Linde AG and The BOC Group PLC; Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Order To Aid Public Comment, 41443-41446 [E6-11624]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 140 / Friday, July 21, 2006 / Notices
Dated: July 6, 2006.
Greg Armstrong,
Acting Chief, Superfund Enforcement &
Information Management Branch, Waste
Management Division.
[FR Doc. E6–11605 Filed 7–20–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FRL–8201–1]
Notice of Tentative Approval and
Solicitation of Request for a Public
Hearing for Public Water System
Supervision Program Revision for the
State of West Virginia
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of tentative approval and
solicitation of requests for a public
hearing.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given in
accordance with the provision of section
1413 of the Safe Drinking Water Act as
amended, and the rules governing
National Primary Drinking Water
Regulations Implementation that the
State of West Virginia has revised its
approved Public Water System
Supervision Program and revised its
regulations for issuing variances and
exemptions. EPA has determined that
these revisions are no less stringent than
the corresponding Federal regulations.
Therefore, EPA has decided to
tentatively approve these program
revisions. All interested parties are
invited to submit written comments on
this determination and may request a
public hearing.
DATES: Comments or a request for a
public hearing must be submitted by
August 21, 2006. This determination
shall become effective on August 21,
2006 if no timely and appropriate
request for a hearing is received and the
Regional Administrator does not elect to
hold a hearing on his own motion, and
if no comments are received which
cause EPA to modify its tentative
approval.
Comments or a request for
a public hearing must be submitted to
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029.
Comments may also be submitted
electronically to Ghassan Khaled at
khaled.ghassan@epa.gov. All
documents relating to this
determination are available for
inspection between the hours of 8 a.m.
and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
at the following offices:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES_1
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:59 Jul 20, 2006
Jkt 208001
• Drinking Water Branch (3WP21),
Water Protection Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029.
• Office of Environmental Health
Services, West Virginia Department of
Health and Human Resources, 1 Davis
Square, Suite 200, Charleston, WV
25301.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ghassan Khaled, Drinking Water Branch
(3WP21) at the Philadelphia address
given above; telephone (215) 814–5780
or fax (215) 814–2318.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: All
interested parties are invited to submit
written comments on this determination
and may request a public hearing. All
comments will be considered and, if
necessary, EPA will issue a response.
Frivolous or insubstantial requests for a
hearing may be denied by the Regional
Administrator. However, if a substantial
request for a public hearing is made by
August 21, 2006, a public hearing will
be held.
A request for public hearing shall
include the following: (1) The name,
address, and telephone number of the
individual, organization, or other entity
requesting a hearing; (2) a brief
statement of the requesting person’s
interest in the Regional Administrator’s
determination and of information that
the requesting person intends to submit
at such a hearing; and (3) the signature
of the individual making the request; or
if the request is made on behalf of an
organization or other entity, the
signature of a responsible official of the
organization or other entity.
Dated: July 12, 2006.
W.T. Wisniewski,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA, Region
III.
[FR Doc. E6–11604 Filed 7–20–06; 8:45 am]
41443
that is listed in § 225.28 of Regulation Y
(12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has
determined by Order to be closely
related to banking and permissible for
bank holding companies. Unless
otherwise noted, these activities will be
conducted throughout the United States.
Each notice is available for inspection
at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated.
The notice also will be available for
inspection at the offices of the Board of
Governors. Interested persons may
express their views in writing on the
question whether the proposal complies
with the standards of section 4 of the
BHC Act. Additional information on all
bank holding companies may be
obtained from the National Information
Center Web site at https://www.ffiec.gov/
nic/.
Unless otherwise noted, comments
regarding the applications must be
received at the Reserve Bank indicated
or the offices of the Board of Governors
not later than August 7, 2006.
A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
(Patrick M. Wilder, Assistant Vice
President) 230 South LaSalle Street,
Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:
1. Marshall & Ilsley Corporation,
Milwaukee, Wisconsin; to acquire,
through its wholly-owned subsidiary,
Metavante Corporation, Milwaukee,
Wisconsin 100 percent of the votings
shares of VICOR, Inc., Richmond,
California, and thereby engage in data
processing activities, management
consulting and counseling activities,
pursuant to section 225.28(b)(9)(i)(A)
and 225.28(b)(14)(i) of Regulation Y.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System, July 18, 2006.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E6–11619 Filed 7–20–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210–01–S
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
[File No. 061 0114]
Notice of Proposals to Engage in
Permissible Nonbanking Activities or
to Acquire Companies that are
Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking
Activities
Linde AG and The BOC Group PLC;
Analysis of Agreement Containing
Consent Order To Aid Public Comment
The companies listed in this notice
have given notice under section 4 of the
Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C.
1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y (12
CFR part 225) to engage de novo, or to
acquire or control voting securities or
assets of a company, including the
companies listed below, that engages
either directly or through a subsidiary or
other company, in a nonbanking activity
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Federal Trade Commission.
Proposed Consent Agreement.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this
matter settles alleged violations of
Federal law prohibiting unfair or
deceptive acts or practices or unfair
methods of competition. The attached
Analysis to Aid Public Comment
describes both the allegations in the
draft complaint and the terms of the
consent order—embodied in the consent
E:\FR\FM\21JYN1.SGM
21JYN1
41444
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 140 / Friday, July 21, 2006 / Notices
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES_1
agreement—that would settle these
allegations.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 16, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are
invited to submit written comments.
