ISSN 1977-0987
Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali
tal-Unjoni Ewropea
C 129
Edizzjoni bil-Malti
Informazzjoni u Avviżi
Volum 66
13 ta' April 2023
|
ISSN 1977-0987 |
||
|
Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea |
C 129 |
|
|
|
||
|
Edizzjoni bil-Malti |
Informazzjoni u Avviżi |
Volum 66 |
|
Werrej |
Paġna |
|
|
|
II Komunikazzjonijiet |
|
|
|
KOMUNIKAZZJONIJIET MINN ISTITUZZJONIJIET, KORPI, UFFIĊĊJI U AĠENZIJI TAL-UNJONI EWROPEA |
|
|
|
Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea |
|
|
2023/C 129/01 |
Ebda oppożizzjoni għal konċentrazzjoni notifikata (Il-Każ M.11005 — RENAULT / MINTH / JV) ( 1 ) |
|
|
IV Informazzjoni |
|
|
|
INFORMAZZJONI MINN ISTITUZZJONIJIET, KORPI, UFFIĊĊJI U AĠENZIJI TAL-UNJONI EWROPEA |
|
|
|
Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea |
|
|
2023/C 129/02 |
||
|
2023/C 129/03 |
||
|
|
INFORMAZZJONI DWAR IŻ-ŻONA EKONOMIKA EWROPEA |
|
|
|
L-Awtorità ta’ Sorveljanza tal-EFTA |
|
|
2023/C 129/04 |
|
|
V Avviżi |
|
|
|
ATTI OĦRAJN |
|
|
|
Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea |
|
|
2023/C 129/05 |
||
|
2023/C 129/06 |
||
|
2023/C 129/07 |
|
|
|
|
|
(1) Test b'rilevanza għaż-ŻEE. |
|
MT |
|
II Komunikazzjonijiet
KOMUNIKAZZJONIJIET MINN ISTITUZZJONIJIET, KORPI, UFFIĊĊJI U AĠENZIJI TAL-UNJONI EWROPEA
Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea
|
13.4.2023 |
MT |
Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea |
C 129/1 |
Ebda oppożizzjoni għal konċentrazzjoni notifikata
(Il-Każ M.11005 — RENAULT / MINTH / JV)
(Test b'rilevanza għaż-ŻEE)
(2023/C 129/01)
Fis-6 ta’ Marzu 2023, il-Kummissjoni ddeċidiet li ma topponix il-konċentrazzjoni notifikata msemmija hawn fuq u li tiddikjaraha kompatibbli mas-suq intern. Din id-deċiżjoni hi bbażata fuq l-Artikolu 6(1)(b) flimkien mal-Artikolu 6(2) tar-Regolament tal-Kunsill (KE) Nru 139/2004 (1). It-test sħiħ tad-deċiżjoni hu disponibbli biss bl-Ingliż u ser isir pubbliku wara li jitneħħa kwalunkwe sigriet tan-negozju li jista’ jkun fih. Dan it-test jinstab:
|
— |
fit-taqsima tal-amalgamazzjoni tas-sit web tal-Kummissjoni dwar il-Kompetizzjoni (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). Dan is-sit web jipprovdi diversi faċilitajiet li jgħinu sabiex jinstabu d-deċiżjonijiet individwali ta’ amalgamazzjoni, inklużi l-kumpanija, in-numru tal-każ, id-data u l-indiċi settorjali, |
|
— |
f’forma elettronika fis-sit web EUR-Lex (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=mt) fid-dokument li jġib in-numru 32023M11005. Il-EUR-Lex hu l-aċċess fuq l-internet għal-liġi tal-Unjoni Ewropea. |
IV Informazzjoni
INFORMAZZJONI MINN ISTITUZZJONIJIET, KORPI, UFFIĊĊJI U AĠENZIJI TAL-UNJONI EWROPEA
Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea
|
13.4.2023 |
MT |
Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea |
C 129/2 |
