Month End Requisition For Office Supplies Form.Doc: Fill & Download for Free

First published in the June 2007 (No 126) issue of Ton Talk, the magazine of the Ton Class Association, and subsequently in the November 2007 (Vol 95 No 4) issue of the Naval Review.)INTRODUCTIONThe handful of Royal Navy personnel involved in Minewarfare, Diving and Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD - more familiarly known as Bomb & Mine Disposal) during Operation CORPORATE, the Falkland Islands campaign in 1982, and its aftermath, was awarded a total of one Distinguished Service Order (DSO), three Distinguished Service Crosses (DSCs), one Distinguished Service Medal (DSM), one Queen's Gallantry Medal (QGM), one British Empire Medal (BEM), six Mentions in Despatches (MIDs) and at least seven Commander-in-Chief’s Commendations for Brave Conduct. One Minewarfare & Clearance Diving Officer (MCDO) was appointed an Officer of the British Empire (OBE) and three MCDOs were appointed Members of the British Empire (MBE) for their achievements. It is therefore surprising that the list of participating units on the Falklands Memorial outside Port Stanley fails to mention either of the two main Portsmouth-based Fleet Clearance Diving Teams (FCDTs 1 and 3 but up to five FCDTs were active) although it does include the Army’s field postal unit and the RAF’s mobile meteorological unit. Of further note, Sir Lawrence Freedman’s Official History of the Falklands Campaign says little about the activities of the Fleet Clearance Diving Teams or the minesweeping trawlers of the specially formed 11th Mine Countermeasures (MCM) Squadron that swept 10 of the 21 deadly moored mines laid by the Argentinians in the approaches to Port Stanley. I have brought these omissions to Sir Lawrence's attention in the hope that he will set the record straight sometime in the future.Throughout the Falklands campaign, the members of the FCDTs lived and worked in atrocious conditions. Performing most of their bomb disposal and repair work at night during lulls in the air raids, they slept in cramped spaces in odd nooks of ships or ashore in damp, makeshift shelters. Much of their diving was conducted in dark fetid compartments surrounded by jagged steel edges, explosive debris and freezing water contaminated by oil, battery acid and raw sewage. They also turned their hands to acting as mechanics, welders, cutters, riggers, first aiders, stretcher bearers, nurses and mortuary attendants, as well as organising the odd entertainment for fellow servicemen. Early on, the members of the FCDTs surrendered all their spare clothing to the survivors of SIR GALAHAD and other bombed ships so they soon looked a piratical bunch. When he first heard about the bomb disposal work conducted by the Fleet Clearance Diving Teams in the Falklands, Admiral of the Fleet Lord Fieldhouse GCB, GBE, the then Commander-in-Chief Fleet, said in wonderment to the Fleet Minewarfare & Clearance Diving Officer (Lt Cdr J H 'Hamish' LOUDON MBE RN), “Who are these people and where do we get them from?”The ships’ companies of the five minesweeping trawlers comprising the rapidly formed 11th Mine Countermeasures (MCM) Squadron also had it tough. They endured rough weather, unreliable machinery and lack of proper self-defence armament, communications and navigation systems. Sailing to and fro on their various often clandestine missions carrying stores and personnel in the dark, with radar switched off and all lights extinguished for security, they frequently ran the risk of being rammed or fired on by both enemy and friendly forces. Apart from acting as guinea pigs in channels suspected of being mined and landing Special Forces raiding parties, they swept 10 of the 21 deadly moored mines laid by the Argentinians in the approaches to Port Stanley; the other mines had either broken adrift and floated away or failed to deploy properly. Astonishingly, the relatively junior officer who welded the makeshift squadron together as an effective force, led it 8,000 miles south, supervised its hazardous operations and then brought it home again four months later without its ships or men sustaining a single casualty received no public recognition for his feat.CHRONOLOGYWhen the Task Force was being prepared it was realised that, in the event of hostilities, clearance divers would be required to conduct Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD), Battle Damage Assessment (BDA), Battle Damage Repair (BDR) and underwater reconnaissance in potential landing areas. It was also recognised that minesweeping would be required if the Argentinians laid sea mines in critical areas off the coast. To coordinate such operations, MCDO Lt Cdr (later Cdr) Chris MEATYARD was appointed to the staff of Commodore Amphibious Warfare (COMAW – Cdre Michael CLAPP CB, RN). On 5 April 1982, Chris and his small MCM staff embarked in HMS FEARLESS and departed Portsmouth with other elements of the Task Force. Later on, he and his team were transferred to HMS INTREPID but he was soon recalled to FEARLESS because the Commodore needed his specialist advice ‘on tap’.On 25 April 1982, the Agentinian garrison at Grytviken on South Georgia surrendered. The same day, the Agentinian submarine ARA SANTA FE, severely damaged by depth charges from HMS ANTRIM’s Wessex helicopter (Lt (now Rear Admiral) Chris PARRY CBE, son of the late MCDOA member Cdr John PARRY OBE RN), beached herself in Grytviken harbour. MCDO Lt (later Lt Cdr) David 'Doc' O’CONNELL MBE RN, embarked in HMS ENDURANCE, led a five-man team of ships’ divers which spent three weeks clearing hazardous explosives and other materials from the submarine before re-floating her so she could safely be towed out to sea and sunk. He was subsequently appointed an MBE.Minesweeping trawlers of the11th MCM Squadron at GibraltarThe elderly Ton class coastal mine countermeasures vessels (MCMVs) in service at the time were unsuited for the long passage and heavy seas expected in the South Atlantic. The first two of the new Hunt Class MCMVs were not yet operational so it was decided to requisition five deep sea trawlers from Hull and fit them with rudimentary minesweeping equipment. These vessels were commissioned into the Royal Navy and crewed mostly by the ships' companies of Ton Class MCMVs based at Rosyth: CORDELLA (HMS UPTON); FARNELLA (HMS WOTTON); JUNELLA (HMS BICKINGTON); NORTHELLA (HMS SOBERTON); and PICT (HMS BILDESTON). Originally, PICT was to be used solely as a stores ship. However, to minimise loss should ships be lost, stores were distributed evenly among the squadron allowing her to be utiised as a fully-fledged minesweeper too. The group was designated the 11th MCM Squadron and sailed from Portland on 27 April 1982 with MCDO Lt Cdr Martyn HOLLOWAY as Senior Officer in HMS CORDELLA. HMS PICT's conversion delayed her departure such that she joined the squadron on 30 April while 150 miles west of the Portuguese coast.RAF Hercules C-130 re-supplying 11th MCM Squadron at seaOn 11 May 1982 at Ascension Island, FCDT 1 (led by MCDO Lt Cdr Brian DUTTON DSO, QGM, with FCPO(D) Michael 'Mick' FELLOWS MBE, DSC, BEM* as his 2 I/C) and FCDT 3 (led by MCDO Lt (later Lt Cdr) Nigel ‘Bernie’ BRUEN MBE, DSC with CPO(D) Graham ‘Piggy’ TROTTER DSM as his 2 I/C) arrived in an RAF C130 Hercules aircraft to join the Task Force. The 11th MCM Squadron arrived at Ascension Island for fuel and met up briefly with FCDT 3 which had planned to embark in the ships but was ordered to passage with RFA SIR BEDIVERE instead.On 12 May at Ascension Island, FCDT 1 embarked in the Royal Fleet Auxiliary landing ship RFA SIR TRISTRAM and FCDT 3 embarked in the landing ship RFA SIR BEDIVERE.On 13 May, the 11th MCM Squadron sailed from Ascension Island for South Georgia and SIR TRISTRAM and SIR BEDIVERE sailed for the Falklands.Soon after the arrival of Task Force advance elements in San Carlos Water, the clearance divers found themselves in the thick of it. On the afternoon of 21 May, FCPO(D) FELLOWS, LS(D) SEWELL and AB(D) PULLAN of FCDT 1 were called upon to deal with an unexploded Agentinian 1,000 lb bomb in the County Class destroyer HMS ANTRIM. The bomb had passed through the Sea Slug missile magazine and lodged in the heads (toilets). The fuze had been damaged so any attempt to render the bomb safe was useless. While still under air attack and with considerable difficulty, the clearance divers and ship’s staff carefully manoeuvred the bomb through a hole cut in the flight deck and lowered it into deep water.In the meantime, the Type 21 frigate HMS ARDENT was bombed and sunk and the Leander Class frigate HMS ARGONAUT reported two unexploded bombs on board; one forward in the Seacat missile magazine and one aft in the boiler room. As ARGONAUT’s Officer of the Watch, Lt Peter MORGAN RN had already saved the ship once by letting go an anchor to stop her running at full speed towards the shore with her rudders jammed owing to bomb damage. As the Ship’s Diving Officer, he also led his men in surveying and making temporary repairs to the bomb damage in the flooded forward magazine, diving on two occasions in the knowledge that there was an unexploded bomb in the compartment. He was later awarded the DSC.On the morning of 23 May, an Army Royal Engineers team removed the fuze from the bomb in ARGONAUT’s boiler room and it was ditched by the ship’s company. Lt Cdr MEATYARD conducted his own diving survey of ARGONAUT’s flooded Seacat magazine but shortly afterwards, the Type 21 frigate HMS ANTELOPE arrived in the anchorage with two unexploded bombs on board. Tragically, attempts to render these safe by the Royal Engineers bomb disposal team using a rocket-propelled fuze extractor resulted in the death of Staff Sergeant James Prescott (posthumously awarded the Conspicuous Gallantry Medal) and severe injuries to Warrant Officer (later Capt) John Phillips (subsequently awarded the DSC). ANTELOPE was wracked by a series of massive explosions and started to burn from end to end, her lightweight aluminium structure melting in the intense heat.Capt John Phillips DSC RE with the author at the UK DefenceAcademy at Shrivenham in April 2014On 24 May, ANTELOPE broke in half and sank after burning throughout the night. RFAs SIR GALAHAD and SIR LANCELOT both reported unexploded bombs on board and Lt Cdr BRUEN carried out surveys of both ships. The bomb in SIR GALAHAD had entered her hull on the port side, punched its way through several compartments picking up an aluminium bulkhead on the way, and ended up in her battery charging room wrapped in torn steel and surrounded by smashed carboys of acid. The bomb in SIR LANCELOT had come to rest underneath a companion ladder leading from the recreation space to the officers’ accommodation on the deck above. It was positioned with its nose up at an angle of 45 degrees beneath the lowest treads of the stairs in