27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/1

---

COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION

of 10 March 2014

on a Quality Framework for Traineeships

2014/C 88/01

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 292, in conjunction with Articles 153 and 166, thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

Whereas:

(1)

Young people have been hit particularly hard during the crisis. Youth unemployment rates have reached historical peaks in the past years in several Member States, without any sign of decrease in the short term. Fostering the employability and productivity of young people is key to bringing them onto the labour market.

(2)

A smooth transition from education to employment is crucial for enhancing the chances of young people on the labour market. Improving young people's education and facilitating their transition to employment are necessary for achieving the Europe 2020 headline target of aiming to reach a 75 % employment rate of women and men aged 20-64 by 2020. Guideline 8 on the employment policies of the Member States calls on the Member States to enact schemes to help young people and in particular those not in employment, education or training find initial employment, job experience, or further education and training opportunities, including apprenticeships, and to intervene rapidly when young people become unemployed (1).

(3)	Over the past two decades, traineeships have become an important entry point into the labour market.

(4)

Socio-economic costs arise if traineeships, particularly repeated ones, replace regular employment, notably entry-level positions usually offered to trainees. Moreover, low-quality traineeships, especially those with little learning content, do not lead to significant productivity gains nor do they entail positive signalling effects. Social costs can also arise in connection with unpaid traineeships that may limit the career opportunities of those from disadvantaged backgrounds.

(5)

There is evidence that links exist between the quality of the traineeship and the employment outcome. The value of traineeships in easing the transition to employment depends on their quality in terms of learning content and working conditions. Quality traineeships bring direct productivity benefits, improve labour market matching and promote mobility, notably by decreasing search and matching costs both for enterprises and for trainees.

(6)

The Council Recommendation on establishing a Youth Guarantee (2) invites Member States to ensure that all young people up to the age of 25 years receive a good-quality offer of employment, continued education, an apprenticeship or a traineeship within four months of becoming unemployed or leaving formal education.

(7)	Various studies and surveys have found that quality problems affect a significant share of traineeships, most particularly those where no educational or training institution is directly responsible for the learning content and the working conditions of the traineeship.

(8)

Evidence shows that a significant number of trainees are simply asked to do menial tasks. A quality traineeship must also offer a solid and meaningful learning content. This means, inter alia, the identification of the specific skills to be acquired, supervision and mentoring of the trainee, and monitoring of his/her progress.

(9)

Problems have also been identified as regards working conditions, e.g. long working hours, lack of social security coverage, the presence of health and safety or occupational risks, little or no remuneration and/or compensation, a lack of clarity on the applicable legal regimes, and the excessively prolonged duration of the traineeship.

(10)

Traineeships are currently unregulated in some Member States and sectors and, where regulation exists, it is very diverse and provides different quality elements or different implementing practices. In the absence of a regulatory framework or instrument, or because there is a lack of transparency regarding working conditions for traineeships and their learning content, many traineeship providers are able to use trainees as cheap or even unpaid labour.

(11)

A Quality Framework for Traineeships will support the improvement of working conditions and the learning content of traineeships. The main element of the Quality Framework for Traineeships is the written traineeship agreement that indicates the educational objectives, adequate working conditions, rights and obligations, and a reasonable duration for traineeships.

(12)

Lack of information is one of the causes of low quality traineeships and is a much more widespread problem for traineeships than it is for regular employment. Increased transparency requirements for notices or announcements advertising traineeship positions would help to improve working conditions and stimulate cross-border mobility.

(13)

The social partners play a key role in the design, implementation and monitoring of training policies and programmes. Cooperation between the social partners, providers of lifelong career guidance services and relevant authorities could aim at providing trainees with targeted information on available career opportunities and skills needs on labour markets, as well as on trainees' rights and responsibilities. In addition, the social partners can play a role in facilitating the implementation of the Quality Framework for Traineeships, notably by drawing up and making available simple and concise model traineeship agreements, particularly for use by micro enterprises and tailored for their specific purposes. In their Framework of Actions on Youth Employment of July 2013, the European social partners took note of the Commission’s intention to propose a Council Recommendation in this field and announced their support for Member States’ actions aiming to improve the quality of traineeships.

(14)

One of the challenges is to increase the cross-border mobility of trainees in the Union so as to help foster a genuine European labour market. The existing diversity in regulations constitutes an obstacle to the development of cross-border trainee mobility. Moreover, in some cases, administrative and legal obstacles to cross-border mobility of trainees have been found to affect several of the receiving Member States. In this context, information on the right to cross-border mobility of trainees, in particular the rights included in Directive 2004/38/EC (3), is important. By providing principles and guidelines to serve as a reference, the Quality Framework for Traineeships will also facilitate access to transnational traineeships.

(15)	The development of a Quality Framework for Traineeships will increase transparency. Furthermore, it could support an extension of EURES to paid traineeships, thus facilitating mobility.

(16)

The Member States' programmes promoting and offering traineeships can be financially supported by the European Funds. In addition, the Youth Employment Initiative will support traineeships in the context of the Youth Guarantee, targeting young people from the Union's regions worst affected by youth unemployment and co-financed by the European Social Fund (ESF) 2014-2020. The ESF as well as the Youth Employment Initiative can be used to increase the number and the quality of Member States' traineeship schemes. This involves a possible contribution to the cost of the traineeships including, under certain conditions, a part of the allowance. In addition, they can also support the costs of other forms of training that trainees may pursue outside their traineeship, e.g. language courses.

(17)

The Commission has launched a specific ESF Technical Assistance Support Programme to help Member States establish traineeship schemes with ESF support. This Support Programme provides strategic, operational and policy advice to national and regional authorities that are considering the establishment of new traineeship schemes, or the modernization of existing schemes.

(18)	The Council, in its Resolution on the Structured Dialogue on Youth Employment of May 2011, stated that a quality framework for internships is desirable in order to guarantee the educational value of such experience.

(19)	Council conclusions from 17 June 2011 on ‘Promoting youth employment to achieve the Europe 2020 objectives’ invited the Commission to provide guidance on conditions for high quality traineeships by means of a quality framework for traineeships.

