Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10181 – Entega/Viessmann/EMS/EPS)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 398/01)

On 3 June 2021, 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 German language 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 32021M10181. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

Communication in accordance with Article 34 (7)(a)(iii) of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council, on decisions relating to binding information issued by the customs authorities of the Member States concerning the classification of goods in the customs nomenclature

(2021/C 398/02)

The customs authorities shall revoke decisions relating to binding information from this day if they become incompatible with the interpretation of the customs nomenclature as a result of the following international tariff measures:

Classification Decisions, Classification Opinions or amendments to the Explanatory Notes of the Nomenclature of the Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding System, adopted by the Customs Cooperation Council (CCC document No NC2803 - report of the 67th session of the HS Committee):

AMENDMENTS TO THE EXPLANATORY NOTES TO BE DONE UNDER AN ARTICLE 8 PROCEDURE OF THE HS CONVENTION AND CLASSIFICATION OPINIONS AND DECISIONS EDITED BY THE HS COMMITTEE OF THE WCO

(67th SESSION OF THE HSC – APRIL 2021)

DOC. NC2803

Amendments of the Explanatory Notes of the Nomenclature annexed to the HS Convention

24.03 30.02 Chapter 65 73.23 85.01 87.03 95.03 95.05 (Page XX-9505-1. Part (A). Item (3))

T/1 T/12 T/15 T/27 T/16 T/14 T/13 T/15

Classification Opinions approved by the HS Committee

0410.00/1	T/18
2403.99/2	T/19
2711.19/1	T/20
7004.90/1	T/21
7312.10/1-2	T/22
8415.90/4	T/23
8708.99/6	T/24
9026.20/1	T/25
9503.00/13	T/26

Classification Opinions deleted by the HS Committee

8528.69/1-2

IJ/29

Classification Decisions approved by the HS Committee

2933.79 (INN: List 118) 2939.79 2939.80	T/5 T/9, T/10 T/10
INN: List 120	T/2
INN: List 121 INN: List 122 INN: List 123 INN: List 124	T/3 T/6 T/7 T/11

Information regarding the contents of these measures can be obtained from the Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union of the European Commission (rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 200, 1049 Brussels, Belgium) or can be downloaded from the internet site of this Directorate-General:

https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/calculation-customs-duties/what-is-common-customs-tariff/harmonized-system-general-information_en

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10452 – CPP Investments/FountainVest/Langdi Pharmaceutical)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 398/03)

On 27 September 2021, 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 32021M10452. 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.10229 – Allianz/Aviva Italia)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 398/04)

On 29 June 2021, 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 32021M10229. 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.10334 – BMW/Daimler/BP/Digital Charging Solutions)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 398/05)

On 24 September 2021, 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 32021M10334. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

Euro exchange rates (1)

30 September 2021

(2021/C 398/06)

1 euro =

	Currency	Exchange rate
USD	US dollar	1,1579
JPY	Japanese yen	129,67
DKK	Danish krone	7,4360
GBP	Pound sterling	0,86053
SEK	Swedish krona	10,1683
CHF	Swiss franc	1,0830
ISK	Iceland króna	150,90
NOK	Norwegian krone	10,1650
BGN	Bulgarian lev	1,9558
CZK	Czech koruna	25,495
HUF	Hungarian forint	360,19
PLN	Polish zloty	4,6197
RON	Romanian leu	4,9475
TRY	Turkish lira	10,2981
AUD	Australian dollar	1,6095
CAD	Canadian dollar	1,4750
HKD	Hong Kong dollar	9,0184
NZD	New Zealand dollar	1,6858
SGD	Singapore dollar	1,5760
KRW	South Korean won	1 371,58
ZAR	South African rand	17,5629
CNY	Chinese yuan renminbi	7,4847
HRK	Croatian kuna	7,4889
IDR	Indonesian rupiah	16 572,03
MYR	Malaysian ringgit	4,8475
PHP	Philippine peso	59,066
RUB	Russian rouble	84,3391
THB	Thai baht	39,235
BRL	Brazilian real	6,2631
MXN	Mexican peso	23,7439
INR	Indian rupee	86,0766

---

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

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions at its meeting on 15 April 2021 concerning a draft decision in case AT.40330 – Rail cargo

Rapporteur: Luxembourg

(2021/C 398/07)

Final Report of the Hearing Officer (1)

Case AT.40330 – Rail Cargo

(2021/C 398/08)

The draft decision, addressed to ÖBB (2), DB (3) and SNCB (4) (collectively ‘the Parties’), concerns a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 TFEU consisting of customer allocation and the exchange of commercially sensitive information related to the provision of cross-border rail cargo transport services in conventional sectors (other than the automotive sector) carried out on certain routes starting in, ending in or passing through Germany or the Netherlands, Austria or Hungary and (in some cases) Belgium. The draft decision finds that ÖBB and DB participated in this infringement between 8 December 2008 and 30 April 2014, and SNCB between 15 November 2011 and 30 April 2014.

On 4 April 2019, the Commission initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 (5) against the Parties with a view to engaging in settlement discussions with them under the Settlement Notice. (6)

Following settlement discussions (7) and settlement submissions (8) in accordance with Article 10a(2) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004, the Commission adopted a statement of objections addressed to the Parties on 4 December 2020.

In their respective replies to the statement of objections, the Parties confirmed, pursuant to Article 10a(3) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004, that the statement of objections reflected the contents of their settlement submissions and that they therefore remained committed to following the settlement procedure.

Pursuant to Article 16 of Decision 2011/695/EU, I have examined whether the draft decision deals only with objections in respect of which the Parties have been afforded the opportunity of making known their views. I conclude that it does so.

In view of the above, and taking into account that the Parties have not addressed any requests or complaints to me, (9) I consider that the effective exercise of the procedural rights of the Parties to the proceedings in this case has been respected.

---

(1)  Pursuant to Articles 16 and 17 of Decision 2011/695/EU of the President of the European Commission of 13 October 2011 on the function and terms of reference of the hearing officer in certain competition proceedings (OJ L 275, 20.10.2011, p. 29).

(2)  Österreichische Bundesbahnen-Holding Aktiengesellschaft and Rail Cargo Austria Aktiengesellschaft (together referred to as ‘ÖBB’).

(3)  Deutsche Bahn AG, DB Cargo AG and DB Cargo BTT GmbH (together referred to as ‘DB’).

(4)  Société Nationale des Chemins de fer belges/Nationale Maatschappij der Belgische Spoorwegen (SNCB/NMBS) SA de droit public/NV van publiek recht, LINEAS Group NV (formerly SNCB Logistics NV/SA) and LINEAS NV (formerly Xpedys NV/SA) (together referred to as ‘SNCB’).

(5)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 of 7 April 2004 relating to the conduct of proceedings by the Commission pursuant to Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 18).

(6)  Commission Notice on the conduct of settlement procedures in view of the adoption of Decisions pursuant to Article 7 and Article 23 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 in cartel cases (OJ C 167, 2.7.2008, p. 1).

(7)  The settlement meetings took place between 2 May 2019 and 28 August 2020.

(8)  The Parties submitted their formal requests to settle on 18 September 2020 (DB) and 21 September 2020 (ÖBB and SNCB).

(9)  Under Article 15(2) of Decision 2011/695/EU, parties to the proceedings in cartel cases that engage in settlement discussions pursuant to Article 10a of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004, may call upon the hearing officer at any stage during the settlement procedure in order to ensure the effective exercise of their procedural rights. See also paragraph 18 of Commission Notice 2008/C 167/01 on the conduct of settlement procedures in view of the adoption of Decisions pursuant to Article 7 and Article 23 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 in cartel cases (OJ C 167, 2.7.2008, p. 1).

SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DECISION

of 20 April 2021

relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

(Case AT.40330 – Rail cargo)

(notified under document number C(2021)2521 final)

(Only the English text is authentic)

(2021/C 398/09)

On 20 April 2021, the Commission adopted a decision relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. In accordance with the provisions of Article 30 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (1) , the Commission herewith publishes the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed, having regard to the legitimate interest of undertakings in the protection of their business secrets.

1.   INTRODUCTION

(1)

This Decision relates to a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘the Treaty’). The infringement concerned cross-border rail cargo transport services in the European Union (2) provided under the so-called freight sharing model (3) and carried out in blocktrains (4) by the three railway undertakings Österreichische Bundesbahnen (ÖBB), Deutsche Bahn (DB) and Société Nationale des Chemins de fer belges/Nationale Maatschappij der Belgische Spoorwegen (SNCB). The conduct amounted to anti-competitive customer allocation and lasted from December 2008 to April 2014.