Rata tal-kambju tal-euro (1)
It-12 ta' April 2023
(2023/C 129/02)
1 euro =
|
|
Munita |
Rata tal-kambju |
|
USD |
Dollaru Amerikan |
1,0922 |
|
JPY |
Yen Ġappuniż |
146,09 |
|
DKK |
Krona Daniża |
7,4506 |
|
GBP |
Lira Sterlina |
0,88038 |
|
SEK |
Krona Żvediża |
11,3480 |
|
CHF |
Frank Żvizzeru |
0,9853 |
|
ISK |
Krona Iżlandiża |
149,10 |
|
NOK |
Krona Norveġiża |
11,4745 |
|
BGN |
Lev Bulgaru |
1,9558 |
|
CZK |
Krona Ċeka |
23,421 |
|
HUF |
Forint Ungeriż |
376,23 |
|
PLN |
Zloty Pollakk |
4,6631 |
|
RON |
Leu Rumen |
4,9385 |
|
TRY |
Lira Turka |
21,0976 |
|
AUD |
Dollaru Awstraljan |
1,6377 |
|
CAD |
Dollaru Kanadiż |
1,4728 |
|
HKD |
Dollaru ta’ Hong Kong |
8,5737 |
|
NZD |
Dollaru tan-New Zealand |
1,7649 |
|
SGD |
Dollaru tas-Singapor |
1,4538 |
|
KRW |
Won tal-Korea t’Isfel |
1 448,10 |
|
ZAR |
Rand ta’ l-Afrika t’Isfel |
20,1330 |
|
CNY |
Yuan ren-min-bi Ċiniż |
7,5183 |
|
IDR |
Rupiah Indoneżjan |
16 253,32 |
|
MYR |
Ringgit Malażjan |
4,8193 |
|
PHP |
Peso Filippin |
60,291 |
|
RUB |
Rouble Russu |
|
|
THB |
Baht Tajlandiż |
37,391 |
|
BRL |
Real Brażiljan |
5,4635 |
|
MXN |
Peso Messikan |
19,7972 |
|
INR |
Rupi Indjan |
89,6875 |
(1) Sors: rata tal-kambju ta' referenza ppubblikata mill-Bank Ċentrali Ewropew.
|
13.4.2023 |
MT |
Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea |
C 129/3 |
Informazzjoni mill-Kummissjoni Ewropea, ippubblikata f’konformità mal-Artikolu 22(2) tar-Regolament tal-Kunsill (KE) n° 1005/2008, dwar in-notifiki tal-Istat tal-bandiera (Lista tal-Istati u l-awtoritajiet kompetenti tagħhom), skont l-Artikolu 20(1), (2), (3), u l-Anness III tar-Regolament (KE) n° 1005/2008
(2023/C 129/03)
F’konformità mal-Artikolu 20(1), (2), (3) u l-Anness III tar-Regolament tal-Kunsill (KE) n° 1005/2008 (1), il-pajjiżi terzi li ġejjin innotifikaw lill-Kummissjoni Ewropea dwar l-awtoritajiet pubbliċi li, fir-rigward tal-iskema ta’ ċertifikazzjoni tal-qabda skont l-Artikolu 12 tar-Regolament, għandhom is-setgħa li:
|
a) |
jirreġistraw il-bastimenti tas-sajd taħt il-bandiera tagħhom; |
|
b) |
jagħtu, jissospendu u jirtiraw liċenzji tas-sajd lill-bastimenti tas-sajd tagħhom; |
|
c) |
jaffermaw il-veraċità tal-informazzjoni mogħtija fiċ-ċertifikati tal-qabda msemmija fl-Artikolu 12 u jivvalidaw dawn iċ-ċertifikati; |
|
d) |
jimplimentaw, jikkontrollaw u jinfurzaw il-liġijiet, ir-regolamenti u l-miżuri ta’ konservazzjoni u ta’ ġestjoni li jridu jiġu osservati mill-bastimenti tas-sajd tagħhom; |
|
e) |
iwettqu verifiki ta’ dawn iċ-ċertifikati tal-qabda biex jassistu lill-awtoritajiet kompetenti tal-Istati Membri permezz tal-kooperazzjoni amministrattiva msemmija fl-Artikolu 20(4); |
|
f) |
jikkomunikaw il-formoli kampjuni taċ-ċertifikati tal-qabda tagħhom f’konformità mal-mudell fl-Anness II; u |
|
g) |
jaġġornaw dawn in-notifiki.
|
(1) ĠU L 286, 29.10.2008, p. 1.