(20)

In 14 June 2012 in its Resolution ‘Towards a job-rich recovery’ the European Parliament invited the Commission to present as soon as possible a proposal for a Council Recommendation on a Quality Framework for Traineeships, and to define minimum standards supporting the provision and take-up of high-quality traineeships.

(21)	The 28-29 June 2012 European Council invited the Commission to examine the possibility of extending the EURES portal to traineeships.

(22)	The European Council conclusions of 13-14 December 2012 invited the Commission to rapidly finalise the quality framework for traineeships.

(23)

In the Youth Employment Package of 6-7 December 2012, the Commission launched a social partner consultation on a Quality Framework for Traineeships. In their replies, EU social partners informed the Commission that they did not intend to launch negotiations towards an autonomous agreement under Article 154 TFEU.

(24)	The 27-28 June 2013 European Council reconfirmed that the Quality Framework for Traineeships should be put into place in early 2014.

(25)	The Quality Framework is an important reference point for determining what constitutes a good quality offer of traineeships under the Council Recommendation on Establishing a Youth Guarantee.

(26)	According to the Annual Growth Survey 2014 it is essential to facilitate the transition from school to work, notably by increasing the availability of good quality traineeships or apprenticeships.

(27)

For the purposes of this Recommendation, traineeships are understood as a limited period of work practice, whether paid or not, which includes a learning and training component, undertaken in order to gain practical and professional experience with a view to improving employability and facilitating transition to regular employment.

(28)

This Recommendation does not cover work experience placements that are part of curricula of formal education or vocational education and training. Traineeships the content of which is regulated under national law and whose completion is a mandatory requirement to access a specific profession (e.g. medicine, architecture, etc.) are not covered by this Recommendation.

(29)	Considering the nature and objective of this Recommendation, it should not be interpreted as hindering Member States from maintaining or establishing more favourable provisions for trainees than the ones recommended.

HEREBY RECOMMENDS THAT MEMBER STATES:

1.	Improve the quality of traineeships, in particular as regards learning and training content and working conditions, with the aim of easing the transition from education, unemployment or inactivity to work by putting in practice the following principles for a Quality Framework for Traineeships:

Conclusion of a written traineeship agreement

2.	Require that traineeships are based on a written agreement concluded at the beginning of the traineeship between the trainee and the traineeship provider;

3.

Require that traineeship agreements indicate the educational objectives, the working conditions, whether an allowance or compensation is provided to the trainee by the traineeship provider, and the rights and obligations of the parties under applicable EU and national law, as well as the duration of the traineeship, as referred to in recommendations 4-12;

Learning and training objectives

4.	Promote best practices as regards learning and training objectives in order to help trainees acquire practical experience and relevant skills; the tasks assigned to the trainee should enable these objectives to be attained;

5.	Encourage traineeship providers to designate a supervisor for trainees guiding the trainee through the assigned tasks, monitoring and assessing his/her progress;

Working conditions applicable to trainees

6.	Ensure that the rights and working conditions of trainees under applicable EU and national law, including limits to maximum weekly working time, minimum daily and weekly rest periods and, where applicable, minimum holiday entitlements, are respected;

7.	Encourage traineeship providers to clarify whether they provide coverage in terms of health and accident insurance as well as sick leave;

8.	Require that the traineeship agreement clarifies whether an allowance or compensation is applicable, and if applicable, its amount;

Rights and obligations

9.	Encourage the concerned parties to ensure that the traineeship agreement lays down the rights and obligations of the trainee and the traineeship provider, including, where relevant, the traineeship provider's policies on confidentiality and the ownership of intellectual property rights;

Reasonable duration

10.	Ensure a reasonable duration of traineeships that, in principle, does not exceed six months, except in cases where a longer duration is justified, taking into account national practices;

11.	Clarify the circumstances and conditions under which a traineeship may be extended or renewed after the initial traineeship agreement expired;

12.	Encourage the practice of specifying in the traineeship agreement that either the trainee or the traineeship provider may terminate it by written communication, providing advance notice of an appropriate duration in view of the length of the traineeship and relevant national practice;

Proper recognition of traineeships

13.	Promote the recognition and validation of the knowledge, skills and competences acquired during traineeships and encourage traineeship providers to attest them, on the basis of an assessment, through a certificate;

Transparency requirements

14.

Encourage traineeship providers to include in their vacancy notices and advertisements information on the terms and conditions of the traineeship, in particular on whether an allowance and/or compensation and health and accident insurance are applicable; encourage traineeship providers to give information on recruitment policies, including the share of trainees recruited in recent years;

15.	Encourage employment services and other providers of career guidance, if providing information on traineeships, to apply transparency requirements;

Cross-border traineeships

16.	Facilitate the cross-border mobility of trainees in the European Union inter alia, by clarifying the national legal framework for traineeships and establishing clear rules on hosting trainees from, and the sending of trainees to, other Member States and by reducing administrative formalities;

17.	Examine the possibility to make use of the extended EURES network and to exchange information on paid traineeships through the EURES portal;

Use of European Structural and Investment Funds

18.

Make use of the European Structural and Investment Funds, namely the European Social Fund and the European Regional Development Fund, in the programming period 2014-2020, and the Youth Employment Initiative, where applicable, for increasing the number and quality of traineeships, including through effective partnerships with all relevant stakeholders;

Applying the Quality Framework for Traineeships

19.	Take appropriate measures to apply the Quality Framework for Traineeships as soon as possible;

20.	Provide information to the Commission by the end of 2015 on the measures taken in accordance with this Recommendation;

21.	Promote the active involvement of social partners in applying the Quality Framework for Traineeships;

22.	Promote the active involvement of employment services, educational institutions and training providers in applying the Quality Framework for Traineeships;

NOTES THAT THE COMMISSION INTENDS TO:

23.	Foster close cooperation with the Member States, the social partners and other stakeholders with a view to swiftly applying this Recommendation;

24.	Monitor, in cooperation with the Member States and in particular through EMCO, the progress in applying the Quality Framework for Traineeships pursuant to this Recommendation and analyse the impact of the policies in place;

25.	Report on the progress in applying this Recommendation on the basis of information provided by Member States;

26.	Work with Member States, the social partners, employment services, youth and trainee organisations and other stakeholders to promote this Recommendation;

27.

