville, Ontario, Canada

               B107

               Canada

               Rothsay Biodiesel, Guelph, Ontario, Canada

               B108

         The duty to be extended shall be the one established for ‘All other companies’ in Article 1(2) of Regulation (EC) No 598/2009, which is a definitive countervailing duty of EUR 237 per tonne net.
   The countervailing duty on blends shall be applicable in proportion, in the blend, by weight, of the total content of fatty-acid mono-alkyl esters and of paraffinic gasoil obtained from synthesis and/or hydro-treatment, of non-fossil origin (biodiesel content).
   2.   The application of exemptions granted to the companies mentioned in paragraph 1 or authorised by the Commission in accordance with Article 4(2) shall be conditional upon presentation to the customs authorities of the Member States of a valid commercial invoice, which shall conform to the requirements set out in the Annex. If no such invoice is presented, the countervailing duty as imposed by paragraph 1 shall apply.
   3.   The duty extended by paragraph 1 of this Article shall be collected on imports consigned from Canada, whether declared as originating in Canada or not, registered in accordance with Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 721/2010 and Articles 23(4) and 24(5) of Regulation (EC) No 597/2009, with the exception of those produced by the companies listed in paragraph 1.
   4.   The provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply.
   Article 2
   1.   The definitive countervailing duty imposed by Regulation (EC) No 598/2009 on imports of fatty-acid mono-alkyl esters and/or paraffinic gasoil obtained from synthesis and/or hydro-treatment, of non-fossil origin, commonly known as ‘biodiesel’, in pure form or in a blend containing by weight more than 20 % of fatty-acid mono-alkyl esters and/or paraffinic gasoil obtained from synthesis and/or hydro-treatment, of non-fossil origin, originating in the United States of America, is hereby extended to imports into the Union of biodiesel in a blend containing by weight 20 % or less of fatty-acid mono-alkyl esters and/or paraffinic gasoil obtained from synthesis and/or hydro-treatment, of non-fossil origin, originating in the United States of America, and currently falling within CN codes ex 1516 20 98 (TARIC code 1516209830), ex 1518 00 91 (TARIC code 1518009130), ex 1518 00 99 (TARIC code 1518009930), ex 2710 19 41 (TARIC code 2710194130) and ex 3824 90 97 (TARIC code 3824909704).
   The duties to be extended shall be those established in Article 1(2) of Regulation (EC) No 598/2009.
   The countervailing duty on blends shall be applicable in proportion, in the blend, by weight, of the total content of fatty-acid mono-alkyl esters and of paraffinic gasoil obtained from synthesis and/or hydro-treatment, of non-fossil origin (biodiesel content).
   2.   The duties extended by paragraph 1 of this Article shall be collected on imports originating in the United States of America, registered in accordance with Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 721/2010 and Articles 23(4) and 24(5) of Regulation (EC) No 597/2009.
   3.   The provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply.
   Article 3
   The investigation initiated by Regulation (EU) No 721/2010 concerning the possible circumvention of countervailing measures imposed by Regulation (EC) No 598/2009 on imports of biodiesel originating in the United States of America by imports of biodiesel consigned from Singapore, whether declared as originating in Singapore or not, and making such imports subject to registration, is hereby terminated.
   Article 4
   1.   Requests for exemption from the duty extended by Article 1(1) and Article 2(1) shall be made in writing in one of the official languages of the European Union and must be signed by a person authorised to represent the entity requesting the exemption. The request must be sent to the following address:

               European Commission

               Directorate-General for Trade

               Directorate H

               Office: N-105 04/92

               1049 Brussels

               BELGIUM

               Fax + 32 22956505

         2.   In accordance with Article 23(6) of Regulation (EC) No 597/2009, the Commission, after consulting the Advisory Committee, may authorise, by decision, the exemption of imports from companies which do not circumvent the countervailing measures imposed by Regulation (EC) No 598/2009, from the duty extended by Article 1(1) and Article 2(1).
   Article 5
   Customs authorities are hereby directed to discontinue the registration of imports, established in accordance with Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 721/2010.
   Article 6
   This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following 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, 5 May 2011.

