RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN SYSTEMIC RISK BOARD

of 2 June 2020

amending Recommendation ESRB/2015/2 on the assessment of cross-border effects of and voluntary reciprocity for macroprudential policy measures

(ESRB/2020/9)

(2020/C 217/01)

THE GENERAL BOARD OF THE EUROPEAN SYSTEMIC RISK BOARD,

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

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on European Union macro-prudential oversight of the financial system and establishing a European Systemic Risk Board (1), and in particular Article 3 and Articles 16 to 18 thereof,

Having regard to Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms, amending Directive 2002/87/EC and repealing Directives 2006/48/EC and 2006/49/EC (2), and in particular Article 134(4) thereof,

Having regard to Decision ESRB/2011/1 of the European Systemic Risk Board of 20 January 2011 adopting the Rules of Procedure of the European systemic Risk Board (3), and in particular Article 18 to 20thereof,

Whereas:

(1)	In order to ensure effective and consistent national macroprudential policy measures, it is important to complement the mandatory reciprocity required under Union law with voluntary reciprocity.

(2)	The framework on voluntary reciprocity for macroprudential policy measures set out in Recommendation ESRB/2015/2 of the European Systemic Risk Board (4) aims to ensure that all exposure-based macroprudential policy measures activated in one Member State are reciprocated in the other Member States.

(3)

On 24 June 2016, pursuant to Recommendation ESRB/2016/4 of the European Systemic Risk Board (5), Recommendation ESRB/2015/2 was amended in order to recommend the reciprocation of the 1 per cent systemic risk buffer rate applied by Eesti Pank in accordance with Article 133 of Directive 2013/36/EU to the domestic exposures of all credit institutions authorised in Estonia.

(4)

In response to Eesti Pank’s decision of 6 April 2020 to reduce the level of the systemic risk buffer rate to 0 per cent, with effect from 1 May 2020, the General Board of the European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB) has decided to exclude the Estonian measure from the list of macroprudential policy measures which are recommended to be reciprocated under Recommendation ESRB/2015/2.

(5)	Therefore, Recommendation ESRB/2015/2 should be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:

AMENDMENTS

Recommendation ESRB/2015/2 is amended as follows:

1.

in Section 1, sub-recommendation C(1) is replaced by the following: ‘1. The relevant authorities are recommended to reciprocate the macroprudential policy measures adopted by other relevant authorities and recommended for reciprocation by the ESRB. It is recommended that the following measures, as further described in the Annex, be reciprocated:   Finland: — a 15 per cent floor for the average risk-weight on residential mortgage loans secured by a mortgage on housing units in Finland applied in accordance with Article 458(2)(d)(vi) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 to credit institutions authorised in Finland, using the Internal Ratings Based (IRB) Approach for calculating regulatory capital requirements;   Belgium: — a risk-weight add-on for retail exposures secured by residential immovable property located in Belgium, applied in accordance with Article 458(2)(d)(vi) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 to credit institutions authorised in Belgium, using the IRB Approach for calculating regulatory capital requirements and composed of: (a) a flat risk-weight add-on of 5 percentage points; and (b) a proportionate risk-weight add-on consisting of 33 per cent of the exposure-weighted average of the risk-weights applied to the portfolio of retail exposures secured by residential immovable property located in Belgium;   France: — a tightening of the large exposure limit provided for in Article 395(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, applicable to exposures to highly-indebted large non-financial corporations having their registered office in France to 5 per cent of eligible capital, applied in accordance with Article 458(2)(d)(ii) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 to global systemically important institutions (G-SIIs) and other systemically important institutions (O-SIIs) at the highest level of consolidation of their banking prudential perimeter;   Sweden: — a credit institution-specific floor of 25 per cent for the exposure-weighted average of the risk weights applied to the portfolio of retail exposures to obligors residing in Sweden secured by immovable property in accordance with Article 458(2)(d)(vi) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 to credit institutions authorised in Sweden using the IRB Approach for calculating regulatory capital requirements.’;

2.	The Annex is replaced by the Annex to this Recommendation.

---

(1)  OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 338.

(3)  OJ C 58, 24.2.2011, p. 4.

(4)  Recommendation ESRB/2015/2 of the European Systemic Risk Board of 15 December 2015 on the assessment of cross-border effects of and voluntary reciprocity for macroprudential policy measures (OJ C 97, 12.3.2016, p. 9).

(5)  Recommendation ESRB/2016/4 of the European Systemic Risk Board of 24 June 2016 amending Recommendation ESRB/2015/2 on the assessment of cross-border effects of and voluntary reciprocity for macroprudential policy measures (OJ C 290, 10.8.2016, p. 1).

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9316 – Peab/YIT’s paving and mineral aggregates business)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 217/02)

On 26 March 2020, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

—	in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

—	in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M9316. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9601 – Czech Media Invest/Rockaway/Brasinex Bohemia)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 217/03)

On 25 June 2020, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in Czech and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

—	in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

—	in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32020M9601. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.9450 – PPG/TIL/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 217/04)

On 31 October 2019, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

—	in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

—	in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9450. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

Notice for the attention of certain persons and entities subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/849 and Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

(2020/C 217/05)

The following information is brought to the attention of Mr HYON Chol-hae (no. 2), Mr O Kuk-Ryol (no. 3), Mr PAK Jae-gyong (no. 4), Lieutenant General KIM Yong Chol (no. 7), Mr HONG Sung-Mu (no. 10), Mr KIM Chun-sam (no. 12), Mr KIM Chun-sop (13), Mr KIM Jong-gak (no. 14), Mr KIM Rak Kyom (no. 15), Mr KIM Won-hong (no. 16), Mr PAK Jong-chon (no. 17), Mr RI Jong-su (no. 18), Mr SON Chol-ju (no. 19), Mr YUN Jong-Rin (no. 20), Mr RI Myong Su (no. 24), Mr SO Hong Chan (no.25), Mr JANG Chol (no. 27) and Korean Ryengwang Trading Corporation (no. 2), persons and entity appearing in Annex II to Decision (CFSP) 2016/849 (1) and in Annex XV to Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 (2), as well as Mr JONG Chol Young (no. 4) and Pan Systems Pyongyang (no. 4),person and entity appearing in Annex III to Decision (CFSP) 2016/849 and in Annex XVI to Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

The Council intends to maintain the restrictive measures against the above-mentioned persons and entities with new statements of reasons. Those persons are hereby informed that they may submit a request to the Council to obtain the intended statements of reasons for their designation, before 7 July 2020, to the following address:

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

RELEX.1.C

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu.