Encourage and support Member States, including through promoting the exchange of best practices among them, to make use of the European Social Fund and the European Regional Development Fund or other European Funds for the 2014-2020 programming period to increase the number and quality of traineeships;

28.	Examine, together with the Member States, the possibility to include paid traineeships in EURES, and set up a dedicated webpage on national legal frameworks for traineeships.

---

(1)  Council Decision on Guidelines for the Employment policies of the Member States, 2010/707/EU of 21 October 2010 (OJ L 308, 24.11.2010, p. 46).

(2)  OJ C 120, 26.4.2013, p. 1.

(3)  Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (OJ L 158, 30.4.2004, p. 77).

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/5

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

26 March 2014

2014/C 88/02

1 euro =

	Currency	Exchange rate
USD	US dollar	1,3791
JPY	Japanese yen	141,25
DKK	Danish krone	7,4651
GBP	Pound sterling	0,83360
SEK	Swedish krona	8,9032
CHF	Swiss franc	1,2216
ISK	Iceland króna
NOK	Norwegian krone	8,3320
BGN	Bulgarian lev	1,9558
CZK	Czech koruna	27,459
HUF	Hungarian forint	312,27
LTL	Lithuanian litas	3,4528
PLN	Polish zloty	4,1803
RON	Romanian leu	4,4717
TRY	Turkish lira	3,0445
AUD	Australian dollar	1,4934
CAD	Canadian dollar	1,5398
HKD	Hong Kong dollar	10,6995
NZD	New Zealand dollar	1,6018
SGD	Singapore dollar	1,7479
KRW	South Korean won	1 482,41
ZAR	South African rand	14,7398
CNY	Chinese yuan renminbi	8,5631
HRK	Croatian kuna	7,6645
IDR	Indonesian rupiah	15 736,96
MYR	Malaysian ringgit	4,5498
PHP	Philippine peso	61,857
RUB	Russian rouble	48,8965
THB	Thai baht	44,945
BRL	Brazilian real	3,1784
MXN	Mexican peso	18,0986
INR	Indian rupee	82,8850

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/6

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

2014/C 88/03

National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Latvia

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

Issuing country: Latvia

Subject of commemoration: Riga — European Capital of Culture 2014

Description of the design: The central image of the coin shows the skyline of Riga and the historic centre of the city that has been included in the list of the UNESCO World Heritage Sites. At the top of the image, the inscription ‘EIROPAS KULTURAS GALVASPILSETA’ (European capital of culture) and at the bottom the name of the celebrated city and the year of issuance ‘RIGA — 2014’, and underneath the indication of the issuing country ‘LV’.

The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Number of coins to be issued: 1 million

Approximate date of issue: September 2014

---

(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for the national faces of all the coins issued in 2002.

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/7

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

2014/C 88/04

National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Portugal

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

Issuing country: Portugal

Subject of commemoration: The 40th Anniversary of the 25th April Revolution

Description of the design: The two curves represent the general shape of a carnation, the flower symbolizing the movement, which was also the origin of the revolution’s name. The name of the issuing country ‘PORTUGAL’ and the Coat of Arms are inscribed on the top of the flower. The center of the image shows the date of the event ‘25 DE ABRIL’ (25th April) and at the bottom is written the number of years past since the revolution ‘40 ANOS’ (40 years) and the year of issuance ‘2014’. The shape of the letters and numbers is inspired on those used in posters and other political information supports 40 years ago, as a symbol of the euphoric period lived right after the event.

The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Number of coins to be issued:

Date of issue: April 2014

---

(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for the national faces of all the coins issued in 2002.

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/8

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

2014/C 88/05

National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Portugal

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

Issuing country: Portugal

Subject of commemoration: The International Year of Family Farming

Description of the design: On the central part of the design are represented tools typically used in the traditional agriculture, together with farming products: a chicken in the center, surrounded by pumpkins, a basket of potatoes, and other vegetables and flowers. On the left side, in semi-circle, the subject of the commemoration ‘AGRICULTURA FAMILIAR’ (Family Farming) and on the right side, in semi-circle, the name of the issuing country ‘PORTUGAL’ followed by the year of issuance ‘2014’. At the bottom left the mintmark ‘INCM’.

The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Number of coins to be issued:

Date of issue: October 2014

---

(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1, for the national faces of all the coins issued in 2002.

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/9

---

NOTICE OF OPEN COMPETITION

2014/C 88/06

The European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) is organising open competition:

EPSO/AD/278/14 — Administrators (AD 7) in the following fields:

1.	Digital forensics

2.	Operational analysis

The competition notice is published in 24 languages in Official Journal C 88 A of 27 March 2014.

Further information can be found on the EPSO website: http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/eu-careers.info/

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/10

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 15 November 2013

in Case E-10/13

EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland

(Failure by an EEA/EFTA State to fulfil its obligations — Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle for equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation)

2014/C 88/07

In Case E-10/13, EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland — APPLICATION for a declaration that by failing, within the time prescribed, to adopt measures necessary to correctly implement into its national legislation the provisions of Article 2(1)(a)-(d) and Article 2(2)(a)-(b) of the Act referred to at point 21b of Annex XVIII to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle for equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation), as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 15 November 2013, the operative part of which is as follows:

The Court hereby:

1.

declares that, by failing within the time limit prescribed to adopt the measures necessary to correctly implement into its national legislation Article 2(1)(a)-(d) and Article 2(2)(a)-(b) of the Act referred to at point 21b of Annex XVIII to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle for equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation), as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act;

2.	orders Iceland to bear the costs of the proceedings.