the ship’s tiny film store.On 25 May, RFA FORT AUSTIN reported suspicious underwater noises and members of FCDT 1 and FCDT 3 searched the ships’ hulls of all RFAs in the area to ensure that no explosive devices had been planted. Other members of FCDT 3, supported by technical staff from HMS FEARLESS, started to clear the way for the removal of the bomb from SIR LANCELOT but the operation to remove the bomb from SIR GALAHAD had to be curtailed because FCDT 3 had to move themselves and all their equipment to INTREPID because SIR BEDIVERE, their accommodation ship, was suddenly forced to depart San Carlos Water.On 26 May, the 11th MCM Squadron arrived at South Georgia and various high value ships such as the QE2 packed with the men of 5 Brigade, vital stores and ammunition began arriving from 28 May. It was vital to transfer these essential supplies for the re-supply of the Falklands into the CANBERRA, NORLAND and the various RFAs that shuttled between South Georgia, the Task Force at sea, and the bridgehead at San Carlos. The trawler minesweepers worked tirelessly day after day transferring troops, stores and ammunition in atrocious Antarctic weather with wind speeds in excess of 100 knots, on occasions for several days, before heading on towards the Falklands.HMS Cordella and HMS Northella alongsideQE2 at Grytviken, South GeorgiaTroops of 5 Brigade being cross-decked between ships at South Georgiaby a trawler of the 11th MCM SquadronHMS Cordella and HMS Junella alongside QE2at South Georgia with Canberra in backgroundAlso on 26 May, members of FCDT 1 completed the clearance of ordnance from the vicinity of the bomb in ARGONAUT’s Seacat magazine. This had been patched and pumped out but still required a route to be cut and lifting gear to be fitted before the bomb could be removed safely. FCDT 3 had removed the unexploded bomb from SIR GALAHAD during the night and lowered it into an inflatable Gemini dinghy filled with boxes of corn flakes and two Board of Trade lifejackets; they then towed the Gemini away and sank it in deep water. FCDT3 then commenced clearing the area surrounding the bomb on board SIR LANCELOT, in the meantime moving their belongings from HMS INTREPID to a new shore base at Ajax Bay.S(D) Stan Bowles and LS(D) Dave Southwell ofFCDT 1 with 1,000 lb bomb in HMS ArgonautDuring 27 May, progress was made in cutting out two of three access holes for the extraction of ARGONAUT’s remaining unexploded bomb. Repairs to SIR GALAHAD continued while members of FCDT 3 secured and padded the unexploded bomb in SIR LANCELOT.Early on 28 May, Lt Cdr DUTTON (FCDT 1) and his team removed the remaining unexploded bomb from ARGONAUT. FCDT 3 investigated three unexploded bombs in Ajax Bay and countermined one bomb found on the shoreline. They also built a sand bag wall to protect the field hospital from two adjacent unexploded bombs then bivouacked between the blast wall and the hospital to provide reassurance to its patients and staff. Other members of FCDT 3 recommenced clearing access to the unexploded bomb on board SIR LANCELOT.Bernie Bruen (wearing beret) with membersof FCDT 3 in the Falklands 1982On the morning of 29 May, CPO(D) TROTTER (FCDT 3) and his team removed the unexploded bomb from SIR LANCELOT after a lengthy operation which required considerable cutting and rigging. CPO(D) TROTTER was subsequently awarded the Distinguished Service Medal (DSM).Between 31 May and 2 June, MCDO Lt Cdr Iain 'Bruce' MACKAY RN, accompanied by CPO(MW) 'Bill' HALEY, LS(MW) P C STRIDE and LS(MW) J S CARTER, commanded one of two Landing Craft Vehicles & Personnel (HMS INTREPID’s LCVPs T5 and T6) towing the hurriedly developed Assault Minesweeping System Mk 1 to confirm the Port Salvador approach channel and the length of Teal Inlet were clear of mines prior to amphibious landings. Lt Cdr MACKAY was subsequently awarded a Mention in Despatches.During the night of 4 June, members of FCDT 1 conducted a covert underwater search of Bluff Cove inlet for obstacles or mines that could hazard an amphibious landing.On 8 June, the Type 12 frigate HMS PLYMOUTH was struck by four bombs, none of which exploded. WO(D) FELLOWS and other members of FCDT 1 de-fuzed two unexploded bombs in her mortar magazine and removed damaged volatile Seacat missiles from her launchers. RFA SIR TRISTRAM was also bombed and severely damaged at Fitzroy Cove. She was abandoned while FCDT 3 conducted a search for unexploded bombs (UXB).FCDT 3's LS(D) 'Tommo' Thompson, AB(D) 'Whisky' Walkerand AB(D) 'Jock' Rebecca on the surviving bridge wingof RFA SIR TRISTRAMDuring the night of 10 June, HMS PICT (Lt Cdr David GARWOOD RN), (sister ship of the GAUL that had sunk in unknown circumstances while fishing) was tasked with HMS CORDELLA (Lt Cdr Martyn HOLLOWAY RN) in support to influence sweep Berkeley Sound. Their objective was to clear an area for ships that would provide naval gunfire support for the final stages of the assault on Stanley. HMS PICT was the only ship available that had the special sweep system necessary. Transferring all non-essential crew to HMS CORDELLA at sea at the entrance to Berkeley Sound, HMS PICT began sweeping but the risk increased markedly early in the operation when the influence sweep failed. Clearly PICT was not built as a minesweeper and any breach in the hull would have resulted in the ship's rapid sinking. Undeterred, knowing the importance of the mission, and in the knowledge that the Task Force Commander had accepted the risk of loss of a trawler, HMS PICT's Commanding Officer decided to turn his ship into a guinea pig. HMS PICT was made as noisy as possible by running all machinery at various speeds and revving up the main engine while completing the required number of runs through the area. Fortunately no mines were found, HMS CORDELLA transferred the remaining crew back to HMS PICT and Lt Cdr GARWOOD was subsequently awarded a Mention in Despatches.During the nights of 12, 13 and 14 June, CORDELLA, PICT and JUNELLA conducted covert operations re-supplying SAS and SBS teams deployed variously along the coast.On 14 June, the Agentinian forces occupying the Falklands surrendered.AFTERMATHBetween 23 June and 4 July, when the weather allowed, the minesweeping trawlers of the 11th MCM Squadron swept the enemy minefields at the entrance to Port Stanley. They bagged 10 of the 21 deadly moored mines laid by the Argentinians, the other mines having broken adrift and floated away or failed to deploy from their sinkers properly. CORDELLA did not sweep any mines as she was always out in front using her sweeps to protect the other ships and hopefully in safe water. PICT, next in line swept three mines. One of these nearly struck NORTHELLA which had to manoeuvre hurriedly to avoid it. NORTHELLA swept two of her own, JUNELLA four, and FARNELLA one mine. Another of PICT's mines was recovered on 26 June by Lt Cdr Nigel 'Bernie' Bruen, assisted in a Gemini dinghy by CPO(MW) 'Tex' Marshall and LS(MW) Nick Smith of JUNELLA. JUNELLA then towed the mine into Fitzroy Sound where LS(D) Anthony ‘Tommo’ Thompson helped beach it on a pallet and it was made safe by Lt Cdr Bruen, assisted by CPO(D) Graham ‘Piggy’ Trotter, CPO(MW) Marshall and LS(D) Thompson, for shipping back to the UK for analysis. This mine, normally on display in the mining hall of the Minewarfare Training Element at the Maritime Warfare School at HMS Collingwood, was exhibited at the Imperial War Museum as part of the 'Falklands 25' exhibition in 2007.Martyn Holloway with recovered Agentinianmine at the Imperial War MuseumIn early July 1982, the Hunt Class minehunters HMS BRECON and HMS LEDBURY arrived in theatre and confirmed by sonar that all poised mines had been cleared. Further utilising their submersibles and divers, the two mine hunters then located and disposed of remaining married mine failures and mine sinkers.Between 13 October 1982 and 2 January 1983, a Royal Navy saturation diving team led by MCDO Lt Cdr (later Cdr) Mike KOONER RN (CO MV STENA SEASPREAD and OIC Naval Party 2002) recovered sensitive items from the wreck of the Type 42 destroyer HMS COVENTRY, sunk by Agentinian bombs 10 miles north of Pebble Island. At the request of COVENTRY’s Commanding Officer, Captain David HART DYKE LVO, RN, the divers also recovered his ceremonial sword and telescope, now on display in the RN Museum in Portsmouth, and the cross of nails from Coventry Cathedral, presented in 1978 when the ship was commissioned. Lt Cdr KOONER was subsequently appointed an MBE and PO(D) Michael 'Harry' Harrison was awarded the Queen's Gallantry Medal (QGM).KEY PERSONNELCinCFleetLt Cdr James Hutcheon ‘Hamish’ LOUDON MBE RN (Fleet MCDO)COMAWLt Cdr Christopher George Brandon 'Chris’ MEATYARD RN (COMAW SMCDO)Lt Alex MANNING RNCPO(MW) Derek RIDLEYLS(MW) P C STRIDELS(MW) J S CARTERHMS EnduranceLt David Charles Winston ‘Doc’ O’CONNELL MBE RNFCDT 1Lt Cdr Brian DUTTON DSO, QGM, RN (OIC)FCPO(D) Michael FELLOWS MBE, DSC, BEM (2 I/C)CPO(D) W ‘Bill’ BAUCKHAMCPO(D) Brian T ‘Ben’ GUNNELLLS(D) C W ‘Billy’ EVERNDENLS(D) Lester GEOFFREYSLS(D) A P ‘Tony’ GROOMLS(D) Ian MILNE LS(D) ‘Nobby' NOBLELS(D) Garry J ‘Jan’ SEWELLLS(D) David W ‘Saggy’ SOUTHWELLLS(D) David ‘Wilkie’ WILKINSONAB(D) Nigel M PULLANAB(D) Billy SMARTAB(D) J W 'George' SHARPS(D) W G 'Stan' BOWLESS(D) D BARRETTFCDT 2FCPO(D) John DADD BEM (OIC)CPO(D) Carl MASSEYCPO(D) Barry 'Blondie' LIMBRICK BEMPOMA Keith PAGELS(D) Graham 'Tug' WILSON MBELS(D) Martin JENRICKLS(D) Ray SUCKLINGLS(D) 'Biff' DAVISLS(D) Chris DAVIDLS(D) Dickie DABERLS(D) 'Freebie' BEANAB(D) Paul 'Yorky' TUDORAB(D) 'Nick' NICHOLFCDT 3 (NP 1890)Lt Cdr Nigel ‘Bernie’ BRUEN MBE, DSC, RN (OIC)CPO(D) Graham Michael ‘Piggy’ TROTTER DSM (2 I/C)CMEA(L) David FOX (Technical Support)LS(D) Alan ‘Charlie’ CHAPMANLS(D) P M ‘Phil’ KEARNS LS(D)Charles Anthony ‘Charlie’ SMITHARDLS(D) Anthony Savour ‘Tommo’ THOMPSONAB(D ‘Taff’ HURLEYAB(D) ‘Buster’ MOTTRAMAB(D) ‘Jock’ REBECCAAB(D) ‘Taff’ REESAB(D) ‘Whisky’ WALKERAB(D) David ‘John Boy’ WALTONAB(D) G R ‘Jock’ WEIRAB(D) M A ‘Wheels’ WHEELERS(D) ‘Joe’ GOFTONS(D) ‘Rex’ TURNBULLSpecial Mine Evaluation Liaison Team(NP 1880 embarked in HMS Intrepid)Lt Cdr Iain Bruce MACKAY RN (OIC)CPO(MW) Brian ‘Bill’ HALEY11th MCM SquadronLt Cdr Martyn HOLLOWAY RN (CO HMS CORDELLA and Senior Officer 11th MCM Sqn)Lt (later Cdr RAN) Allan RANKIN RN (Squadron Operations Officer)Lt Cdr David Gordon GARWOOD RN (CO HMS PICT)Lt Cdr Jeremy P S GREENOP RN (CO HMS NORTHELLA)Lt Cdr Mark ROWLEDGE RN (CO HMS JUNELLA)Lt Robert ‘Bob’ J BISHOP RN (CO HMS FARNELLA)Falklands Liberation Memorial showing ships of 11thMCM Squadron (section enlarged for clarity)Postscript: In August 2007, MCDOA member Brian Dutton sent me photos showing that FCDT 1 and 3 had been added to the units listed on the Falklands Liberation Memorial at Port Stanley. In February 2012, Sukey Cameron MBE, the London representative of the Falkland Islands