Comments should refer to ‘‘Linde AG
and BOC, File No. 061 0114,’’ to
facilitate the organization of comments.
A comment filed in paper form should
include this reference both in the text
and on the envelope, and should be
mailed or delivered to the following
address: Federal Trade Commission/
Office of the Secretary, Room 135–H,
600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20580. Comments
containing confidential material must be
filed in paper form, must be clearly
labeled ‘‘Confidential,’’ and must
comply with Commission Rule 4.9(c).
16 CFR 4.9(c) (2005).1 The FTC is
requesting that any comment filed in
paper form be sent by courier or
overnight service, if possible, because
U.S. postal mail in the Washington area
and at the Commission is subject to
delay due to heightened security
precautions. Comments that do not
contain any nonpublic information may
instead be filed in electronic form as
part of or as an attachment to e-mail
messages directed to the following email box: consentagreement@ftc.gov.
The FTC Act and other laws the
Commission administers permit the
collection of public comments to
consider and use in this proceeding as
appropriate. All timely and responsive
public comments, whether filed in
paper or electronic form, will be
considered by the Commission, and will
be available to the public on the FTC
Web site, to the extent practicable, at
https://www.ftc.gov. As a matter of
discretion, the FTC makes every effort to
remove home contact information for
individuals from the public comments it
receives before placing those comments
on the FTC Web site. More information,
including routine uses permitted by the
Privacy Act, may be found in the FTC’s
privacy policy, at https://www.ftc.gov/
ftc/privacy.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sean G. Dillon, Bureau of Competition,
600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326–3575.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade
1 The comment must be accompanied by an
explicit request for confidential treatment,
including the factual and legal basis for the request,
and must identify the specific portions of the
comment to be withheld from the public record.
The request will be granted or denied by the
Commission’s General Counsel, consistent with
applicable law and the public interest. See
Commission Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:59 Jul 20, 2006
Jkt 208001
Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C.
46(f), and § 2.34 of the Commission
Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is
hereby given that the above-captioned
consent agreement containing a consent
order to cease and desist, having been
filed with and accepted, subject to final
approval, by the Commission, has been
placed on the public record for a period
of thirty (30) days. The following
Analysis to Aid Public Comment
describes the terms of the consent
agreement, and the allegations in the
complaint. An electronic copy of the
full text of the consent agreement
package can be obtained from the FTC
Home Page (for July 18, 2006), on the
World Wide Web, at https://www.ftc.gov/
os/2006/07/index.htm. A paper copy
can be obtained from the FTC Public
Reference Room, Room 130–H, 600
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20580, either in person
or by calling (202) 326–2222.
Public comments are invited, and may
be filed with the Commission in either
paper or electronic form. All comments
should be filed as prescribed in the
ADDRESSES section above, and must be
received on or before the date specified
in the DATES section.
Analysis of Agreement Containing
Consent Order To Aid Public Comment
I. Introduction
The Federal Trade Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) has accepted from
Linde AG (‘‘Linde’’), subject to final
approval, an Agreement Containing
Consent Orders (‘‘Consent Agreement’’),
which is designed to remedy the
anticompetitive effects resulting from
Linde’s acquisition of the entire share
capital of The BOC Group plc (‘‘BOC’’).
Under the terms of the Consent
Agreement, Linde is required to divest
air separation units (‘‘ASUs’’) and
related assets currently owned and
operated by Linde in the following eight
locations in which the proposed
acquisition would lessen competition:
(1) Canton, Ohio; (2) Dayton, Ohio; (3)
Madison, Wisconsin; (4) Waukesha,
Wisconsin; (5) Carrollton, Georgia; (6)
Jefferson, Georgia; (7) Rockhill, South
Carolina; and (8) Bozrah, Connecticut.
The Consent Agreement also requires
Linde to divest bulk refined helium
assets, including helium source
contracts, ancillary distribution assets,
and customer contracts, to Taiyo
Nippon Sanso Corporation (‘‘Nippon
Sanso’’).
The proposed Consent Agreement has
been placed on the public record for 30
days to solicit comments from interested
persons. Comments received during this
period will become part of the public
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
record. After 30 days, the Commission
will again review the proposed Consent
Agreement, and will decide whether it
should withdraw from the proposed
Consent Agreement or make it final.
Pursuant to a tender offer and
agreement dated March 6, 2006, Linde
announced its intention to acquire the
entire share capital of BOC for an
aggregate purchase price of
approximately $14.4 billion.
Consummation of this transaction is
subject to acceptance of the offer by a
sufficient number of the shareholders of
BOC. The Commission’s complaint
alleges the facts described below and
that the proposed acquisition, if
consummated, would violate Section 7
of the Clayton Act, as amended, 15
U.S.C. 18, and Section 5 of the FTC Act,
as amended, 15 U.S.C. 45, by lessening
competition in the market for bulk
refined helium worldwide, and certain
regional markets in the United States for
liquid oxygen and liquid nitrogen.