---

(1)  OJ L 141, 28.5.2016, p. 79.

(2)  OJ L 224, 31.8.2017, p. 1.

Euro exchange rates (1)

30 June 2020

(2020/C 217/06)

1 euro =

	Currency	Exchange rate
USD	US dollar	1,1198
JPY	Japanese yen	120,66
DKK	Danish krone	7,4526
GBP	Pound sterling	0,91243
SEK	Swedish krona	10,4948
CHF	Swiss franc	1,0651
ISK	Iceland króna	155,40
NOK	Norwegian krone	10,9120
BGN	Bulgarian lev	1,9558
CZK	Czech koruna	26,740
HUF	Hungarian forint	356,58
PLN	Polish zloty	4,4560
RON	Romanian leu	4,8397
TRY	Turkish lira	7,6761
AUD	Australian dollar	1,6344
CAD	Canadian dollar	1,5324
HKD	Hong Kong dollar	8,6788
NZD	New Zealand dollar	1,7480
SGD	Singapore dollar	1,5648
KRW	South Korean won	1 345,83
ZAR	South African rand	19,4425
CNY	Chinese yuan renminbi	7,9219
HRK	Croatian kuna	7,5708
IDR	Indonesian rupiah	16 184,41
MYR	Malaysian ringgit	4,7989
PHP	Philippine peso	55,834
RUB	Russian rouble	79,6300
THB	Thai baht	34,624
BRL	Brazilian real	6,1118
MXN	Mexican peso	25,9470
INR	Indian rupee	84,6235

---

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

Summary of the Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the opening of negotiations for a new partnership with the UK

(The full text of this Opinion can be found in English, French and German on the EDPS website www.edps.europa.eu)

(2020/C 217/07)

Executive Summary

On 3 February 2020, the European Commission adopted a Recommendation for a Council Decision authorising the opening of negotiations for a new partnership with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

The objective of the negotiations is to establish a partnership between the Union, and Euratom where relevant, and the United Kingdom, that is comprehensive and covers areas of interest outlined in the Political Declaration. Such partnership would be composed of three main parts: general provisions, containing, inter alia, the underlying principles and basis for cooperation as well as the governance provisions, an economic partnership and a security partnership.

The EDPS welcomes and supports the objective of the Commission to conclude a comprehensive partnership with the UK, establishing a cooperation the essential elements of which should be in particular the respect for and safeguarding of human rights as well as the rule of law, affirming the Parties’ commitment to ensuring a high level of personal data protection and fully respecting the Union’s personal data protection rules.

Given the close cooperation that is expected to continue between the EU and the UK at the end of the transition period, the EDPS also welcomes and supports the Commission’s commitment in its Recommendation to work towards the adoption of adequacy decisions, provided that the relevant conditions are met.

This Opinion aims at providing constructive and objective advice in relation to the envisaged partnership and the adequacy assessment.

The EDPS makes the following three main recommendations in relation to the envisaged partnership:

—	ensuring that the security and the economic partnerships are underpinned by similar commitments to respect fundamental rights including adequate protection of personal data,

—	defining priorities where arrangements for international cooperation should be concluded in matters other than law enforcement, in particular for the cooperation between public authorities, including Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies,

—	assessing the issue of onward transfers of personal data, in the light of the Opinion 1/15 of the CJEU both for the economic and the security partnerships.

With regard to the assessment of adequacy, the EDPS draws the attention to the following points:

—	the importance of such assessment under the Law Enforcement Directive and under the GDPR for cooperation between public authorities and its impact on transfers by Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies to the UK,

—	the importance of defining the scope of the envisaged adequacy decisions, in particular under the Law Enforcement Directive,

—	the adoption of an adequacy decision is subject to specific conditions and requirements and, should the Commission present a draft adequacy decision, the EDPB should be appropriately and timely involved,

—	given the specific situation of the UK, any substantial deviation from the EU data protection acquis that would result in lowering the level of protection would constitute an important obstacle to the adequacy findings.

The EDPS finally recommends that the Union take steps to prepare for all eventualities, including where the adequacy decision(s) could not be adopted within the transition period, where no adequacy decision would be adopted at all, or where it would be adopted only in relation to some areas.

The EDPS remains at the disposal of the Commission, the European Parliament and the Council for further advice during the negotiations and before the finalisation of the envisaged partnership.

1.   INTRODUCTION

1.

On 1 February 2020, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (hereinafter the ‘UK’) withdrew from the European Union and European Atomic Energy Community. The arrangements for the withdrawal are set out in the Agreement on the withdrawal of the UK from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (1).

2.

The Withdrawal Agreement entered into force on 1 February 2020 and provides for a transition period during which Union law applies to and in the United Kingdom in accordance with that Agreement. This period will end on 31 December 2020, unless the Joint Committee established under the Withdrawal Agreement adopts, before 1 July 2020, a single decision extending the transition period for up to 1 or 2 years. The Withdrawal Agreement (2) was accompanied by a Political Declaration setting out the framework for the future relationship between the European Union and the United Kingdom 2020/C 34/01 (hereinafter ‘Political Declaration’) (3).

3.

On 3 February 2020, the European Commission adopted its recommendation for a Council Decision authorising the opening of negotiations for a new partnership with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (4) (hereinafter ‘the Recommendation’). The Annex to the Recommendation (hereinafter ‘the Annex’) lays down the Council’s negotiating directives to the Commission, i.e. the objectives the latter should aim to achieve on behalf of the EU in the course of the negotiations.

4.

The Recommendation was adopted on the basis of the procedure laid down in Article 218 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) for agreements concluded between the EU and third countries. As for the substantive legal basis, the Commission recommends the Decision to be based at this stage on Article 217 TFEU (association agreement) while recognising that ‘the substantive legal basis for the signature and conclusion of the new partnership can only be determined at the end of the negotiations’.

5.

‘The envisaged partnership is a single package that comprises three main components: — general arrangements (including provisions on basic values and principles and on governance), — economic arrangements (including provisions on trade and level playing field guarantees), and — security arrangements (including provisions on law enforcement and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, as well as on foreign policy, security and defence)’ (5).