(2) Skont l-Artikolu 31 tar-Regolament tal-Kunsill (KE) Nru 1005/2008, fil-5 ta’ Jannar 2023, il-Kummissjoni Ewropea identifikat lill-Kamerun bħala pajjiż li ma jikkooperax fil-ġlieda kontra s-sajd IUU (ĠU L 8, 11.1.2023, p. 4–15). F’konformità mal-Artikolu 33 tar-Regolament imsemmi, il-Kunsill tal-Unjoni Ewropea elenka lill-Kamerun bħala pajjiż li ma jikkooperax fil-ġlieda kontra s-sajd IUU (ĠU L 56, 23.2.2023, p. 26–28). L-importazzjoni fl-Unjoni ta’ prodotti tas-sajd maqbuda minn bastimenti tas-sajd li jtajru l-bandiera tal-Kamerun hija pprojbita f’konformità mal-Artikolu 38 tar-Regolament imsemmi.
(3) Applikabbli mill-1 ta’ Jannar 2021
INFORMAZZJONI DWAR IŻ-ŻONA EKONOMIKA EWROPEA
L-Awtorità ta’ Sorveljanza tal-EFTA
|
13.4.2023 |
MT |
Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea |
C 129/22 |
Id-Deċiżjoni Nru 44/23/COL tat-8 ta’ Marzu 2023 biex tinfetaħ investigazzjoni formali dwar l-allegata għajnuna mill-Istat lil Farice
Stedina sabiex jiġu ppreżentati osservazzjonijiet dwar kwistjonijiet tal-għajnuna mill-Istat skont l-Artikolu 1(2) tal-Parti I tal-Protokoll 3 tal-Ftehim bejn l-Istati tal-EFTA dwar it-Twaqqif ta’ Awtorità ta’ Sorveljanza u Qorti tal-Ġustizzja
(2023/C 129/04)
Permezz tad-Deċiżjoni msemmija hawn fuq, riprodotta fil-lingwa awtentika fil-paġni ta’ wara dan is-sommarju, l-Awtorità ta’ Sorveljanza tal-EFTA nnotifikat lill-awtoritajiet Iżlandiżi bid-deċiżjoni tagħha li tiftaħ il-proċedimenti skont l-Artikolu 1(2) tal-Parti I tal-Protokoll 3 tal-Ftehim bejn l-Istati tal-EFTA dwar it-Twaqqif ta’ Awtorità ta’ Sorveljanza u Qorti tal-Ġustizzja.
Il-partijiet interessati jistgħu jressqu l-kummenti tagħhom fi żmien xahar mid-data tal-pubblikazzjoni lil:
|
EFTA Surveillance Authority |
|
Registry |
|
Avenue des Arts 19H |
|
1000 Bruxelles/Brussel |
|
BELGIQUE/BELGIË |
|
registry@eftasurv.int |
Il-kummenti jiġu kkomunikati lill-awtoritajiet Iżlandiżi. L-identità tal-parti interessata li tibgħat il-kummenti tista’ tinżamm mistura jekk issir talba bil-miktub li tiddikjara r-raġunijiet għal din it-talba.
Sommarju
Proċedura
Fit-23 ta’ Frar 2021, l-ESA rċeviet ilment (“l-ilment”) mingħand Sýn hf. (“Sýn”) rigward Farice. Sýn allegat, fost l-oħrajn: 1) li Farice rċeviet kumpens għall-ispejjeż relatati ma’ stħarriġiet imwettqa bi tħejjija għat-tielet kejbil sottomarin (“il-Miżura 1”); u 2) ksur tal-obbligu ta’ waqfien totali fir-rigward tal-investiment ta’ Farice fit-tielet kejbil sottomarin bejn l-Iżlanda u l-Ewropa (“il-kejbil IRIS” jew “il-Miżura 2”).
Fit-23 ta’ Marzu 2021, l-ESA rċeviet notifika formali mill-awtoritajiet Iżlandiżi rigward l-investiment fil-kejbil IRIS (“il-Miżura 2”). Fis-26 ta’ Marzu 2021, l-ESA adottat id-Deċiżjoni 023/21/COL dwar Għajnuna lil Farice ehf. għal investiment fit-tielet kejbil sottomarin, u kkonkludiet li l-ESA ma kellha l-ebda dubju li l-għajnuna kienet kompatibbli mal-funzjonament tal-Ftehim ŻEE, skont l-Artikolu 61(3)(c) tiegħu, u għalhekk ma kellha l-ebda oġġezzjoni għall-implimentazzjoni tal-miżura.