II. The Parties
Linde is a global supplier of industrial
and medical gases and related
equipment. Linde LLC is the parent
corporation of the United States
subsidiary that manufactures and sells a
variety of industrial gases, including
oxygen, nitrogen, argon, helium, and
many other industrial and speciality
gases for use in a variety of industries,
including the medical, welding, and
metal production fields. Linde is the
fifth-largest industrial gas supplier in
the United States with 11 liquid
atmospheric gas producing plants in the
United States, most of which are
concentrated in the Midwest, Northeast,
and Southeast.
BOC is the world’s second-largest
industrial gas supplier, and the fourthlargest supplier in the United States.
BOC operates 23 liquid atmospheric gas
producing plants in the United States,
many of which are concentrated in the
Midwest, Northeast, and Southeast
regions, as well as the West and Gulf
Coast regions.
III. Liquid Oxygen and Liquid Nitrogen
Both Linde and BOC own and operate
ASUs in the United States that produce
liquid atmospheric gases, including
liquid oxygen and liquid nitrogen. Each
gas has specific properties that make it
uniquely suited for the applications in
which it is used. For most of these
applications, there is no substitute for
the use of oxygen or nitrogen.
Customers would not switch to another
gas or product even if the price of liquid
oxygen or liquid nitrogen increased by
five to ten percent.
E:\FR\FM\21JYN1.SGM
21JYN1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES_1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 140 / Friday, July 21, 2006 / Notices
There are three distinct methods of
distributing oxygen and nitrogen: in
cylinders, in liquid form, and through
on-site ASUs or pipelines. Customers
choose a distribution method based on
the volume of gas required. Customers
who use liquid oxygen or liquid
nitrogen require volumes of these gases
that are too large to purchase
economically in cylinders, but too small
to justify the expense of an on-site ASU
or pipeline. Thus, even if the price of
liquid oxygen or liquid nitrogen
increased by five to ten percent,
customers would not switch to another
method of distribution.
Due to high transportation costs,
liquid oxygen and liquid nitrogen may
only be purchased economically from a
supplier with an ASU located within
150 to 250 miles of the customer.
Therefore, it is appropriate to analyze
the competitive effects of the proposed
acquisition in local geographic markets
for liquid oxygen and liquid nitrogen.
The relevant geographic markets in
which to analyze the effects of the
proposed acquisition are the Northeast,
the Chicago-Milwaukee Metropolitan
Area, the Eastern Midwest, and the
Southeast.
The markets for liquid oxygen and
liquid nitrogen are highly concentrated.
In each of the relevant geographic
markets, Linde and BOC are two of only
five companies supplying liquid oxygen
and liquid nitrogen to customers. As a
result of the proposed acquisition, a
significant competitor would be
eliminated, and a small number of
viable competitors would remain. In
addition, certain market conditions,
including the relative homogeneity of
the firms and products involved and
availability of detailed market
information, are conducive to the firms
reaching terms of coordination and
detecting and punishing deviations from
those terms. Therefore, the proposed
acquisition would enhance the
likelihood of collusion or coordinated
action between or among the remaining
firms in each market. Furthermore, by
eliminating direct competition between
these two suppliers in these areas, the
proposed acquisition likely would allow
Linde to exercise market power
unilaterally, thereby increasing the
likelihood that purchasers of liquid
oxygen or liquid nitrogen would be
forced to pay higher prices in these
areas. The proposed acquisition
provides Linde a larger base of sales on
which to enjoy the benefit of a unilateral
price increase and also eliminates a
competitor to which customers
otherwise could have diverted their
sales in markets where alternative
sources of supply likely are already
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:59 Jul 20, 2006
Jkt 208001
limited. In addition, in certain
geographic markets, Linde and BOC are
the two closest competitors to a
significant number of customers.
Significant impediments to new entry
exist in the markets for liquid oxygen
and liquid nitrogen. In order to be cost
competitive in these markets, an ASU
must produce at least 250 to 300 tons
per day of liquid product. The cost to
construct a plant sufficiently large to be
cost effective can be 30 to 40 million
dollars, most of which are sunk costs
and cannot be recovered. Although an
ASU can theoretically be constructed
within two years, it is not economically
justifiable to build an ASU before
contracting to sell a substantial portion
of the plant’s capacity, either to an onsite customer or to liquid customers.
On-site customers normally sign longterm contracts. Because such
opportunities to contract with these
customers are rare, it is uncertain
whether such an opportunity would
arise in the near future in any of the
areas affected by the acquisition. It is
even more difficult and time-consuming
for a potential new entrant to try to
contract with enough liquid gas
customers to justify building a new
ASU. These customers are generally
locked into contracts with existing
suppliers that typically last between five
and seven years. Even if the new entrant
were able to contract with enough
customers to justify constructing a new
ASU in any of the affected markets, the
new entrant may still need to rely on
suppliers already in the market to obtain
liquid gases to service the new entrant’s
customers while the ASU was
constructed. Given the difficulties of
entry, it is unlikely that new entry could
be accomplished in a timely manner in
the liquid oxygen and liquid nitrogen
markets to defeat a likely price increase
caused by the acquisition.
IV. Bulk Refined Helium
Both Linde and BOC are suppliers of
bulk refined helium. Bulk refined
helium has specific properties that make
it uniquely suited for the applications in
which it is used. For most of these
applications, there is no substitute for
bulk refined helium. Customers likely
would not switch to another gas or
product even if the price of bulk refined
helium increased by five to ten percent.