6.

On 12 February 2020, the European Parliament adopted a Resolution (6) on the proposed mandate for negotiations for a new partnership with the UK. The EDPS welcomes that he was consulted on the Recommendation by the European Commission on 12 February 2020. This Opinion is without prejudice to any additional comments that the EDPS could make on the basis of further available information at a later stage. The EDPS expects to be consulted on the text of the draft partnership in due course, in accordance with Article 42(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725.

5.   CONCLUSION

20.

The EDPS welcomes and supports the objective of the Commission to conclude a comprehensive partnership with the UK, establishing a cooperation the essential elements of which should be in particular the respect for and safeguarding of human rights as well as the rule of law, affirming the Parties’ commitment to ensuring a high level of personal data protection and fully respecting the Union’s personal data protection rules.

21.

Given the close cooperation that is expected to continue between the EU and the UK at the end of the transition period, the EDPS also welcomes and supports the Commission’s commitment in its Recommendation to work towards the adoption of adequacy decisions, provided that the relevant conditions are met.

22.

Therefore, this Opinion aims at providing constructive and objective advice to the EU institutions as the Commission seeks to obtain authorisation from the Council to negotiate a new partnership with the UK and intends to work towards adequacy decisions if the conditions are met.

23.

To this end, in relation to the envisaged partnership, the EDPS recommends: — ensuring that the security and the economic partnerships are underpinned by similar commitments to respect fundamental rights including adequate protection of personal data, — defining priorities where arrangements for international cooperation should be concluded in matters other than law enforcement, in particular for the cooperation between public authorities, including Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies, — assessing the issue of onward transfers of personal data, in the light of the Opinion 1/15 of the CJEU, not only in the framework of the processing of PNR data but both for the economic and the security partnerships.

24.

With regard to the assessment of adequacy, the EDPS highlights the importance of: — such assessment under the Law Enforcement Directive and under the GDPR for cooperation between public authorities and its impact on transfers by Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies to the UK, — defining the scope of the envisaged adequacy decisions, in particular under the Law Enforcement Directive.

25.

He recalls that the adoption of an adequacy decision is subject to specific conditions and requirements and, should the Commission present a draft adequacy decision, the EDPB should be appropriately and timely involved. He emphasises that given the specific situation of the UK, any substantial deviation from the EU data protection acquis that would result in lowering the level of protection would constitute an important obstacle to the adequacy findings. The EDPS also recommends that the Union take steps to prepare for all eventualities, including where the adequacy decision(s) could not be adopted within the transition period, where no adequacy decision would be adopted at all, or where it would be adopted only in relation to some areas.

26.

Finally, the EDPS remains at the disposal of the Commission, the Council and the European Parliament to provide advice at further stages of this process. The comments in this Opinion are without prejudice to any additional comments that the EDPS could make as further issues may arise and would then be addressed once further information is available. He expects to be consulted on the text of the draft partnership before its finalisation.

---

(1)  OJ L 29, 31.1.2020, p. 7.

(2)  Article 184 of the Withdrawal Agreement provides: ‘The Union and the United Kingdom shall use their best endeavours, in good faith and in full respect of their respective legal orders, to take the necessary steps to negotiate expeditiously the agreements governing their future relationship referred to in the Political Declaration of 17 October 2019 and to conduct the relevant procedures for the ratification or conclusion of those agreements, with a view to ensuring that those agreements apply, to the extent possible, as from the end of the transition period.’

(3)  OJ C 34, 31.1.2020, p. 1.

(4)  COM(2020) 35 final.

(5)  Page 2 of the Recommendation.

(6)  2020/2557(RSP) European Parliament Resolution of 12 February 2020 on the proposed mandate for negotiations for a new partnership with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (P9_TA(2020)0033).

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9736 – Lone Star/BASF Construction Chemicals (EB) Business)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 217/08)

---

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

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9803 – SAZKA Group/OPAP)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2020/C 217/09)

---

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

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

Publication of a communication of approval of a standard amendment to a product specification for a name in the wine sector referred to in Article 17(2) and (3) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33

(2020/C 217/10)

This communication is published in accordance with Article 17(5) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33 (1).

COMMUNICATION OF STANDARD AMENDMENT MODIFYING THE SINGLE DOCUMENT

‘ALELLA’

PDO-ES-A1423-AM04

Date of communication: 3.4.2020

DESCRIPTION OF AND REASONS FOR THE APPROVED AMENDMENT

1.   Enlargement of the geographical area of the do

The amendment concerns extending the demarcated area to include the municipality of Santa Coloma de Gramenet, amending point 6 of the product specification and point 1.6 of the Single Document.

It is therefore considered a standard amendment as it does not affect the name of the designation of origin, nor does it change the wine categories or affect the link to the area, and it is not a restriction on trade.

Reasons:

The municipality of Santa Coloma de Gramenet has submitted a request for its territory to be included in the scope of the ‘Alella’ PDO and provided the required technical documentation.

The report submitted demonstrates that the soil, climate and environmental conditions in this municipality are similar to the those in the current demarcated area for the ‘Alella’ PDO. This is because they are part of the same geomorphological system comprising Sierra de la Marina, San Mateo, Corredor and Montnegre, between the Besós and Tordera rivers, which has a granite bedrock that decomposes to form the ‘sauló’ soil typical of the area.

Santa Coloma de Gramenet is therefore part of the continuous natural territory for the ‘Alella’ PDO.

While traditional wine-growing had been in decline in this municipality, there has been something of a revival in recent years. The highlight is a winegrowing heritage recovery project at Vinya d’en Sabater launched in 2015. One example of this in growing interest is the agreement between the University of Barcelona, INCAVI (Catalan Institute of Vine and Wine) and the Council of Santa Coloma de Gramenet – with the support of ‘Alella’ PDO – to study the suitability of four local vine varieties for environmentally friendly growing techniques.

The municipality and the professionals behind this project that are seeking the protection of the ‘Alella’ PDO would like to be able to market the product as soon as possible, as well as increase the number of plots in production and the number of wineries.

Furthermore, the 10th additional provision of Law 2/2020 of 5 March 2020 on winegrowing and winemaking, under the heading on protection of peri-urban areas (such as the municipality of Santa Coloma de Gramenet), sets out the commitment of the Catalan Public Administration to setting up a special project to protect peri-urban wine production areas in order to avoid the pressures of urbanisation and safeguard the continuity of the winegrowing tradition.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

1.   Name of the product

Alella

2.   Geographical indication type

PDO – Protected Designation of Origin

3.   Categories of grapevine products

1.