            For the Council

            The President

         MARTONYI J.

      (1)  OJ L 188, 18.7.2009, p. 93.

      (2)  OJ L 67, 12.3.2009, p. 50.

      (3)  OJ L 179, 10.7.2009, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ L 179, 10.7.2009, p. 26.

      (5)  OJ L 211, 12.8.2010, p. 6.

      (6)  OJ L 211, 12.8.2010, p. 1.

      ANNEX
      A declaration signed by an official of the entity issuing the commercial invoice, in the following format, must appear on the valid commercial invoice referred to in Article 1(2):

                  1.

                  The name and the function of the official of the entity issuing the commercial invoice.

                  2.

                  The following declaration: ‘I, the undersigned, certify that the (volume) of (product concerned) sold for export to the European Union covered by this invoice was manufactured by (company name and address) (TARIC additional code) in (country concerned). I declare that the information provided in this invoice is complete and correct.’

                  3.

                  Date and signature.


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 367/2012 of 27 April 2012 laying down necessary measures as regards the release of additional quantities of out-of-quota sugar and isoglucose on the Union market at reduced surplus levy during marketing year 2011/2012

text:
               28.4.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 116/12

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 367/2012
   of 27 April 2012
   laying down necessary measures as regards the release of additional quantities of out-of-quota sugar and isoglucose on the Union market at reduced surplus levy during marketing year 2011/2012
   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) and in particular Article 64(2) and Article 186, in conjunction with Article 4 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Prices on the world sugar markets based on the London futures market have stabilized since the beginning of the 2011/2012 marketing year at a historically rather high level. Prices at the London futures exchange moved in the range of 600 – 650 USD per tonne, or 460 – 500 EUR per tonne.

               (2)

               At the same time the prices on the Union sugar markets, as indicated by the price monitoring system set up by Article 14 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 952/2006 of 29 June 2006 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 as regards the management of the Community market in sugar and the quota system (2), have continued to increase; moreover the price increase accelerated as from October 2011 when the average Union sugar price raised by over 10% within a month.

               (3)

               In order to improve the supply situation on the Union sugar market, exceptional measures have been taken in November 2011 by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1239/2011 of 30 November 2011 opening a standing invitation to tender for the 2011/2012 marketing year for imports of sugar of CN code 1701 at a reduced customs duty (3) and by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1240/2011 of 30 November 2011 laying down exceptional measures as regards the release of out-of-quota sugar and isoglucose on the Union market at reduced surplus levy during marketing year 2011/2012 (4). Despite those measures the present upwards trend of the Union sugar prices has continued and the average price reached 701 EUR per tonne in February 2012, representing an increase of over 20 % between September 2011 and February 2012, or close to 40 % between February 2011 and February 2012.

               (4)

               The continued upwards trend of the Union sugar prices indicates that the availability of supply on the Union sugar market has improved only moderately at this stage. This analysis was confirmed by a large majority of Member States in the Management Committee of 8 March 2012 who considered that there were still supply problems which could even become worse in the course of the marketing year. This could concern especially small and medium enterprises and customers with fixed quantities in long term contracts.

               (5)

               On the other hand, good harvest in several parts of the Union led to the production of sugar in excess of the quota set out in Article 56 of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 5.3 million tonnes. Taking into account the estimated demand for industrial sugar in accordance with Article 62 of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, the 2011/2012 export commitments for out-of-quota sugar fixed by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 372/2011 of 15 April 2011 fixing the quantitative limit for exports of out-of-quota sugar and isoglucose until the end of the 2011/2012 marketing year (5), as well as the quantities of out-of-quota sugar released on the Union market in accordance with Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1240/2011, substantial quantities of out-of-quota sugar will still be available. Part of this sugar could be made available immediately to the sugar market of the Union in order to partially satisfy the demand and therefore contribute to constrain the upwards trend of the Union sugar prices currently disturbing the market.

