Erasmus Mundus

Official Journal C 373
of the European Union
Volume 62
English edition Information and Notices 5 November 2019
Contents
II Information
INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES
European Commission
2019/C 373/01 Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9462 — Emil Frey Group/Autocommerce/Avto
Triglav/AC-Mobil) (1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
III Preparatory acts
EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK
European Central Bank
2019/C 373/02 Opinion of the Governing Council of the European Central Bank of 23 October 2019 on a Council
recommendation on the appointment of a member of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank
(CON/2019/35) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
IV Notices
NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES
European Commission
2019/C 373/03 Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: 0,00 % on
1 November 2019 — Euro exchange rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2019/C 373/04 Commission Decision of 30 October 2019 notifying the Republic of Ecuador of the possibility of being
identified as a non-cooperating third country in fighting illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing . . . . . . . 4
2019/C 373/05 Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use
and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European
Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of
Chemicals (REACH) (Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006) (1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
EN (1) Text with EEA relevance.

V Announcements
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
European Commission
2019/C 373/06 Call for proposals 2020 — EAC/A02/2019 Erasmus+ Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY
European Commission
2019/C 373/07 Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9576 — Blackstone/Dream Global REIT) Candidate case for
simplified procedure (1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
OTHER ACTS
European Commission
2019/C 373/08 Publication of a communication of approval of a standard amendment to a product specification for a
name in the wine sector referred to in Article 17(2) and (3) of Commission Delegated Regulation
(EU) 2019/33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Corrigenda
2019/C 373/09 Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Decision 2018/C 100/09 of 14 March 2018 on the
publication in the Official Journal of the European Union of an application for amendment of a
specification for a name in the wine sector referred to in Article 105 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
of the European Parliament and of the Council (Chianti Classico (PDO)) (OJ C 100, 16.3.2018) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
(1) Text with EEA relevance.

5.11.2019 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 373/1
II
(Information)
INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES

AND AGENCIES
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9462 — Emil Frey Group/Autocommerce/Avto Triglav/AC-Mobil)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2019/C 373/01)
On 18 October 2019, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible
with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text
of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It
will be available:
— in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/).
This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number,
date and sectoral indexes,
— in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document
number 32019M9462. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.
(1) OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

C 373/2 EN Official Journal of the European Union 5.11.2019
III
(Preparatory acts)
EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK
OPINION OF THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

of 23 October 2019
on a Council recommendation on the appointment of a member of the Executive Board of the
European Central Bank
(CON/2019/35)
(2019/C 373/02)
Introduction and legal basis

On 18 October 2019 the European Central Bank (ECB) received a request from the President of the European Council for an
opinion on Council Recommendation of 10 October 2019 (1) on the appointment of a member of the ECB’s Executive
Board.
The competence of the ECB’s Governing Council to deliver an opinion is based on Article 283(2) of the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union.
General observations
1. The Council’s recommendation, which was submitted to the European Council and on which the European Parliament
and the ECB’s Governing Council are being consulted, recommends that Fabio PANETTA be appointed as a member of
the ECB’s Executive Board for a term of office of eight years with effect from 1 January 2020.
2. The ECB’s Governing Council is of the opinion that the proposed candidate is a person of recognised standing and
professional experience in monetary or banking matters as required by Article 283(2) of the Treaty.
3. The ECB’s Governing Council has no objection to the Council’s recommendation to appoint Fabio PANETTA as a
member of the ECB’s Executive Board.
Done at Frankfurt am Main, 23 October 2019.
The President of the ECB

Mario DRAGHI
(1) OJ C 351, 17.10.2019, p. 1.

IV
(Notices)
NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND

AGENCIES
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations (1):
0,00 % on 1 November 2019
Euro exchange rates (2)

4 November 2019
(2019/C 373/03)
1 euro =
Currency Exchange rate Currency Exchange rate
USD US dollar 1,1158 CAD Canadian dollar 1,4680
JPY Japanese yen 120,93 HKD Hong Kong dollar 8,7461
DKK Danish krone 7,4713 NZD New Zealand dollar 1,7358
GBP Pound sterling 0,86368 SGD Singapore dollar 1,5146