Wine

3.	Liqueur wine

5.	Quality sparkling wine

8.	Semi-sparkling wine

4.   Description of the wine(s)

White wine and rosé wine

Made from the varieties listed in section 6 of the specification; white varieties only for the white wines, and all varieties for the rosés. Fractions of must obtained by inadequate pressure may not, in any event, be used in the production of protected wines.

* The actual volatile acidity of crianza wines must not exceed 0,80 g/l.

* The maximum sulphur content is 250 mg/l when there is 5 g/l or more of sugar.

General analytical characteristics
Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)
Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)	10,5
Minimum total acidity	(in milliequivalents per litre)
Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)	8,3
Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)	200

Red wine

Produced from the red grape varieties listed in section 6 of this specification. Fractions of must obtained by inadequate pressure may not, in any event, be used in the production of protected wines.

* The actual volatile acidity limit may increase by 0,06 gr/l for each degree of alcohol above 11 % vol. and year of ageing, up to a maximum of 0,9 gr/l.

* The maximum sulphur content is 200 mg/l when there is 5 g/l or more of sugar.

General analytical characteristics
Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)
Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)	11,5
Minimum total acidity	(in milliequivalents per litre)
Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)	11,7
Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)	150

Liqueur wine

Rancio: made from the Garnacha Blanca and Macabeo or Garnacha Negra varieties, produced from white wines with a minimum sugar content of 14 °Bx using oxidative ageing in oak containers. The ‘sol y serena’ method (where the wine is exposed to the sun during the day and the cooler temperatures at night) is used for oxidative ageing and the wine is kept in oak barrels for at least one year.

Mistelle: made from all white grape varieties. It is produced by separating the free-run must and then immediately filtering the wine. Vinous alcohol is then added and it is stirred.

Natural sweet wine: made from must with a high sugar content – more than 250 g/l – and partially fermented.

* The maximum sulphur content is 200 mg/l when there is 5 g/l or more of sugar.

General analytical characteristics
Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)
Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)	15
Minimum total acidity	(in milliequivalents per litre)
Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)
Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)	150

Quality sparkling wine

Produced from authorised varieties, made according to the traditional method with secondary fermentation in the bottle, minimum excess pressure of 3,5 bars and a nine-month ageing period from the date of tirage until it is disgorged.

General analytical characteristics
Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)
Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)	10,8
Minimum total acidity	(in milliequivalents per litre)
Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)
Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

Semi-sparkling wine

Produced from all the red and white varieties. Part of the carbonation from the wine’s own fermentation is kept during the production process.

* The maximum sulphur content is 250 mg/l when the white or rosé wine has 5 g/l or more of sugar. In the case of red wine, the limits are 150 and 200 respectively.

* Excess pressure at 20 °C due to dissolved endogenous carbon dioxide of between 1 and 2,5 bars.

General analytical characteristics
Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)
Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)	10,5
Minimum total acidity	(in milliequivalents per litre)
Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)
Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)	200

5.   Wine-making practices

a.   Essential oenological practices

Cultivation method

The vine must be trained as follows so as to ensure the best quality and aromatic richness of the wines:

a)	Traditionally using goblet training with vines with two buds and one blind bud.

b)	Trellis training with division of the vegetation.

Irrigation must be authorised and it may only be carried out to improve the quality of the grape, its alcoholic strength, and its acidity. The vine plots may be re-balanced for reasons of moisture, depending both on the water conditions of the soil and the ecological conditions of the vine.

Essential oenological practice

The grapes must be harvested with great care, and only healthy grapes that are ripe enough to yield wines with a minimum natural alcoholic strength equal to or greater than 9,5 % vol. may be used to produce wines covered by the PDO. The harvested grapes must be transported as quickly as possible, using methods that guarantee that their quality is preserved.

b.   Maximum yields

White grape varieties

12 000 kilograms of grapes per hectare

White grape varieties

78 hectolitres per hectare

Red grape varieties

10 000 kilograms of grapes per hectare

Red grape varieties

60 hectolitres per hectare

6.   Demarcated geographical area

—

Alella

—	Arenys de Mar

—	Arenys de Munt

—

Argentona

—

Badalona

—	Cabrera de Mar

—

Cabrils

—

Calella

—

El Masnou

—	Granollers

—	La Roca del Vallès

—	Llinars del Vallès

—

Montgat

—	Montornès del Vallès

—	Martorelles

—

Mataró

—

Òrrius

—	Premià de Dalt

—	Premià de Mar

—	Sant Cebrià de Vallalta

—	Sant Fost de Campsentelles

—	Sant Iscle de Villalta

—	Sant Pol de Mar

—	Santa Coloma de Gramenet

—	Santa Maria de Martorelles

—

Teià

—

Tiana

—	Vilanova del Vallès

—	Vilassar de Dalt

—	Vilassar de Mar

—	Vallromanes

7.   Main wine grapes variety(ies)

GARNACHA TINTA

SYRAH

XARELLO – PANSA BLANCA

8.   Description of the link(s)

‘Wine’

The local soil type is a granite subsoil with traces from the sea. The surface layer is formed by small grains. The soil drains well and this means the vines have to put down deep roots to find water and the various nutrients that the local soil provides. In fact this circumstance causes it slight ‘stress’, which, when well-controlled, helps to regulate the production of grapes per vine. The slight difference in taste between the wines produced on the coast and those produced inland is that the latter are more acidic.

‘Liqueur wine’

The oxidative ageing in producing these wines is what makes the PDO so distinctive as the ‘sol y serena’ process brings out the mineral/sea residues..

‘Quality sparkling wine’

The characteristic feature of these wines is that they are produced using grape varieties that are native to the area and also more classic varieties. The DNA of our PDO is the local soil, which gives our wines a mineral content that is not found in the ‘Cava’ PDO (the comparison is valid as sparkling wines are produced there using the same vine varieties as the ‘Alella’ PDO). When tasting quality sparkling white wines from these two areas, ‘Alella’ PDO can be identified most of all by its elegant bitter/citrus finish reminiscent of green almonds. The common denominator is the mineral content, irrespective of the production method.