               (6)

               Article 186 of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 empowers the Commission to take the necessary measures for the sector if prices on the Union markets of sugar increase to such an extent that the situation disrupts or threatens to disrupt the markets.

               (7)

               Article 64(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 empowers the Commission to fix the surplus levy on sugar and isoglucose produced in excess of the quota at a sufficiently high level in order to avoid the accumulation of surplus quantities. Article 3(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 967/2006 of 29 June 2006 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 as regards sugar production in excess of the quota (6) has fixed that levy at EUR 500 per tonne.

               (8)

               The Commission has estimated that the continuing low supply of sugar on the internal market, as clearly indicated by the observed considerable increase of the average price on the Union sugar markets in the 2011/2012 marketing year, may make necessary the release of additional quantities of out-of-quota sugar on the internal market. Increasing supply should improve the fluidity of the sugar market. In order to avoid any risk of accumulation of quantities, it is appropriate, toallow the release on the Union market of a limited quantity. Taking into account the estimated shortage and the alternative sources of supply, the limited quantity should be fixed at 250 000 tonnes. The reduced suplus levy for that limited quantity of sugar produced in excess of the quota should be fixed at a level per tonne representing the difference between the most recent publicly available average Union price and the world market price.

               (9)

               As Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 fixes quotas for both sugar and isoglucose, a similar measure should apply for an appropriate quantity of isoglucose produced in excess of the quota because the latter product is, to some extent, a commercial substitute for sugar.

               (10)

               For that reason and with the view to increasing the supply, sugar and isoglucose producers should apply to the competent authorities of the Member States for certificates allowing them to sell certain quantities, produced above the quota limit, on the Union market with a reduced surplus levy.

               (11)

               The validity of the certificates should be limited in time to encourage a fast improvement of the supply situation.

               (12)

               Fixing upper limits of the quantities for which each producer can apply in one application period and restricting the certificates to products of the applicant's own production, should prevent speculative actions within the system created by this Regulation.

               (13)

               With their application, sugar producers should commit themselves to pay the minimum price for sugar beet used to produce the quantity of sugar for which they apply. The minimum eligibility requirements for applications should be specified.

               (14)

               The competent authorities of the Member States should notify the Commission of the applications received. In order to simplify and standardise those notifications, models should be made available.

               (15)

               The Commission should ensure that certificates are granted only within the quantitative limits fixed in this Regulation. Therefore, if necessary, the Commission should be able to fix an allocation coefficient applicable to the applications received.

               (16)

               Member States should immediately inform the applicants whether the quantity applied for was fully or partially granted.

               (17)

               The reduced surplus levy should be paid after the application is admitted and before the certificate is issued.

               (18)

               The competent authorities should notify the Commission of the quantities for which certificates with a reduction of the surplus levy have been issued. For this purpose, models should be made available by the Commission.

               (19)

               Sugar quantities released on the Union market of quantities in excess of the certificates issued under this Regulation should be subject the surplus levy set out in Article 64(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007. It is therefore appropriate to provide that any applicant not fulfilling his commitment to release on the Union market the quantity covered by a certificate delivered to him, should also pay an amount of EUR 500 per tonne. This consistent approach is aimed at preventing abuse of the mechanism introduced by this Regulation.

               (20)

               For the purpose of establishing average prices for quota and out-of-quota sugar on the Union market in accordance with Article 13(1) ofRegulation (EC) No 952/2006, sugar covered by a certificate issued pursuant to this Regulation should be considered as quota sugar.

               (21)

               Article 2(1)(a) of Council Decision 2007/436/EC, Euratom of 7 June 2007 on the system of the European Communities' own resources (7) lays down that contributions and other duties provided for within the framework of the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector are to constitute own resources. It is therefore necessary to set the date of establishment of the amounts in question within the meaning of Articles 2(2) and 6(3)(a) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/2000 of 22 May 2000 implementing Decision 2007/436/EC, Euratom on the system of the Communities' own resources (8).