KRW South Korean won 1 296,92
SEK Swedish krona 10,7035
ZAR South African rand 16,5296
CHF Swiss franc 1,1021
CNY Chinese yuan renminbi 7,8425
ISK Iceland króna 137,90
HRK Croatian kuna 7,4488
NOK Norwegian krone 10,1668
IDR Indonesian rupiah 15 643,31
BGN Bulgarian lev 1,9558
MYR Malaysian ringgit 4,6311
CZK Czech koruna 25,511
PHP Philippine peso 56,376
HUF Hungarian forint 328,78
RUB Russian rouble 70,5726
PLN Polish zloty 4,2588
THB Thai baht 33,689
RON Romanian leu 4,7542 BRL Brazilian real 4,4644
TRY Turkish lira 6,3483 MXN Mexican peso 21,3095
AUD Australian dollar 1,6158 INR Indian rupee 78,9205
(1) Rate applied to the most recent operation carried out before the indicated day. In the case of a variable rate tender, the interest rate is
the marginal rate.
(2) Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
COMMISSION DECISION
of 30 October 2019
notifying the Republic of Ecuador of the possibility of being identified as a non-cooperating third
country in fighting illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing
(2019/C 373/04)
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 establishing a Community system to prevent, deter and eliminate
illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, amending Regulations (EEC) No 2847/93, (EC) No 1936/2001 and (EC)
No 601/2004 and repealing Regulations (EC) No 1093/94 and (EC) No 1447/1999 (1), and in particular Article 32 thereof,
Whereas:
1. INTRODUCTION
(1) Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 (the IUU Regulation) establishes a Union system to prevent, deter and eliminate
illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing.
(2) Chapter VI of the IUU Regulation lays down the procedure to identify non-cooperating third countries, the démarches
in respect of such countries, the establishment of a list of such countries, the removal from that list, the publicity of
that list and any emergency measures.
(3) Pursuant to Article 31 of the IUU Regulation, the Commission is to identify third countries that it considers as non-
cooperating countries in the fight against IUU fishing. A third country is to be identified as non-cooperating if it fails
to discharge the duties incumbent upon it under international law as flag, port, coastal or market State, to take
action to prevent, deter and eliminate IUU fishing.
(4) Prior to identifying third countries as non-cooperating under Article 31 of the IUU Regulation, the Commission is to
first notify third countries of the possibility of being identified as non-cooperating countries in accordance with
Article 32 of that Regulation. Such notification is of a preliminary nature. The notification is to be based on the
criteria laid down in Article 31 of the IUU Regulation. The Commission is also to take into account all the démarches
set out in Article 32 of that Regulation with respect to the notified third countries. In particular, the Commission is
to include in the notification information concerning the essential facts and considerations underlying such
identification, provide those countries with the opportunity to respond and provide evidence refuting the
identification or, where appropriate, a plan of action to improve and measures taken to rectify the situation. The
Commission is to give to the notified third countries adequate time to answer the notification and reasonable time
to remedy the situation.
(5) The identification of non-cooperating third countries under Article 31 of the IUU Regulation is to be based on the
review of all information as set out under Article 31(2) of that Regulation.
(6) In accordance with Article 33 of the IUU Regulation, the Council is to establish a list of non-cooperating third
countries. The measures set out, inter alia, in Article 38 of the IUU Regulation apply to those countries.
(7) Pursuant to Article 20(1) of the IUU Regulation, the acceptance of validated catch certificates from third country flag
States is subject to a notification from the flag state concerned to the Commission of the arrangements for the
implementation, control and enforcement of laws, regulations and conservation and management measures which
must be complied with by its fishing vessels.
(8) In accordance with Article 20(4) of the IUU Regulation, the Commission is to cooperate administratively with third
countries in areas pertaining to the implementation of the provisions of that Regulation relating to catch
certification.
(1) OJ L 286, 29.10.2008, p. 1.