9.   Essential further conditions (packaging, labelling, other requirements)

Legal framework:

In national legislation

Type of further condition:

Packaging within the demarcated geographical area

Description of the condition:

The bottling of wines covered by the ‘Alella’ PDO should be carried out in registered bottling cellars in order to facilitate traceability and preserve the quality of the end product.

Legal framework:

In national legislation

Type of further condition:

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition:

The labels must bear a guarantee seal.

The height of the characters used to indicate ‘Alella’ must not exceed 4 mm, and half that for ‘Denominación de Origen’.

For designations of wines with the name of the wine-grower or the estate, the wine must come from vines grown by the same wine-grower or registered to the estate, and be made solely and exclusively from the wine-grower’s crops and on the estate respectively.

Link to the product specification

http://ves.cat/eqCL

---

(1)  OJ L 9, 11.1.2019, p. 2.

Publication of a communication of approval of a standard amendment to a product specification for a name in the wine sector referred to in Article 17(2) and (3) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33

(2020/C 217/11)

This communication is published in accordance with Article 17(5) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33 (1).

COMMUNICATING THE APPROVAL OF A STANDARD AMENDMENT

‘MITTERBERG’

Reference number: PGI-IT-A0295-AM02

Date of communication: 24.3.2020

DESCRIPTION OF AND REASONS FOR THE APPROVED AMENDMENT

1.   Production of the semi-sparkling and passito types

It has been specified that the semi-sparkling and passito types may made as both non-varietal and varietal wines (single- or multi-variety).

This is a formal amendment that better defines these types as they currently exist.

The amendment concerns Article 2 of the product specification but does not concern the single document

2.   Update to the list of grape varieties approved for production of the wines

Johanniter B., Solaris B., Muscaris B. and Souvignier gris B. have been added to the list of varieties that may be used for the wines.

With the amendment, these varieties have been added to the list of varieties in Annex 1 to the product specification and may therefore be used to produce both non-varietal and varietal (single- or multi-variety) ‘Mitterberg’ PGI wines.

The amendment concerns Article 2 of and Annex 1 to the product specification and point 1.7 of the single document.

3.   Environmental and growing conditions

It has been specified that the environmental and growing conditions of the vineyards used for the production of ‘Mitterberg’ IGT wines must be those that are traditional of the area and that are suitable for giving the grapes and the resulting wine the specific quality characteristics identified in the product specification.

This is a formal clarification that makes reference to the specific environmental and cultivation characteristics of local winegrowing.

The amendment concerns Article 4 of the product specification but does not concern the single document

4.   Characteristics on consumption – Novello

The ‘Novello’ type has been removed.

This amendment consists of removing a wine type which has not been produced for many years, meaning that there is no longer any reason to retain it in the product specification.

The amendment concerns Article 6 of the product specification and point 1.4 of the single document.

5.   Characteristics on consumption – Passito

For Mitterberg Passito, the minimum total alcoholic strength by volume has been increased from 14 to 16 % vol. and the minimum actual alcoholic strength has been increased from 7,00 to 9,00 so as to come under the category of ‘Wine from raisined grapes’. Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, Annex VII, Part II.

This amendment consists of bringing the chemico-physical parameters in question into line with European Union legislation.

The amendment concerns Article 6 of the product specification and point 1.4 of the single document.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

1.   Name of the product

Mitterberg

2.   Geographical indication type

PGI – Protected Geographical Indication

3.   Categories of grapevine product

1.

Wine

8.	Semi-sparkling wine

15.	Wine from raisined grapes

4.   Description of the wine(s)

Mitterberg bianco

colour: straw yellow;

aroma: pleasant, fruity, sometimes also aromatic;

taste: full, harmonious, pleasant;

minimum total alcoholic strength by volume: 10,00 % vol.;

minimum sugar-free extract: 15,0 g/l.

Any analytical parameters not shown in the table below comply with the limits laid down in national and EU legislation.

General analytical characteristics
Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume):
Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume):
Minimum total acidity:	3,5 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid
Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre):
Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre):

Mitterberg bianco varietals (single- or multi-varietal)

colour: typical of the grape variety used;

aroma: pleasant, delicate, typical of the grape variety used;

taste: full, harmonious, typical of the grape variety or varieties used;

minimum total alcoholic strength by volume: 10,00 % vol.;

minimum sugar-free extract: 15,0 g/l.

Any analytical parameters not shown in the table below comply with the limits laid down in national and EU legislation.

General analytical characteristics
Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume):
Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume):
Minimum total acidity:	3,5 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid
Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre):
Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre):

Mitterberg rosso

colour: from pale to deep ruby red to dark garnet;

aroma: pleasant, delicate;

taste: soft, pleasant, full, harmonious;

minimum total alcoholic strength by volume: 10,00 % vol.;

minimum sugar-free extract: 16,0 g/l.

Any analytical parameters not shown in the table below comply with the limits laid down in national and EU legislation.

General analytical characteristics
Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume):
Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume):
Minimum total acidity:	3,5 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid
Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre):
Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre):

Mitterberg rosso varietals (single- or multi-variety)

colour: from pale to deep ruby red to dark garnet, typical of the grape variety used;

aroma: pleasant, typical of the grape variety used;

taste: soft, pleasant, full, harmonious, typical of the grape variety or varieties used;

minimum total alcoholic strength by volume: 10,00 % vol.;

minimum sugar-free extract: 16,0 g/l.

Any analytical parameters not shown in the table below comply with the limits laid down in national and EU legislation.

General analytical characteristics
Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume):
Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume):
Minimum total acidity:	3,5 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid
Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre):
Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre):

Mitterberg rosato varietals (single- or multi-variety) or non-varietal

colour: pink;

aroma: delicate, pleasant, typical of the grape variety used;

taste: not much body, harmonious, elegant, fresh, typical of the grape variety or varieties used;

minimum total alcoholic strength by volume: 10,00 % vol.;

minimum sugar-free extract: 15,0 g/l.

Any analytical parameters not shown in the table below comply with the limits laid down in national and EU legislation.

General analytical characteristics
Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume):
Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume):
Minimum total acidity:	3,5 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid
Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre):
Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre):

Mitterberg frizzante varietals (single- or multi-variety) or non-varietal

foam: fine, long-lasting;

colour: typical of the grape variety used;

aroma: delicate, pleasant, fruity, typical of the grape variety used;

taste: dry or medium sweet, harmonious, typical of the grape variety or varieties used;

minimum total alcoholic strength by volume: 10,00 % vol.;

minimum sugar-free extract: 15,0 g/l.