2.   CASE DESCRIPTION

2.1.   Procedure

(2)

Following an application for immunity from fines under the Leniency Notice from ÖBB in April 2015 the Commission carried out unannounced inspections at the premises of DB in Germany in September 2015.

(3)

In October 2015, DB applied for a reduction of fines under the Leniency Notice.

(4)

The Commission sent several requests for information to various railway undertakings and in September 2016, SNCB applied for a reduction of fines under the Leniency Notice.

(5)

On 4 April 2019, the Commission initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 against the addressees of this Decision with a view to engaging in settlement discussions with them. Settlement meetings between each party and the Commission took place between May 2019 and August 2020. Subsequently, all parties submitted their formal request to settle pursuant to Article 10(2) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004. (5)

(6)

On 4 December 2020, the Commission adopted a Statement of Objections. All parties replied to the Statement of Objections confirming that it reflected the contents of their settlement submissions and that they remained committed to following the settlement procedure.

(7)

The Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions issued a favourable opinion on 15 April 2021.

(8)

On 16 April 2021, the Hearing Officer issued a final report in this case.

2.2.   Summary of the infringement

(9)

This case concerns customer allocation relating to cross-border rail cargo transport services by DB, ÖBB and SNCB. The anticompetitive conduct took place between December 2008 and April 2014. It concerned conventional transports of goods in blocktrains, except in the automotive sector, carried out under the so-called freight sharing model. Under the freight sharing model, railway undertakings cooperating on a given cross-border rail cargo transport service provide the customer with a single overall price for the entire service required under a single multilateral contract.

(10)

Cooperation by railway undertakings on the joint provision of cross-border rail cargo services as such, including joint pricing in the framework of the freight sharing model, is outside the scope of Article 101(1) of the Treaty by virtue of Council Regulation (EC) No 169/2009 (6) and is not put in question by the proceedings in this case. (7) However, apart from legitimate contacts in the context of cooperation in the framework of the freight sharing model, DB, ÖBB and SNCB held occasional meetings and had other contacts in which conduct took place which went beyond what was required to carry out joint cross border rail cargo transport services which do not fall under the exceptions foreseen by Council Regulation (EC) No 169/2009.

(11)

DB, ÖBB and SNCB protected each other’s position as lead carrier for existing business. Under the freight sharing model, the lead carrier is the railway undertaking which acts as main interlocutor with the customer, although all railway undertakings involved become parties to the transport contract (unlike in a sub-contracting relationship).

(12)

The role of lead carrier can have important advantages, notably in building and maintaining customer relationships, which potentially provide further and/or future business opportunities. (8) Mutual recognition of the role of lead carrier in ’existing business’ was therefore at the core of the collusive scheme operated by DB, ÖBB and SNCB. The conduct was implemented by contacts between DB, ÖBB, and later SNCB, at all levels of business operations in the undertakings. DB, ÖBB and SNCB were at the time all vertically integrated railway undertakings, providing both railway services (traction) and logistics / shipping agent services within their groups. (9)

(13)

The mutual understanding between the parties was that the lead carrier position for ‘existing business’ should be protected for the rail undertaking which held that position for a given existing business, and that any switching of the lead carrier position by that customer should be avoided. To protect the role of lead carrier, DB, ÖBB and SNCB abstained from making offers to potential other customers, or made cover quotes to potential other customers who asked for quotes for an ‘existing business’.

(14)

The collusive scheme was implemented through competitor contacts concerning the protection of the role of lead carrier for one of the parties or to agree amongst themselves which carrier would be the lead carrier for a given ‘existing business’ where it was occasionally in dispute.

(15)

The collusive scheme served to ensure that discussions during ongoing customer contracts or on the occasion of renewal/prolongation of customer contracts would not result in a change of the lead carrier.

(16)

The collusive scheme applied to cross-border rail cargo transport services on routes starting in, ending in or passing through Germany or Austria and carried out by DB and ÖBB.

(17)

Cross-border rail cargo transports carried out by DB and ÖBB in this way extended also to Hungary (where ÖBB had taken over the incumbent railway undertaking) and to the Netherlands (where DB had taken over the incumbent railway undertaking).

(18)

The same applied to transports starting or ending in Belgium carried out together with SNCB. SNCB participated in the infringement only to the extent that such trilateral transports were concerned.

(19)

There is a consistent pattern of collusive contacts between DB and ÖBB relating to the lead carrier role in rail cargo transport services on blocktrains carried out under the freight sharing model since 8 December 2008. Collusive trilateral contacts between DB, ÖBB and SNCB started on 15 November 2011. The last collusive contact between DB, ÖBB and SNCB took place on 30 April 2014. On this basis, the overall infringement is considered to have lasted from 8 December 2008 to 30 April 2014. The starting date for SNCB however, was 15 November 2011. The duration of the infringement has been determined on the basis of the documentary evidence in the Commission file proving the first and last collusive contacts between the parties.

(20)

SNCB did not participate in the scheme as concerns bilateral cross-border rail cargo transport services, which only DB and ÖBB carried out together.

2.3.   Addressees

(21)

This Decision is addressed to the following entities: ÖBB: — Österreichische Bundesbahnen-Holding Aktiengesellschaft; — Rail Cargo Austria Aktiengesellschaft; DB: — Deutsche Bahn AG; — DB Cargo AG; — DB Cargo BTT GmbH; SNCB: — Société Nationale des Chemins de fer belges/Nationale Maatschappij der Belgische Spoorwegen (SNCB/NMBS) SA de droit public/NV van publiek recht ; — LINEAS Group NV (formerly SNCB Logistics NV/SA); — LINEAS NV (formerly Xpedys NV/SA).

2.4.   Remedies

(22)

This Decision applies the 2006 Guidelines on Fines. (10)

2.4.1.   Basic amount of the fine

(23)

The relevant value of sales is each undertaking’s sales of conventional cross-border rail cargo transport services (except in the automotive sector) in 2013, provided on blocktrains under the freight sharing model and carried out in cooperation a) by the three railway undertakings DB, ÖBB and SNCB and starting or ending in or passing through Austria or Hungary, Germany or the Netherlands and Belgium and b) by DB and ÖBB and starting or ending in or passing through Austria or Hungary and Germany or the Netherlands.

(24)

Considering the nature of the infringement and the geographic scope the percentage of the variable amount of the fines as well as the additional amount (the ‘entry fee’) is set at 15% of the value of sales.

2.4.2.   Adjustments to the basic amount

Aggravating circumstances: recidivism

(25)

According to point 28 of the Guidelines on fines, where an undertaking continues or repeats the same or a similar infringement after the Commission or a national competition authority has made a finding that the undertaking infringed Article 101 or 102 of the Treaty, the basic amount will be increased by up to 100 % for each such infringement established.

(26)

Deutsche Bahn AG, the ultimate parent company of the group, was an addressee of a previous Commission cartel prohibition decision in case AT.39462 - Freight Forwarding in March 2012.

(27)

The basic amount of the fine for Deutsche Bahn AG is therefore increased by 50 %.

Mitigating circumstances

(28)

There are no mitigating circumstances.

Specific increase for deterrence

(29)

A deterrence multiplier of 1.1 is applied to DB due to its large worldwide turnover.

Application of the 10 % turnover limit

(30)

None of the fines calculated for any of the parties exceeds 10 % of the undertaking’s total turnover in 2019.

Application of the 2006 Leniency Notice

(31)

ÖBB was the first to submit information and evidence meeting the conditions of point 8(a) of the 2006 Leniency Notice in the infringement. ÖBB is therefore granted immunity from fines.

(32)

DB was the first undertaking to meet the requirements of points 24 and 25 of the 2006 Leniency Notice. DB applied for leniency at a relatively early stage of the investigation. It submitted evidence of the infringement, which represented significant added value with respect to the evidence already in the Commission’s possession. DB is therefore granted a reduction of 45 % of the fine.

(33)

SNCB was the second undertaking to meet the requirements of points 24 and 25 of the 2006 Leniency Notice. SNCB’s leniency application also represented added value and considerably facilitated the establishment of the infringement, notably with regard to DB. SNCB is therefore granted a reduction of 30 % of the fine.

Application of the Settlement Notice

(34)

According to point 32, the amount of the fine to be imposed on each party is further reduced by 10 %.

3.   CONCLUSION

(35)

The following fines were imposed pursuant to Article 23(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003: Undertaking Fines (EUR) ÖBB 0 DB 48 324 000 SNCB 270 000

---

(1)  OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 411/2004 (OJ L 68, 6.3.2004, p. 1).

(2)  The United Kingdom withdrew from the European Union as of 1 February 2020. Accordingly, any reference made to the EU in this Decision does not include the United Kingdom.