Government, provided a photo showing the addition of FCDT 2 in 2007/8. Unfortunately, the teams are shown as '1 FCDT', '2 FCDT' and '3 FCDT' instead of 'FCDT 1', 'FCDT 2' and 'FCDT 3' respectively but at least their contributions have now been acknowledged.Falklands Liberation Memorial showing the addition of the FCDTsThe Revised and Updated Edition of Volume II of Sir Lawrence Freedman's Official History of the Falklands Campaign was released in October 2007. In his introduction, Sir Lawrence states with regard to his previous work:"...I am sure it was galling for those who had been neglected in earlier studies and reports to find that this omission was continued. An example of this is the Fleet Clearance Diving Teams whose role I am now pleased to acknowledge."At long last, it looks as though the record is being set straight.Post Postscript: This Ministerial Statement to the House of Lords was published in Hansard on 29 June 2014. Its Annex contained this passage:"South Atlantic The qualifying period for the award of the South Atlantic Medal without the Rosette will be extended from 12 July to 21 October 1982. The original decision to end the qualifying period on 12 July 1982 was taken too hastily: those who served beyond that date experienced both risk and rigour until the airfield at Mount Pleasant was completed on 21 October. The qualifying period for the award of the South Atlantic Medal without the Rosette will be extended from 12 July to 21 October 1982. The original decision to end the qualifying period on 12 July 1982 was taken too hastily: those who served beyond that date experienced both risk and rigour until the airfield at Mount Pleasant was completed on 21 October."The islands had been liberated on 14 June but this statement brought into entitlement members of the ships' companies of HMS Brecon (CO & CTU Cdr (later Cdre CBE) Peter Fish RN), HMS Ledbury (MCDOA member Lt Cdr (later Cdr OBE) Tony Rose RN) and the older RMS St Helena who didn't arrive off the Falklands until early July 1982. MCDOA member Dougie MacDonald was the TU's SOO.The following was then published on the Veterans UK website:Changes to Ministry Of Defence Medals and Clasps following Sir John Holmes’s Independent ReviewExisting Medals/Clasps that are to be awarded under revised qualifying criteriaSouth AtlanticThe qualifying period for the award of the South Atlantic Medal without the Rosette will be extended from 12 July to 21 October 1982, when the airfield at Mount Pleasant was completed. Applications for the South Atlantic Medal, under the new time extension, will be accepted from 1 October 2014 onwards. The awards will begin to be despatched towards the end of that month. Applications will be dealt with in date order.MOD Medal Application Form

Communism is definitely evil, according to many people who have researched into it.I believe most of you have seen such “statistics” as this:And this:And this:You know what? Let me tell you a bunch of reasons why Socialism cannot work in words.People are not born equal.However, hard you work, you will get the same income.People are selfish.Corruption is an inevitable part of it.Capitalism works better for industrializing societies.It has been tried many times, many times it failed.Karl Marx will really be fascinated, because he would find out people are actually becoming enlightened.Why would people be enlightened? Because people are coming to realize all the above are shit pretended to be gold.Firstly, let us examine philosophical matters before going into history, that we would understand how things work.People are not born equal.Yeah, we are not dogs to not know that. There are strong people, weak people, tall people, not-as-tall people, bright people, not-as-bright people. It is a matter for all men to realize that nobody is born equal.So, what is equal under Socialism and Communism? The law."Women in the USSR are accorded equal rights with men in all spheres of economic, state, cultural, social, and political life."(Article 122)What is the law? The law is the treatment of the state with men. So, the law is the treatment between people and people.What is the different between “people are not born equal” and “people are born equal before the law”?Of course, nobody is born equal. However, how you treat those unequal to you is the only thing matter, not their equality. So, to be equal before the law is to be equal before treatment.Why does this matter?Imagine when a very bright boy but disabled studying in your school gets bullied. You, a very heroic individual born with healthy body and healthy mind, of course will come to save the boy, would you not?So, does it matter at all how unequal mother nature created you to be compared to other people? No, of course.Under the treatment of Socialism and Communism, everybody is equal, but nobody is fundamentally equal before nature. Socialism and Communism do not treat people with equal income (a way of pretending that everyone is born equal), Socialism and Communism do not force people to take harsh standardized exercise too extreme for their health.Under Socialism and Communism, the weak gets treated equal to the strong, the strong gets treated equal to the weak. You are rich? You are just a citizen like the poor. You are poor? You have all the rights the law has to give you as well as the rich.You are disabled? You will get support. You are healthy? You will work to support the disabled. You are unhealthy? You will be healthy anyways, unless you get disabled, so we will support you.However, hard you work, you will get the same income.Under Socialism and Communism, the income of the people is not determined by a universal standard, but by their own workforce.“From each according to his ability to each according to his need.”-Karl Marx.What does this sentence mean? It means everyone will “make” their income based on how many products they can make, and others’ products will satisfy their needs.You know what? Throughout history, we Socialists have been explaining to the non-Socialists that we do not support equal income. It’s complete bullshit.Even the least skilled economist would know equal income leads to inflation. That corrupts a society, not improves it.People are selfish.Yeah, we are not dogs to not know that.You know what? Let us read some Darwinism.Darwinism is a theory of biological evolution developed by the English naturalist Charles Darwin (1809–1882) and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual's ability to compete, survive, and reproduce.-Wikipedia.You know what? Let us check what Wikipedia tells us about Human Nature.Human nature is a concept that denotes the fundamental dispositions and characteristics—including ways of thinking, feeling, and acting—that humans are said to have naturally.Charles Darwin's theory of evolution has particularly changed the shape of the discussion, supporting the proposition that mankind's ancestors were not like mankind today. Still, more recent scientific perspectives—such as behaviorism, determinism, and the chemical model within modern psychiatry and psychology—claim to be neutral regarding human nature. As in much of modern science, such disciplines seek to explain with little or no recourse to metaphysical causation. They can be offered to explain the origins of human nature and its underlying mechanisms, or to demonstrate capacities for change and diversity which would arguably violate the concept of a fixed human nature.-Wikipedia.So, Darwinism is the theory of the human development of characteristics that help us compete, survive and reproduce, and Human Nature is what to come after it.You know what? According to Darwinism, human nature can absolutely be changed, despite taking time.Why does this matter, anyways?There is a common argument against Socialism and Communism that runs like this:Because:What does this sentence mean? It means everyone will “make” their income based on how many products they can make, and others’ products will satisfy their needs.So, people under Socialism and Communism will get lazy and will not work.Yeah, that is why under Socialism and Communism everyone not disabled is required to work.So, how can we change human nature, from being selfish to be collective? Indoctrination. Do not think of it like something bad, it is like physics, you use physics for bad purposes not physics is bad.Corruption is an inevitable part of it.Just a few days ago, some guys talked to me about it. I don’t blame him, he is trying to improve the world, he is just not knowing how.Technically this guy has no idea how economics works, since he claims corruption is a practice and not to minimize in an economy.You know what? Corruption does exist in a Socialist society and not a Communist society. There are selfless people, there are greedy people. These are the characteristics of those people, not Socialism and Communism.The only reason corruption exists in a Socialist society and not a Communist one is because in a Socialist society corruption is still in the process of being removed, and in a Communist society, corruption has been fully removed.I live in Vietnam. You know what? This year, we got some stuff like this:Khởi tố 57 vụ liên quan đến tham nhũng.“Prosecuted 57 cases linked with corruption.”And you know what? Corruption is on its way to decrease.Surveys reveal that petty corruption has decreased significantly throughout the country, while high-level corruption has increased.-Wikipedia.So, petty corruption has decreased significantly, great. By why does high-level corruption increase?According to the Vietnamese government officers themselves, corruption in Vietnam is both individual and systemic.“Theo tôi cơ chế này ở Việt Nam đẻ ra tệ nạn tham nhũng và bọn tham nhũng lại ra sức bảo vệ cơ chế này. Do vậy nếu giao phó cho Đảng Cộng sản Việt Nam độc quyền chống tham nhũng thì tham nhũng càng phát triển.”“I believe the current system in Vietnam creates corruption and the corrupt helps defend this corrupted system. So, if we make the Communist Party of Vietnam the monopoly in defending against corruption, corruption will worsen.”