Refined helium is available to
customers in two distinct distribution
methods: Cylinder form or bulk form.
Customers choose a distribution method
based on the volume of gas required.
Bulk form is generally used by
customers that require large volumes of
refined helium. In bulk form, refined
helium may be packaged into containers
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
41445
known as ‘‘dewars’’ and then
distributed in liquid form to customers.
Refined helium may also be converted
into gaseous form and distributed in
high-pressure ‘‘tube trailers’’ in bulk
quantities to customers. Bulk refined
helium customers obtain helium in bulk
form (liquid dewars or gaseous tube
trailers) because it is the most costeffective method of purchasing the
volume of refined helium they require.
Therefore, customers would not switch
to purchasing refined helium via
another method of distribution even if
the prices of bulk refined helium
distributed by one method increased by
five to ten percent.
Refined helium is a rare and
expensive gas. Because of its high value,
refined helium can be, and is,
transported economically on a
worldwide basis. Because helium is
transported globally, foreign helium
capacity and demand impact the
demand and pricing for domesticallyproduced helium. Therefore, it is
appropriate to analyze the competitive
effects of the proposed acquisition using
a worldwide market for bulk refined
helium.
The market for bulk refined helium is
highly concentrated. Linde and BOC are
two of only five companies in the world
with access to refined bulk helium; BOC
is the second-largest supplier, and a
combined Linde/BOC would become
the largest. While Linde is currently the
smallest of the five, it has substantial
new reserves coming on line in the near
future, and already is an aggressive
participant in the market for refined
bulk helium. In addition, certain market
conditions, including the relative
homogeneity of the firms and products
involved and availability of detailed
market information, are conducive to
the firms reaching terms of coordination
and detecting and punishing deviations
from those terms. The Commission’s
complaint charges that the proposed
acquisition would enhance the
likelihood of collusion or coordinated
action among the remaining firms in the
market.
There are substantial barriers to entry
in the bulk refined helium market. The
most significant impediment to entry is
securing a source of refined helium.
There are no sources of refined helium
available that are not committed to
market incumbents in long term
contracts. A new entrant would need to
locate a new source of crude helium and
build a refinery. In addition, tens of
millions of dollars would be needed to
acquire the necessary infrastructure and
ancillary distribution assets, including
transfill facilities, cryogenic storage
trailers, high-pressure tube trailers and
E:\FR\FM\21JYN1.SGM
21JYN1
41446
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 140 / Friday, July 21, 2006 / Notices
liquid dewars, capable of transporting
helium from the refinery to customers.
While the costs of entering are high,
opportunities to recoup these costs are
comparatively limited. As with other
industrial gases, helium is sold pursuant
to long-term contracts, so only a fraction
of the market is available at a given
time. Given the difficulties of entering
the market, it is unlikely that new entry
sufficient to counteract the competitive
impact of the proposed acquisition
would occur in a timely manner in the
market for bulk refined helium.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES_1
V. The Consent Agreement
A. Liquid Oxygen and Liquid Nitrogen
The proposed Consent Agreement
remedies the acquisition’s likely
anticompetitive effects in the markets
for liquid oxygen and liquid nitrogen.
Pursuant to the Consent Agreement,
Linde will divest all of its merchant
liquid oxygen and nitrogen producing
business in the identified geographic
markets. Thus, Linde will divest the
eight ASUs listed in Section I to a single
purchaser that will operate the ASUs as
a going concern. The Consent
Agreement provides that Linde must
find a buyer for the ASUs, at no
minimum price, that is acceptable to the
Commission, no later than six months
from the date the Consent Agreement
becomes final. If the Commission
determines that Linde has not provided
an acceptable buyer for the ASUs within
this time period, or that the manner of
the divestiture is not acceptable, the
Commission may appoint a trustee to
divest the assets. The trustee would
have the exclusive power and authority
to accomplish the divestiture.
The acquirer of the divested assets
must receive the prior approval of the
Commission. The Commission’s goal in
evaluating possible purchasers of
divested assets is to maintain the
competitive environment that existed
prior to the acquisition. A proposed
acquirer of divested assets must not
itself present competitive problems.
Numerous entities are interested in
purchasing the divested ASUs,
including industrial gas suppliers that
currently have a regional presence in
the industry, but do not compete in the
areas affected by the acquisition, as well
as entities in related fields that are
interested in entering the production
and sale of industrial gases. The
Commission is therefore satisfied that
sufficient potential buyers for the
divested liquid oxygen and liquid
nitrogen assets exist.
The Consent Agreement also contains
an Agreement to Hold Separate and
Maintain Assets. This will serve to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:59 Jul 20, 2006
Jkt 208001
protect the viability, marketability, and
competitiveness of the divestiture asset
package until the assets are divested to
a buyer approved by the Commission.
The Agreement to Hold Separate and
Maintain Assets became effective on the
date the Commission accepted the
Consent Agreement for placement on
the public record and will remain in
effect until Linde successfully divests
the divestiture asset package according
to the terms of the Decision and Order.
The Commission has appointed
Richard Klein to oversee the
management of the divestiture asset
package until the divestiture is
complete, and for a brief transition
period after the sale. Mr. Klein has
approximately 23 years experience as
the Chief Executive Officer of a global
specialty chemicals manufacturer, and
is well-respected in the industry. In
order to ensure that the Commission
remains informed about the status of the
proposed divestitures, the proposed
Consent Agreement requires the parties
to file periodic reports with the
Commission until the divestiture is
accomplished.