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/11

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 15 November 2013

in Case E-9/13

EFTA Surveillance Authority v the Kingdom of Norway

(Failure by an EEA State to fulfil its obligations — Commission Directive 2010/48/EU of 5 July 2010 adapting to technical progress Directive 2009/40/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers)

2014/C 88/08

In Case E-9/13, EFTA Surveillance Authority v the Kingdom of Norway — APPLICATION for a declaration that by failing to adopt or to notify the EFTA Surveillance Authority forthwith of all the measures necessary to implement the Act referred to at point 16a of Chapter II of Annex XIII to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Commission Directive 2010/48/EU of 5 July 2010 adapting to technical progress Directive 2009/40/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers), as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, within the time prescribed (both except for paragraph 3 of Annex II to the Directive on roadworthiness certificates which is only to be implemented by 31 December 2013), the Kingdom of Norway has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act and under Article 7 of the Agreement, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen and Páll Hreinsson (Judge-Rapporteur), Judges, gave judgment on 15 November 2013, the operative part of which is as follows:

The Court hereby:

1.

declares that by failing to adopt all the measures necessary to implement the Act referred to at point 16a of Chapter II of Annex XIII to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Commission Directive 2010/48/EU of 5 July 2010 adapting to technical progress Directive 2009/40/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers), as adapted by the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, within the time prescribed (both except for paragraph 3 of Annex II to the Directive on roadworthiness certificates which is only to be implemented by 31 December 2013), the Kingdom of Norway has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act and under Article 7 of the EEA Agreement;

2.	orders the Kingdom of Norway to bear the costs of the proceedings.

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/12

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 15 November 2013

in Case E-11/13

EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland

(Failure by a Contracting Party to fulfil its obligations — Directive 2002/92/EC of 9 December 2002 on insurance mediation)

2014/C 88/09

In Case E-11/13, EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland — APPLICATION for a declaration that, by failing to correctly implement Article 9, paragraphs 1 and 2, and Article 10 of the Act referred to at point 13b of Annex IX to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2002/92/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 December 2002 on insurance mediation), as adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations arising under that Act and under Article 7 of the EEA Agreement, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President and Judge-Rapporteur, Per Christiansen and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 15 November 2013, the operative part of which is as follows:

The Court hereby:

1.

declares that, by failing to correctly implement Article 9, paragraphs 1 and 2, and Article 10 of the Act referred to at point 13b of Annex IX to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2002/92/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 December 2002 on insurance mediation), as adapted to the EEA Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, within the time prescribed, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations pursuant to that Act and pursuant to Article 7 of the EEA Agreement;

2.	orders Iceland to bear the costs of the proceedings.

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/13

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 27 November 2013

in Case E-6/13

Metacom AG v Rechtsanwälte Zipper & Collegen

(Lawyers’ freedom to provide cross-border services — Directive 77/249/EEC — Self-representation — Notification requirement in national law — Consequences of failure to notify)

2014/C 88/10

In Case E-6/13, Metacom AG v Rechtsanwälte Zipper & Collegen — REQUEST to the Court under Article 34 of the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice by Fürstliche Landgericht des Fürstentums Liechtenstein (Princely Court of the Principality of Liechtenstein), concerning the interpretation of Council Directive 77/249/EEC of 22 March 1977 to facilitate the effective exercise by lawyers of the freedom to provide services, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 27 November 2013, the operative part of which is as follows:

1.

A lawyer bringing proceedings in his own name in an EEA State other than the one in which he is established may rely on the freedom to provide services and Directive 77/249/EEC if he is acting in a professional capacity, and if the national legal order of the host State foresees that a lawyer may act on his own behalf in the capacity as a lawyer in legal proceedings.

2.

A national rule such as Article 59 of the Liechtenstein Lawyers Act, whereby a lawyer established in another EEA State is required, in all circumstances and on his own motion, not only to provide documentation to establish his qualifications as a lawyer, but also to notify the competent authorities of the host State prior to providing services in that State, and to renew the notification yearly, is contrary to Article 7(1) of Directive 77/249/EEC and to Article 36 EEA.

3.	Failure to comply with a national rule such as Article 59 of the Liechtenstein Lawyers Act cannot be a relevant consideration as regards the possibility of claiming legal fees relating to the cross-border provision of services by a lawyer.

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/14

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 6 December 2013

in Case E-15/13

EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland

(Failure by an EEA State to fulfil its obligations — Directive 2009/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on injunctions for the protection of consumers’ interests)

2014/C 88/11

In Case E-15/13, EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland — APPLICATION for a declaration that by failing to adopt, or to notify the EFTA Surveillance Authority forthwith of, the measures necessary to implement the Act referred to at point 7d of Annex XIX to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2009/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on injunctions for the protection of consumers’ interests), as adapted by the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, within the time prescribed, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act and under Article 7 of the EEA Agreement, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen and Páll Hreinsson (Judge-Rapporteur), Judges, gave judgment on 6 December 2013, the operative part of which is as follows:

The Court hereby:

1.

declares that by failing to adopt the measures necessary to implement the Act referred to at point 7d of Annex XIX to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2009/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on injunctions for the protection of consumers’ interests), as adapted by the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, within the time prescribed, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act and under Article 7 of the Agreement;

2.	orders Iceland to bear the costs of the proceedings.

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/15

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 6 December 2013

in Case E-16/13

EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland

(Failure by a Contracting Party to fulfil its obligations — Failure to implement — Directive 2008/122/EC on the protection of consumers in respect of certain aspects of timeshare, long-term holiday product, resale and exchange contracts)

2014/C 88/12

In Case E-16/13, EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland — APPLICATION for a declaration that by failing to adopt, or to notify the EFTA Surveillance Authority forthwith of, measures necessary to implement the Act referred to at point 7b of Annex XIX to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2008/122/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 January 2009 on the protection of consumers in respect of certain aspects of timeshare, long-term holiday product, resale and exchange contracts), as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, within the time prescribed, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act and under Article 7 of the Agreement, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President and Judge-Rapporteur, Per Christiansen and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 6 December 2013, the operative part of which is as follows:

The Court hereby:

1.

declares that, by failing to correctly implement the Act referred to at point 7b of Annex XIX to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2008/122/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 January 2009 on the protection of consumers in respect of certain aspects of timeshare, long-term holiday product, resale and exchange products), as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, within the time prescribed, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations pursuant to that Act and pursuant to Article 7 of the Agreement;

2.	orders Iceland to bear the costs of these proceedings.