-Nguyễn Đăng Quang, retired police colonel, speaking to the government.So, Mister Nguyễn Đăng Quang suggests that Vietnam should be decentralized, because the high-level centralization in Vietnam in defending against corruption is advocating corruption.Now, it is a basis that corruption is not a part of Socialism and corruption is stood against by Socialism. However, centralization in the Vietnamese government causes corruption. That means the people cause it, not the ideology causes it. In fact, decentralization is the goal of Socialism. So, Vietnam is doing pretty neaty I would say.Is corruption a practice in a Socialist society? Never.Capitalism works better for industrializing societies.We could make a religion out of “yeah, we are not dogs to not know that.” No, don’t.You know what? There is a style of Socialism that lets private ownership to exist to an extent, which is referred as “delaying one step for two steps ahead.” It is called New Economic Policy.NEP has been adopted by Vladimir Lenin after the Russian Civil War ended. The practice helps ease the conflict between the Capitalists and the Socialists down, but ensures Communism would be achieved in the end.Under NEP, Capitalist exists to an extent. Which means, this Socialist society will be able to both develop society and satisfy people’s needs.NEP when coped with Marxism Leninism as an economic policy coped with a political policy is just perfect. And that is what Socialist countries nowadays are doing.Why does this matter, anyways?If Capitalism works better in developing societies, why do we have to change to Socialism?You know what? Let Wikipedia define “need.”A need is something that is necessary for an organism to live a healthy life. Needs are distinguished from wants. In the case of a need, a deficiency causes a clear adverse outcome: a dysfunction or death.-Wikipedia.You know what? Let us continue examining what “healthy” means.Health is a state of physical, mental and social well-being in which disease and infirmity are absent.-Wikipedia.Capitalism is very effective in industrializing and developing rationally, but is it effective in making people mentally healthy?You know not the gender, ethnicity or race of the individual behind that cart, but he sure buys a lot of toilet paper, clearly more than he actually needs it.Capitalism benefits the rich, that is why it enrich people? Yes. Capitalism makes everyone rich, but it does not make everyone wealthy.You know what? Let us examine what “wealthy” means.Being wealthy ultimately has more to do with financial freedom. It means you’re not living paycheck to paycheck. It means you’ve either saved enough that you don’t need to work every day to sustain your lifestyle or you’ve built up enough residual, passive income sources that you’re getting paid in your sleep.The Difference Between Being Rich vs. Wealthy | Passive Income M.D.Technically, when you are wealthy, you do not need to worry about money stuff anymore.What about richness? Is it the same with wealthiness? Clearly not. That is why I am writing this. So, what is richness, anyways?As doctors, we most likely fall into the first category. We may be rich in the sense that our salaries are in the higher economic range, however, because of our expenses (houses, cars, student loan debt, private school tuition, practice overhead, etc.) and sometimes poor decisions, we have a tough time accumulating any real wealth. We’re also handicapped by the fact that we start along this financial journey relatively later in life.The Difference Between Being Rich vs. Wealthy | Passive Income M.D.You are rich simply when your income is high. Because Capitalism is great for industrialization and development, so its only good is increasing the income. However, Capitalism benefits the rich more than the middle class.There is one thing in Capitalism. A monopoly. Monopolies are everywhere in free market systems. They prevent smaller businesses from thriving. Apple is currently a monopoly, Samsung is also a monopoly, Microsoft is a monopoly, along with other companies with similar popularities.You almost never hear of any other companies except these when you read books, articles, and news about economy. Their popularities are too high, which means, their influences are too high. They maybe cannot force you to not compete with them but if they are able to buy your company, then what is the difference?There is also another thing in Capitalism. Tax. Tax helps drive an economy. Tax helps stabilize the economy and the country’s politics. It can also break everything up.Everything is taxed under Capitalism. Your house, your car, your land, your head, your health, your food, your water. These are the most common things to be taxed throughout the history of Capitalism.So, the people living under Capitalism, inherently cannot make their businesses advance because the monopolies have prevented that, also having to pay massive tax and expense, are rich because the economy goes up, but never wealthy because the economy exploits them.So, how are you making people both rich and wealthy? You combine Socialism with Capitalism. And that is NEP. That is what Socialist countries nowadays are doing. So, they are doing pretty neaty I would say.It has been tried many times, many times it failed.My Chemistry teacher at secondary school once told us a story about how he got interested in Chemistry.He was quite a regular student, like us, disliked going to school. But one day, his class was brought to the laboratory. So, he was free to experiment whatever he wanted.So, the guy mixed Hydrogen with some other matters, and lit them on fire. BOOM.You know what? If he did not mix Hydrogen with those matters, things would not have gone BOOM. That is technically what he wanted, right? Everything not going to BOOM.So, “everything not going to BOOM” is right, and “everything going to BOOM” is wrong, according to my Chemistry teacher.This is the same with Socialism. If you do it right, it will not go BOOM. If you do it wrong, it will absolutely go BOOM. And the process of Socialism is one pretty hard, harder than anything humanity has ever experienced. But if it is done right, it will succeed, despite slowly.Let us return to the pictures above, shall we? Since we have all understood how Socialism and Communism work. If you still have no idea how it works and why it works, try removing your bias.The estimation of the number of people killed under Socialist regimes.Notice the word “estimation.” Is estimation 100% correct? No. Is estimation 90% correct? No either. Estimation is just something you randomly come up with your mind. Estimations are never static. Estimations is always either accumulating or decaying in the arena of thoughts. It is like power. Power is never fixed.Does that make these estimations wrong or right? No. But these estimations are inherently untrustworthy. Why?During the Vietnam War, there was an infamous massacre caused by North Vietnam in Hue. It is known today as Hue Massacre.You know what? Let us examine the Vietnamese Wikipedia page for it.Tử Vong: Không rõ (Mỹ tuyên bố con số 2,800 - 6000, nhưng ước tính khác cho rằng con số thấp hơn)Thủ phạm: Không rõ (các bên tham chiến quy trách nhiệm cho nhau.Death: Unclear (the USA claims the number 2.800 - 6.000, however, other estimations give much lower numbers)Perpetrator: Unclear (both sides claim each other was the perpetrator).Why does this matter, anyways?Because fact is a tale agreed upon, not data. Anything America and its allies proposed during history was a lie.Lucia Millar is a Taiwanese, she is not a Socialist, but she has given a very bright answer for this matter.According to her answer in What was the massacre at Huế from Vietnam’s history?:Secondly, What I have read about this myth, I found some reports that told me the different stories with What the American government or the American media often reported.The number of Vietnamese killed is about 2000–6000 but the body found was far less to this number.VC/NVA or supporters of North Vietnam seemed to not be killed or died during the American campaign seizing again Hue City. All of them may be run away before the Americans came?Many of the independent Journalists were not allowed to investigate deeply this myth.America and its allies - South Vietnam seemed to not kill any of the Civilians in Hue City during their bombing campaign. I do not believe that the American bombs could know who was the Vietnamese civilians or VC?Ironically, Only a few months from this myth that the American government tried to slander VC/NVA, America also massacred all completely the Vietnamese in the My Lai village including most children, females, elders.South Vietnam regime was enthusiastic about investigating this myth but ignoring various massacres made by the South Korean soldiers, American soldiers. At least, as far as I know that the South Korean troops committed 43 massacres during the Vietnam War (Of course, We should investigate more on this issue). It was the way that the government of a country should do. I do not know What the role of the South Vietnam regime was to the Vietnamese at that time?Finally, From my perspective, the number of the myth of the Hue massacre about 2000–6000 killed is exaggerated (I guess that They counted All VC/NVA who died in this battle in Hue to their statistic). I think that it was around 300 the Vietnamese killed with almost of South Vietnam officials that was suitable with the number the bodies found.So, Lusia Millar believes that the number is inflated on purpose. Not just Lusia Millar believes so, but many others. Alexander Finnegan and David J King have provided lots of lower estimations of Communist killings.These are all Quora users, they are not authorized. So, for further trustworthy sources, let us examine authorized articles.CriticismWhereas chapters of the book, where it describes the events in separate Communist states, were highly praised, some generalizations made by Courtois in the introduction to the book became a subject of criticism both on scholarly and political grounds. Moreover, two of the book's main contributors—Nicolas Werth and Jean-Louis Margolin—as well as Karel Bartosek publicly disassociated themselves from Courtois' statements in the introduction and criticized his editorial conduct. Werth and Margolin felt Courtois was "obsessed" with arriving at a total of 100 million killed which resulted in "sloppy and biased scholarship" and faulted him for exaggerating death tolls in specific countries. They also argued that based on the results of their studies, one can tentatively estimate the total number of the victims at between 65 and 93 million. In particular, Margolin, who authored the Black Book's chapter on Vietnam, clarified "that he has never mentioned a million deaths in Vietnam". Historians Jean-Jacques Becker and J. Arch Getty have criticized Courtois for failing to draw a distinction between victims of neglect and famine and victims of "intentional murder". Economic historian Michael Ellman has argued that the book's estimate of "at least 500,000" deaths during the Soviet famine of 1946–1947 "is formulated in an extremely conservative way, since the actual number of victims was much larger", with 1,000,000–1,500,000 excess deaths. Regarding these questions, historian Alexander Dallin has argued that moral, legal, or political judgments hardly depend on the number of victims.Many observers have rejected Courtois's numerical and moral comparison of Communism to Nazism in the introduction. According to Werth, there was still a qualitative difference between Nazism and Communism, saying: "Death