(3)  See below paragraphs 9ss.

(4)  Blocktrains are cargo trains shipped from one site (e.g. the production site of the vendor of the transported goods) to another site (e.g. a warehouse of the purchaser of the goods) without being split up or stored on the way. Such blocktrains serve high-volume customers, often carry a single commodity and run on the same unchanged destination for long periods. Rail cargo transport services covered by Commission Decision of 15 June 2015 in case AT.40098 - Blocktrains are excluded from the scope of this case.

(5)  OJ l 123, 27.4.2004, p.18.

(6)  Council Regulation (EC) No 169/2009 of 26 February 2009 applying rules of competition to transport by rail, road and inland waterway (OJ L 61, 5.3.2009, p. 1).

(7)  Joint price formation processes are provided for in Art. 2 (1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 169/2009.

(8)  Ancillary services offered may consist, for example, in transport to/from loading/unloading train stations and storage services for transported goods.

(9)  DB, ÖBB and SNCB are the incumbents in Germany, Austria and Belgium. DB took over cargo operations in the Netherlands from the former incumbent in 2003, ÖBB in Hungary in late 2007.

(10)  OJ C 210, 1.9.2006, p. 2.

Commission notice pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community

Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 398/10)

Member State	France
Route concerned	Tarbes – Paris (Orly)
Period of validity of the contract	From 1 June 2022 to 31 May 2026
Deadline for the submission of applications and tenders	1 December 2021 (12.00, Paris time)
Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation relating to the public tender and the public service obligation can be obtained	Syndicat mixte PYRÉNIA Bâtiment Pic du Midi Aéroport Tarbes-Lourdes-Pyrénées 65290 Juillan FRANCE Tel. +33 0562325651 Email: syndicat.mixte@pyrenia.fr Buyer profile (website): www.marches-publics.info

Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-dumping measures

(2021/C 398/11)

2.   Procedure

Union producers may submit a written request for a review. This request must contain sufficient evidence that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. Should the Commission decide to review the measures concerned, importers, exporters, representatives of the exporting country and Union producers will then be provided with the opportunity to amplify, rebut or comment on the matters set out in the review request.

3.   Time limit

Union producers may submit a written request for a review on the above basis, to reach the European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade (Unit G-1), CHAR 4/39, 1049 Brussels, Belgium (2) at any time from the date of the publication of the present notice but no later than three months before the date mentioned in the table below.

---

(1)  OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21.

(2)  TRADE-Defence-Complaints@ec.europa.eu

(3)  The measure expires at midnight (00:00) of the day mentioned in this column.

Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-subsidy measures

(2021/C 398/12)

1.   As provided for in Article 18(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European Union (1), the Commission gives notice that, unless a review is initiated in accordance with the following procedure, the countervailing measures mentioned below will expire on the date mentioned in the table below.

2.   Procedure

Union producers may submit a written request for a review. This request must contain sufficient evidence that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of subsidisation and injury. Should the Commission decide to review the measures concerned, importers, exporters, representatives of the exporting country and Union producers will then be provided with the opportunity to amplify, rebut or comment on the matters set out in the review request.

3.   Time limit

Union producers may submit a written request for a review on the above basis, to reach the European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade (Unit G-1), CHAR 4/39, 1049 Brussels, Belgium (2) at any time from the date of the publication of the present notice but no later than three months before the date mentioned in the table below.

4.   This notice is published in accordance with Article 18(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1037.

Product	Country(ies) of origin or exportation	Measures	Reference	Date of expiry (3)
Certain coated fine paper	The People’s Republic of China	Anti-subsidy duty	Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1187 of 3 July 2017 imposing a definitive countervailing duty on imports of certain coated fine paper originating in the People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 18 of the Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 171, 4.7.2017, p. 134)	5.7.2022

---

(1)  OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 55.

(2)  TRADE-Defence-Complaints@ec.europa.eu

(3)  The measure expires at midnight (00:00) of the day mentioned in this column

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.10486 — CDPQ/Centerbridge/Medical Solutions)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 398/13)

---

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

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.10443 — Allianz Capital/Aimco/Dalmore/Generation/Porterbrook)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 398/14)

---

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

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.10314 — Vinci/Energía y Servicios DINSA II)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2021/C 398/15)

---

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

Communication from the Commission published pursuant to Article 27(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 in Case AT.40305 - Network Sharing - Czech Republic

(2021/C 398/16)

1.   Introduction

(1)

According to Article 9 of the Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (1), the European Commission (‘Commission’) may decide – in cases where it intends to adopt a decision requiring that an infringement is brought to an end and the parties concerned offer commitments to meet the concerns expressed to them by the Commission in its preliminary assessment – to make those commitments binding on the undertakings. Such a decision may be adopted for a specified period and shall conclude that there are no longer grounds for action by the Commission.

(2)	According to Article 27(4) of the same Regulation, the Commission shall publish a concise summary of the case and the main content of the commitments. Interested parties may submit their observations within the time limit fixed by the Commission.

2.   Summary of the case

(3)

On 7 August 2019, the Commission adopted a Statement of Objections in which it expressed its preliminary concerns as to the compatibility with Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area of the horizontal network sharing agreements (‘NSAs’) concluded between T- Mobile Czech Republic a.s. (‘T-Mobile’) and O2 Czech Republic a.s. (‘O2’) (2) and then CETIN a.s. (‘CETIN’), which legally succeeded O2 as the Party to the NSAs and as the operator of the infrastructure concerned by the NSAs (3), as well as the Mobile Network Services Agreement (‘MNSA’) concluded between O2 and CETIN (4). T-Mobile, O2 and CETIN are collectively referred to as the ‘Sharing Parties’ in the present Communication.

(4)	On 14 February 2020, a Statement of Objections was addressed to the parent companies of the Sharing Parties, namely Deutsche Telekom AG and PPF Group N.V.

(5)

After careful analysis of the evidence on the file, including the arguments and evidence submitted by the parties to this proceeding in their replies to the SO and at the Oral Hearing (5), the Commission set out its concerns as regards the compatibility of the NSAs and the MNSA with Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement in the preliminary assessment within the meaning of Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, adopted on 27 August 2021. The preliminary assessment was addressed to the Sharing Parties and their parent companies.

(6)

The concerns expressed in the preliminary assessment differ from the objections expressed by the Commission in the Statement of Objections addressed to the parties to the proceedings. Solely the concerns expressed in the preliminary assessment form part of the Commission’s preliminary assessment within the meaning of Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.

(7)

The NSAs concern the sharing of passive (6) and active infrastructure (7) for 2G, 3G and 4G mobile telecommunications technologies, while spectrum and the core network remain separate for each operator. The cooperation comprises the entire territory of Czechia, with the exception of Prague and Brno. Approximately three quarters of subscribers in Czechia use the common network infrastructure of the Sharing Parties. The MNSA was concluded to govern the modalities of the mobile network services provided to O2 by CETIN, after the latter legally succeeded O2 as a contractual party in the NSAs.

(8)

According to the Commission’s preliminary assessment, the NSAs, as well as the MNSA, may restrict competition in violation of Article 101(1) of the TFEU by their effects. The Commission preliminarily considers that the NSAs (together with the MNSA), considered in their specific market context, reduce the Sharing Parties’ ability and incentives to unilaterally invest in network infrastructure and therefore may negatively affect the ability and incentives of T- Mobile and O2 to compete on the retail and wholesale markets for mobile telecommunications services in Czechia.

(9)

Specifically, in the preliminary assessment, the Commission considers that the NSAs (i) led to a lack of roll-out of the 2 100 MHz capacity band in Eastern Czechia by T-Mobile, as well as to restrictions of the Sharing Parties’ individual flexibility in rolling-out the 1 800 MHz band, and (ii) disincentivised the Sharing Parties from unilateral network deployments of any type due to financial disincentives as well as information exchange.

(10)

As regards (i), in the preliminary assessment, the Commission observes that T- Mobile’s technology allows it to optimally use its spectrum holdings and deploy LTE in the 2 100 MHz spectrum band (‘LTE2100’). (8) T-Mobile has made use of this ability in the area where it is the Master Operator (9) (the Western part of Czechia). However, the Commission’s preliminary concern is that T-Mobile was unable to deploy LTE2100 in the area where it is the Visitor operator and which is served by CETIN’s network (the Eastern part of Czechia), to the disadvantage of the subscribers in this part of the country. Moreover, capacity extensions on 1 800 MHz spectrum band could be added without any major installations and/or modifications only on specific sites based on the common network planning of the Sharing Parties.