2. PROCEDURE WITH RESPECT TO THE REPUBLIC OF ECUADOR
(9) The notification of the Republic of Ecuador (hereafter ‘Ecuador’) as flag State was received by the Commission in
accordance with Article 20 of the IUU Regulation on the 22 July 2009.
(10) Following this notification, the Commission initiated a process of administrative cooperation with the authorities of
Ecuador as provided for in Article 20(4) of the IUU Regulation. This cooperation covered issues pertaining to the
implementation of the European Union catch certification scheme and to the national arrangements in place for the
implementation, control, renewal and enforcement of the fisheries legal framework and applicable conservation and
management measures. It entailed exchange of oral and written comments as well as five visits to Ecuador between
30 January and 6 February 2014, 22 and 24 September 2015, 11 and 15 December 2017, 12 and
16 November 2018, and 17 and 21 June 2019, where the Commission sought and verified all information deemed
necessary concerning the measures taken by Ecuador in order to implement its obligations in the fight against IUU
fishing. A delegation from Ecuador also visited DG MARE on the 2 July 2015.
(11) Ecuador is a member of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC), and of the South Pacific Regional
Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO), a cooperating non-member of the Western and Central Pacific
Fisheries Commission (WCFPC) and a non-contracting party voluntarily participating in the Commission for the
Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) catch documentation scheme. Ecuador has ratified
the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) (2), the United Nations Fish Stocks
Agreement (UNFSA) (3), and the Port State Measures Agreement (PSMA) (4).
(12) In order to evaluate the compliance of Ecuador with its international obligations as flag, port, coastal or market State
as set out in the international agreements referred to in recital (11) and established by the relevant Regional Fisheries
Management Organisations (RFMOs), the Commission sought, collected and analysed all necessary information
required for the purpose of this exercise.
3. POSSIBILITY OF ECUADOR BEING IDENTIFIED AS A NON-COOPERATING THIRD COUNTRY
(13) Pursuant to Article 31(3) of the IUU Regulation, the Commission analysed the duties of Ecuador as flag, port, coastal
or market State. For the purpose of this review the Commission took into account the criteria listed in Article 31(4)
to (7) of the IUU Regulation.
3.1. Measures taken in respect of recurrence of IUU fishing activities and IUU trade flows (Article 31(4) of
the IUU Regulation)
(14) In accordance with Article 31(4)(a), the Commission analysed the measures taken by Ecuador with respect to any
recurrent IUU fishing carried out or supported by fishing vessels flying its flag or by its nationals, or by fishing
vessels operating in its maritime waters or using its ports.
(15) The information gathered by the Commission demonstrated that in 2017 there were at least 24 longliners greater
than 23 meters length overall fishing for species covered by the IATTC Convention within the IATTC Convention
Area and which were not on the IATTC Regional Vessel Register. Although Ecuadorian authorities subsequently
reported that this breach of IATTC Resolutions C-11-05 and C-14-01 (subsequently replaced by Resolution
C-18-06), which could entail IUU listing of the vessels pursuant to Resolution C-15-01, had been addressed and
that all the vessels concerned had been added to the IATTC Regional Vessel Register, in 2019 the Commission
identified again a similar case.
(2) https://treaties.un.org/
(3) https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_fish_stocks.htm
(4) http://www.fao.org/port-state-measures/background/parties-psma/en/
(16) The information collected by the Commission also led to the identification of two squid-jiggers that engaged in 2015
and early 2016 in fishing activities in the SPRFMO Convention area, but were not at that moment on the SPRFMO
Record of vessels authorised to fish in the Convention Area. Although Ecuadorian authorities acknowledged these
were illegal activities, in June 2019 there were still no sanction procedure initiated against the operator of the two
vessels.
(17) During the visits to the country, the Commission also detected various cases of Ecuadorian vessels fishing in waters
under jurisdiction of third countries. In such cases, Ecuadorian authorities were not able to confirm whether the
vessels concerned had been duly authorised by the country concerned to fish in its waters. The same issue arose
again during the visit made in 2019. In spite of the recurrence of the described situation, Ecuadorian authorities
have not put in place the appropriate mechanisms of cooperation with third countries where the Ecuadorian fleet
operates. The existing cooperation agreement in place with a neighbouring country does not contemplate exchange
of information on fishing licences, and the arrangement with another neighbouring country is still in preparation.
During the last visit to Ecuador, authorities were also unable to provide information on the follow-up given to a
case identified in 2017.
(18) Contrary to points 36 and 42 of the International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported
and Unregulated fishing (IPOA IUU) (5), the procedures in place prior to the registration of a fishing vessel do not
entail a comprehensive verification of the history of the vessel and are limited to a verification of the RFMOs IUU
lists. The Commission collected suitable evidence that at least one vessel with a problematic compliance history had
been registered in Ecuador and in 2017 escaped to the control of the authorities, which were unable to locate it.
Subsequent exchanges indicated as well that due to the currently applicable legislation Ecuadorian authorities had
been, so far, unable to deregister the vessel and to impose sanctions of adequate severity.
(19) Hence, the evidence retrieved by the Commission demonstrates that specific weaknesses that were notified to the
Ecuadorian authorities during the missions of 2017 and 2018, and resulting in possible or confirmed IUU
activities, remain poorly addressed in 2019.
(20) With regard to the information laid out in recitals (15), (16), (17), (18) and (19), the Commission concluded that
Ecuador failed to uphold its responsibilities as a flag State to prevent its fleet from engaging in IUU activities in high
seas or waters of third countries. This is in breach of Article 94(1) and (2) of UNCLOS which provides that every
State shall effectively ensure its jurisdiction and control over vessels flying its flag. It is also not in line with point 24
of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) IPOA-IUU that provides for the obligation to
undertake comprehensive and effective control of fishing activities.
(21) Pursuant to Article 31(4)(b) of the IUU Regulation, the Commission examined the measures taken by Ecuador in
respect of access of fisheries products stemming from IUU fishing to its market and subsequent trade flows.
(22) The Commission analysed documentation and other information relating to monitoring and control procedures and
considers that Ecuador cannot ensure that fish and fishery products entering its market and processing plants do not
stem from IUU fishing. Ecuadorian authorities were not able to demonstrate they are collecting and verifying all the
necessary information required to control the legality of fish entering their market or destined to others.
(23) Findings made during the missions especially question the level of control that Ecuadorian authorities exert on
processing plants. In 2017, the Commission detected significant inconsistencies in the information reported by a
processing plant. Nevertheless the figures provided by this processing plant had been endorsed without further
verifications by Ecuadorian authorities, and it was only upon Commission’s intervention that additional
verifications were eventually carried out, resulting in the confirmation of serious misreporting by this processing
plant. In 2018, the Commission also detected fish lots in the cold store of a processing plant whereas the
Ecuadorian Fisheries Administration was unaware of these lots having entered the plant.
(5) International Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing, Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations, 2001.
(24) Information obtained from Ecuadorian authorities also points to the conclusion that controls on processing plants
supplies remain based on random sampling rather than focusing on high-risks scenarios.
(25) In preparation for the missions to the country, the European Fisheries Control Agency analysed samples of catch
certificates and processing statements originating from Ecuador. All these analysis revealed mistakes at the level of
validation of catch certificates stemming from superficial verification of information provided by the operators in
these documents, which the Ecuadorian authorities acknowledged. The latest analysis carried out in 2019 also
showed that Ecuadorian authorities were endorsing processing statements referring to processing of quantities of
fish higher than in the supporting catch certificates.
(26) The information described in recitals (22), (23), (24) and (25) demonstrates that fishery products landed, processed
in or traded through Ecuador do not comply with sustainable post-harvest rules as described in Article 11 of the
FAO Code of Conduct. Furthermore, Ecuador has failed to impose rules to ensure the traceability of fish or fish
products through the market in accordance with points 67 to 69 and 71 to 72 of the IPOA-IUU.
(27) In view of the considerations presented in this Section and on the basis of all factual elements gathered by the
Commission, as well as all the statements made by the competent authorities of Ecuador, there are strong
indications, pursuant to Article 31(3), (4)(a) and (4)(b) of the IUU Regulation, that Ecuador fails to discharge its
duties under international law as a flag, port, coastal and market State in respect of IUU fishing carried out or
supported by fishing vessels flying its flag or by its nationals, and to prevent access of fisheries products stemming
from IUU fishing to its market.
3.2. Failure to cooperate and to enforce (Article 31(5) of the IUU Regulation)
(28) Under Article 31(5)(a) of the IUU Regulation, the Commission analysed its collaboration with Ecuador to see if the