               (22)

               The Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its Chair,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   Temporary reduction of the surplus levy
   By way of derogation from Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 967/2006, the amount of the surplus levy for an additional maximum quantity of 250 000 tonnes of sugar in white sugar equivalent and 13 000 tonnes of isoglucose in dry matter, produced in excess of the quota fixed in Annex VI to Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 and released on the Union market in the marketing year 2011/2012, shall be fixed at EUR 211 per tonne. The reduced surplus levy shall be paid after the application, referred to in Article 2, is admitted and before the certificate, referred to in Article 6, is issued.
   Article 2
   Application for certificates
   1.   In order to benefit from the conditions specified in Article 1, sugar and isoglucose producers shall apply for a certificate.
   2.   Applicants may be only undertakings producing beet and cane sugar or isoglucose, which are approved in accordance with Article 57 of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 and have been allocated a production quota for the 2011/2012 marketing year, in accordance with Article 56 of that Regulation.
   3.   Each applicant may submit not more than one application for sugar and one for isoglucose per application period.
   4.   Applications for certificates shall be submitted by fax or electronic mail to the competent authority in the Member State in which the undertaking was approved. The competent authorities of the Member States may require that electronic applications be accompanied by an advance electronic signature within the meaning of Directive 1999/93/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (9).
   5.   To be admissible, the applications shall fulfil the following conditions:

               (a)

               the applications shall indicate:

                           (i)

                           the name, address and VAT number of the applicant; and

                           (ii)

                           the quantities applied for, expressed in tonnes of white sugar equivalent and tonnes of isoglucose in dry matter, rounded to no decimal places;

               (b)

               the quantities applied for in this application period, expressed in tonnes of white sugar equivalent and tonnes of isoglucose in dry matter, shall not exceed 50 000 tonnes in the case of sugar and 2 500 tonnes in the case of isoglucose;

               (c)

               if the application concerns sugar, the applicant shall commit himself to pay the minimum beet price, set out in Article 49 of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007, for the quantity of sugar covered by certificates issued in accordance with Article 6 of this Regulation;

               (d)

               the application shall be written in the official language or one of the official languages of the Member State in which the application is lodged;

               (e)

               the application shall indicate a reference to this Regulation and the expiry date for the submission of the applications for the application period in question, as set out in Article 3.

         6.   An application may not be withdrawn or amended after its submission, even if the quantity applied for is granted only partially.
   Article 3
   Submission of applications
   1.   The first period during which applications may be submitted shall end on 2 May 2012 at 12 noon, Brussels time.
   2.   The periods during which applications may be submitted for the second and subsequent application periods shall begin on the first working day following the end of the preceding period. They shall end at 12 noon, Brussels time, on 23 May 2012, 6 June 2012 and 20 June 2012.
   3.   The Commission may suspend the submission of applications for one or several application periods.
   Article 4
   Transmission of applications by the Member States
   1.   The competent authorities of the Member States shall decide on the admissibility of applications on the basis of the conditions set out in Article 2. Where the competent authorities decide that an application is inadmissible, they shall inform the applicant without delay.
   2.   The competent authority shall notify the Commission on Friday at the latest, by fax or electronic mail, of the admissible applications submitted during the preceding application period. That notification shall not contain the data referred to in Article 2(5)(a)(i). Member States that received no applications but have sugar or isoglucose quota allocated to them in marketing year 2011/2012, shall also send their nil returns notifications to the Commission within the same time limit.
   3.   The form and content of the notifications shall be defined on the basis of models made available by the Commission to the Member States.
   Article 5
   Exceeded limits
   When the information notified by the competent authorities of the Member States pursuant to Article 4(2) indicates that the quantities applied for exceed the limits set out in Article 1, the Commission shall:

               (a)

               fix an allocation coefficient, which the Member States shall apply to the quantities covered by each notified certificate application;

               (b)

               reject applications not yet notified;

               (c)

               close the period for submitting the applications.