(11)

As regards (ii), the Commission preliminarily concludes that the Visitor’s incentives to invest may be reduced. This is due to the fact that, as the Commission’s preliminary assessment suggests, network upgrades are charged by the Master Operator to the Visitor Operator at a price that is higher than the underlying costs. Thus, the agreed prices for network deployments exceed the underlying cost of such deployment that would have been incurred by the Visitor Operator if it were the Master Operator. Also, the Commission preliminarily considers that the scope of the information exchanged goes beyond what is strictly necessary for the functioning of the NSAs and includes strategic information that decreases the Sharing Parties’ incentives to compete with each other. As regards the information exchange, the Commission preliminarily considers that it is not counterbalanced by the structural separation of O2 and CETIN as CETIN – based on the provisions of the MNSA requiring CETIN to share certain information with O2 – does not function effectively as a ‘black box’, i.e. it does not effectively prevent information spill-over between T-Mobile and O2.

3.   The main content of the offered commitments

(12)

The parties subject to the proceedings do not agree with the Commission’s preliminary assessment. They have nevertheless offered commitments pursuant to Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, to meet the Commission’s competition concerns. The key elements of the commitments can be summarised as follows: — Network Modernization Commitment - deployment of multi-standard Radio Access Network (‘RAN’) equipment in the Mid-Band layers: existing equipment, including both hardware and software, on all existing sites where, by the end of March 2021, at least one Mid-Band layer has been active, will be replaced in order to be able to support both 4G and 5G operations in the Mid-Band layers. The upgrade of the existing hardware will enhance the capabilities of the RAN in the deployment of capacity layer bands, since i.a. the existing hardware supports the operation of LTE2100 only to a limited extent. This network modernisation commitment will occur within less than 5 years, after the Commencement Date (10). — Setting and review of the financial conditions for unilateral deployments - cost- based pricing for any investments demanded by the Visitor Operator to the Master Operator. — Improvement of the NSAs contractual provisions as regards information exchange - contractual changes to limit information exchange: — Streamline the governance structure involved in information exchange: remove one of the levels of the governance structure, limit working groups to technical staff only (involving non-technical staff only to the extent objectively necessary and under defined rules for their participation), working groups to be staffed on a need-to-know basis, and limit meetings of the working groups. — Limit the information exchanged: update and refine the list of categories of information that can be exchanged within each respective working group, specify what information may be handed out to the non-technical staff, commercially sensitive information to be classified as prohibited information, explicitly prohibit the exchange of capacity forecasts and traffic forecasts, remove the obligation to annually discuss changes of certain conditions of the NSAs. — MNSA Commitments - measures to ensure that CETIN acts as a ‘black box’ between T-Mobile and O2, and in particular the MNSA commitments : — specify how CETIN shall treat O2 under the MNSA compared to T- Mobile under the NSAs; — ensure that CETIN shall not inform O2 about or pass on or otherwise automatically make available to O2 commercially sensitive information; — ensure that CETIN shall not be constrained by O2 in changing the design and composition of the mobile network.

(13)	Furthermore, the commitments stipulate that an independent Monitoring Trustee shall be appointed in order to monitor the Sharing Parties’ compliance with the commitments.

(14)	The commitments with regard to the NSAs will remain in force until 28 October 2033. The commitments with regard to the MNSA would remain in force for a period of (i) the term of the MNSA or (ii) the term of the NSAs whichever of those terms ends earlier.

(15)	The commitments are published in full in English on the website of the Directorate-General for Competition at: https://ec.europa.eu/competition-policy/index_en

4.   Invitation to make comments

(16)	Subject to market testing, the Commission intends to adopt a decision under Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 declaring binding the commitments summarised above and published on the Internet, on the website of the Directorate-General for Competition.

(17)

In accordance with Article 27(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, the Commission invites interested third parties to submit their observations on the proposed commitments. These observations must reach the Commission not later than one month following the date of this publication. Interested third parties are also asked to submit a non-confidential version of their comments, in which any information they claim to be business secrets and other confidential information should be deleted and replaced as required by a non-confidential summary or by the words ’business secrets’ or ’confidential’.

(18)	Answers and comments should preferably be reasoned and should set out the relevant facts. If you identify a problem with any part of the proposed commitments, the Commission would also invite you to suggest a possible solution.

(19)

Observations can be sent to the Commission under reference number AT.40305 – Network Sharing – Czech Republic either by email (COMP-GREFFE- ANTITRUST@ec.europa.eu), by fax (+32 22950128) or by post, to the following address: European Commission Directorate-General for Competition Antitrust Registry B-1049 Bruxelles/Brussel BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1. With effect from 1 December 2009, Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty have become Articles 101 and, respectively, 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’). The two sets of provisions are in substance identical. For the purposes of this notice, references to Articles 101 and 102 of the TFEU should be understood as references to Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty when applicable.

(2)  The NSAs regarding 2G/3G and LTE mobile telecommunications technologies were concluded on 29 October 2013 and 2 May 2014, respectively.

(3)  As of 1 June 2015, CETIN owns and manages both fixed and mobile infrastructure formerly owned by O2, while O2 remained active as a Mobile Network Operator in the Czech Republic.

(4)  The MNSA was concluded on 2 June 2015.

(5)  The Oral Hearing took place on 15-17 September 2020.

(6)  Passive sharing involves sharing of basic infrastructure, such as the space at a rooftop of a building or on a telecommunications tower, the antenna masts, power supplies and air conditioning systems.

(7)  Active sharing involves sharing, in addition to the passive assets, the active radio equipment, meaning the base station, the antennas and, for the technologies applicable (2G and 3G), the controller nodes.

(8)  T-Mobile uses equipment which supports the Single RAN concept, that is, the flexible use of 2G, 3G and 4G mobile telecommunications technologies in the same band, as well as across different bands.

(9)  The radio access development and operation is shared according to the territoriality principle of Master/Visitor Operator structure, whereby each of T-Mobile and CETIN is in charge of the network in one side of the country, e.g. T-Mobile deploys, operates and maintains a consolidated mobile network infrastructure in the Western part of Czechia (i.e. it is the Master Operator in this part of the country) and serves the subscribers of both operators in this area.

(10)  Commencement Date means the date on which the Sharing Parties are notified by the Commission of the adoption of the final decision accepting these commitments pursuant to Article 9 of Regulation 1/2003 and closing case AT.40305.

Publication of the single document referred to in Article 94(1)(d) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council and of the reference to the publication of the product specification for a name in the wine sector

(2021/C 398/17)

This publication confers the right to oppose the application pursuant to Article 98 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) within two months from the date of this publication.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

’Dehesa Peñalba’

PDO-ES-02592

Date of application: 18 November 2019

1.   Name to be registered

Dehesa Peñalba

2.   Geographical indication type

PDO - Protected Designation of Origin

3.   Categories of grapevine products

1.

Wine

4.   Description of the wine(s)

RED WINE

—	Appearance: Clear, with medium to high intensity of colour, in shades ranging from brick red to purplish red.

—	Aroma: Medium to high intensity, with varietal notes characterised by fruits (red and/or black) and/or florals and/or balsamics, as well as notes imparted by the ageing process in the case of wines aged in wood (vanilla and/or wood and/or toasted and/or caramelised and/or spiced elements).

—

Taste: Wines should be balanced and redolent of fruits (red and/or black) and/or florals and/or balsamics, combined with notes imparted by the ageing process for wines aged in wood (vanilla and/or wood and/or toasted and/or caramelised and/or spiced elements). They are full-bodied with a medium-to-long finish.

(*)	Any values not shown here comply with limits laid down in EU legislation.