authorities had effectively cooperated in responding to questions, providing feedback or investigating matters
related to IUU fishing and associated activities.
(29) While Ecuadorian authorities have been generally cooperative in responding and providing feedback to requests for
information, on various occasions there was limited follow-up on issues raised by the Commission. As an example,
the Commission did not receive clear and comprehensive explanations on the significant discrepancies it observed
between quantities of fish landed by purse seiners and the carrying capacity and fish hold volumes reported to the
IATTC, whereas carrying capacity and fish hold volumes are the elements that IATTC uses to manage the fishing
capacity in the Eastern Pacific, including through 72 days annual fishing stops applying to vessels exceeding 182
metric tons carrying capacity.
(30) As underlined in recitals (15), (16), (17) and (25), there is also a lack of continuity and consistence in efforts to
address the identified shortcomings.
(31) In accordance with Article 31(5)(b), the Commission analysed existing enforcement measures to prevent, deter and
eliminate IUU fishing in Ecuador.
(32) The current sanction system is based on the Fisheries Law which was adopted in 1974 and complemented in 2016
by the Decree 852. However, the sanctions contemplated in the Decree 852, and which were originally designed to
compensate for the weakness of the ones in the 1974 Fisheries Law, have been seldom applied since the entry into
force of this Decree.
(33) Consequently, the sanctioning scheme remains based on a weak and outdated legal framework, which lacks a
definition of IUU activities and provides for a level of sanctions which fails to ensure deterrence of these sanctions.
The maximum fine imposed in Ecuador for industrial vessels in 2018, irrespective of the gravity of the infringement
and the value of the fishery products involved, did not exceed 4 500 USD. In addition, Ecuadorian authorities also
acknowledged that they face legal and practical issues to recover the fines, and cumbersome administrative
procedures often result in practical impossibility to address recidivism. Information provided by Ecuadorian
authorities also suggests uneven approach in relation to the application of sanctions, notably as regards the
confiscation of illegal catches.
(34) Moreover, the entry into force of a new fisheries Law and the development of a revised sanctioning scheme has been
repeatedly delayed since 2015.
(35) Consequently, the current sanction system fails to address point 16 of the IPOA-IUU, which states that national
legislation should address IUU fishing as well as point 21 which states that States should ensure that sanctions for
IUU fishing by vessels and, to the greatest extent possible, by nationals under their jurisdiction, are of sufficient
severity to deprive offenders of the benefits accruing from such fishing.
(36) In light of the information gathered on the legal framework and the sanction procedures, the Commission concluded
that Ecuador failed to apply Article 19(2) of UNFSA, which states that sanctions must be adequate in severity to
secure compliance and discourage violations, as well as to deprive offenders of the benefits accruing from their
illegal activities.
(37) In accordance with Article 31(5)(c), the Commission analysed the extent and gravity of the manifestations of IUU
fishing considered.
(38) The visits conducted by the Commission revealed serious and recurrent issues in the control of vessels and fish
processed in the country, as reflected notably in recitals (15), (16), (17), (18), (23) and (24). These issues result in
significant risks of large volumes of fish stemming from IUU activities being traded or processed in Ecuador.
(39) It is also pertinent to mention that Ecuador was also identified in the United States of America National Marine
Fisheries Service report to Congress of 2017 (6) as having vessels engaged in IUU fishing. In particular, Ecuador was
identified for having 25 vessels acting in violation of IATTC resolutions in 2014 and 2015. The report states that
several of the vessels included repeat offenders from the 2015 and prior round of identifications. In addition, the
Commission collected evidence that several of the vessels have also been subject to infringement administrative
procedures by Ecuador in 2018 and 2019.
(40) In view of the considerations presented in this Section, and on the basis of all factual elements gathered by the
Commission, as well as all the statements made by the Ecuadorian authorities, there are strong indications, pursuant
to Article 31(3) and (5) of the IUU Regulation, that Ecuador failed to discharge its duties under international law with
respect to cooperation and enforcement.
3.3. Failure to implement international rules (Article 31(6) of the IUU Regulation)
(41) In accordance with Article 31(6)(a) and (b) of the IUU Regulation, the Commission analysed Ecuador’s ratification or
accession to relevant international fisheries instruments and its status as a contracting party to regional fisheries
management organisations or its agreement to apply the conservation and management measures adopted by them.
(42) Ecuador ratified UNCLOS in 2012, and the Agreement for the implementation of the provisions of the Convention
of 10 December 1982 relating to the conservation and management of straddling fish stocks and highly migratory
fish stocks (UNFSA) in 2016. Ecuador has also acceded the 2009 FAO Port State Measures Agreement (PSMA) in
2019.
(43) However, the current national legal framework does not provide for a comprehensive implementation of the PSMA.
Ecuadorian authorities reported for instance that there is no legally established mechanism to ensure the control of
transhipments in ports.
(44) The information gathered by the Commission also demonstrates that initiation of a sanction procedure for serious
infringement (undertaking a fishing trip during the annual fishing stop imposed by IATTC) took place more than
17 months after the infringement, while Article 19(1)(b) of the UNFSA requests States to investigate immediately
and fully any alleged violation of subregional or regional conservation and management measures.
(45) In accordance with Article 31(6)(c), the Commission analysed any act or omission by the third country concerned
that may have diminished the effectiveness of applicable laws, regulations or international conservation and
management measures.
(6) https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/international-affairs/identification-iuu-fishing-activities#magnuson-stevens-reauthorization-act-
biennial-reports-to-congress
(46) As described in recital (11), Ecuador is a member of IATTC and SPRFMO, a cooperating non-member of WCPFC and
a non-contracting party voluntarily participating in the CCAMLR’s catch documentation scheme.
(47) As described in recitals (15) and (16), several vessels have been operating over the recent years without proper
registration with the RFMOs concerned. This has resulted in illegal and unreported fishing by these vessels.
(48) As described in recitals (33) and (39), failure to enforce deterrent sanctions also resulted in recidivism by Ecuadorian
vessels operating in the IATTC area and therefore additional breaches of the conservation and management measures
adopted by this organisation.
(49) The absence of a structured and risk-based strategy for the management of inspection activities also results in a
failure to ensure that the main compliance risks are addressed, as underlined for instance in recital (23).
(50) In view of the considerations presented in this Section and on the basis of all factual elements gathered by the
Commission as well as all the statements made by the Ecuadorian authorities, there are strong indications, pursuant
to Article 31(3) and (6) of the IUU Regulation, that Ecuador failed to discharge all the duties incumbent upon it
under international law with respect to international rules, regulations and conservation and management measures.
3.4. Specific constraints of developing countries (Article 31(7) of the IUU Regulations)
(51) According to the United Nations Human Development Index (UNHDI) (7), in 2017 Ecuador was considered a high
human development country ranked 86 out of 189 countries (8).
(52) Account taken of the above UNHDI ranking and observations during the 2017 to 2019 visits, no evidence suggests
that the failure of Ecuador to discharge its duties under international law is the result of low levels of development.
No tangible evidence exists to correlate shortcomings in fisheries legal framework, monitoring, control and
surveillance, and traceability systems, with poor capacity and infrastructure. The Commission responded positively
to the requests made by Ecuador for support in the revision of its fisheries legal framework.
(53) In view of the situation explained in this Section and on the basis of all the factual elements gathered by the
Commission as well as all the statements made by the country, there are strong indications, pursuant to Article 31
(7) of the IUU Regulation, that the development status and overall performance of Ecuador with respect to fisheries
management are not impaired by its level of development.
4. CONCLUSION ON THE POSSIBLE IDENTIFICATION AS A NON-COOPERATING THIRD COUNTRY
(54) In view of the conclusions reached with regard to the failure of Ecuador to discharge its duties under international
law as flag, port, coastal or market State and to take action to prevent, deter and eliminate IUU fishing, Ecuador
should be notified, in accordance with Article 32 of the IUU Regulation, of the possibility of being identified by the
Commission as a non-cooperating third country in fighting IUU fishing.
(55) The Commission should also take all the démarches set out in Article 32 of the IUU Regulation with respect to
Ecuador. In the interest of sound administration, a period should be fixed within which that country may respond
in writing to the notification and rectify the situation.
(56) Furthermore, the notification to Ecuador of the possibility of being identified as a country which the Commission
considers to be a non-cooperating third country for the purposes of this Decision does neither preclude nor
automatically entail any subsequent step taken by the Commission or the Council for the purpose of the
identification and the establishment of a list of non-cooperating third countries,
(7) Information from: http://hdr.undp.org/en/data