Any analytical parameters not shown in the table below comply with the limits laid down in national and EU legislation.

General analytical characteristics
Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume):
Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume):
Minimum total acidity:	3,5
Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre):
Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre):

Mitterberg passito varietals (single- or multi-variety) or non-varietal

colour: typical of the grape variety used;

aroma: pleasant, delicate, characteristic;

taste: medium sweet or sweet, full, harmonious, typical of the grape variety or varieties used;

minimum total alcoholic strength by volume: 16,00 % vol.;

minimum sugar-free extract: 20,0 g/l.

Any analytical parameters not shown in the table below comply with the limits laid down in national and EU legislation.

General analytical characteristics
Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume):
Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume):	9,00
Minimum total acidity:	3,5
Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre):
Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre):

5.   Wine-making practices

a.   Specific oenological practices

‘Mitterberg’

Specific oenological practice

The various enrichment techniques provided for under EU legislation are permitted.

Blending with other musts or wines, including those from other production areas in Italy, is permitted up to a maximum volume of 15 %.

b.   Maximum yields

Mitterberg bianco, rosso and rosato

19 000 kilograms of grapes per hectare

Mitterberg varietals

18 000 kilograms of grapes per hectare

6.   Demarcated geographical area

The production area for grapes suitable for making ‘Mitterberg’ typical geographical indication wines comprises the entire administrative territory of the Province of Bolzano.

7.   Main wine grape variety(ies)

Bronner B.

Cabernet franc N. – Cabernet

Cabernet sauvignon N. – Cabernet

Carmenère N. – Cabernet nostrano

Chardonnay B.

Diolinoir N.

Johanniter B.

Kerner B.

Lagrein N.

Malvasia N. – Roter Malvasier

Manzoni bianco B. – Incrocio Manzoni 6.0.13 B.

Merlot N.

Moscato giallo B. – Muskateller

Moscato rosa Rs. – Rosen muskateller

Muscaris B.

Müller thurgau B. – Riesling x Sylvaner

Petit manseng B.

Petit verdot N.

Pinot bianco B. – Pinot

Pinot grigio – Pinot

Pinot nero N. – Pinot

Portoghese N. – Portugieser

Regent N.

Riesling italico B. – Riesling

Riesling italico B. – Welschriesling

Sauvignon B. – Sauvignon blanc

Schiava N.

Schiava gentile N. – Mittervernatsch

Schiava grigia N. – Grauvernatsch

Schiava grossa N. – Großvernatsch

Solaris B.

Souvignier gris B.

Sylvaner verde B. – Grüner Sylvaner

Syrah N. – Shiraz

Tannat N.

Tempranillo N.

Teroldego N.

Traminer aromatico Rs. – Gewürztraminer

Veltliner B.

Viogner B.

Zweigelt N.

8.   Description of the link(s)

‘Mitterberg’

The production area for ‘Mitterberg’ PGI wine benefits from extensive hilly areas with wonderful exposure and from certain soil characteristics. These factors are decisive in fostering a product of very high quality. The extremely varied morphological characteristics of the production area create a large number of different micro-climates that make it possible to grow numerous grape varieties, both native and otherwise. To the north, the Alps protect the production area from Arctic winds and the cold Atlantic climate, while to the south the area opens up to the inflow of beneficial warmth from the Mediterranean, which reaches even the interior of the Val Venosta and Valle Isarco valleys.

9.   Essential further conditions (packaging, labelling, other requirements)

NONE

Link to the product specification

https://www.politicheagricole.it/flex/cm/pages/ServeBLOB.php/L/IT/IDPagina/15208

---

(1)  1 OJ L 9, 11.1.2019, p. 2.

Publication of an application for registration of a name 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

(2020/C 217/12)

This publication confers the right to oppose the application pursuant to Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) within three months from the date of this publication.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

‘PAMPEPATO DI TERNI’/‘PANPEPATO DI TERNI’

EU No: PGI-IT-02467 – 30.12.2019

PDO () PGI (X)

1.   Name(s)

‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’

2.   Member State or third country

Italy

3.   Description of the agricultural product or foodstuff

3.1.   Type of product

Class 2.3. Bread, pastry, cakes, confectionery, biscuits and other baker’s wares

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

‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’ is an oven-baked product made by combining nuts, chocolate, raisins, candied fruit, unsweetened cocoa powder, honey, coffee, spices and flour.

When released for consumption, ‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’ has the following characteristics:

Physical characteristics:

Shape: circular, with a flat base and convex surface;

Size:

diameter: between 1 and 20 cm;

height: between 1 and 10 cm;

Weight: between 25 g and 1 kg;

Moisture: between 7,5 % and 25 %;

Organoleptic characteristics:

External appearance: dark brown, almost black, dome-shaped, with nuts visible on the surface;

Internal appearance: dark brown, with a lot of evenly distributed nuts and candied fruit;

Consistency of the dough: compact, soft thanks to the soft ingredients (chocolate, raisins, candied fruit, honey and coffee) and crunchy due to the toasted nuts;

Aroma: at first of chocolate and nuts, then of spices, especially cinnamon, pepper and nutmeg;

Taste: initially of chocolate with a slight hint of spices, then gradually of nuts and candied fruit; a final taste of chocolate and spices, in particular cinnamon, nutmeg and pepper.

The product contains neither added preservatives nor colours.

3.3.   Feed (for products of animal origin only) and raw materials (for processed products only)

For the production of ‘Pampepato di Terni/‘Panpepato di Terni’ the following ingredients are required for 10 kg of dough prior to baking:

—	toasted nuts: almonds, walnuts and hazelnuts mixed together, in varying proportions, between 3,5 kg and 6 kg;

—	candied and dried fruit: raisins, orange and citron mixed together, in varying proportions, between 1,5 kg and 3 kg;

—	multi-flower honey: between 0,5 kg and 1,5 kg;

—	unsweetened cocoa powder (20–22 % cocoa butter): between 0,2 kg and 0,5 kg;

—	chocolate (cocoa content minimum 50 %): between 0,5 kg and 1,5 kg;

—	spices: pepper, cinnamon and nutmeg mixed together, in varying proportions, between 0,05 kg and 0,15 kg;

—	type ‘0’ flour or alternatively maize, rice or almond flour: between 0,2 kg and 0,7 kg.