camps did not exist in the Soviet Union". He further told Le Monde: "The more you compare Communism and Nazism, the more the differences are obvious". In a critical review, historian Amir Weiner wrote: "When Stalin's successors opened the gates of the Gulag, they allowed 3 million inmates to return home. When the Allies liberated the Nazi death camps, they found thousands of human skeletons barely alive awaiting what they knew to be inevitable execution". Historian Ronald Grigor Suny remarked that Courtois' comparison of 100 million victims of Communism to 25 million victims of Nazism "[leaves out] out most of the 40-60,000,000 lives lost in the Second World War, for which arguably Hitler and not Stalin was principally responsible". A report by the Wiesel Commission criticized the comparison of Gulag victims with Jewish Holocaust victims as an attempt to trivialize the Holocaust.Historian Peter Kenez criticized the chapter written by Nicolas Werth: "Werth can also be an extremely careless historian. He gives the number of Bolsheviks in October 1917 as 2,000, which is a ridiculous underestimate. He quotes from a letter of Lenin to Alexander Shliapnikov and gives the date as 17 October 1917; the letter could hardly have originated at that time, since in it Lenin talks about the need to defeat the Tsarist government, and turn the war into a civil conflict. He gives credit to the Austro-Hungarian rather than the German army for the conquest of Poland in 1915. He describes the Provisional Government as 'elected'. He incorrectly writes that the peasant rebels during the civil war did more harm to the Reds than to the Whites, and so on". Historian Mark Tauger challenged the authors' thesis that the famine of 1933 was largely artificial and genocidal. According to journalist Gilles Perrault, the books ignores the effect of international factors, including military interventions, on the Communist experience.Historian Noam Chomsky has criticized the book and its reception as one-sided by outlining economist Amartya Sen's research on hunger. While India's democratic institutions prevented famines, its excess of mortality over China—potentially attributable to the latter's more equal distribution of medical and other resources—was nonetheless close to 4 million per year for non-famine years. Chomsky argued that "supposing we now apply the methodology of the Black Book" to India, "the democratic capitalist 'experiment' has caused more deaths than in the entire history of [...] Communism everywhere since 1917: over 100 million deaths by 1979, and tens of millions more since, in India alone".Le Siècle des Communismes, a collective work of twenty academics, was a response to both François Furet's Le passé d'une Illusion and Courtois's The Black Book of Communism. It broke Communism down into series of discrete movements, with mixed positive and negative results.The Black Book of Communism prompted the publication of several other "black books" which argued that similar chronicles of violence and death tolls can be constructed from an examination of colonialism and capitalism.-Wikipedia, The Black Book of Communism.If you have had time to read unto this part, try examining this:Compare the estimations in the image to the quote above, examine all the connections between them. You find even the author is contradicted to their own estimations.In particular, Margolin, who authored the Black Book's chapter on Vietnam, clarified "that he has never mentioned a million deaths in Vietnam".You know what? I do not trust the “millions” anymore, since longs ago. You will find the answer for yourself when you examine contradicting sources to your current beliefs.Russian Famine 1921–22.The question is not whether it happened or not. The question is who caused it? The Soviets? Their policy? Or some other factors? And is that even related to Socialism at all?Before the famine, all sides in the Russian Civil Wars of 1918–21—the Bolsheviks, the Whites, the Anarchists, the seceding nationalities—had provisioned themselves by seizing food from those who grew it, giving it to their armies and supporters, and denying it to their enemies. The Bolshevik government had requisitioned supplies from the peasantry for little or nothing in exchange. This led peasants to drastically reduce their crop production. The rich peasants (kulaks) withheld their surplus grain to sell on the black market. In 1920, Lenin ordered increased emphasis on food requisitioning from the peasantry.-Wikipedia.Technically, almost everyone in Russia participated in looting. So, why did the Russian famine happen? Because of war, not Socialism. Because of all the sides participated in war, specifically the Russian Civil War.Since the Bolsheviks was a Socialist party, was it a contribution of Socialism in the Russian famine? No. Theoretically, Socialism cannot take away from you anything, because that is not a part of its doctrines. So, theoretically, the problem is not Socialism.About practice, if the Russian Civil War did not happen, the Russian famine could not have happened due to no sides would need to steal foods to maintain their power. Whose fault was that? The enemies.You know what? Let us examine a much worse famine:The Holomodor.The main and only question about the Holomodor is, “was it the Socialists’ faults, in particular, Stalin’s fault?”You know what other factors caused the Holomodor? Droughts, high birthrate, urbanization of the population due to the Russian Civil War, and sabotages.Whose sabotages?Do you know what this is?Grains, beautiful grains, the grains that should have prevented the Holomodor.What happened to those grains? Those grains were hidden. By whom? The Kulaks. Who were the Kulaks? A bunch of petty Capitalists.So, was it the Socialists’ fault? No. It was the Capitalists, the regular Russians citizens, and Mother Nature.I visited several places in those regions during that period. There was a serious grain shortage in the 1932 harvest due chiefly to inefficiencies of the organizational period of the new large-scale mechanized farming among peasants unaccustomed to machines. To this was added sabotage by dispossessed kulaks, the leaving of the farms by 11 million workers who went to new industries, the cumulative effect of the world crisis in depressing the value of Soviet farm exports, and a drought in five basic grain regions in 1931.The harvest of 1932 was better than that of 1931 but was not all gathered; on account of overoptimistic promises from rural districts, Moscow discovered the actual situation only in December when a considerable amount of grain was under snow.-Anna Louise Strong, American journalist.Do you know what this is?If you understand Russian, you can read it well and thoroughly. What does it say? It says, Stalin ordered his men to send foods to the famine areas to help the devastated people.So, was the Holomodor a Socialist famine? Never.You know what? Let us examine another bad famine, not worse:The Vietnamese Famine of 1944–45.The famous revolution in Vietnam took place in August 1945. Which means, the famine happened before it. Whose fault?According to a 2018 study, the primary cause of the famine were typhoons that reduced the availability of food, Japan's occupation, American attacks on the Vietnamese transport system, and French colonial administration hindered an effective famine alleviation response.-Wikipedia.Why does this matter, at all? Because I want to emphasize that all the famines happened in Socialist countries were parts of the Capitalists’ plan.The Boat People.You know what? The Boat People exodus happened because the people’s loyalty to the Americans’ puppet government South Vietnam, and by the Khmer Rogue.We all know the Khmer Rogue was a Socialist party, but they were psychopaths pretending to be Socialists, so I am not going far into this subject.There was another devastating event that is always referred to as the Socialists’ fault, let us examine it.The Berlin Wall.Now, why was the Berlin Wall built? To stop the people from East Berlin fleeing to West Berlin.Why did people in East Berlin flee to West Berlin?People in East Berlin generally sought better economic conditions for themselves. That means the economic condition in East Berlin was worse than West Berlin, right?The East German economy was one of the largest and one of the most stable economies in the "Second World," until the revolutions of 1989. Relative to its Western counterpart before Soviet occupation, East Germany was in a slightly better economic position.-Wikipedia.You know what runs in my mind? Yes, you can guess it. You have read a bunch of my words, you have analyzed a bunch of my thoughts, you definitely are able to figure out what I am thinking right now.After the fall of the Berlin Wall, the people in East Berlin “invaded” the streets of West Berlin to buy the luxury. West Berlin government allowed the East Berliners to transfer their currency by 1–1, which means, even a very inflated currency could buy the White House, if it was in West Berlin.That sounds really bright for us Vietnamese, we went through a short hyperinflation in the 1990s, which was “briefly” caused by American Vietnamese sending money back to their families in Vietnam.Is that my thought? Yes. But is that the thought I talked about? No.According to proper studies, living condition in East Berlin and East Germany was slightly better than West Berlin and West Germany. Why? Because their government focused on improving the people’s livings, instead of producing luxuries that only the rich could buy.There was little entrepreneurship in East Berlin and East Germany. Sure, no problems, the economy could still go up, people’s needs could still be satisfied, nothing was wrong. The luxuries in West Berlin just looked cool.So, why did people flee East Berlin? Because of lack of indoctrination. Was it the lack of indoctrination caused by the Socialists? No. The Socialists in East Berlin actually did very well in this type of education.Then why did people flee East Berlin? Caught up with my thoughts yet? It was the Capitalist propaganda.Technically, you may notice that I claims at the beginning of the answer that Communism is terribly evil. Do you think that I pranked you or tricked you? Some of you are thinking so, I know. But I don’t.I am not tricking you, Communism is evil.Is there even good or bad at all? Was Adolf Hitler good or bad? Was Adolf Hitler evil? Evil is a satanic thing. Was Adolf Hitler Satan? Adolf Hitler and the Second World War he provoked killed tens of millions, was he bad? If Hitler did not arise, could have Supercapitalism been destroyed and democratic movements taken place in Europe?Was Churchil a good man? He defeated Hitler, he ended the killing of tens of millions. But himself also caused the killing of millions in India. Was he bad?Communism is evil according to the people who consider it evil. In other word, Communism is evil according to the misinformation that makes it so.So, to the misinformation, Communism is evil, to the right information, Communism is not.It is like yourself, it is just an idea, it is produced by a human. Are you brave enough to say that you have never sinned? Are you good? Are you bad?You cannot determine it, right? You have done both bad things and good things throughout your life. So, according to the people who focus on your faults, you are evil. However, according to the people who can see the big picture, you are just a regular human.Adolf Hitler was a kind man, if you have researched deep enough into his personal life, you will know it. But he sure killed many people. Does that make him good or bad? Even Hitler, the man who killed millions, was just a human, as well as you, and I, and anybody in this world.Do you dare to make an assumption?“In a board game, you cannot be either the king or queen, but the player, the player is most powerful.”-Belaventoni Rhohidrit.