(8) http://hdr.undp.org/sites/all/themes/hdr_theme/country-notes/ECU.pdf
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Sole Article
Ecuador shall be notified of the possibility of being identified by the Commission as a non-cooperating third country in
fighting illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing.
Done at Brussels, 30 October 2019.
For the Commission

Karmenu VELLA
Member of the Commission
Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to
5.11.2019
Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of
Chemicals (REACH)
(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1))
(2019/C 373/05)
EN
Decisions granting an authorisation
Reference of the Holder of the Date of expiry of review

Date of decision Substance name Authorisation number Authorised use Reasons for the decision
decision (1) authorisation period
C(2019) 7683 29 October 2019 Potassium dichromate Wesco Aircraft EMEA REACH/19/31/0 Sealing after anodizing 21 September 2024 In accordance with Article
EC No 231-906-6, Limited, Lawrence applications by the aero 60(4) of Regulation (EC)
Official Journal of the European Union

CAS No 7778-50-9 House, Riverside space sector where the key No 1907/2006, the socio
drive, BD19 4DH functionalities of corro economic benefits out
Cleckheaton West sion resistance or corro weigh the risk to human
Yorkshire, United sion inhibition are neces health from the uses of the
Kingdom sary for the intended use. substance and there are no
suitable alternative sub
stances or technologies.
(1) The decision is available on the European Commission website at: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/chemicals/reach/about/index_en.htm
C 373/11
(1) OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.
V
(Announcements)
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
CALL FOR PROPOSALS 2020 — EAC/A02/2019

Erasmus+ Programme
(2019/C 373/06)
1. Introduction and objectives

This call for proposals is based on the Regulation (EU) No 1288/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of
11 December 2013 establishing ‘Erasmus+’: the Union programme for education, training, youth and sport (1) as well as
on the 2019 and 2020 Erasmus+ Annual Work Programmes. The Erasmus+ Programme covers the period 2014 to 2020.
The general and specific objectives of the Erasmus+ Programme are listed in Articles 4, 5, 11 and 16 of the Regulation.
2. Actions
This call for proposals covers the following actions of the Erasmus+ Programme:
Key Action 1 (KA1) - Learning mobility of individuals
— Mobility of individuals in the field of education, training and youth
— Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Degrees
Key Action 2 (KA2) - Cooperation for innovation and the exchange of good practices
— Strategic partnerships in the field of education, training and youth
— European Universities
— Knowledge Alliances
— Sector Skills Alliances
— Capacity building in the field of higher education
— Capacity building in the field of youth
Key Action 3 (KA3) - Support for policy reform
— Youth Dialogue projects
Jean Monnet activities
— Jean Monnet Chairs
— Jean Monnet Modules
— Jean Monnet Centres of Excellence
— Jean Monnet Support to Associations
— Jean Monnet Networks
— Jean Monnet Projects
(1) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 50.