In addition to the previous ingredients, the following optional ingredients may be used in this reference dough:

—	boiled must: up to 0,8 kg;

—	liqueur: up to a maximum of 0,075 kg;

—	sugar: up to a maximum of 0,05 kg;

—	orange peel: up to a maximum of 0.05 kg;

—	pine nut kernels: up to 0,2 kg;

—	liquid coffee: up to 0,2 kg;

—	communion wafer: as a base.

If the dough is made in a machine, water may be used up to a maximum of 5 %.

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

The stages of kneading, portioning, shaping, baking and ageing of ‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’ must take place in the geographical area of production.

3.5.   Specific rules concerning slicing, grating, packaging, etc. of the product the registered name refers to

Initial packaging, after the product has aged, must take place at the place of production in order to avoid a deterioration of the product’s quality as perceived by the consumer. Exposure of the product to the air without the protection of the initial packaging would change the durability of the aroma and cause the complex range of spice aromas to disperse and become less intense, as well as possibly making the surface opaque due to the blooming of the cocoa butter and causing a loss of crispness in the nuts.

The packaging consists of at least one sealed protective wrapping made of: food-grade cellophane, parchment, aluminium foil or other materials suitable for foodstuffs, as defined by current legislation.

A second outer layer may be added outside the production area.

‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’ is sold in single-product packages, either whole or cut into slices with a thickness of between 0,5 cm and 1,5 cm.

3.6.   Specific rules concerning labelling of the product to which the registered name refers

The packaging must feature the following wordings: either ‘Pampepato di Terni’ or ‘Panpepato di Terni’ and ‘Indicazione Geografica Protetta’ [‘Protected Geographical Indication’] in full or the abbreviation ‘IGP’ [‘PGI’] as well as the following additional information:

—	the European PGI symbol;

—	the name or business name and address of the producer and/or packager;

—	the product logo, which must always be used in conjunction with the Protected Geographical Indication.

The product logo is as follows:

4.   Concise definition of the geographical area

The production area for ‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’ consists of the entire administrative territory of the Province of Terni and the municipalities of Massa Martana, Marsciano, Todi, Fratta Todina, Montecastello di Vibio and Deruta in the Province of Perugia.

5.   Link with the geographical area

The reputation of ‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’ is traditionally linked to the environment and the territory which it represents.

‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’, which for centuries has been prepared with whatever was available from the rural economy during the year, is the Christmas cake par excellence.

Over the course of time ‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’ has come to represent Terni gastronomy during the Christmas festivities.

The first reference to professional and ‘large-scale’ production of ‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’ dates back to 1913, when it was promoted by a historical bakery in Terni as the Terni cake.

During the course of the 20th century, and to this day, numerous books of traditional recipes, food and tourist guides and various types of publications have referred to ‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’ as a typical local Christmas cake.

The Italian Touring Club, in the first edition of its ‘Guida Gastronomica d’Italia’ [Italian Gastronomic Guide] published in 1931, states that ‘in Terni, don’t forget the Christmas Panpepato’; another book with the same title by Felice Cunsolo (Istituto Geografico De Agostini, Novara, 1975), in its section devoted to the Umbria Region, also mentions ‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’ as the typical Christmas cake of Terni.

‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’ is also mentioned in Loretta Santini’s tourist guide ‘Guida di Terni e del ternano’ [Guide to Terni and the surrounding area] as the sweet ‘lord of the Christmas table’ (p. 23, publisher: Qguide, 2003).

The Province of Terni’s 2008 guide ‘Sapori e Profumi’ [Tastes and aromas], in its section on gastronomic Christmas traditions, lists pampepato as one of the sweet dishes.

The Italian Academy of Cuisine has written various articles mentioning ‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’, contained in celebratory books or specialist magazines; among the most important are: ‘I frutti del sole’ [Fruits of the sun] (2007), in which it is written: ‘Panpepato is the main sweet dish of the Christmas tradition in Terni’, and the article ‘Panpepato ternano’, where the subheading reads: ‘the main sweet dish of the Christmas tradition in the Umbrian town’ (‘Civiltà della Tavola’ [The civilisation of the table], No 299 of December 2017).

Other evidence of the reputational link between ‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’ and the Terni area is provided by the article ‘Terni da leccarsi i baffi’ [Mouthwatering Terni], published in the daily newspaper Corriere dell’Umbria on Saturday 9 April 2016; referring to culinary traditions, the article stated that ‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’‘best represents the many contradictions at the heart of the Umbrian tradition. It is the perfect balance between sweetness and bitterness that makes this dessert stand out and immediately become part of the Umbrian peasant tradition’.

There is also an extract from the article published in the daily newspaper ‘Il Messaggero’, in the Terni local edition, on 31 December 2009: ‘Tradition dictates that since 1851 pampepato is never absent from Terni people’s tables.’

There is another interesting article published in the same newspaper, entitled ‘In gara per il migliore “Pampepato dell’anno”’ [Competing for the best ‘Pampepato of the year’], where the Terni pampepato is celebrated as ‘unique and found only in Terni and is also a symbol of tradition as evidenced by the ingredients themselves.’ (Il Messaggero of 15 December 2008).

‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’ is described in the cookery magazine ‘Cucina Moderna’ as the ‘classic Christmas sweet dish’ (January 2018, p. 98, Ed. Mondadori Group).

The second edition of the 2000 publication ‘La vera Umbria’ [True Umbria] features the recipe for ‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’, described as the typical sweet dish of Terni (La tradizione umbra nei piaceri della tavola, P. Caruso, edited by Grilligraf Collazzone).

In the publication ‘Terni: la città fra due fiumi’ [Terni, the city between two rivers] (ed. Vanni, 2006) in the series ‘Il turismo culturale: la rivista che ti guida’ [Cultural tourism: your guide], it is also stated that ‘in Terni, at Christmas time, there is no family, restaurant, gastronomy, bakery or oven that does not prepare pampepato […].’

‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’ also features in local competitions and gatherings.