In Simple Words REX is Compliance system initiated by European union for Certification of Origin.If one wants to export goods value exceeds 6000 EUR to Europe then has to attach this certificate with consignment.In Official Frame of words:Subject: – Certification of Origin of Goods for European Union Generalised System of Preferences (EU-GSP) – Modification of the system as of 1 January 2017.In exercise of powers conferred under paragraph 2.04 of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2015-2020, the Director General of Foreign Trade hereby inserts a new sub para (c) under Para 2.104 Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) as under:(c) The European Union (EU) has introduced a self-certification scheme for certifying the rules of origin under GSP from 1.1.2017 onwards. Under the Registered Exporter System (REX) being introduced from 1.1.2017, exporters with a REX number will be able to self-certify the Statement on Origin of their goods being exported to EU under the GSP Scheme. The registration on REX is without any fee or charges and this system would eventually phase out the current system of issuance of Certificates of Origin (Form-A) by the Competent Authorities listed in Appendix-2C of FTP (2015-20) by 1.1.2018 (one year transition period). The details of the scheme are at Annex 1 to Appendix 2C of the Foreign Trade Policy (2015- 20).3. Effect of this Public Notice: Registered Exporters System (REX) as of 1 January 2017 for the EU Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) is notified.(A.K.Bhalla)Director General of Foreign TradeEmail: [email protected][Issued from F. No.01/93/180/56/AM-13/PC-2B]ANNEXURE 1 to APPENDIX 2CCertification of Origin of Goods for the EU Generalised System of Preferences (GSP)-Modification of the system as of 1st January 2017.Introduction:1.1 The EU has been continuously undertaking reforms of its GSP rules of origin. One such reform finalised in 2011 relates to the self-certification of the rules of origin criteria by exporters themselves. The purpose of this reform is to facilitate trade and reduce administrative burden and costs for exporters.1.2 Under the new scheme of self-certification, being introduced from 1.1.2017, the current system of issuance of certificates of origin (Form-A) by competent authorities as listed in Appendix 2C of Foreign Trade Policy (2015-20) will be replaced with “statements on origin” to be issued by exporters themselves. This “statement on origin” is to be made out on, on any commercial document (such as commercial invoice etc.) of the exported consignment. However, during the transition period of twelve months from 1.1.2017 until 31.12.2017, the competent authorities [as listed in Appendix 2C of the FTP (2015-20)] would continue to issue certificates of origin (Form A) at the request of exporters who are not registered in the REX system. At the end of this period, i.e. from 1.1.2018 onwards, the consignments above the value of € 6000 will be entitled to GSP preferential tariff treatment, only if accompanied by a statement on origin made out by a registered exporter. Exporters consigning low value goods (i.e. less than €6000 per consignment) are however entitled to make out statements on origin without being registered in REX, instead of submitting “Form- A” from 1.1.2017 itself.1.3 As exporters are in the best position to assess the origin of their products, the European Union considers it appropriate that the exporters directly provide their customers in the EU with ‘statements on origin’ that no longer need to be endorsed by their national authorities. For this purpose, exporters will need to be registered by the competent authorities in an electronic system, named the REX system, or the. ‘Registered Exporter System’.1.4 The competent authorities would have access to the REX system for registration of exporters as well as access to relevant information. The registration of exporters in the system will not require any fees. An exporter will be registered in the system only once and the REX system will be common to the GSP schemes of the European Union, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey (based on Turkey fulfilling certain conditions).1.5 The REX is a composite system relating to both registration of exporters and all other aspects related to the self-certification of the rules of origin under the EU GSP. The rules of the REX system are laid down in European Commission’s Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2015/2447 [the Union Customs Code (UCC) “Implementing Act”(IA)]. The details on the REX system are available at the following URL:https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/calculation-customs-duties/rules-origin/general-aspectspreferential-origin/arrangements-list/generalised-systempreferences/the_register_exporter_system_en1.6 Questions and Answers on the reform of GSP rules of origin can also be assed atReform of GSP rules of origin1.7 While the REX system will come into operation on 1.1.2017 and exporters will be able to submit their applications for registration under REX w.e.f 1.1.2017, the registration on the REX System will only be done when EU operationalizes the system and gives access to the system to competent authorities in India. Exporters may submit their applications to the competent authorities as listed in Annexure 1(b) who will receive such applications, verify the details therein and if accepted, these applications will be registered on the REX once their access to REX is permitted. Upon registration with REX, they will intimate the REX registration number and it’s validity date to the exporters through email and a communication at the address indicated in the application form.2. Tasks and responsibilities of the competent authorities under the REX system:2.1 Under the EU GSP self-certification system, all the beneficiary countries would have two types of competent authorities namely.i. Competent authority for administrative cooperation (ADC) which interfaces with the EU on issues related to the EU GSP and takes overall policy decisions on the EU GSPii. Competent authority for registration (REG) which is responsible for registration of exporters through local users as also assistance related to verification.2.2 Each of these competent authorities must have at least one local administrator namelyi. Local administrator(s) for administrative cooperation (ADC)ii. Local administrator(s) for registration (REG)The role of the local administrators is to create local users in their competent authority. Hence, the Local Users for registration (REG) would be created by the Local Administrators for registration (REG). The exporters would need to approach these local users for registration (REG) to undertake a one time registration for exports under the EU GSP self- certification.2.3 The Department of Commerce is the Local Administrator of India for Administrative Cooperation (ADC) under the EU GSP self-certification scheme. Besides, the Department of Commerce, India would have sixteen Local Administrators for Registration (REG). The Local Administrators for Registration along with the name of their nodal officers, designation, email id and telephone numbers is listed at Annexure.-“1A”. All these Local Administrators would access the REX system through their ECAS IDs. The Local Administrators for Registration on the request of the Local Administrator for Administrative Cooperation (i.e the Department of Commerce) will also provide all support requested by the Commission for the monitoring of the proper management of the scheme in the country, including verification visits on the spot by the Commission or the customs authorities of EU Member States.2.4 The Local Administrators for Registration would nominate and create the Local Users for Registration (REG) in the REX system through their ECAS IDs. This would have to be done by logging into the T-REX (sub-component of the REX system).and registering the local users. Local Administrators for REG would also train the Local Users in registering exporters under the REX system. Local Administrators for REG will maintain updated record of its Local Users for Registration (name, address, email id and phone no.) and intimate any change in details of Local Users for Registration to EU / Switzerland / Norway administrators and to Department of Commerce at the following email [email protected]@[email protected] Local users for Registration (REG) nominated by the Local Administrators for Registration are at Annexure.