B. Bulk Refined Helium
The Consent Agreement resolves the
proposed acquisition’s likely
anticompetitive effects in the bulk
refined helium market by requiring
Linde to divest bulk refined helium
assets, including helium source
contracts, ancillary distribution assets,
and customer contracts, to Nippon
Sanso no later than ten days after the
acquisition. A buyer upfront remedy
was required in this market because the
helium assets to be divested do not
constitute a stand-alone business and
require key third-party consents for
their transfer under the Order.
Nippon Sanso is particularly wellpositioned to compete successfully with
the divested helium assets. Nippon
Sanso is the largest industrial and
speciality gas company in Japan, and is
the sixth-largest industrial gas company
in the world. Matheson Tri-Gas, Nippon
Sanso’s U.S. subsidiary, is the sixthlargest industrial gas supplier in the
United States. Although it lacks helium
sourcing contracts, Nippon Sanso is one
of the world’s largest helium
distributors, selling helium to end-users
in the United States and Japan. (Nippon
Sanso, however, does not have current
access to bulk refined helium.) Having
access to the helium sourcing contracts
and other ancillary helium assets will
provide Nippon Sanso the ability to
grow its helium business in the U.S.,
European, and Asian markets. Nippon
Sanso should be successful in restoring
the competition that likely would be
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
lost if the proposed Linde/BOC
transaction were to proceed
unremedied.
If the Commission determines that
Nippon Sanso is not an acceptable
purchaser, or the manner of the
divestiture is not acceptable, the parties
must unwind the sale to Nippon Sanso
and divest the bulk refined helium
assets within six months of the date the
Order becomes final to another
Commission-approved acquirer. If the
parties fail to divest within six months,
the Commission may appoint a trustee
to divest the bulk refined helium assets.
The Consent Agreement also contains
an Order to Maintain Assets. This will
serve to ensure that the helium assets
are protected and divested in
substantially the same condition
existing at the time the Consent
Agreement was signed. The Order to
Maintain Assets became effective on the
date the Commission accepted the
Consent Agreement for placement on
the public record and will remain in
effect until Linde successfully divests
the helium assets according to the terms
of the Decision and Order.
The Commission has also appointed
Mr. Klein to oversee the transition in
ownership of the divested helium assets
to Nippon Sanso and to ensure Linde’s
and BOC’s compliance with all of the
provisions of the proposed Consent
Agreement. In order to ensure that the
Commission remains informed about
the status of the proposed divestitures,
the proposed Consent Agreement
requires Mr. Klein to file reports with
the Commission periodically until the
divestiture is accomplished.
The purpose of this analysis is to
facilitate public comment on the
Consent Agreement, and it is not
intended to constitute an official
interpretation of the proposed Decision
and Order or the Agreement to Hold
Separate, or to modify their terms in any
way.
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6–11624 Filed 7–20–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750–01–P
E:\FR\FM\21JYN1.SGM
21JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 140 (Friday, July 21, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41443-41446]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-11624]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
[File No. 061 0114]
Linde AG and The BOC Group PLC; Analysis of Agreement Containing
Consent Order To Aid Public Comment
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.
ACTION: Proposed Consent Agreement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this matter settles alleged
violations of Federal law prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts or
practices or unfair methods of competition. The attached Analysis to
Aid Public Comment describes both the allegations in the draft
complaint and the terms of the consent order--embodied in the consent
[[Page 41444]]
agreement--that would settle these allegations.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 16, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are invited to submit written comments.
Comments should refer to ``Linde AG and BOC, File No. 061 0114,'' to
facilitate the organization of comments. A comment filed in paper form
should include this reference both in the text and on the envelope, and
should be mailed or delivered to the following address: Federal Trade
Commission/Office of the Secretary, Room 135-H, 600 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580. Comments containing confidential
material must be filed in paper form, must be clearly labeled
``Confidential,'' and must comply with Commission Rule 4.9(c). 16 CFR
4.9(c) (2005).\1\ The FTC is requesting that any comment filed in paper
form be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible, because U.S.
postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission is subject to
delay due to heightened security precautions. Comments that do not
contain any nonpublic information may instead be filed in electronic
form as part of or as an attachment to e-mail messages directed to the
following e-mail box: consentagreement@ftc.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The comment must be accompanied by an explicit request for
confidential treatment, including the factual and legal basis for
the request, and must identify the specific portions of the comment
to be withheld from the public record. The request will be granted
or denied by the Commission's General Counsel, consistent with
applicable law and the public interest. See Commission Rule 4.9(c),
16 CFR 4.9(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FTC Act and other laws the Commission administers permit the
collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding as
appropriate. All timely and responsive public comments, whether filed
in paper or electronic form, will be considered by the Commission, and
will be available to the public on the FTC Web site, to the extent
practicable, at https://www.ftc.gov. As a matter of discretion, the FTC
makes every effort to remove home contact information for individuals
from the public comments it receives before placing those comments on
the FTC Web site. More information, including routine uses permitted by
the Privacy Act, may be found in the FTC's privacy policy, at https://
www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean G. Dillon, Bureau of Competition,
600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326-3575.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 6(f) of the Federal
Trade Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and Sec. 2.34 of
the Commission Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is hereby given
that the above-captioned consent agreement containing a consent order
to cease and desist, having been filed with and accepted, subject to
final approval, by the Commission, has been placed on the public record
for a period of thirty (30) days. The following Analysis to Aid Public
Comment describes the terms of the consent agreement, and the
allegations in the complaint. An electronic copy of the full text of
the consent agreement package can be obtained from the FTC Home Page
(for July 18, 2006), on the World Wide Web, at https://www.ftc.gov/os/
2006/07/index.htm. A paper copy can be obtained from the FTC Public
Reference Room, Room 130-H, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20580, either in person or by calling (202) 326-2222.