General analytical characteristics
Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)
Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)	12,5
Minimum total acidity	4,0 in grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid
Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)	20,00
Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)	150

5.   Wine making practices

a.   Essential oenological practices

Cultural practice

1.	The vines are trellised.

2.	The minimum planting density is 2 000 vines per hectare.

Specific oenological practice

1)

Winemaking conditions Young red wines: The grapes are hand-picked, placed in crates and then stored in a chiller to lower their temperature to between 5 °C and 10 °C. They are sorted by hand at the selection table and carried to the tanks by conveyor belt (no pumping equipment is used to lift the berries). A pre-fermentation cold soak (5-10 °C) for 5-8 days is practised. Before malolactic fermentation, the wines are aged on the lees for at least 15 days. Micro-oxygenation is carried out at a dosage rate of 15 ml per litre per month for 3 days and 6 ml per litre per month for 8 days. Spontaneous alcoholic fermentation takes place in stainless steel tanks. Extended maceration is practised during and after fermentation for at least 21 days. Aged red wines: The grapes are hand-picked, placed in crates and then stored in a chiller to lower their temperature to between 5 °C and 10 °C. They are sorted by hand at the selection table and carried to the tanks by conveyor belt (no pumping equipment is used to lift the berries). A pre-fermentation cold soak (5-10 °C) for 5-8 days is practised. Spontaneous alcoholic fermentation takes place in stainless steel tanks. Extended maceration is practised during and after fermentation for at least 21 days. Before malolactic fermentation, the wines are aged on the lees for at least 15 days. Micro-oxygenation is carried out at a dosage rate of 15 ml per litre per month for 3 days and 6 ml per litre per month for 8 days. Specific oenological practice

2)

Ageing conditions Ageing conditions vary by wine type, as follows: Monovarietal red wines: Aged in 225-litre oak barrels for 12-24 months Multivarietal red wines: Aged in 225- and/or 500-litre oak barrels and/or 5 000-litre wooden vats for 6-24 months Relevant restriction on making the wines The must may only be extracted by means of mechanical systems which do not damage the solid parts of the bunch, with a maximum average grape-to-wine ratio of 72 %. For red wine due to undergo ageing, pumps must not be used to transport the pulp to the tanks.

b.   Maximum yields

Young red wines

8 000 kilograms of grapes per hectare

Young red wines

57,60 hectolitres per hectare

Aged red wines

6 000 kilograms of grapes per hectare

Aged red wines

43,20 hectolitres per hectare

6.   Demarcated geographical area

The geographical area for ‘Dehesa Peñalba’ PDO is located in the municipality of Villabáñez (Valladolid). It is a continuous portion of land spanning 91,4287 hectares, identified by the following Land Parcel Information System (LPIS) references (*):

—	Parcelas [parcels] 5 121, 5 122, 5 123, 5 124 and 5 125, and recinto [plot] 3 of parcela 9 003 (irrigation channel), all in polígono [polygon] 6 of the municipality.

‘Dehesa Peñalba’ PDO wines must be made and aged in the area defined above.

(*)	As the LPIS is subject to updates, please note that these are references to the 2020 version.

7.   Main wine grapes variety(ies)

CABERNET SAUVIGNON

MERLOT

SYRAH

TEMPRANILLO

8.   Description of the link(s)

a)   Geographical area (natural and human factors)

a.1)   Natural factors

The geographical area defined in point 1,6 has its own unique terrain, soil and climate characteristics. These characteristics are uniform throughout the area and, as will be explained below, differentiate it from the surrounding areas. The area is what is traditionally known as a pago: a single uninterrupted portion of land, traditionally used to grow vines, with its own soil and microclimate characteristics that distinguish it from the surrounding areas. The unique nature of a pago is usually shaped by physical elements surrounding it – such as rivers, plains, woods, etc. – which help to create the specific conditions. In this demarcated area, this is the result of the following factors:

1.

The River Duero is ultimately responsible for the hilly topography of the region, having formed various structures by means of erosion and sedimentation, including river plain terraces – on which deposit matter (mainly sand and gravel) abounds – and the valley floor. As a result, the demarcated area is an area of gently sloping countryside (with a constant gradient of less than 5 %) sitting on the valley floor and flanked by two higher plains (the demarcated area is at an altitude of 720 m and the plains are at 800-840 m, at an incline of 5-15 %) which separate the area both to the north and to the south. The River Duero also borders the area to the north. The area beyond the river continues to be known as Dehesa Peñalba, but as the incline becomes steeper (on the slopes leading up to the high plains and the plains themselves), the land is no longer suitable for vine-growing. To the south it is bordered by a pine forest. These two elements – the high plains and the pine forest – have a buffering effect, shielding the area from adverse weather conditions.

2.

The demarcated area sits on a terrace of land formed from gravelly fluvial deposits, with a sandy top layer on a bedrock of marly limestone. The soil is notable for its pebbles, gravel and an average sand content of 78 %, compared to the less sandy soils (around 60 %) found in the areas to the west and the more clay-rich soils with marl and limestone deposits found on the high plains and on the slopes leading up to them, where the incline is greater. As a result, the demarcated area offers a dry, sandy topsoil with filtering properties: an area of warm earth but with a cool base and healthy water reserves. It is poor in both organic matter and nutrients.

3.

The fact that the elements surrounding the area act as a buffer means that it is somewhat shielded from adverse conditions such as extreme temperatures, low levels of moisture, punishing winds, and so on. As a result the area has its own microclimate, with milder temperatures (an annual average of 12 oC, roughly half a degree warmer than the surrounding area), particularly in spring and autumn. It has good wind coverage (west to east) and is free of frost for longer than the surrounding area (206 days per year compared to 200).

In summary, the demarcated area known as Dehesa Peñalba is located in a river basin on the valley floor, where the ground is level and the land homogeneous. Its north-west/south-west orientation is ideal for winegrowing, and the soil can be described as warm and poor in view of the high level of sand and coarse elements (pebbles and gravel). These in turn render it highly permeable and reflective of the sun’s rays, protected as it is by a pair of marly limestone plains to the north and south, which shield and enclose it thanks to the altitude difference. The demarcated area is also influenced by the pine forest which runs along its southern and western borders, while the River Duero skirts along its northern and eastern edges. An analysis of the physical environment shows that the demarcated area known as Dehesa Peñalba is a clearly defined site with its own uniform soil and climate conditions that set it apart from its surroundings. This is the result of geomorphological, lithological and orographic formation processes and the presence of natural barriers, such as a river, woods, slopes and high plains.

a.2)   Human factors

Experience gained in the demarcated area’s vineyards over the last 18 years has led to the introduction of a number of vine varieties that are particularly well suited to the local environment, resulting in grapes with a high concentration of polyphenols – particularly in terms of total anthocyanins and tannin content.

—	Tempranillo: This is the most important variety grown in the Dehesa Peñalba vineyard. Thanks to green cover crops in the rows and deep soil work near the trunks, complemented by meticulous trellising, it is in perfect harmony with the local area.

—	Syrah: This is the second most characteristic variety. With its longer growth cycle, it enjoys ideal conditions in this area (clement springs and autumns), allowing its varietal qualities to be expressed to their fullest.

—	Cabernet Sauvignon: As with Syrah, the microclimate in the demarcated area enables this grape to reach its fullest potential, though at the same time limits its yield.

—	Merlot: Whereas this grape tends to suffer from insufficient water in the surrounding areas, the subsoil in the demarcated area offers sufficient water reserves for it to ripen in an optimal, balanced manner.

In order to improve the conditions in which these varieties are grown and ripen, the viticulture techniques practised during the vine growth cycle are ones that tend to give lower yields per hectare, resulting in a higher quality of raw material with a consistent degree of ripeness.

Sustainable viticulture practices are used, ensuring maximum respect for the environment. The vineyard parcels are certified as organic.

Following on from this careful process in the vineyard, painstaking production practices are applied at the winery. The following steps are the most important:

—

The grapes are hand-picked, placed in crates and then stored in a chiller to lower their temperature to between 5 °C and 10 °C. The grapes are hand-sorted at the selection table and lifted by conveyor belt (pumps are not used) so there is no oxidation before they arrive in the tanks and maceration can take place in the best conditions.

—	Maceration is practised during and after fermentation for at least 21 days.

—	Before malolactic fermentation, the wines are aged on the lees, resulting in micro-oxygenation

b)   Quality and characteristics of the product owing principally or solely to the geographical area

‘Dehesa Peñalba’ PDO wines are reds with a deep, sustained colour (high colour intensity, bluish-red tonality and good stability). They are highly aromatic, with a predominance of ripe red and black fruits, especially when young. They have a consistent structure due to their stable high polyphenol content, with mild, long-lasting tannins. This results in highly elegant wines that are medium- to full-bodied and full of flavour and volume, with a long finish.

c)   Description of the link – interaction between natural and human factors and the characteristics of the product

The demarcated area for ‘Dehesa Peñalba’ PDO occupies an uninterrupted stretch of land which, as described above, boasts its own uniform soil and microclimatic characteristics which set it apart from other areas in the vicinity. These natural conditions, together with the choice of varieties, sustainable vineyard practices and a painstaking production method, make it possible to obtain a product (wine) with specific characteristics. This statement is borne out by the following features:

1.

The soil, defined as poor yet warm land with a high level of sand and coarse elements (pebbles and gravel) which render it highly permeable and reflective of the sun’s rays, boosts the ripening of the grape and promotes phenomena such as skin pigmentation, resulting in grapes with higher polyphenol content, particularly anthocyanins and tannins.

2.