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/16

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 6 December 2013

in Case E-17/13

EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland

(Failure by a Contracting Party to fulfil its obligations — Directive 2009/44/EC — Failure to implement)

2014/C 88/13

In Case E-17/13, EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland — APPLICATION for a declaration that by failing, within the time prescribed, to adopt or to notify the EFTA Surveillance Authority forthwith of all measures necessary to implement Article 2 of the Act referred to at point 16b, first indent, of Annex IX and point 4, first indent, of Annex XII to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, that is Directive 2009/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 amending Directive 98/26/EC on settlement finality in payment and securities settlement systems and Directive 2002/47/EC on financial collateral arrangements as regards linked systems and credit claims, as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act and under Article 7 EEA, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 6 December 2013, the operative part of which is as follows:

The Court hereby:

1.

declares that Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act referred to at point 16b, first indent, of Annex IX and point 4, first indent, of Annex XII to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2009/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 amending Directive 98/26/EC on settlement finality in payment and securities settlement systems and Directive 2002/47/EC on financial collateral arrangements as regards linked systems and credit claims), as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, and under Article 7 of the Agreement, by failing to adopt all the measures necessary to implement Article 2 of the Act within the time prescribed;

2.	orders Iceland to bear the costs of the proceedings.

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/17

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 6 December 2013

in Case E-18/13

EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland

(Failure by a Contracting Party to fulfil its obligations — Directive 2001/81/EC — Failure to implement)

2014/C 88/14

In Case E-18/13, EFTA Surveillance Authority v Iceland — APPLICATION for a declaration that by failing, within the time prescribed to adopt or to notify the EFTA Surveillance Authority forthwith of all measures necessary to implement the Act referred to at point 21 ar of Annex XX to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, that is Directive 2001/81/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2001 on national emission ceilings for certain atmospheric pollutants, as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act and under Article 7 EEA, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 6 December 2013, the operative part of which is as follows:

The Court hereby:

1.

Declares that Iceland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Act referred to at point 21ar of Annex XX to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Directive 2001/81/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2001 on national emission ceilings for certain atmospheric pollutants), as adapted to the Agreement by way of Protocol 1 thereto, and under Article 7 of the Agreement, by failing to adopt all the measures necessary to implement the Act within the time prescribed.

2.	Orders Iceland to bear the costs of the proceedings.

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/18

---

Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by Staatsgerichtshof des Fürstentums Liechtenstein dated 29 October 2013 in the case of the Casino Admiral AG v Wolfgang Egger

(Case E-24/13)

2014/C 88/15

A request has been made to the EFTA Court by a letter dated 6 November 2013 from Staatsgerichtshof des Fürstentums Liechtenstein (State Court of the Principality of Liechtenstein), which was received at the Court Registry on 8 November 2013, for an Advisory Opinion in the case of the Casino Admiral AG v Wolfgang Egger, on the following questions:

1.	What are the general requirements of EEA law and European law (in particular Articles 43 and 49 EC and the obligation of transparency derived therefrom) regarding the procedure for awarding casino concessions?

2.	Does EEA law or European law require that an authority seeking to award a concession states at the time at which it publishes its tender notice how it intends to supplement and specify in greater detail the requirements set out in the act and the regulation?

3.

In particular, in the context of the relevant tendering procedure, is there a general obligation to give prior notice of the relative weighting that will be given to the award criteria when awarding the concession? If that question is answered in the affirmative, what requirements do EEA law and European law impose as regards the substance of the information that must be provided in that prior notice?

4.	In the case at hand, were the requirements of EEA law and European law satisfied?

5.

If the EFTA Court finds that the tendering procedure did not comply with the requirements of EEA law and European law: (a) Do EEA law and European law establish specific legal consequences in the case of procedural errors of that kind? (b) Can procedural errors of that kind be cured? If so, under what conditions? (c) In the case at hand, were the requirements met to set aside the whole tendering and concession award procedure?

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/19

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.7153 — BNPP/LaSer)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

2014/C 88/16

1.

On 18 March 2014, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which the undertaking BNP Paribas SA (‘BNPP’, France), through its subsidiary BNP Paribas Personal Finance (‘BNPP PF’, France), acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking LaSer SA (‘LaSer’, France), by way of purchase of shares. LaSer is currently controlled jointly by BNPP PF and Galerie Lafayette SA

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are: — BNP Paribas group: operates on the global market for retail banking and financial services (to which BNPP PF belongs), lending and investing, as well as asset management and insurance, — LaSer: specialises mainly in providing consumer credit, namely loans, personal loans and revolving loans, as well as payment solutions in France, Poland, the United Kingdom, Denmark, Norway and the Netherlands. The company also provides customer loyalty programmes and relationship marketing services.

3.

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

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation. Observations must reach the Commission not later than ten days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number COMP/M.7153 — BNPP/LaSer, to the following address: European Commission Directorate-General for Competition Merger Registry 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

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

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/20

---

Publication of an amendment application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs

2014/C 88/17

This publication confers the right to oppose the amendment application, pursuant to Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1).

AMENDMENT APPLICATION

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 510/2006

on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs  (2)

AMENDMENT APPLICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 9

‘COPPA PIACENTINA’

EC No: IT-PDO-0117-01102-08.04.2013

PGI ( ) PDO ( X )

1.   Heading in the product specification affected by the amendment

—		Name of product
—	☒	Description of product
—		Geographical area
—		Proof of origin
—	☒	Method of production
—		Link
—		Labelling
—		National requirements
—		Other (to be specified)

2.   Type of amendment

—	☒	Amendment to Single Document or Summary Sheet
—		Amendment to Specification of registered PDO or PGI for which neither the Single Document nor the Summary has been published
—		Amendment to Specification that requires no amendment to the published Single Document (Article 9(3) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006)
—		Temporary amendment to Specification resulting from imposition of obligatory sanitary or phytosanitary measures by public authorities (Article 9(4) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006)

3.   Amendment(s)

Description of product

—

The sentence in the Summary Sheet (point 4.2. Description) stating that legs of pork must be used for ‘Coppa Piacentina’ has been deleted. This amendment aims to correct an inconsistency between the Summary Sheet published in OJ C 311/20 of 16 November 2010 and the Specification. Indeed, the requirements in Article 3 of the Specification regarding the raw material used to produce ‘Coppa Piacentina’ were always that muscle mass from the upper neck area of Italian heavy pigs is to be used, and not legs of pork as could be deduced from the Summary Sheet.