         Article 6
   Issue of certificates
   1.   Without prejudice to Article 5, on the tenth working day following a week where an application period ended, the competent authority shall issue certificates for the applications notified to the Commission, in accordance with Article 4(2), for that application period.
   2.   Each Monday Member States shall notify the Commission of the quantities of sugar and/or isoglucose for which they issued certificates in the preceding week.
   3.   A template of the certificate is set out in the Annex.
   Article 7
   Validity of certificates
   Certificates shall be valid until the end of the second month following the month of issue.
   Article 8
   Transferability of certificates
   Neither the rights nor the obligations deriving from the certificates shall be transferable.
   Article 9
   Price reporting
   For the purpose of Article 13(1) of Regulation (EC) No 952/2006, the quantity of sugar sold which is covered by a certificate issued pursuant to this Regulation shall be considered as quota sugar.
   Article 10
   Monitoring
   1.   Applicants shall add to their monthly notifications provided for in Article 21(1) of Regulation (EC) No 952/2006 the quantities for which they received certificates in accordance with Article 6 of this Regulation.
   2.   Before 31 October 2012, each holder of a certificate under this regulation shall submit to the competent authorities of the Member States proof that all quantities covered by his certificates were released on the Union market. Each tonne covered by a certificate but not released on the Union market for reasons other than force majeure, shall be subject to payment of an amount of EUR 289 per tonne.
   3.   Member States shall notify the Commission of the quantities not released on the Union market.
   4.   Member States shall calculate and notify the Commission of the difference between the total quantity of sugar and isoglucose produced by each producer in excess of the quota and the quantities which have been disposed by the producers in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 967/2006 and Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1240/2011. If the remaining quantities of out-of-quota sugar or isoglucose of a producer are less than the quantities issued for that producer under this Regulation, the producer shall pay an amount of EUR 500 per tonne on that difference.
   Article 11
   Date of establishment
   For the purposes of Article 2(2) and Article 6(3)(a) of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/2000, the date of establishment of the Union's entitlement shall be the date on which the surplus levy is paid by the applicants in accordance with Article 1.
   Article 12
   Entry into force
   This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
   It shall expire on 31 December 2012.

      This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
      Done at Brussels, 27 April 2012.

            For the Commission

            The President

         José Manuel BARROSO

      (1)  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 178, 1.7.2006, p. 39.

      (3)  OJ L 318, 1.12.2011, p. 4.

      (4)  OJ L 318, 1.12.2011, p. 9.

      (5)  OJ L 102, 16.4.2011, p. 8.

      (6)  OJ L 176, 30.6.2006, p. 22.

      (7)  OJ L 163, 23.6.2007, p. 17

      (8)  OJ L 130, 31.5.2000, p. 1

      (9)  OJ L 13, 19.1.2000, p. 12.

      ANNEX

         Model for the certificate referred to in Article 6(3)

      CERTIFICATE
      for the reduction, for the 2011/12 marketing year, of the levy provided for in Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 967/2006


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 719/2012 of 7 August 2012 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

text:
               8.8.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 211/3

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 719/2012
   of 7 August 2012
   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, 7 August 2012.

            For the Commission, On behalf of the President,
         José Manuel SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

            Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

      (1)  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.

      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

                  TR

                  54,9

                  XS

                  32,3

                  ZZ

                  43,6

                  0707 00 05

                  TR

                  100,7

                  ZZ

                  100,7

                  0709 93 10

                  TR

                  105,8

                  ZZ

                  105,8

                  0805 50 10

                  AR

                  96,8

                  TR

                  92,0

                  UY

                  94,8

                  ZA

                  99,0

                  ZZ

                  95,7

                  0806 10 10

                  CL

                  226,1

                  EG

                  229,0

                  IL

                  138,6

                  MA

                  159,3

                  MX

                  186,3

                  TN

                  203,8

                  TR

                  138,3

                  ZZ

                  183,1

                  0808 10 80

                  AR

                  165,0

                  BR

                  86,0

                  CL

                  120,9

                  NZ

                  123,4

                  US

                  161,5

                  ZA

                  102,7

                  ZZ

                  126,6

                  0808 30 90

                  AR

                  129,0

                  CL

                  164,3

                  NZ

                  165,5

                  TR

                  130,9

                  ZA

                  104,0

                  ZZ

                  138,7

                  0809 29 00

                  CA

                  627,1

                  TR

                  434,9

                  ZZ

                  531,0

                  0809 30

                  TR

                  166,0

                  ZZ

                  166,0

                  0809 40 05

                  BA

                  62,3

                  IL

                  69,8

                  MK

                  70,3

                  ZZ

                  67,5

         (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’.