As it is a level area with good orientation, protected by two higher plain formations and by a pine forest, and delimited to the north by the River Duero, the demarcated area is framed by natural barriers. This means that the grapes can reach perfect ripeness, as they receive more ground-reflected irradiance, and the vines are offered protection from extreme weather conditions, meaning that conditions are more clement at two key times for the vine cycle: spring, when flowering and fruit set take place, and autumn, when the grapes are at the final stage of the ripening process. This allows the vine to have a longer growth cycle. The area is free of frost for longer – so the vines have more days to develop and mature – and has a higher average annual temperature than the surrounding areas. This all conspires to afford a more balanced ripening, boosting phenomena such as the pigmentation of red grape skins and producing grapes with higher polyphenol content, which in turn gives the wines more polyphenols and lengthens their life thanks to their increased structure and greater concentration of total anthocyanins and tannins.

3.

The warm, sandy soil and milder climate (more clement springs and autumns) mean that the Tempranillo variety and – in particular – the non-native varieties with longer growth cycles (the French varieties Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot and Syrah) have adapted very well, allowing the grapes to ripen and the vines to complete their growth cycle in a more balanced and comprehensive manner, meaning that certain components (total anthocyanins and aromas) are found in greater concentrations than in the grapes grown in the surrounding area.

4.

The choice of varieties, coupled with sustainable vineyard management practices, makes it possible to obtain an optimum raw material with which to make ‘Dehesa Peñalba’ PDO wines: — Tempranillo provides structure, red fruit and forest fruit aromas, and sustained depth of colour; — Cabernet Sauvignon provides volume, length and long-lasting tannins, as well as intense ripe fruit and spiced notes; — Merlot gives elegance, very mild tannins, red fruit and a good balance between acidity and pH; — Syrah provides silky tannins, black fruit, and pH and acidity levels that provide a good deal of freshness. In short, the Tempranillo and Cabernet varieties yield wines that last, thanks to their volume, structure and length, while Syrah and Merlot give freshness, acidity, aromatic intensity, elegance and finesse.

5.

Picking the grapes by hand, placing them in crates and then storing them in a chiller to lower their temperature to between 5 °C and 10 °C prevents oxidation and protects the colour (anthocyanin compounds). Sorting the grapes by hand at the selection table and lifting them by conveyor belt (without pumping) means there is no oxidation before they arrive in the tanks and maceration can take place in the best conditions. All of this means that the cold soak begins with the grapes intact, which improves aromatic potential and colour extraction.

6.	The maceration process during and after fermentation is long enough (at least 21 days) to obtain higher concentrations of colour compounds (anthocyanins and tannins), to release the free aromas, and to give more structured and potentially longer-lasting wines.

7.

Ageing on the lees prior to malolactic fermentation – causing micro-oxygenation – promotes increased extraction and lengthens the wines’ lifespan by increasing the amount of phenolic compounds, such as tannins and anthocyanins because it promotes the formation of pyranoanthocyanins, anthocyanins and flavanols, which need acetaldehyde to form so that coloured ethyl-bridged adducts can be created (oxygen is needed for acetaldehyde formation). Thus, the practice of micro-oxygenation before malolactic fermentation improves the wines’ chromatic characteristics and colour stability. Mouthfeel is also improved in terms of body and astringency. A further positive effect of micro-oxygenation is that it improves wine aroma by reducing vegetal qualities. Micro-oxygenation allows compounds such as pyrazines and thiols, which are oxidised by oxygen, to be reduced.

As has already been explained, testing has shown that the grapes grown in the demarcated area have higher concentrations of anthocyanins, as well as tannin composition. These are transferred in the winemaking process: maceration allows these substances to seep into the wine, giving the wines more intensity and a bluish-red tonality when young, as well as a longer life thanks to the formation of more stable colourants. As a result, ‘Dehesa Peñalba’ PDO wines have good intensity of colour, generally with notes of ripe red and/or black fruits. They are medium- to full-bodied, round wines that are mature and have a long finish, with a high concentration of polyphenolic pigments, giving more structured wines, with a more stable colour. As a result they last longer and are more suited for ageing, including bottle-ageing, than wines produced in the surrounding area.

More specifically, according to research by the Oenology Group at the Regional Institute of Applied Scientific Research (part of the University of Castile-La Mancha’s Food Technology Area), it is basically possible to distinguish ‘Dehesa Peñalba’ PDO wines from wines made in the adjacent areas that have been aged for a similar length of time (‘Ribera del Duero’ PDO and ‘Castilla y León’ PGI wines) because the former have larger quantities of monomeric anthocyanins and these are more inherently stable (with a greater concentration of malvidin-3-glucoside and a larger proportion of the more stable anthocyanins, such as p-Coumaroylated anthocyanins and caffeoylated anthocyanins).

While the demarcated geographical area for ‘Dehesa Peñalba’ PDO lies within the area for ‘Castilla y León’ PGI and is near the ‘Ribera del Duero’ PDO, and although the wines do have the general characteristics of the PGI, they also have some substantially different qualities and some other characteristics not found in ‘Ribera del Duero’ PDO wines.

A comparison of ‘Dehesa Peñalba’ PDO, ‘Castilla y León’ PGI and ‘Ribera del Duero’ PDO is as follows:

Higher alcoholic strength

‘Castilla y León’ PGI	‘Dehesa Peñalba’
> 11,0	> 12,5

Lower yield per hectare

‘Castilla y León’ PGI	‘Dehesa Peñalba’
16 000 kg	8 000 kg for young reds
	6 000 kg for aged reds

Higher volatile acidity

‘Castilla y León’ PGI	‘Dehesa Peñalba’
< 13,36 meq/l	< 20 meq/l

Higher alcoholic strength

‘Ribera del Duero’ PDO	‘Dehesa Peñalba’
> 11,0 for whites
> 11,5 for reds	> 12,5

Lower yield per hectare

‘Ribera del Duero’ PDO	‘Dehesa Peñalba’
7 000 kg	6 000 kg for aged reds

Higher volatile acidity

‘Ribera del Duero’ PDO	‘Dehesa Peñalba’
< 8,33 meq/l	< 20 meq/l

According to research by the University of Castile-La Mancha, they also have a greater concentration of monomeric anthocyanins:

‘Ribera del Duero’ PDO	‘Dehesa Peñalba’
< 59 mg/l	< 223 mg/l

While parts of the demarcated area (recintos 1 and 2 of parcela 5121, and recinto 3 of parcela 5122) have other owners, the application has been submitted by the only winery that is currently present in the demarcated area. Other producers would be able to join the project in the future if they wished.

d)   Informal interaction

Dehesa Peñalba has long been a sought-after site among marquises, bishops and nobles, who have recognised the potential of this land on the banks of the River Duero since antiquity.

Numerous written and bibliographic sources attest to the long history of the town of Peñalba de Duero and the localities which fall within its bounds, as also to vine cultivation and its commercial ends or to the obligations due towards the feudal lords in the form of tithes of must obtained from this land.

In the fourteenth century the Libro Becerro de las Behetrías de Castilla [‘Vellum Tome of the Free Towns of Castile’] was compiled by order of Pedro I of Castile, listing the various counties and free towns of which the Kingdom of Castile was composed. It contains accounts of the different towns governed under the ‘free town’ [behetría] system, their legal status, the economic entitlement of the king and the rights of the lords. A number of manuscript copies survive, although the Royal Chancellery in Valladolid houses one of the very oldest.

Within the dominion of the principality of Valladolid (the ‘Merindad del Infantado de Valladolid’ or, in Old Spanish, ‘Merindat del infantazgo de vallit’), Villabáñez (‘Villa hanes’) and Peñalba (‘Peñalva’) both feature.

‘In 1751, the town of Villabáñez came under three jurisdictions’ within the administrative district of Portillo in the Province of Madrid: it was ruled by the Cabildo [“Council”] of Valladolid Cathedral and by the Marchioness of Camarasa and the Marquis of Revilla, both resident in Valladolid. At that time the municipality of Villabáñez comprised 11 423 plots or obradas [an old agricultural measure] of land, of which 600 were vineyard, amounting to 1 200 aranzadas [another old agricultural measure]... .’

‘The municipality of Peñalba de Duero consisted of 1 923 obradas of land, of which 560 were unirrigated fields, 6 meadows (4 of them commons), 7 planting beds (commons), 500 of mountain land with oak and holm oak (commons), 650 vineyards in Dehesa de Peñalba la Verde [“the Green”] ... .’

Although several different names are used in the historical documents – ‘Dehesa’, ‘La Dehesa’, ‘Dehesa de Peñalba’ and ‘Peñalba La Verde’ – they all refer to the same place, which has been known as Dehesa Peñalba for the last 30 years. This also shows that in this context the term ‘Dehesa’ is a toponym and has nothing to do with livestock (the Spanish word dehesa refers to a traditional form of rearing livestock on poor or non-agricultural land).