Public comments are invited, and may be filed with the Commission
in either paper or electronic form. All comments should be filed as
prescribed in the ADDRESSES section above, and must be received on or
before the date specified in the DATES section.
Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Order To Aid Public Comment
I. Introduction
The Federal Trade Commission (``Commission'') has accepted from
Linde AG (``Linde''), subject to final approval, an Agreement
Containing Consent Orders (``Consent Agreement''), which is designed to
remedy the anticompetitive effects resulting from Linde's acquisition
of the entire share capital of The BOC Group plc (``BOC'').
Under the terms of the Consent Agreement, Linde is required to
divest air separation units (``ASUs'') and related assets currently
owned and operated by Linde in the following eight locations in which
the proposed acquisition would lessen competition: (1) Canton, Ohio;
(2) Dayton, Ohio; (3) Madison, Wisconsin; (4) Waukesha, Wisconsin; (5)
Carrollton, Georgia; (6) Jefferson, Georgia; (7) Rockhill, South
Carolina; and (8) Bozrah, Connecticut. The Consent Agreement also
requires Linde to divest bulk refined helium assets, including helium
source contracts, ancillary distribution assets, and customer
contracts, to Taiyo Nippon Sanso Corporation (``Nippon Sanso'').
The proposed Consent Agreement has been placed on the public record
for 30 days to solicit comments from interested persons. Comments
received during this period will become part of the public record.
After 30 days, the Commission will again review the proposed Consent
Agreement, and will decide whether it should withdraw from the proposed
Consent Agreement or make it final.
Pursuant to a tender offer and agreement dated March 6, 2006, Linde
announced its intention to acquire the entire share capital of BOC for
an aggregate purchase price of approximately $14.4 billion.
Consummation of this transaction is subject to acceptance of the offer
by a sufficient number of the shareholders of BOC. The Commission's
complaint alleges the facts described below and that the proposed
acquisition, if consummated, would violate Section 7 of the Clayton
Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 18, and Section 5 of the FTC Act, as
amended, 15 U.S.C. 45, by lessening competition in the market for bulk
refined helium worldwide, and certain regional markets in the United
States for liquid oxygen and liquid nitrogen.
II. The Parties
Linde is a global supplier of industrial and medical gases and
related equipment. Linde LLC is the parent corporation of the United
States subsidiary that manufactures and sells a variety of industrial
gases, including oxygen, nitrogen, argon, helium, and many other
industrial and speciality gases for use in a variety of industries,
including the medical, welding, and metal production fields. Linde is
the fifth-largest industrial gas supplier in the United States with 11
liquid atmospheric gas producing plants in the United States, most of
which are concentrated in the Midwest, Northeast, and Southeast.
BOC is the world's second-largest industrial gas supplier, and the
fourth-largest supplier in the United States. BOC operates 23 liquid
atmospheric gas producing plants in the United States, many of which
are concentrated in the Midwest, Northeast, and Southeast regions, as
well as the West and Gulf Coast regions.
III. Liquid Oxygen and Liquid Nitrogen
Both Linde and BOC own and operate ASUs in the United States that
produce liquid atmospheric gases, including liquid oxygen and liquid
nitrogen. Each gas has specific properties that make it uniquely suited
for the applications in which it is used. For most of these
applications, there is no substitute for the use of oxygen or nitrogen.
Customers would not switch to another gas or product even if the price
of liquid oxygen or liquid nitrogen increased by five to ten percent.
[[Page 41445]]
There are three distinct methods of distributing oxygen and
nitrogen: in cylinders, in liquid form, and through on-site ASUs or
pipelines. Customers choose a distribution method based on the volume
of gas required. Customers who use liquid oxygen or liquid nitrogen
require volumes of these gases that are too large to purchase
economically in cylinders, but too small to justify the expense of an
on-site ASU or pipeline. Thus, even if the price of liquid oxygen or
liquid nitrogen increased by five to ten percent, customers would not
switch to another method of distribution.
Due to high transportation costs, liquid oxygen and liquid nitrogen
may only be purchased economically from a supplier with an ASU located
within 150 to 250 miles of the customer. Therefore, it is appropriate
to analyze the competitive effects of the proposed acquisition in local
geographic markets for liquid oxygen and liquid nitrogen. The relevant
geographic markets in which to analyze the effects of the proposed
acquisition are the Northeast, the Chicago-Milwaukee Metropolitan Area,
the Eastern Midwest, and the Southeast.