Method of production

The deletion of the obligation to slice off the neck muscle while it is warm — left as an option — allows such operations to also take place in dedicated cutting plants which ensure better results when processing the raw material necessary for production.

The introduction of the use of nitrites, within the legal limits, is required because the presence of nitrites and nitrates gives the product greater resistance against pathogens and oxidation during the production phase of ‘Coppa Piacentina’ PDO.

We request that sugar be added to the salting mixture so as to ensure that the product remains more stable during the maturing process. The maximum permitted amount of sugar is 1,5 kg per 100 kg of fresh meat.

The amendment to permit the use of pig's casings rather than just the pig's abdominal wall for casing allows suitable casings to be used for production, while responding to changing real market conditions, which make it very difficult (and indeed in some market situations impossible) to find the specific type of casing previously prescribed.

We thought it necessary to introduce the option of using net casings rather than twine to allow the product to dry more uniformly and thus achieve a higher level of quality.

The introduction of a margin of error of + 10 % for the humidity parameters during the maturing process helps improve the quality of the PDO. Today's consumers want products to be matured for longer, and for longer than the minimum period stated in the Specification. In such cases we have found that the longer maturing period may lead to air getting into and thus oxidising the product if the atmosphere is not sufficiently humid. It is therefore appropriate to allow greater flexibility in the humidity parameters for the maturing room.

It was thought necessary to state that maturing may also take place in rooms which are not basements, provided they have the optimum conditions for maturing associated with adequate air renewal. Indeed, the fact that the product is not kept in basements — for an unspecified period, has no negative effect on the success of the traditional maturing process. The characteristic element in the maturing of ‘Coppa Piacentina’ is its duration, i.e. at least six months: during this period the influence of the area's humid climate and the skill of the producers in determining the correct humidity and temperature during each phase, thereby maximising their seasoning effects on the product, help achieve the excellent quality of the PDO. The experience of the area's producers is what guarantees the optimum conditions for maturing, regardless of whether or not the room is a basement, while at the same time ensuring the constant links with the environment.

Finally, the reduction of the minimum ash content from 4 % to 1 % is in line with the minimum permitted salt content, on which the ash content closely depends, and is also consistent with the trend towards reducing the amount of salt in food.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 510/2006

on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs  (3)

‘COPPA PIACENTINA’

EC No: IT-PDO-0117-01102-08.04.2013

PGI ( ) PDO ( X )

1.   Name

‘Coppa Piacentina’

2.   Member State or Third Country

Italy

3.   Description of the agricultural product or foodstuff

3.1.   Type of product

Class 1.2 —

Meat product (cooked, salted, smoked etc.)

3.2.   Description of product to which the name in (1) applies

‘Coppa Piacentina’ is a pigmeat product, salted and naturally matured that is preserved raw. It is produced from muscle mass from the upper neck area. The finished product is cylindrical and slightly thinner at the ends, compact and not elastic; when cut, the slices are homogenous and red in colour with pinky-white marbling streaks.

3.3.   Raw materials (for processed products only)

‘Coppa Piacentina’ comes from pigs that are born, raised and slaughtered in Emilia Romagna and Lombardy. The denomination ‘Coppa Piacentina’ is subject to the derogation in Article 5(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012.

3.4.   Feed (for products of animal origin only)

There are detailed rules to be observed regarding the use and composition of the feed ration. The feeding of the pigs takes place in two stages and is mainly based on cereal products from the macro-area identified in point 3.3. The average feed ration mainly consists of maize mash followed by barley, bran, soya and mineral supplements. Cheese-making by-products (whey, curds and buttermilk) mostly come from cheese makers in the identified geographical area.

3.5.   Specific steps in production that must take place in the identified geographical area

All steps in the production, salting, tying, drying and maturing of ‘Coppa Piacentina’ take place in the area indicated in point 4 below.

3.6.   Specific rules concerning slicing, grating, packaging, etc.

Packaging, slicing and portioning must take place under the supervision of the designated control facility, exclusively in the production area indicated in point 4. In order to ensure that the product's original and specific characteristics are maintained, packaging, slicing and portioning must be carried out in the production area by people with special knowledge of the product. Contact with air and exposure of the sliced or portioned product without its casing to unsuitable environmental conditions may lead to oxidisation and thus to the slices or the cut surfaces turning brown, resulting in the characteristic bright red colour of the lean meat being lost, the fat becoming rancid and the aroma deteriorating.

3.7.   Specific rules concerning labelling

When put up for consumption, the product must bear the words ‘Coppa Piacentina’.

The designation ‘Coppa Piacentina’ must appear on the label in clear, indelible letters fully distinguishable from any other wording and be followed immediately by the term ‘Denominazione di Origine Protetta’.

Any other description not expressly allowed is prohibited.

However, the use of indications which make reference to names, company names and private brands is authorised, provided they have no laudatory purport and are not such as to mislead the consumer, as are names of pig farms from which the product comes.

4.   Concise definition of the geographical area

The production area includes the whole territory of the province of Piacenza, but only those parts below 900 m above sea level.

5.   Link with the geographical area

5.1.   Specificity of the geographical area

The production of ‘Coppa Piacentina’ began during the Roman period and has been passed down over time, concentrated in the geographical area of the Province of Piacenza.

The importance of the ‘Coppa Piacentina’ production area ties in with the development of a typical rural tradition common to the entire Po valley, from where the raw material is sourced (Emilia Romagna and Lombardy). In the area which is the source of the raw material, the development of livestock farming is linked to the widespread cultivation of cereal crops and to working methods in the highly specialised dairy sector which have encouraged pig farming locally.

Producers in the Province of Piacenza have developed and passed down through time their specific abilities in selecting and processing the cuts of meat. The operators need special expertise to be able to cut and trim the cuts of meat in such a way as to eliminate waste fat and small pieces of lean meat. This makes sure that the muscle mass is in the correct condition for subsequent salting and tying.