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 900/2012 of 2 October 2012 entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Agneau de lait des Pyrénées (PGI))

text:
               3.10.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 268/1

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 900/2012
   of 2 October 2012
   entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Agneau de lait des Pyrénées (PGI))
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 7(5) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Pursuant to Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, France’s application of 10 December 2007 to register the name ‘Agneau de lait des Pyrénées’ as a protected geographical indication (PGI) was published in the Official Journal of the European Union
                   (2).

               (2)

               Spain submitted an objection to such registration under Article 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006. The objection was deemed admissible under points (a) and (c) of the first subparagraph of Article 7(3) thereof.

               (3)

               By letter dated 8 November 2010, the Commission asked the Member States concerned to seek agreement among themselves in accordance with their internal procedures.

               (4)

               Given that no agreement was reached between Spain and France within the designated timeframe, the Commission should adopt a decision in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 15(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006.

               (5)

               The objection of Spain focused in particular on the alleged incorrect delimitation of the geographical area and on the alleged absence of a specific link between the characteristics of the product concerned and the Pyrenees massif. Yet, the Commission has neither identified any obvious error related to these elements in the application submitted, nor spotted any inconsistency between the said application and the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006.

               (6)

               Spain further considered in its objection that registering the name ‘Agneau de lait des Pyrénées’ is likely to create confusion regarding its actual origin, considering that the Pyrenees is not an exclusively French massif and considering that products similar to those covered by the application are traditionally elaborated in the Spanish part of the Pyrenees massif, including the already protected geographical indication ‘Cordero de Navarra’.

               (7)

               If no agreement is reached following an objection, the Commission shall take a decision in line with the third subparagraph of Article 7(5) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006. The term ‘Agneau de lait des Pyrénées’ used in translation, and in particular in Spanish language, could lead to confusion of consumers with respect to the true origin of the product. While there is no reason not to register the term ‘Agneau de lait des Pyrénées’, it is necessary to avoid such confusion and ensure fair usage. Therefore, the geographical component of the designation ‘Agneau de lait des Pyrénées’ should not be translated into other languages when marketing the product corresponding to the specification for ‘Agneau de lait des Pyrénées’. This would thus apply both for use of such translation on the label as well as in presentations or advertising of the product. Furthermore, with respect to labels, the country of origin should be indicated in the same field of vision as the term ‘Agneau de lait des Pyrénées’, in letters of the same size as those used for that term.

               (8)

               In the light of the above, the name ‘Agneau de lait des Pyrénées’ should be entered in the Register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications.

               (9)

               The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Protected Geographical Indications and Protected Designations of Origin,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
   Article 1
   The designation contained in the Annex to this Regulation shall be entered in the register.
   Article 2
   References to the term ‘Pyrénées’ shall not be translated when marketing products conforming to the specification of the designation contained in the Annex to this Regulation.
   Labels containing the designation contained in the Annex to this Regulation shall indicate the country of origin in the same field of vision, in letters of the same size as those of the designation.
   Article 3
   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, 2 October 2012.

            For the Commission

            The President

         José Manuel BARROSO

      (1)  OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.

      (2)  OJ C 93, 13.4.2010, p. 20.

      ANNEX
      Foodstuffs referred to in Annex I of the Regulation (EC) No 510/2006:

         Class 1.1.   Fresh meat (and offal)

      FRANCE
      Agneau de lait des Pyrénées (PGI)


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 429/2014 of 25 April 2014 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

text:
               26.4.2014

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 125/68

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 429/2014
   of 25 April 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, 25 April 2014.

            For the Commission,

            On behalf of the President,
         Jerzy PLEWA

            Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

      (1)  OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.