In 1995 the decision was taken to resume cultivation, planting a selection of vine varieties with a medium-to-long growth cycle, and a winery was built with the very latest in winemaking technology. This allows the potential of the grape to be fully harnessed and transformed into wines of international renown.

9.   Essential further conditions

Legal framework:

In national legislation

Type of further condition:

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition:

The year of harvest must be stated on the labels of the protected wines.

Wines of the ‘Dehesa Peñalba’ PDO may use the term roble or ‘oak’ on the label, provided that they comply with current applicable legislation.

Wines of the ‘Dehesa Peñalba’ PDO may make use of the traditional terms ‘Crianza’, ‘Reserva’ and ‘Gran Reserva’ on the label, provided that they fulfil the terms of use set out in the current applicable legislation.

Link to the product specification

www.itacyl.es/documents/20143/342640/PPTA+PCC+VP+DEHESA+PE%C3%91ALBA+Rev+0+%281%29.docx/3066f78c-4629-ae2d-ea64-1c0f64b265e9

---

(1)  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

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

(2021/C 398/18)

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

’Увс чацаргана/Uvs chatsargana’

EU No: PGI-MN-02143 – 2 June 2016

PDO ( ) PGI (X )

1.   Name(s) [of PDO or PGI]

’Увс чацаргана/Uvs chatsargana’

2.   Member State or Third Country

Mongolia

3.   Description of the agricultural product or foodstuff

3.1.   Type of product

Class 1.6 Fruit, vegetables and cereals fresh or processed.

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

’Увс чацаргана/Uvs chatsargana’, the Seabuckthorn from Uvs, refers to berries of which the Latin name is Hippophae rhamnoides. It is a cultivated species of a flowering plant in the family Elaeagnaceae.

’Увс чацаргана/Uvs chatsargana’ can take different colours generally yellow or orange but can also sometimes be reddish, cream of maroon.

It is characterized by its smell and size and has an elliptical or bulb shape. The elliptical berries have a length of 11 to 13 mm and a width of 8 to 10 mm. The round ones (bulbs) have a diameter of 6 to 9 mm. According to their form they weigh between 0,3 and 0,8 g (50-96 g/100 fruits).

The fruit pulp is juicy, not acidic; it has also an aromatic smell and a sour taste.

The seed is of white, brown, black, or shiny brown colour with a length of 4-7 mm, and width of 2-3 mm and the weight is around 13 gr for 1 000 seeds.

Moreover, depending on the harvest time, either in autumn or in winter, the berry will either be juicy, and therefore dedicated to juice processing, or it will be full of fat and thus processed into oil, respectively. The physical and organoleptic characteristics of the product are shown below (Table 1).

Table 1.

The physical and organoleptic characteristics:

Types	Taste	Smell	Weight (g)
Elliptical yellow	Sweet and sour	Sour	0,6-0,8
Elliptical orange	Oily	Flavorous	0,6-0,8
Bulb yellow	Sweet	Sour	0,3-0,4
Bulb orange	Sour oily	Sour	0,3-0,4

Uvs Seabuckthorn brings together fruity, acidulous, and subtly sweet flavour pairings.

’Увс чацаргана/Uvs chatsargana’ is particularly rich and has a higher content of fat produced from all its parts (seed, flesh, skin), carotene, vitamin B1 and vitamin C as shown in the table below.

Table 2.

Nutritional components of berry pulp (fresh weight):

No.	Nutritional components	Scale	Minimum amount of Uvs Seabuckthorn
1	Fat	%	2,50
2	Protein	%	1,4
3	Vitamin C	mg/kg	128
4	Vitamin B1	mg/kg	0,84
5	Carbohydrate	%	8,9
6	Acidic	%	0,75
7	Moisture	%	78,13
8	Carotene	mg/100gr	2,32

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

—

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

All steps in production must take place in the defined geographical area: from the plantation to the harvest.

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

—

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

Packaged products must contain the following information: raw materials of product, product name, manufacturer’s name and address, product’s serial number, volume and parcel, production date, storage period and the end of period, storage condition, and nutrition facts.

The packets and containers of the product shall bear the name ‘УВС ЧАЦАРГАНА’ and the following logos (in English and Mongolian):

4.   Concise definition of the geographical area

The geographical area for the production of ’Увс чацаргана/Uvs chatsargana’, consists of 10 administrative divisions (soums) of Uvs Province located in north-western Mongolia. These are the soums of Davst, Sagil, Turgen, Ulaangom, Tarialan, Naranbulag, Malchin, Zuungovi, Khyargas and Tes. They are located in the surroundings with a distance of approximately 50 km of the Uvs Lake basin.

5.   Link with the geographical area

A strong causal link exists between the quality of ’Увс чацаргана/Uvs chatsargana’ and its geographical origin.

The geographical area is situated in the Uvs province. The geographical area is surrounded by the Altai Mountains with altitudes reaching 4 000 m and presents in its center a wide plain including the Uvs Lake which is salty as it is the remainder of a sea. Like the Dead Sea, the Uvs Lake is empty of fishes or of any kind of living form, but presents big concretions of salt apparent on its shores.

The Uvs lake basin presents soils which appear to have a particular composition with extremely high rates of exchangeable CaO, of MgO and K20.

The basin area enjoys a low pluviometry, which accentuates the calcium rate in the water and the soil. Indeed, the rain average is estimated to 161,5 mm by year and on average there are 7 months without any rain per year. This low pluviometry keeps the Calcium in the soils as it is not washed away. In contrast to the low precipitation, the number of sunshine hours is very high.

In winter, snow is covering the southern and western mountains and due to the high altitudes is melting only gradually in spring and summer. As a result, myriads of streams and rivers are carrying melt water to the cultivation areas and fill underground water basins. As the melting proceeds gradually the cultivation areas enjoy a relatively even inflow of water which benefits productivity of ’Увс чацаргана/Uvs chatsargana’ growing and the quality of the berries.

The ’Увс чацаргана/Uvs chatsargana’ grows in a natural environment that is extremely harsh with temperatures fluctuating between +36 °C in summer and -49.6°C in winter. In order to resist these exceptionally high temperature oscillations, ’Увс чацаргана/Uvs chatsargana’ develops a higher content of oil to protect itself and also a high content of carotene and other substances. A study has observed that ’Увс чацаргана/Uvs chatsargana’ contains 2,5 times more palmitic acid compared to seabuckthorns in other regions in Mongolia.

Plantations of ’Увс чацаргана/Uvs chatsargana’ have positive environmental externalities in the region to prevent from sand movement and desertification.

The elements of the soil of the Uvs basin namely its content in Calcium and other subtances and the particular harsh climate conditions influence the local cultivations around the Uvs lake and they also have an impact on the qualities of ’Увс чацаргана/Uvs chatsargana’. Indeed the berries have a higher yield than in other Mongolian provinces (namely Tuv and Selenge provinces). The berries which produce oil from all its parts (seed, lash and shell) have also a particularly high content of oil, high rates of vitamins such as vitamins C, B1 and B6 and carotene. Thanks to the high number of sunshine hours, the berries also develop a rich aroma.

Originally, the seabuckthorn is a wild berry and historically, the traditional nomadic lifestyle of Mongolian people implied a specific diet. It consisted mainly of dairy product and meat. In consequence, several Mongolians suffered from dietary deficiencies, especially vitamins. It appeared that on the western part of Mongolia, in the region of Uvs where the seabuckthorn was endemic and the inhabitants were eating it, the inhabitants were in a better shape than the other inhabitants. That’s one of the reasons why wild seabuckthorn research started from 1960 and several selected varieties of the berry were planted in some parts of the Uvs province.

Thanks to its specific qualities and nutrients ’Увс чацаргана/Uvs chatsargana’ also enjoys a reputation both nationally and internationally.

The specific characteristics are notably recognized by consumers locally but also internationally, especially in Japan and Korea where ’Увс чацаргана/Uvs chatsargana’ is used as a raw material for organic juices and cosmetic products (source: ‘Linking people, places and products’ Ts. Enkh-Amgalan, 2009).

Reference to publication of the specification

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

—

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

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

(2021/C 398/19)

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

‘Carne Ramo Grande’

EU No: PDO-PT-02640 – 13 October 2020

PDO (X) PGI ( )

1.   Name(s)

’Carne Ramo Grande’

2.   Member state or third county

Portugal

3.   Description of the agricultural product or foodstuff

3.1.   Type of product

Class 1.1. Fresh meat (and offal)

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

Fresh, refrigerated and frozen meat taken from cattle of the Ramo Grande breed that have been entered in the herd book for the Ramo Grande cattle breed and which were born, reared and slaughtered in the defined geographical area in accordance with this specification.