The Terni branch of the Accademia Italiana della Cucina has for a number of years invited its members to present their home-made pampepato for tasting and to share their recipes. The best sweet, which is in line with tradition, is awarded a prize. Since 2009, in a similar vein, the Terni MET association has organised the ‘Pampepato of the Year’ award in which everyone can participate by submitting their product for scrutiny by a qualified jury made up of culinary experts, bakers, chocolatiers, sommeliers and representatives of sectors and professional bodies. The prize to be awarded to the best ‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’ is a wooden cake-maker’s spoon, which is returned every year by the winner of the previous competition to be given to this year’s winner. (‘The wooden spoon for the best Pampepato’, article in Il Messaggero of 5 January 2013).

On 10 February 2002, during a fair dedicated to ‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’, a group of Terni bakers produced a pampepato weighing 112 kg, the largest ever.

Finally, other highly significant indicators of the entrenched reputation of ‘Pampepato di Terni’/‘Panpepato di Terni’ are linked to its growing and important presence on the shelves of typical products, where it is always greatly appreciated as a gastronomic souvenir by the consumer.

Reference to publication of the product specification

(second subparagraph of Article 6(1) of this Regulation)

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 (www.politicheagricole.it) and clicking on ‘Qualità’ (at the top right of the screen), then on ‘Prodotti DOP, IGP e STG’ (on the left-hand side of the screen) and finally on ‘Disciplinari di produzione all’esame dell’UE’.

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

Information Notice – Public Consultation

Geographical indications from Japan

(2020/C 217/13)

The EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement (hereafter ‘the Agreement’) including a chapter on Geographical Indications (GIs) protecting many EU and Japanese GIs entered into force on 1 February 2019. Following Article 14.30 of the Agreement, the Japanese authorities have presented a list of additional GIs to be protected under the Agreement. The European Commission is currently considering whether these Geographical Indications shall be protected under the Agreement.

The Commission invites any Member State or third country or any natural or legal person having a legitimate interest, resident or established in a Member State or in a third country, to submit oppositions to such protection by lodging a duly substantiated statement.

Statements of opposition must reach the Commission within two months of the date of this publication. Statements of opposition should be sent to the following email address: AGRI-A4@ec.europa.eu

Statements of opposition shall be examined only if they are received within the time-limit set out above and if they show that the protection of the name proposed would:

(a)	conflict with the name of a plant variety or an animal breed and as a result is likely to mislead the consumer as to the true origin of the product;

(b)

be wholly or partially homonymous with that of a name already protected in the Union under Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), under Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products (2) and under Regulation (EU) 2019/787 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on the definition, description, presentation and labelling of spirit drinks, the use of names of spirit drinks in the presentation and labelling of other foodstuffs, the protection of geographical indications of spirit drinks, the use of ethyl alcohol distillates of agricultural origin in alcoholic beverages, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 110/2008 (3) or with one of the geographical indications from non-EU countries protected in the EU under bilateral agreements available at the following address: https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/food-farming-fisheries/food_safety_and_quality/documents/list-gis-non-eu-countries-protected-in-eu_en.pdf

(c)	in the light of a trade mark’s reputation and renown and the length of time it has been used, be liable to mislead the consumer as to the true identity of the product;

(d)	jeopardise the existence of an entirely or partly identical name or of a trade mark or the existence of products which have been legally on the market for at least five years preceding the date of the publication of this notice.

(e)	or if they can give details from which it can be concluded that the name for which protection is considered is generic.

The criteria referred to above shall be evaluated in relation to the territory of the Union, which in the case of intellectual property rights refers only to the territory or territories where the said rights are protected. The possible protection of these names in the European Union is subject to the successful conclusion of the discussions led under Article 14.30 of the Agreement and subsequent legal act.

List of Geographical Indications  (4)

No	Protected name in Japan	Transcription into latin alphabet (for information purpose only)	Short description (when necessary and for information purpose only)	Category of Product
1		Mito no Yawaraka Negi	Green onion	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
2		Matsudate Shibori Daikon	Japanese white radish (Daikon)	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
3		Taisyu Soba	Buckwheat and Buckwheat flour	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
4	/Yamagata Celery	Yamagata Celery	Celery	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
5		Nango Tomato	Tomato	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
6		Yamadai Kansho	Sweet potato	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
7	/	Iwadeyama Koridofu/ Iwadeyama Meisan Koridofu	Freeze dried bean curd	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
8		Kumamoto Akaushi	Beef	Fresh meat (and offal)
9	/	Futago Satoimo/ Futago Imonoko	Taro	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
10	/	Echizen Gani/Echizen Kani	Snow crab/Boiled snow crab	Fresh fish, molluscs, and crustaceans and products derived therefrom
11	/ Daisen Broccoli	Daisen Broccoli	Broccoli	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
12	/Okukuji Shamo Chicken	Okukuji Shamo	Chicken	Fresh meat (and offal)
13	/ Koge Hanagoshogaki	Koge Hanagoshogaki	Japanese persimmon	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
14	/ Kikuchi Suiden Gobo	Kikuchi Suiden Gobo	Burdock	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
15	/ Tsuruta Steuben	Tsuruta Steuben	Grape	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
16	/Ozasa Urui	Ozasa Urui	Hosta	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
17	/Tokyo Shamo	Tokyo Shamo	Chicken	Fresh meat (and offal)
18	/ Sayo Mochidaizu	Sayo Mochidaizu	Soy Beans	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
19	/Iburigakko	Iburigakko	Pickles	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
20	/Daiei Suika	Daiei Suika	Watermelon	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
21	/ Tsunan no Yukishita Ninjin	Tsunan no Yukishita Ninjin	Carrot	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
22	/Zentsujisan Shikakusuika	Zentsujisan Shikakusuika	Watermelon	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
23	/Hiba Gyu	Hiba Gyu	Beef	Fresh meat (and offal)
24	/Ibuki Soba/ /Ibuki Zairaisoba	Ibuki Soba/Ibuki Zairaisoba	Buckwheat	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
25	/Higashiizumo no Maruhata Hoshigaki/Higashiizumo no Maruhata Hoshikaki	Higashiizumo no Maruhata Hoshigaki	Dried Japanese Persimmon	Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed
26		Hokkaido	Wine	Wine
27		Nadagogo	Sake	Other alcoholic beverages
28		Harima	Sake	Other alcoholic beverages

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

(3)  OJ L 130, 17.5.2019, p. 1.

(4)  List of GIs registered in Japan provided by the Japanese authorities in the framework of the ongoing discussions according to Article 14.30 of the Agreement.