Sport
— Collaborative partnerships
— Small collaborative partnerships
— Not-for-profit European sport events
3. Eligibility
Any public or private body active in the fields of education, training, youth and sport may apply for funding within the
Erasmus+ Programme. In addition, groups of young people who are active in youth work, but not necessarily in the
context of a youth organisation, may apply for funding for learning mobility of young people and youth workers as well as
for Strategic partnerships in the field of youth.
The following Programme Countries can fully take part in all Erasmus+ Programme actions (2):
— the Member States of the European Union,
— the EFTA/EEA countries: Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway,
— EU candidate countries: Turkey, North Macedonia and Serbia.
In addition, certain Erasmus+ Programme actions are open to organisations from partner countries.
Please refer to the Erasmus+ Programme Guide for further details on the modalities of participation.
For British applicants: Please be aware that eligibility criteria must be complied with for the entire duration of the grant. If the United
Kingdom withdraws from the EU during the grant period without concluding an agreement with the EU ensuring in particular that British
applicants continue to be eligible, you will cease to receive EU funding (while continuing, where possible, to participate) or be required to
leave the project on the basis of the relevant provisions of the grant agreement on termination.
4. Budget and duration of projects
The implementation of this call for proposals is subject to the availability of the appropriations provided for in the draft
budget for 2020 after the adoption of the budget for 2020 by the budgetary authority or if the budget is not adopted as
provided for in the system of provisional twelfths.
The total budget earmarked for this call for proposals is estimated at EUR 3 207,4 million:
Education and Training: EUR 2 943,3 million (1)

Youth: EUR 191,9 million
Jean Monnet: EUR 14,6 million
Sport: EUR 57,6 million
( ) This amount includes the funds for the International dimension of Higher Education (EUR 395 million in total).
1
The total budget earmarked for the call for proposals as well as its repartition is indicative and may be modified subject to
an amendment of the Erasmus+ Annual Work Programmes. Potential applicants are invited to regularly consult the
Erasmus+ Annual Work Programmes and their amendments, published on:
https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus-plus/resources/documents/annual-work-programmes_en
as regards the available budget for each action covered by the call.
The level of grants awarded as well as the duration of projects vary depending on factors such as the type of project and the
number of partners involved.
(2) Jean Monnet activities are open to organisations from the whole world.
5. Deadline for the submission of applications
All deadlines for submission of applications specified below are set at Brussels time.
Key Action 1
Mobility of individuals in the field of youth 5 February 2020 at 12.00
Mobility of individuals in the field of higher education 5 February 2020 at 12.00
Mobility of individuals in VET, school education and adult 5 February 2020 at 12.00
education fields
Mobility of individuals in the field of youth 30 April 2020 at 12.00
Mobility of individuals in the field of youth 1 October 2020 at 12.00
Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Degrees 13 February 2020 at 17.00
Key Action 2
Strategic partnerships in the field of youth 5 February 2020 at 12.00
Strategic partnerships in the field of education and training 24 March 2020 at 12.00
Strategic partnerships in the field of youth 30 April 2020 at 12.00
Strategic partnerships in the field of youth 1 October 2020 at 12.00
European Universities 26 February 2020 at 17.00
Knowledge Alliances 26 February 2020 at 17.00
Sector Skills Alliances 26 February 2020 at 17.00
Capacity building in the field of higher education 5 February 2020 at 17.00
Capacity building in the field of youth 5 February 2020 at 17.00
Key Action 3
Youth Dialogue projects 5 February 2020 at 12.00
30 April 2020 at 12.00
1 October 2020 at 12.00
Jean Monnet actions

Chairs, Modules, Centres of Excellence, Support to Associa 20 February 2020 at 17.00
tions, Networks, Projects
Sport actions
Collaborative partnerships 2 April 2020 at 17.00
Small collaborative partnerships 2 April 2020 at 17.00
Not-for-profit European sport events 2 April 2020 at 17.00
Please refer to the Erasmus+ Programme Guide for detailed instructions for the submission of applications.
6. Full details
The detailed conditions of this call for proposals, including priorities, can be found in the Erasmus+ Programme Guide
at the following internet address:
http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus-plus/resources/programme-guide
The Erasmus+ Programme Guide constitutes an integral part of this call for proposals and the conditions for
participation and funding expressed therein apply in full to this call.
PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION

POLICY
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9576 — Blackstone/Dream Global REIT)
Candidate case for simplified procedure
(2019/C 373/07)
1. On 25 October 2019, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of
Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
This notification concerns the following undertakings:
— The Blackstone Group Inc. (‘Blackstone’, US),
— Dream Global Real Estate Investment Trust (‘Dream Global REIT’, Canada).
Blackstone acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Dream
Global REIT.
The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of assets and other means.
2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
— for Blackstone: a global asset manager, active in the real estate sector in Europe,
— for Dream Global REIT: an open-ended real estate investment trust operating in Germany, the Netherlands, Austria
and Belgium.
3. On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the
Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.
Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council
Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out
in the Notice.
4. The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to
the Commission.
Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following
reference should always be specified:
M.9576 — Blackstone/Dream Global REIT
(1) OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2) OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.
Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:
Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu
Fax +32 22964301
Postal address:
European Commission
Directorate-General for Competition
Merger Registry
1049 Bruxelles/Brussel
BELGIQUE/BELGIË
OTHER ACTS
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
Publication of a communication of approval of a standard amendment to a product specification for a

name in the wine sector referred to in Article 17(2) and (3) of Commission Delegated Regulation
(EU) 2019/33
(2019/C 373/08)
This communication is published in accordance with Article 17(5) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33 (1).
COMMUNICATING THE APPROVAL OF A STANDARD AMENDMENT
‘Matera’
Reference number: PDO-IT-A0533-AM03
Date of communication: 31.7.2019
DESCRIPTION OF AND REASONS FOR THE APPROVED AMENDMENT
1. Characteristics of wine for consumption