The markets for liquid oxygen and liquid nitrogen are highly
concentrated. In each of the relevant geographic markets, Linde and BOC
are two of only five companies supplying liquid oxygen and liquid
nitrogen to customers. As a result of the proposed acquisition, a
significant competitor would be eliminated, and a small number of
viable competitors would remain. In addition, certain market
conditions, including the relative homogeneity of the firms and
products involved and availability of detailed market information, are
conducive to the firms reaching terms of coordination and detecting and
punishing deviations from those terms. Therefore, the proposed
acquisition would enhance the likelihood of collusion or coordinated
action between or among the remaining firms in each market.
Furthermore, by eliminating direct competition between these two
suppliers in these areas, the proposed acquisition likely would allow
Linde to exercise market power unilaterally, thereby increasing the
likelihood that purchasers of liquid oxygen or liquid nitrogen would be
forced to pay higher prices in these areas. The proposed acquisition
provides Linde a larger base of sales on which to enjoy the benefit of
a unilateral price increase and also eliminates a competitor to which
customers otherwise could have diverted their sales in markets where
alternative sources of supply likely are already limited. In addition,
in certain geographic markets, Linde and BOC are the two closest
competitors to a significant number of customers.
Significant impediments to new entry exist in the markets for
liquid oxygen and liquid nitrogen. In order to be cost competitive in
these markets, an ASU must produce at least 250 to 300 tons per day of
liquid product. The cost to construct a plant sufficiently large to be
cost effective can be 30 to 40 million dollars, most of which are sunk
costs and cannot be recovered. Although an ASU can theoretically be
constructed within two years, it is not economically justifiable to
build an ASU before contracting to sell a substantial portion of the
plant's capacity, either to an on-site customer or to liquid customers.
On-site customers normally sign long-term contracts. Because such
opportunities to contract with these customers are rare, it is
uncertain whether such an opportunity would arise in the near future in
any of the areas affected by the acquisition. It is even more difficult
and time-consuming for a potential new entrant to try to contract with
enough liquid gas customers to justify building a new ASU. These
customers are generally locked into contracts with existing suppliers
that typically last between five and seven years. Even if the new
entrant were able to contract with enough customers to justify
constructing a new ASU in any of the affected markets, the new entrant
may still need to rely on suppliers already in the market to obtain
liquid gases to service the new entrant's customers while the ASU was
constructed. Given the difficulties of entry, it is unlikely that new
entry could be accomplished in a timely manner in the liquid oxygen and
liquid nitrogen markets to defeat a likely price increase caused by the
acquisition.
IV. Bulk Refined Helium
Both Linde and BOC are suppliers of bulk refined helium. Bulk
refined helium has specific properties that make it uniquely suited for
the applications in which it is used. For most of these applications,
there is no substitute for bulk refined helium. Customers likely would
not switch to another gas or product even if the price of bulk refined
helium increased by five to ten percent.
Refined helium is available to customers in two distinct
distribution methods: Cylinder form or bulk form. Customers choose a
distribution method based on the volume of gas required. Bulk form is
generally used by customers that require large volumes of refined
helium. In bulk form, refined helium may be packaged into containers
known as ``dewars'' and then distributed in liquid form to customers.
Refined helium may also be converted into gaseous form and distributed
in high-pressure ``tube trailers'' in bulk quantities to customers.
Bulk refined helium customers obtain helium in bulk form (liquid dewars
or gaseous tube trailers) because it is the most cost-effective method
of purchasing the volume of refined helium they require. Therefore,
customers would not switch to purchasing refined helium via another
method of distribution even if the prices of bulk refined helium
distributed by one method increased by five to ten percent.
Refined helium is a rare and expensive gas. Because of its high
value, refined helium can be, and is, transported economically on a
worldwide basis. Because helium is transported globally, foreign helium
capacity and demand impact the demand and pricing for domestically-
produced helium. Therefore, it is appropriate to analyze the
competitive effects of the proposed acquisition using a worldwide
market for bulk refined helium.
The market for bulk refined helium is highly concentrated. Linde
and BOC are two of only five companies in the world with access to
refined bulk helium; BOC is the second-largest supplier, and a combined
Linde/BOC would become the largest. While Linde is currently the
smallest of the five, it has substantial new reserves coming on line in
the near future, and already is an aggressive participant in the market
for refined bulk helium. In addition, certain market conditions,
including the relative homogeneity of the firms and products involved
and availability of detailed market information, are conducive to the
firms reaching terms of coordination and detecting and punishing
deviations from those terms. The Commission's complaint charges that
the proposed acquisition would enhance the likelihood of collusion or
coordinated action among the remaining firms in the market.
There are substantial barriers to entry in the bulk refined helium
market. The most significant impediment to entry is securing a source
of refined helium. There are no sources of refined helium available
that are not committed to market incumbents in long term contracts. A
new entrant would need to locate a new source of crude helium and build
a refinery. In addition, tens of millions of dollars would be needed to
acquire the necessary infrastructure and ancillary distribution assets,
including transfill facilities, cryogenic storage trailers, high-
pressure tube trailers and
[[Page 41446]]
liquid dewars, capable of transporting helium from the refinery to
customers. While the costs of entering are high, opportunities to
recoup these costs are comparatively limited. As with other industrial
gases, helium is sold pursuant to long-term contracts, so only a
fraction of the market is available at a given time. Given the
difficulties of entering the market, it is unlikely that new entry
sufficient to counteract the competitive impact of the proposed
acquisition would occur in a timely manner in the market for bulk
refined helium.