      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

                  MA

                  51,5

                  MK

                  105,0

                  TN

                  89,9

                  TR

                  83,5

                  ZZ

                  82,5

                  0707 00 05

                  AL

                  41,5

                  MA

                  39,8

                  MK

                  59,4

                  TR

                  124,2

                  ZZ

                  66,2

                  0709 93 10

                  MA

                  29,9

                  TR

                  87,2

                  ZZ

                  58,6

                  0805 10 20

                  EG

                  45,0

                  IL

                  69,3

                  MA

                  47,2

                  TN

                  57,9

                  TR

                  44,7

                  ZZ

                  52,8

                  0805 50 10

                  MA

                  35,6

                  TR

                  88,8

                  ZZ

                  62,2

                  0808 10 80

                  AR

                  100,0

                  BR

                  81,4

                  CL

                  107,1

                  CN

                  96,9

                  MK

                  25,7

                  NZ

                  138,7

                  US

                  166,9

                  ZA

                  130,1

                  ZZ

                  105,9

                  0808 30 90

                  AR

                  90,7

                  CL

                  158,6

                  ZA

                  108,7

                  ZZ

                  119,3

         (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’.


title: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1669 of 15 September 2016 establishing the allocation coefficient to be applied to the quantities covered by the applications for import licences lodged from 1 to 7 September 2016 and determining the quantities to be added to the quantity fixed for the subperiod from 1 January to 31 March 2017 under the tariff quotas opened by Regulation (EC) No 533/2007 in the poultrymeat sector

text:
               16.9.2016

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 249/34

         COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2016/1669
   of 15 September 2016
   establishing the allocation coefficient to be applied to the quantities covered by the applications for import licences lodged from 1 to 7 September 2016 and determining the quantities to be added to the quantity fixed for the subperiod from 1 January to 31 March 2017 under the tariff quotas opened by Regulation (EC) No 533/2007 in the poultrymeat sector
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1), and in particular Article 188 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Commission Regulation (EC) No 533/2007 (2) opened annual tariff quotas for imports of poultrymeat products.

               (2)

               For some quotas, the quantities covered by the applications for import licences lodged from 1 to 7 September 2016 for the subperiod from 1 October to 31 December 2016 exceed those available. The extent to which import licences may be issued should therefore be determined by establishing the allocation coefficient to be applied to the quantities requested, calculated in accordance with Article 7(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006 (3).

               (3)

               The quantities covered by the applications for import licences lodged from 1 to 7 September 2016 for the subperiod from 1 October to 31 December 2016 are, for some quotas, less than those available. The quantities for which applications have not been lodged should therefore be determined and these should be added to the quantity fixed for the following quota subperiod.

               (4)

               In order to ensure the efficient management of the measure, 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
   1.   The quantities covered by the applications for import licences lodged under Regulation (EC) No 533/2007 for the subperiod from 1 October to 31 December 2016 shall be multiplied by the allocation coefficient set out in the Annex to this Regulation.
   2.   The quantities for which import licence applications have not been lodged pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 533/2007, to be added to the subperiod from 1 January to 31 March 2017, are set out 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, 15 September 2016.

            For the Commission,

            On behalf of the President,

         Jerzy PLEWA

            Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

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

      (2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 533/2007 of 14 May 2007 opening and providing for the administration of tariff quotas in the poultrymeat sector (OJ L 125, 15.5.2007, p. 9).

      (3)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1301/2006 of 31 August 2006 laying down common rules for the administration of import tariff quotas for agricultural products managed by a system of import licences (OJ L 238, 1.9.2006, p. 13).

      ANNEX

                  Order No

                  Allocation coefficient — applications lodged for the subperiod from 1 October to 31 December 2016
                  (%)

                  Quantities not applied for, to be added to the quantities available for the subperiod from 1 January to 31 March 2017
                  (kg)

                  09.4067

                  1,600004

                  —

                  09.4068

                  0,459349

                  —

                  09.4069

                  0,166975

                  —

                  09.4070

                  —

                  890 500