Description and reasons
Description: For the Matera ‘Primitivo’ category, the upper limit of the sugar content has been raised with regard to its
taste: instead of ‘dry’, it now reads ‘from dry to medium-dry with a maximum residual sugar content of 14 g/l’.
Reasons: Being able to slightly raise the upper limit of the sugar content enables producing this category of wine to be
better managed because its technical-qualitative characteristics can be more fully expressed. The grape variety used
produces fruit early in the season, i.e. it crops early as it has a faster growth cycle and an advanced physiological state,
such that climate change and rising temperatures will provide ideal conditions conducive to grapes with a higher sugar
content, which will in turn be able to produce wine with a higher sugar content. The amendment request offers
operators covered by the designation of origin more potential in terms of products that can meet consumer demand
and access to different sales outlets.
Description: For the Matera ‘Passito Bianco’ category of wine, the range of the sugar content has been extended with
regard to its taste: instead of ‘dry’, it now reads ‘from dry to sweet’.
Reasons: The amendment is actually intended to correct an error in the description of this wine category which, on
account of its intrinsic characteristics, can also be produced with sugar contents that range to sweet, as has traditionally
been the case in the area.
This amendment concerns point 1.4 of the Single Document and Article 6 of the specification.
2. Link with the geographical area

Description and reasons
Description: The link with the geographical area has been reworded to include a reference to the wine product
categories Wine (1) and Sparkling Wine (4).
Reasons: the aspects that prove the link have been sufficiently demonstrated for each product category. The reworded
version, which summarises the content of Article 8 of the specification, does not entail any change to the link but is
intended solely to demonstrate it further by including more aspects.
The amendment concerns point 1.8 of the Single Document.
(1) OJ L 9, 11.1.2019, p. 2.
SINGLE DOCUMENT
1. Name of the product

Matera
2. Geographical indication type

PDO — Protected Designation of Origin
3. Categories of grapevine product

1. Wine
4. Sparkling wine
4. Description of the wine(s):
‘Matera’ Rosso
colour: ruby red;
aroma: complex, fruity;
taste: harmonious, characteristic.
Minimum total alcoholic strength by volume: 12 % vol.;
Minimum sugar-free extract: 23 g/l.
Any analytical parameters not shown in the table below comply with the limits laid down in national and EU legislation.
General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)
Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)
Minimum total acidity 4,5 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid
Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)
Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)
‘Matera’ Primitivo
colour: ruby red tending to purple and garnet with age;
aroma: intense, long-lasting, distinctive;
taste: full-bodied, harmonious tending to velvety, from dry to medium-dry with a maximum sugar content of 14 g/l;
minimum total acidity: 4,5 g/l

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume) 13
Matera ‘Primitivo Passito’
colour: red of varying intensity tending to garnet;
aroma: distinctive and intense;
taste: sweet, harmonious and velvety;
Minimum total alcoholic strength by volume: 14,5 % vol.; effectively at least 13 % vol.;
minimum total acidity: 4 g/l
Minimum sugar-free extract: 25 g/l

Minimum total acidity 4 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid
‘Matera’ Rosato
colour: cherry pink;
aroma: intense, long-lasting, distinctive;
taste: dry, full, harmonious.

‘Matera’ Moro and Moro Riserva
colour: intense ruby red; tending to garnet in the case of the ‘Riserva’ version
aroma: intense, long-lasting;
taste: dry, full-bodied, harmonious tending to velvety;
Minimum total alcoholic strength by volume: 12 % vol.; 13 % vol. in the case of the ‘Riserva’ version;

Matera ‘Greco’
colour: straw yellow;
aroma: distinctive, intense, long-lasting;
taste: typical, distinctive.

Matera ‘Bianco’
aroma: intense, fruity;
taste: typical, dry, flavourful;

Matera ‘Bianco Passito’

colour: from straw yellow to amber depending on ageing;
aroma: intense, fruity;
taste: distinctive, from dry to sweet, flavourful;
Minimum total alcoholic strength by volume: 13 % vol.; effectively at least 12 % vol.;

Matera ‘Spumante’
foam: fine, long-lasting;
aroma: fruity, distinctive, pleasant;
taste: typical, distinctive.
Minimum total alcoholic strength by volume: 12,5 % vol.;
Any analytical parameters not shown in the table below comply with the limits laid down in the applicable legislation

Matera ‘Spumante Rosé’

foam: fine, long-lasting;
colour: cherry pink;
aroma: fruity, distinctive, pleasant;
taste: distinctive.

5. Winemaking practices:
a. Essential oenological practices

None
b. Maximum yields
Matera ‘Rosso’
10 000 kg of grapes per hectare
Matera ‘Primitivo’ and ‘Primitivo Passito’
Matera ‘Rosato’
Matera ‘Moro’ and ‘Moro Riserva’
Matera ‘Greco’
Matera ‘Bianco’ and ‘Bianco Passito’
Matera ‘Spumante’
Matera ‘Spumante Rosé’
6. Demarcated geographical area

The production area for the ‘Matera’ registered designation of origin is the entire administrative territory of the province
of Matera.
7. Main wine grape variety(ies)