The presence of cool, water-rich valleys and wooded hills have a positive influence on the conditions for maturation.

5.2.   Specificity of the product

‘Coppa Piacentina’ is characterised by its cylindrical shape, slightly thinner at the ends. Its consistency is compact, not elastic. Its sweet, delicate taste becomes stronger as it matures. The outer surface is covered in a thin layer of mould which develops during the maturing process. When cut, the slices are homogenous and red in colour with pinky-white marbling streaks.

The muscle mass cuts used in producing ‘Coppa Piacentina’ come from Italian heavy pigs.

5.3.   Causal link between the geographical area and the quality or characteristics of the product (for PDO) or a specific quality, the reputation or other characteristic of the product (for PGI)

The requirements of ‘Coppa Piacentina’ depend on the environmental conditions and natural and human factors. In particular, the characterisation of the raw material is closely linked to the identified geographical area where it is sourced; here, techniques for raising Italian heavy pigs have been developed which determine the quality of the cuts of meat used for producing ‘Coppa Piacentina’.

Moreover, the fact that ‘Coppa Piacentina’ production is based in the Province of Piacenza is linked to the local producers who, over time, have perfected their skills in trimming the cuts of meat so that the product has the characteristic shape, slightly thinner at the ends.

These skills, along with the knowledge of how best to mature the ‘Coppa Piacentina’, are testimony to the link between the product and its area.

The environmental factors are closely linked with the characteristics of the production area and in particular its climate, which has a vital impact on the characteristics of the finished product, contributing to the successful maturing of the ‘Coppa Piacentina’.

This combination of ‘raw material — product — designation’ is therefore linked to the socio-economic development of the area, with specificities that could not be reproduced elsewhere.

Reference to publication of the specification

Article 5(7) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 (4)

The full text of the product specification is available on the following website:

http://www.politicheagricole.it/flex/cm/pages/ServeBLOB.php/L/IT/IDPagina/3335

or alternatively:

by going directly to the home page of the Ministry of Agricultural, Food and Forestry Policy (http://www.politicheagricole.it) and clicking on ‘Qualità e sicurezza’ (at the top right of the screen), and then on ‘Disciplinari di Produzione all’esame dell’UE’.

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12. Replaced by Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012.

(3)  Replaced by Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012.

(4)  See footnote 3.

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/25

---

Publication of an amendment application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs

2014/C 88/18

This publication confers the right to oppose the amendment application, pursuant to Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1).

AMENDMENT APPLICATION

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 510/2006

on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs  (2)

AMENDMENT APPLICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 9

‘SALAME PIACENTINO’

EC No: IT-PDO-0117-01104-08.04.2013

PGI ( ) PDO ( X )

1.   Heading in the product specification affected by the amendment

—		Name of product
—	☒	Description of product
—		Geographical area
—		Proof of origin
—	☒	Method of production
—		Link
—		Labelling
—		National requirements
—		Other (to be specified)

2.   Type of amendment

—	☒	Amendment to single document or summary sheet
—		Amendment to Specification of registered PDO or PGI for which neither the Single Document nor the Summary has been published
—		Amendment to specification that requires no amendment to the published single document (Article 9(3) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006)
—		Temporary amendment to specification resulting from imposition of obligatory sanitary or phytosanitary measures by public authorities (Article 9(4) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006)

3.   Amendment(s)

Description of product

—

The sentence in the summary sheet (point 4.2 ‘Description’) stating that fresh legs of pork must be used for ‘Salame Piacentino’ has been deleted. This amendment aims to correct an inconsistency between the summary sheet published in OJ C 122, 11.5.2010, p. 17 and the Specification. Indeed, the requirements in Article 3 of the specification regarding the raw material used to produce ‘Salame Piacentino’ were always that different cuts of meat from Italian heavy pigs are to be used, and not legs of pork as could be deduced from the summary sheet.

Method of production

—	The introduction of the use of nitrites, within the legal limits, is required because the presence of nitrites and nitrates gives the salami greater resistance against diseases and oxidation during the production phase of ‘Salame Piacentino’ PDO.

—	The inclusion of nutmeg into the salting mixture is requested in order to have a modern alternative to the traditional production recipe.

—	The amendment to permit the use of starter cultures is aimed at ensuring that the fermentation process begins strongly, something which is increasingly difficult today due to the lack of bacteria in the atmosphere and the machinery as a result of modern hygiene requirements.

—

We have included the maximum size limit for ‘Salame Piacentino’ PDO so as to guarantee that the production tradition is respected. ‘Salame Piacentino’ is traditionally of a small size, and therefore we thought it appropriate to explicitly introduce a limit on the maximum size of the salami so that the maturing period stated in the specification is the optimum for this traditional size, allowing for uniform and ideal maturing. Moreover, by limiting the maximum size of the product, we can guarantee that the increase in the maximum permitted weight for the salami for slicing to 2 kg does not in any way change its quality characteristics; therefore, it is guaranteed to have the same appearance of the slices and the same uniformity of maturing as the product sold whole.

—	The salami for slicing is packed into an elastic-twine net so as to make it easier to slice, as this twine can be more easily removed prior to slicing.

—

The introduction of a margin of error of + 10 % for the humidity parameters during the maturing process helps improve the quality of the PDO. Today's consumers want products to be matured for longer, even beyond the minimum period stated in the specification. In such cases we have found that the longer maturing period may lead to air getting into and thus oxidising the product if the atmosphere is not sufficiently humid. It is therefore appropriate to allow greater flexibility in the humidity parameters for the maturing room.

—	We thought it necessary to increase the maximum permitted weight for slicing salami so as to eliminate some issues linked with the amount of waste generated and the low waste obtained when slicing a smaller product.

—	The reduction of the minimum ash content from 4 % to 1,5 % is in line with the minimum permitted salt content, on which the ash content closely depends, and is also consistent with the trend towards reducing the amount of salt in food.