‘Carne Ramo Grande’ can be presented for sale in carcass, half-carcass or quarter-carcass form, as well as cuts which can either be whole or sliced. As well as the traditional presentation formats - the carcass or packaged cuts (whole or sliced), ‘Carne Ramo Grande’ can also be presented for sale in the form of packaged minced meat.

Meat that is bright red in colour (tending towards more intense upon contact with air and the older the animal from which it is taken), with a firm consistency as a result of the interfascicular connective tissue present in variable proportions and with the aromatic smell that is intrinsic to the species. Well-distributed fat at the subcutaneous, intracavity, perimuscular and intramuscular levels. Pearly white fat, with a firm consistency after the carcass has cooled. Not greasy to the touch.

Five age categories have been defined:

—	Vitelão [yearling] – meat taken from bovine carcasses aged at least 8 but not more than 12 months, classified in the ‘Z’ category and with a minimum carcass weight of 110 kg.

—	Novilho/a [young bull/heifer] - meat taken from bovine carcasses aged at least 12 but not more than 24 months in the case of whole male carcasses (category ‘A’) and at least 12 months for females (category ‘E’), with a minimum carcass weight of 130 kg (category ‘A’) and 120 kg (category ‘E’).

—	Macho inteiro (Touro) [whole male carcass (bull)] - meat taken from whole male carcasses aged at least 24 months (category ‘B’) and with a minimum carcass weight of 200 kg.

—	Castrado [castrated bull or steer] - meat taken from castrated male bovine carcasses aged at least 12 months (category ‘C’) and with a minimum carcass weight of 130 kg.

—	Vaca [cow]- meat taken from the carcasses of female bovines that have already calved, classified in category ‘D’ and with a minimum carcass weight of 200 kg.

The meat is tender, succulent and tasty. Meat in the Vitelão and Novilho/a categories is more tender but the meat of the other age categories is just as succulent and tasty.

Carcass classification

Carcasses classified in the following identified categories are allowed.

—	Conformation:

Novilho/a [Young bull/heifer]; Macho inteiro (Touro) [Whole male (bull)]; Castrado [Castrated bull/steer] - categories S, E, U, R and O are allowed.

Other age categories - given the morphological and functional characteristics that are specific to the Ramo Grande breed and the type of livestock management practised, particularly as regards the sex, age and weight of the animals at slaughter, category ‘P’ carcasses are also allowed as well as the categories listed above.

—	Fat cover score:

Carcasses with a fat cover score of 1 are not allowed.

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

The animals are fed in accordance with traditional cattle-rearing practices. The basis of their diet is grazing on natural or improved pastures, used for direct grazing and offering a mixture of grasses and legumes, such as Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass), Lolium multiflorum (Italian ryegrass), Trifolium repens (white clover), Trifolium pratense (red clover) and Dactylis glomerata (cocksfoot), all of which are available all year round thanks to the favourable soil and climate conditions in the Azores.

The calves feed on their mothers’ milk for at least the first three months. They are weaned at 6 - 7 months. As the calves accompany their mothers to the pastures until that time, they also feed on pasture and forage.

The adult cattle feed on fresh grass and their diet is also supplemented with grass silage, hay, green maize or maize silage or other feed from the farm (e.g. maize grains, dry maize husks, sweet potato stalks, sweet pittosporum) or from other farms in the archipelago of the Azores.

When the cattle’s nutritional needs are not fully met by grazing (typically in small, scattered holdings), particularly during the finishing stage or if adverse weather conditions lead to food shortages, compound feed can be administered for energy and protein. Supplementary feed sourced outside the Azores archipelago must never account for more than 50 % of the dry matter in the total annual diet of the animals.

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

Birth, rearing and slaughter.

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

—

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

Irrespective of the presentation format, ‘Carne Ramo Grande’ must feature one of the following wordings: ‘Carne Ramo Grande - Denominação de Origem Protegida’ [Carne Ramo Grande - Protected Designation of Origin] or ‘Carne Ramo Grande DOP’ [Carne Ramo Grande PDO].

4.   Concise definition of the geographical area

The geographical area for ‘Carne Ramo Grande’ is the archipelago of the Azores, which is formed by nine islands: Santa Maria, São Miguel, Terceira, Graciosa, São Jorge, Pico, Faial, Flores and Corvo.

5.   Link with the geographical area

The archipelago of the Azores has a temperate maritime climate with mild temperatures and a narrow temperature range, high relative humidity and rainfall. Its volcanic soils have loam, sandy loam and clay loam textures and are rich in organic matter and potassium.

This soil-climate combination naturally provides conditions that are exceptionally well-suited to grass production, which means that the animals can graze 365 days a year.

This production system is essentially dependent on grazing and the production of forage. The products are obtained using environmentally sustainable methods and there is very little input from outside the farm.

The soil and climate conditions in the Azores are conducive to grassland development all year round. However, it fluctuates with the changes in temperature and rainfall levels. Consequently, grass production is at its peak in spring/summer. Biodiversity is high in the pasturelands and this allows them to cover most of the nutritional needs of Ramo Grande cattle all year round. Cattle-farming in the Azores has always been based on making good use of natural resources, with strong links to the natural environment and a focus on sustainability. The general characteristics of the Ramo Grande native breed are influenced by the natural conditions in the archipelago and by the use traditionally given to animals of this breed. These animals have always been kept for three reasons (as draught animals and for their meat and milk). Farmers used to use Ramo Grande bulls to service the females for one or two breeding seasons and then castrate them and train them for ploughing and as draught animals. They would meet these needs and also gradually provide the meat and milk that were essential in the farmers’ diet. As the cattle were reared in a subsistence agriculture model, farmers used to spend a lot of time in close proximity with their animals. The extensive farming and the specific expertise of the farmers (as regards the animals’ diet and livestock management) ensured excellent living conditions for the animals. This has helped make the quality of the products obtained so distinctive. Given their main role (as draught animals), there has always been a great deal of human contact with these animals as they had to be taught to perform their tasks. They showed great readiness to learn and were very docile, particularly towards their owners, who for their part took every care to ensure that they were fed in accordance with their efforts and to protect them from the cold or other adverse weather conditions. They were mostly housed in ‘atafonas’(mills), ‘palheiros’ (straw lofts) and ‘lojas’ (workshops) at people’s homes, as they provided warmth at the coldest times of year. This meant they were kept in close proximity to people and this fondness for the animals was handed down from generation to generation. Nowadays, there are cultural events (parades, competitions and ethnographic displays, often with a link to religious rituals in honour of the Holy Spirit) which bring the breeders of these cattle together, strengthening ties and gathering people that appreciate and take pride in the fact that they breed these animals. It is important to note that although the average number of cattle per farm is low, their continued existence is proof of the strong emotional link with these animals.

The characteristics of ‘Carne Ramo Grande’, in terms of taste, tenderness and succulence, are the result of the way that the animals are reared. The soil and climate conditions in the Azores, combined with the particular breeding technique and the docile nature of the animals, mean they can graze all year round.

As the meat is taken from animals reared in a grazing system which allows them to freely roam the pastures and move between different plots, it tends to be more intense in colour. In accordance with the age category of the animal, the colour of ‘Carne Ramo Grande’ meat varies from paler red in the case of the younger animals to brighter red as the age increases. The colour of the fat also varies according to the age of the animal, from white in the case of the younger animals to more yellowed in the case of the steers and adult cattle (bulls and cows).

The climate (very suitable for cattle farming) and the soil (fertile and easily tilled) combine to provide good pastureland. This has allowed the cattle that were taken to the Azores archipelago when it was first discovered and settled to adapt, develop and evolve, acquiring the distinctive genetic characteristics that define the Ramo Grande breed today.

Ramo Grande breeders are the guardians of a unique genetic heritage which they have insisted on preserving as the legacy of their ancestors over several generations and often in difficult circumstances. Their commitment has always been to preserve this heritage and they have always thought of the cattle herds as part of their extended family. In the traditional festivities on the various islands of the Azores archipelago, and particularly those devoted to the Holy Ghost, the meat of these animals has always been the favourite for the typical dishes served at these festive events. These combine expertise and traditional recipes from each of the islands and even from one village to the next, passed down through the generations to highlight the flavours and aromas inherent and specific to the meat of this breed.

These cattle are significant in the archipelago of the Azores, for the way they are still used in traditional farming and ethnographic festivities and also for their importance in the cuisine served to locals and visitors alike.

Publication reference of the specification

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

https://tradicional.dgadr.gov.pt/images/prod_imagens/carne/docs/CE_Carne_Ramo_Grande_DOP.pdf

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.