Sangiovese R.
Greco bianco W. - Greco
Malvasia bianca di Basilicata W. - Malvasia
Merlot R.
Primitivo R.
Cabernet sauvignon R. - Cabernet
8. Description of the link(s)
Characteristics of the geographical area
The area where Matera PDO wine is produced contains distinct kinds of relief that result in three different
environments:
— the Coastal Plain environment, which consists of more recent geological surfaces with plains and/or rolling terrain
and a highly varied lithological substrate;
— the environment of the coastal terraces above the coastal plain where various different coastal terraces start, which
are linked to hilly terrain with characteristically deep, well-developed and well to moderately drained soils in a deep
red range of colours (resulting from the high iron content and the breakdown of the pebbles);
— the Fossa Bradanica environment, which accounts for most of the hilly Matera region, spanning north (Irsina), south
(Pistici), east (Matera, with the exception of the area of the town and the south-east) and west (Stigliano) and is
characterised by varied terrain ranging from rolling to rough with a sandy-conglomerate lithological substrate: the
soils consist of coarse sediment or sand, with textures varying from moderately coarse at the surface to sandy
below. They are markedly calcareous and highly permeable.
The high quality of this wine-growing culture is linked to the choice of bright, well-ventilated areas and the naturally
fertile soils which are particularly suitable for vine-growing.
‘Wine’ category (1):
The wines covered by the Matera DOC are made using both native and international grape varieties with good acidity
and flavour due to the range in temperature and the sandy soils, particularly in the case of wine wines, which are fresh,
pale in colour and with varying degrees of alcohol content.
Soils with a higher clay content lead to wines with greater intensity of colour, whereas calcareous soils produce more
sophisticated aromas.
These characteristics are heightened in raisin wines (‘Wine’ category) because of the accumulation of sugars and the
concentration of extracts due to the raisining of the grapes. This is accentuated by the climate and the aspect at which
the vines are grown, mostly south-southeast for optimal ripening. This in turn encourages the production of healthy
grapes better suited for raisining and enables the characteristics of the grape varieties to be fully expressed. The various
types of wines present mostly fruity aromas (berries and stone fruit) but also floral notes typical of the grape varieties
from which they are made. All of the wines show signs of good acidity and structure, with well-balanced taste. This is
particularly true of the types based on grapes of the Primitivo or Cabernet Sauvignon varieties, which are well-suited to
ageing on account of their longevity.
‘Sparkling wine’ category (4):
The native grape varieties Malvasia bianca di Basilicata and Primitivo are used to produce the sparkling wines covered
by the ‘Matera’ DOC.
The Matera hills area is the ideal habitat for both Malvasia and Primitivo. In fact, the two grape varieties complement
one another. Malvasia is grown at a higher altitude where the climate is slightly cooler and the soils are mostly white
and derived from marl, clayey marl and fossil limestone. The areas at a lower altitude have characteristically brown
soils suited to the Primitivo variety, leading to sparkling wines with excellent structure and alcohol content. The
production of sparkling wines is a form of specialised production in this area and makes a significant contribution to
the local wine-growing economy. The first sparkling wines were produced in the early 1900s and it was in the 1950s
and 1960s that many vineyards (some of which are still in operation today) decided to specialise in this sector. In fact,
it was traditional for the wine producers of Matera province to sell large quantities of sparkling wines for weddings,
patron saint festivities and religious holidays, including outside the region.
9. Essential further conditions (packaging, labelling, other requirements)

None
Link to the product specification

https://www.politicheagricole.it/flex/cm/pages/ServeBLOB.php/L/IT/IDPagina/14101
CORRIGENDA
Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Decision 2018/C 100/09 of 14 March 2018 on the

publication in the Official Journal of the European Union of an application for amendment of a
specification for a name in the wine sector referred to in Article 105 of Regulation (EU)
No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Chianti Classico (PDO))
(Official Journal of the European Union C 100 of 16 March 2018)
(2019/C 373/09)
On page 10, in the Annex, section 4 ‘Description of the wine(s)’, Chianti Classico Gran Selezione, in the table ‘General
analytical characteristics’:
for: ‘Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre) 130’
read: ‘Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)’

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
ISSN 1725-2423 (paper edition)
EN

Erasmus Mundus

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Erasmus Mundus

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Official Journal C 373

of the European Union

English edition Information and Notices 5 November 2019

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

III Preparatory acts

EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

European Central Bank

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

EN (1) Text with EEA relevance.

2019/C 373/06 Call for proposals 2020 — EAC/A02/2019 Erasmus+ Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

(1) Text with EEA relevance.

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

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

EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

OPINION OF THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

Introduction and legal basis

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 23 October 2019.

The President of the ECB

(1) OJ C 351, 17.10.2019, p. 1.

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND

Euro exchange rates (2)

Currency Exchange rate Currency Exchange rate

USD US dollar 1,1158 CAD Canadian dollar 1,4680

JPY Japanese yen 120,93 HKD Hong Kong dollar 8,7461

DKK Danish krone 7,4713 NZD New Zealand dollar 1,7358

GBP Pound sterling 0,86368 SGD Singapore dollar 1,5146

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

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

(1) OJ L 286, 29.10.2008, p. 1.

2. PROCEDURE WITH RESPECT TO THE REPUBLIC OF ECUADOR

3. POSSIBILITY OF ECUADOR BEING IDENTIFIED AS A NON-COOPERATING THIRD COUNTRY

4. CONCLUSION ON THE POSSIBLE IDENTIFICATION AS A NON-COOPERATING THIRD COUNTRY

(7) Information from: http://hdr.undp.org/en/data

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Done at Brussels, 30 October 2019.

For the Commission

Reference of the Holder of the Date of expiry of review

Official Journal of the European Union

CALL FOR PROPOSALS 2020 — EAC/A02/2019

1. Introduction and objectives

(1) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 50.

— Small collaborative partnerships

— Not-for-profit European sport events

— the Member States of the European Union,

— the EFTA/EEA countries: Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway,

— EU candidate countries: Turkey, North Macedonia and Serbia.

4. Budget and duration of projects

Education and Training: EUR 2 943,3 million (1)

5. Deadline for the submission of applications

Jean Monnet actions

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION

Prior notification of a concentration

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

— The Blackstone Group Inc. (‘Blackstone’, US),

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of assets and other means.

2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

M.9576 — Blackstone/Dream Global REIT

(1) OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

Fax +32 22964301

Publication of a communication of approval of a standard amendment to a product specification for a