-“1B”.Updates on the REX system can be viewed at Directorate General of Foreign Trade.2.5 The Local Users for Registration shall undertake the following tasks:i. Disseminate information on the REX system to exporters and other stakeholders;ii. Receive signed applications for registration in REX from exporters in the requisite format (Annexure-“1C”). The REX system provides for a Pre-Application component (AREX Form) which allows exporters to fill their details in a REX Pre-Application form and print it. The same can be signed and submitted manually to the Local User. When being processed, the Local User will retrieve the related information using the exporter’s IEC number/Importer Exporter profile.iii. Register Exporters on REX, using either details from Pre-Application (AREX Form) or using details from the paper based application signed and submitted by the exporter;iv. Check whether the applications submitted contains all the information required;v. Check that the applicants are established and functional manufacturers or traders, and their Importer Exporter Code (IEC) is not under DEL(Denied Entity List);vi. Enter information about the exporters into the REX system and assign registered exporter (REX) number, in the 20 digit format namely INREX [10 digit IEC number]- [2 digit alphabetical code for Local Administrator]-[3 digit numeric code for Local User for Registration beginning from 001 until 999]. The two digit alphabetical code for Local Administrator for Registration is given in Appendix IA while the term “INREX” stands for India REX,);vii. Inform exporters of their REX number; date of registration in REX any other relevant details through both email and a hard copy. The date from which the registration is valid should be the date on which the complete application was received by the Local User;viii. Store the application form in safe custody;ix. Keep the electronic record of registered exporters up-to-date;x. Recommend to the Local Administrator for Registration, the revocation of the exporter’s registration if the exporter:a. no longer exists, no longer intends to export goods under the GSP or no longer meets the conditions for exporting goods under the GSP;b. intentionally or negligently draws up, or causes to be drawn up, a statement on origin which contains incorrect information and leads his customer to wrongfully obtaining preferential tariff treatment in the EU;c. fails to keep information relating to his registration up-do-date, where this shortcoming is considered to be serious;xi. inform registered exporters whose registration has been revoked on the action taken for revocation of the date from which the revocation will take effectxii. carry out regular checks, verification and audits on registered exporters, based on the requests of EU Member States Or after obtaining the consent of both the Local Administrator for Registration (REG) and the Local Administrator for Administrative Cooperation (ADC). The fees charged for checks, verification and audits will commensurate with the cost of services rendered. The Local User for Registration (REG) will provide details of the fees to be charged by it (including a rough estimate of the total cost to the exporter) to both the Local Administrator for Registration (REG) and the Local Administrator for Administrative Cooperation (ADC).xiii. Re-registration of the exporter based on the due process of checks and based on recommendation of the Local Administrator for Registration (REG).xiv. Send on a monthly basis, the summary of the “statements on origin” to the Local Administrator for Registration and the Local Administrator for Administrative Cooperation (ADC).2.6 In accordance with Article 93 of the reformed EU GSP rules of origin under Regulation 2015/2447 the competent authorities must revoke a registration if the registered exporter no longer exists, no longer intends to export goods under the GSP or no longer meets the conditions for exporting goods under the GSP.2.7 Without prejudice to the system of penalties and sanctions applicable in the beneficiary country, if a registered exporter intentionally or negligently draws up, or causes to be drawn up, a “statement on origin” which contains incorrect information and leads his customer to wrongfully obtaining preferential tariff treatment in the EU, the Local User must recommend revocation of the exporter’s registration to the Local Administrator for Registration. The Local User for Registration may also recommend revocation to the Local Administrator for Registration if the registered exporter fails to keep information relating to his registration up-to-date and this shortcoming is considered to be serious.2.8 Without prejudice to the possible impact of irregularities found on pending verifications, revocation of the registration can only take effect for statements made out after the date of revocation. Exporters whose registration has been revoked may only be registered again if they prove that they have remedied the situation.2.9 An appeal against the revocation and annulment of the Registration of an exporter shall lie with the Local Administrator for Administrative Cooperation (ADC).3. Tasks and Responsibilities of the Registered Exporters under the REX System3.1 To be registered, an exporter must file an application with one of the Local Users for Registration (REG). The selection of the Local User for Registration (REG) is to be made taking into account the products being exported, nature of the unit (SEZ or DTA) etc. . The application must be made using the form set out in Annexure -“1C” and must contain all the information. Exporters will also have the possibility to pre-encode their application in the Pre-Application component (AREX Form) of the REX system and print it. Paper copy of the application with hand-written signature has to be submitted to the Local User. The application will only be accepted by the competent authorities if it is complete. Registration is valid from the moment a complete application is submitted by the exporter. There is no impact on the exporter if there is a technical problem for the registration or if the competent authorities have organizational difficulties to register the exporter immediately.3.2 An exporter will be registered in the system only once, as the REX system is common to the GSP schemes in the EU, Norway and Switzerland. It will also apply to Turkey’s GSP scheme, once that country meets certain conditions. However, these GSP schemes may differ in terms of country and product coverage. As a result, a particular registration will only be effective for exports under a GSP scheme that considers India as a beneficiary country.3.3 By completing the form, exporters consent to this information being stored in the Commission’s database and being published on a publicly accessible website. In column 6 of the application form the Exporter must indicate as to whether the information furnished by him can be published on the public website. If the exporter gives his consent, the IEC number, name, address, contact details and the registered exporter and the indicative description of his goods which qualify for preferential treatment are made public on the Internet. If the exporter doesn’t give his consent, only the REX number, its validity date, address where the registered exporter is established and date of the revocation of the registration where applicable, is shared on the internet; besides also indicating as to whether the registration applies also to exports to Norway or Switzerland.3.4 Exporters, whether registered or not, (i.e even those whose consignment values are less than €6000 ) must comply with the following obligations:i. they must maintain appropriate commercial accounting records for the production and supply of goods qualifying for preferential treatment;ii. they must keep available all evidence relating to the material used in manufacturing these goods;iii. they must keep all customs documentation relating to the material used in manufacturing these goods;iv. for at least three years from end of the calendar year in which the statement on origin was made out, or more if required by national law, they must keep records of:v. the statements on origin they made out, andvi. details of their originating and non-originating materials, its production and stock accounts.3.5 These records and statements on origin may be kept in an electronic format but must allow the materials used in manufacturing the exported products to be traced and their originating status to be confirmed. These obligations also apply to suppliers who provide exporters with supplier’s declarations certifying the originating status of the goods they supply.3.6 Registered exporters must immediately inform the competent authorities (i.e. Local User for Registration where exporter applied for REX No.) of changes to the information they provided during registration. Registered exporters who no longer meet conditions for exporting goods under the scheme or no longer intend to export goods under the scheme must inform the competent authorities of this.3.7 The Registered exporters would provide a summary of the “statement on origin” to the Local Users for Registration. This summary would contain the following details:i. HS Code,ii. Description,iii. Document No/ date on which Statement on Origin is made out,iv. FOB value of exports (in $),v. destination port,vi. destination of exportvii. Origin Criteria, W/P HS four digit4. Documents to be used by the exporters registered in REX4.1 The “statement on origin” is made out by the registered exporter in the country of export to the EU as soon as the exportation has taken place or is ensured, if the goods can be considered as originating in the beneficiary country concerned. However, the registered exporter must indicate another beneficiary country on the “statement on origin” if:Regional or inter-regional cumulation takes place between the beneficiary countries in question, andIn the country of export to the EU, the goods were subject to working or processing operations insufficient to confer origin as listed in Article 78(1) (b) to (q) of the reformed EU GSP rules of origin.4.2 The exporters must provide the statement on origin to their customer(s) in the EU. It must contain the details specified in Annexure “1D” of this document. A “statement on origin” may be made out in English or any other language approved in the EU regulations on any commercial document allowing the exporter, consignee and the goods involved to be identified.4.3 When bilateral or regional cumulation applies, the exporter of a product manufactured using materials originating in a party with which cumulation is permitted, can rely on the “statement on origin” provided by its supplier. In these cases, the “statement on origin” made out by the exporter must contain the indication: ‘EU cumulation’ or ‘regional cumulation’;4.4 When cumulation under Article 85 of the reformed EU GSP rules of origin applies, the exporter of a product manufactured using materials originating in a party with which cumulation is permitted, can rely on the proof of origin provided by its supplier and issued in accordance with the provisions of GSP rules of origin in Norway or Switzerland (and, in future, Turkey). In these cases, the statement on origin made out by the exporter must contain one of the indications:‘Norway cumulation’, or ‘Switzerland cumulation’ or ‘Turkey cumulation’.4.5 When extended cumulation under Article 86(7) and (8) of the reformed EU GSP rules of origin applies, the exporter of a product manufactured using materials originating in a party with which extended cumulation is permitted, can rely on the proof of origin provided by its supplier and issued in accordance with the provisions of the relevant free-trade agreement between the EU and the relevant party. In these cases, the statement on origin made out by the exporter must contain the indication-‘extended cumulation with country ‘X’.4.6 A “statement on origin” must be made out for each consignment. In exceptional circumstances, a statement on origin may be made out after the goods have been exported (‘retrospective statement’) as it is presented in the Member State of declaration, for release for free circulation, no more than two years after the goods were imported. A statement on origin is valid for 12 months from the date on which it is made out.4.7 A single “statement on origin” may cover several consignments if the goods meet the following conditions:i. They are dismantled or non-assembled products within the meaning of general rule 2(a) of the Harmonised System.ii. are falling within Section XVI or XVII or heading 7308 or 9406 of the Harmonised System, andiii. are intended to be imported in installments.4.8 The reformed EU GSP Rules of Origin may be accessed at the following links:i. http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/itcdtsbmisc25rev3add1_en.pdfii. https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/calculation-customs-duties/rules-origin/generalaspects-preferential-origin/arrangements-list/generalised-system-preferences_eniii. Trade Helpdesk & language Id=ENAnnexes:iv Rules of Origin - Taxation and customs union - European CommissionAnnexure 1AAnnex.