—	The reduction of the finished-product pH value from 5,4 to 5,2 is consistent with the introduction of starter cultures in the abovementioned amendment. The minimum pH variation of 0,2 does not affect the product's quality and organoleptic characteristics.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 510/2006

on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs  (3)

‘SALAME PIACENTINO’

EC No: IT-PDO-0117-01104-08.04.2013

PGI ( ) PDO ( X )

1.   Name

‘Salame Piacentino’

2.   Member State or Third Country

Italy

3.   Description of the agricultural product or foodstuff

3.1.   Type of product

Class 1.2 —

Meat product (cooked, salted, smoked etc.)

3.2.   Description of product to which the name in point 1 applies

‘Salame Piacentino’ is a salted, naturally matured product, cased in pig gut, to be eaten raw. ‘Salame Piacentino’ is produced using lean pig meat with added pig fat at between 10 % and 30 %. The finished product is cylindrical in shape; its slices are bright red in colour, interspersed with chunks of pinkish white fat. It has a particular, very intense, rather sweet flavour with a characteristic aroma of sausage meat.

3.3.   Raw materials (for processed products only)

‘Salame Piacentino’ comes from pigs that are born, raised and slaughtered in Emilia Romagna and Lombardy. The denomination ‘Salame Piacentino’ is subject to the derogation in Article 5(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012.

3.4.   Feed (for products of animal origin only)

There are detailed rules to be observed regarding the use and composition of the feed ration. The feeding of the pigs takes place in two stages and is mainly based on cereal products from the macro-area identified in point 3.3. The average feed ration mainly consists of maize mash followed by barley, bran, soya and mineral supplements. Cheesemaking by-products (whey, curds and buttermilk) mostly come from cheesemakers in the identified geographical area.

3.5.   Specific steps in production that must take place in the identified geographical area

All steps in the production, salting, mixing, casing, drying and maturing of ‘Salame Piacentino’ take place in the area indicated in point 4 below.

3.6.   Specific rules concerning slicing, grating, packaging, etc.

Packaging, slicing and portioning must take place under the supervision of the designated control facility, exclusively in the production area indicated in point 4. In order to ensure that the product's original and specific characteristics are maintained, packaging, slicing and portioning must be carried out in the production area by people with special knowledge of the product. Contact with air and exposure of the sliced or portioned product without its casing to unsuitable environmental conditions may lead to oxidisation and thus to the slices or the cut surfaces turning brown, resulting in the characteristic bright red colour of the lean meat being lost, the fat becoming rancid and the aroma changing.

3.7.   Specific rules concerning labelling

When released for consumption, the product must bear the words ‘Salame Piacentino’.

The designation ‘Salame Piacentino’ must appear on the label in clear, indelible letters fully distinguishable from any other wording and be followed immediately by the term ‘Denominazione di Origine Protetta’ (protected designation of origin).

Any other description not expressly allowed is prohibited.

However, the use of indications which make reference to names, company names and private brands is authorised, provided they have no laudatory purport and are not such as to mislead the consumer, as are names of pig farms from which the product comes.

4.   Concise definition of the geographical area

The ‘Salame Piacentino’ production area covers the whole of the province of Piacenza, but includes only those parts below 900 m above sea level, where particular climatic conditions prevail.

5.   Link with the geographical area

5.1.   Specificity of the geographical area

The production of ‘Salame Piacentino’ began during the Roman period and has been passed down over time, concentrated in the geographical area of Piacenza province.

The importance of the ‘Salame Piacentino’ production area ties in with the development of a typical rural culture common to the entire Po valley, from where the raw material is sourced (Emilia Romagna and Lombardy). In the area which is the source of the raw material, the development of livestock farming is linked to the widespread cultivation of cereal crops and to working methods in the highly specialised dairy sector which have encouraged pig farming locally.

Producers in Piacenza province have developed and passed down through time their specific abilities in selecting the cuts of meat and processing the lean and fat portions. In addition, the presence of cool, water-rich valleys and wooded hills has a positive influence on the conditions for maturation.

5.2.   Specificity of the product

‘Salame Piacentino’ is characterised by its sweet, intense aroma which develops as it matures. The lean part of its slices is bright red in colour, interspersed with chunks of white fat. The raw material for ‘Salame Piacentino’ is made up of different cuts of meat, properly trimmed and selected, from pigs with the typical characteristics of the Italian heavy pig.

5.3.   Causal link between the geographical area and the quality or characteristics of the product (for PDO) or a specific quality, the reputation or other characteristic of the product (for PGI)

The qualities of ‘Salame Piacentino’ depend on environmental conditions and natural and human factors. In particular, the characterisation of the raw material is closely linked to the identified geographical area where it is sourced; here, techniques for raising Italian heavy pigs have been developed which determine the quality of the cuts of meat used for producing ‘Salame Piacentino’.

Moreover, the fact that ‘Salame Piacentino’ production is based in Piacenza province is linked to the local producers who, over time, have perfected their skills in selecting lean cuts and in mixing them with the fat and the spices. These skills, along with the knowledge of how best to mature the ‘Salame Piacentino’, are testimony to the link between the product and its area.

The environmental factors are closely linked with the characteristics of the production area and in particular its climate, which has a vital impact on the characteristics of the finished product, contributing to the successful maturing of the ‘Salame Piacentino’.

This combination of ‘raw material — product — designation’ is therefore linked to the socio-economic development of the area, with connotations that cannot be reproduced elsewhere.

Reference to publication of the specification

(Article 5(7) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 (4))

The full text of the product specification is available on the following website:

http://www.politicheagricole.it/flex/cm/pages/ServeBLOB.php/L/IT/IDPagina/3335

or alternatively:

by going directly to the home page of the Ministry of Agricultural, Food and Forestry Policy (http://www.politicheagricole.it) and clicking on ‘Qualità e sicurezza’ (at the top right of the screen), and then on ‘Disciplinari di Produzione all’esame dell’UE’.

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12. Replaced by Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012.

(3)  Replaced by Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012.

(4)  See footnote 3.

---

27.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/30

---

Corrigendum to Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections

( Official Journal of the European Union C 50 of 21 February 2014 )

2014/C 88/19

On page 12, the text referring to the State Aid No SA.37391 is cancelled and replaced by the following:

---