V. The Consent Agreement
A. Liquid Oxygen and Liquid Nitrogen
The proposed Consent Agreement remedies the acquisition's likely
anticompetitive effects in the markets for liquid oxygen and liquid
nitrogen. Pursuant to the Consent Agreement, Linde will divest all of
its merchant liquid oxygen and nitrogen producing business in the
identified geographic markets. Thus, Linde will divest the eight ASUs
listed in Section I to a single purchaser that will operate the ASUs as
a going concern. The Consent Agreement provides that Linde must find a
buyer for the ASUs, at no minimum price, that is acceptable to the
Commission, no later than six months from the date the Consent
Agreement becomes final. If the Commission determines that Linde has
not provided an acceptable buyer for the ASUs within this time period,
or that the manner of the divestiture is not acceptable, the Commission
may appoint a trustee to divest the assets. The trustee would have the
exclusive power and authority to accomplish the divestiture.
The acquirer of the divested assets must receive the prior approval
of the Commission. The Commission's goal in evaluating possible
purchasers of divested assets is to maintain the competitive
environment that existed prior to the acquisition. A proposed acquirer
of divested assets must not itself present competitive problems.
Numerous entities are interested in purchasing the divested ASUs,
including industrial gas suppliers that currently have a regional
presence in the industry, but do not compete in the areas affected by
the acquisition, as well as entities in related fields that are
interested in entering the production and sale of industrial gases. The
Commission is therefore satisfied that sufficient potential buyers for
the divested liquid oxygen and liquid nitrogen assets exist.
The Consent Agreement also contains an Agreement to Hold Separate
and Maintain Assets. This will serve to protect the viability,
marketability, and competitiveness of the divestiture asset package
until the assets are divested to a buyer approved by the Commission.
The Agreement to Hold Separate and Maintain Assets became effective on
the date the Commission accepted the Consent Agreement for placement on
the public record and will remain in effect until Linde successfully
divests the divestiture asset package according to the terms of the
Decision and Order.
The Commission has appointed Richard Klein to oversee the
management of the divestiture asset package until the divestiture is
complete, and for a brief transition period after the sale. Mr. Klein
has approximately 23 years experience as the Chief Executive Officer of
a global specialty chemicals manufacturer, and is well-respected in the
industry. In order to ensure that the Commission remains informed about
the status of the proposed divestitures, the proposed Consent Agreement
requires the parties to file periodic reports with the Commission until
the divestiture is accomplished.
B. Bulk Refined Helium
The Consent Agreement resolves the proposed acquisition's likely
anticompetitive effects in the bulk refined helium market by requiring
Linde to divest bulk refined helium assets, including helium source
contracts, ancillary distribution assets, and customer contracts, to
Nippon Sanso no later than ten days after the acquisition. A buyer
upfront remedy was required in this market because the helium assets to
be divested do not constitute a stand-alone business and require key
third-party consents for their transfer under the Order.
Nippon Sanso is particularly well-positioned to compete
successfully with the divested helium assets. Nippon Sanso is the
largest industrial and speciality gas company in Japan, and is the
sixth-largest industrial gas company in the world. Matheson Tri-Gas,
Nippon Sanso's U.S. subsidiary, is the sixth-largest industrial gas
supplier in the United States. Although it lacks helium sourcing
contracts, Nippon Sanso is one of the world's largest helium
distributors, selling helium to end-users in the United States and
Japan. (Nippon Sanso, however, does not have current access to bulk
refined helium.) Having access to the helium sourcing contracts and
other ancillary helium assets will provide Nippon Sanso the ability to
grow its helium business in the U.S., European, and Asian markets.
Nippon Sanso should be successful in restoring the competition that
likely would be lost if the proposed Linde/BOC transaction were to
proceed unremedied.
If the Commission determines that Nippon Sanso is not an acceptable
purchaser, or the manner of the divestiture is not acceptable, the
parties must unwind the sale to Nippon Sanso and divest the bulk
refined helium assets within six months of the date the Order becomes
final to another Commission-approved acquirer. If the parties fail to
divest within six months, the Commission may appoint a trustee to
divest the bulk refined helium assets.
The Consent Agreement also contains an Order to Maintain Assets.
This will serve to ensure that the helium assets are protected and
divested in substantially the same condition existing at the time the
Consent Agreement was signed. The Order to Maintain Assets became
effective on the date the Commission accepted the Consent Agreement for
placement on the public record and will remain in effect until Linde
successfully divests the helium assets according to the terms of the
Decision and Order.
The Commission has also appointed Mr. Klein to oversee the
transition in ownership of the divested helium assets to Nippon Sanso
and to ensure Linde's and BOC's compliance with all of the provisions
of the proposed Consent Agreement. In order to ensure that the
Commission remains informed about the status of the proposed
divestitures, the proposed Consent Agreement requires Mr. Klein to file
reports with the Commission periodically until the divestiture is
accomplished.
The purpose of this analysis is to facilitate public comment on the
Consent Agreement, and it is not intended to constitute an official
interpretation of the proposed Decision and Order or the Agreement to
Hold Separate, or to modify their terms in any way.
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-11624 Filed 7-20-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P