-“1C”:Application to become a registered exporter[For the purpose of schemes of generalized tariff preferences of the European Union, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey(1)]1.Exporter’s Name full address country and EORI* or TIN* (*for India it is IEC)2.Contact details including telephone and fax number where available as well as e-mail address:3.Specify whether the main activity is producing or trading4.Indicative description of goods which qualify for preferential treatment, including indicative list of Harmonised System headings (or chapters where goods traded fall within more than 20 Harmonised System headings5.Undertakings to be given by an exporterThe undersigned hereby– Declares that the above details are correct.– Certifies that no previous registration has been revoked, conversely, certifies that the situation which led to any such revocation has been remedied.– Undertakes to make out statements on origin only for goods which qualify for preferential treatment and comply with the origin rules specified for those goods in the Generalised System of Preferences.– Undertakes to maintain appropriate commercial accounting records for production/supply of goods qualifying for preferential treatment and to keep them for at least three years from the end of the calendar year in which the statement on origin was made out.– Undertakes to immediately notify the competent authority of changes as they arise to his registration data since acquiring the number of registered exporter– Undertakes to cooperate with the competent authority– Undertakes to accept any checks on the accuracy of his statements on origin, including verification of accounting records and visits to his premises by the European Commission orMember States authorities, as well as the authorities of Norway, Switzerland and Turkey (applicable only to exporters in beneficiary countries)– Undertakes to request his removal from the system, should he no longer meet the conditions for exporting any goods under the scheme– Undertakes to request his removal from the system, should he no longer intend to export such goods under the schemePlace date, signature of authorized signatory, name and job title6. Prior specific and informed consent of exporter to the publication of his data on the public websiteThe undersigned is hereby informed that the information supplied in this application may be disclosed to the public via the public website.The undersigned accepts the publication and disclosure of this information via the public website.The undersigned may withdraw his consent to the publication of this information via the public website by sending a request to the competent authorities responsible for the registration.7. Box for official use by competent authorityThe applicant is registered under the following number:Registration Number:Date of Registration:Date from which the registration is valid:Signature and stampInformation noticeConcerning the protection and processing of personal data incorporated in the system1. Where the European Commission processes personal data contained in this application to become a registered exporter, Regulation (EC) No. 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data will apply. Where the competent authorities of beneficiary country or a third country implementing Directive 95/46/EC process personal data contained in this application to become a registered exporter the relevant national provisions of the aforementioned Directive will apply.2. Personal data in respect of the application to become a registered exporter are processed for the purpose of EU GSP rules of origin as defined in the relevant EU legislation. The said legislation providing for EU GSP rules of origin constitutes the legal basis for processing personal data in respect of the application to become a registered exporter.3. The competent authority in a country where the application has been submitted is the controller with respect to processing of the data in the REX system. The list of competent authority/customs departments is published on the website of the Commission.4. Access to all data of this application is granted through a user ID/password to users in the Commission, the competent authorities of beneficiary countries and the customsauthorities in the Member States, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey.5. The data of a revoked registration shall be kept by the competent authorities of the beneficiary country and the customs authorities of Member States in the REX system for 10 calendar years. This period shall run from the end of the year in which the revocation of a registration has taken place.6. The data subject has a right of access to the data relating to him that will be processed through the REX system and where appropriate, the right to rectify erase or block data in accordance with Regulation (EC) No. 45/2001 or the national laws implementing Directive 95/46/EC. Any requests for right of access, rectification erasure or blocking shall be submitted to and processed by the competent authorities of beneficiary countries and the customs authorities of Member States responsible for the registration, as appropriate. Where the registered exporter has submitted a request for the exercise of that right to the Commission, the Commission shall forward such requests to the competent authorities of the beneficiary country or the customs authorities of Member States concerned, respectively, if the registered exporter failed to obtain his rights from the controller of data the registered exporter shall submit such request to the Commission acting as controller. The Commission shall have the right to rectify, erase or block the data.7. Complaints can be addressed to the relevant national data protection authority. The contact details of the national data protection authorities are available on the website of the European Commission, Directorate General for Justice:(http.//ec.europaeu/justice/data-protection/bodies/authorities/eu//index_en htm#h2-1.8. Where the complaint concerns processing of data by the European Commission, it should be addressed to the European Data Protection supervisor (EDPS): (http.//www.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/)(1)The present application form is common to the GSP schemes of four entities, the Union (EU), Norway, Switzerland and Turkey (the entities). Please note, however, that the respective GSP schemes of these entities may differ in terms of country and product coverage. Consequently a given registration will only be effective for the purpose of exports under the GSP scheme(s) that consider(s) your country as a beneficiary country.(2)The indication of EORI number is mandatory for EU exporters and re-consignors. For exporters in beneficiary countries, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey, the indication of TIN is mandatory.Annexure-“1D”STATEMENT ON ORIGINTo be made out on any commercial documents showing the name and full address of the exporter and consignee as well as a description of the products and the date of issue(1)The exporter … (Number of Registered Exporter (_2)(_3)(4) of the products covered by this document declares that, except where otherwise clearly indicated, these products are of…. Preferential origin (5) according to rules of origin of the Generalised System of Preferences of the European Union and that the origin of the Generalised System of Preferences of the European Union and that the origin criterion met is … …(6).——————————-(1)Where the statement on origin replaces another statement in accordance with Article 97d(2) and (3), the replacement statement on origin shall bear the mention “Replacement statement”. The replacement shall also indicate the date of issue of the initial statement and all other necessary data according to Article 97d(6).(2)Where the statement on origin replaces another statement in accordance with subparagraph 1 of Article 97d(2) and paragraph (3) of Article 97d, the re-consignor of the goods making out such a statement shall indicate his name and full address followed by his number of registered exporter.(3)Where the statement on origin replaces another statement in accordance with subparagraph 2 of Article 97d(2), the re-consignor of the goods making out such a statement shall indicate his name and full address followed by the mention (English version)” acting on the basis of the statement on origin made out by [name and complete address of the exporter in the beneficiary country] registered under the following number [Number of Registered Exporter of the exporter in the beneficiary country]”(4)Where the statement on origin replaces another statement in accordance with Article 97d(2), the re-consignor of the goods shall indicate the number of registered exporter only if the value of originating products in the initial consignment exceeds EUR 6 000.(5)Country of origin of products to be indicated. When the statement on origin relates, in whole or in part, to products originating in Ceuta and Melilla within the meaning of Article 97j, the exporter must clearly indicate them in the document on which the statement is made out by means of the symbol “XC/XL”.(6)Products wholly obtained: enter the letter “P”, Products sufficiently worked or processed: enter the letter ‘W’ followed by a heading of the Harmonised System (example “W”9618).Where appropriate the above mention shall be replaced with one of the following indications:(a) In the case of bilateral cumulation: “EU cumulation”.(b) In the case of cumulation with Norway, Switzerland or Turkey: “Norway cumulation”,“Switzerland cumulation” or “Turkey cumulation”.(c) In the case of regional cumulation: “regional cumulation”.(d) In the case of extended cumulation: “extend cumulation with country x”.