Fid-9 ta’ Lulju 2021, Sýn ippreżentat rikors fil-Qorti tal-EFTA skont l-Artikolu 36 tal-Ftehim dwar is-Sorveljanza u l-Qorti (“SCA”), li titlob l-annullament tad-Deċiżjoni Nru 023/21/COL tas-26 ta’ Marzu 2021.
Permezz tas-Sentenza tal-1 ta’ Ġunju 2022, il-Qorti tal-EFTA annullat id-Deċiżjoni tal-ESA 023/21/COL (1).
Deskrizzjoni tal-għajnuna kkonċernata
L-allegat benefiċjarju huwa Farice ehf. (“Farice”). Farice hija kumpanija privata b’responsabbiltà limitata u hija kollha kemm hi l-proprjetà l-Istat Iżlandiż. L-għan ta’ Farice huwa l-bejgħ bl-ingrossa tat-trasferiment internazzjonali tad-data bejn il-pajjiżi permezz ta’ kejbil fibrottiku, l-operazzjonijiet ta’ sistemi tal-kejbil fibrottiku, u l-bejgħ ta’ servizzi fir-rigward ta’ tali attivitajiet. Farice topera żewġ kejbils sottomarini mill-Iżlanda għal partijiet tal-Ewropa: FARICE-1 u DANICE.
Fit-3 ta’ Ġunju 2019, il-Parlament Iżlandiż approva riżoluzzjoni dwar politika ta’ komunikazzjonijiet elettroniċi mill-2019 sal-2033 (il-“Politika dwar it-Telekomunikazzjoni”). L-għanijiet tal-politika huma, fost l-oħrajn, li tippromwovi komunikazzjonijiet aċċessibbli u effettivi u li tiggarantixxi s-sigurtà tal-infrastruttura. Biex jintlaħqu dawk l-objettivi, il-politika tenfasizza li huma meħtieġa tliet kejbils sottomarini attivi biex jikkonnettjaw lill-Iżlanda mal-bqija tal-Ewropa minn skali differenti.
Id-Deċiżjoni tikkonċerna żewġ miżuri.
Il-Miżura 1 tikkonċerna l-kumpens lil Farice għar-riċerka f’qiegħ il-baħar bi tħejjija għall-kostruzzjoni possibbli ta’ kejbil sottomarin ġdid bejn l-Iżlanda u l-Ewropa. Il-bażi tax-xogħol u tal-kumpens huwa kuntratt, iffirmat fl-2018, bejn il-Fond tat-Telekomunikazzjonijiet (il-“Fond”) u Farice. L-istima tal-kostijiet, meta ġie ffirmat il-kuntratt, kien ta’ EUR 1.9 miljun.
Il-Miżura 2 tikkonċerna investiment minn Farice fil-kejbil IRIS. L-awtoritajiet Iżlandiżi għażlu lil Farice biex tibni u topera t-tielet kejbil sottomarin li jgħaqqad l-Iżlanda mal-Ewropa, jiġifieri l-kejbil IRIS. Il-Miżura 2 ġiet iffinanzjata mill-Istat Iżlandiż permezz ta’ żieda kapitali stmata ta’ EUR 50 miljun f’Farice, li hija kollha kemm hi l-proprjetà tal-Istat Iżlandiż
Valutazzjoni
Preżenza ta’ għajnuna mill-Istat
Fid-deċiżjoni tagħha, l-ESA tasal għall-fehma preliminari li ma tistax teskludi li l-Miżura 1 kienet tinvolvi għajnuna mill-Istat favur Farice.
B’mod speċifiku, l-ESA ma tistax teskludi li l-pagamenti magħmula mill-Fond lil Farice għat-twettiq ta’ stħarriġ sottomarin taw vantaġġ selettiv lil Farice, peress li għandha dubji dwar jekk dawk il-pagamenti sarux skont it-termini tas-suq.
Barra minn hekk, fid-Deċiżjoni tagħha, l-ESA tasal għall-fehma preliminari li l-Miżura 2 tinvolvi għajnuna mill-Istat.
Kompatibbiltà tal-għajnuna
Fir-rigward tal-kompatibbiltà potenzjali tal-Miżura 1, l-ESA ma rċeviet l-ebda argument dwar hekk, u stiednet lill-awtoritajiet Iżlandiżi jipprovdu din l-argumentazzjoni.
Fir-rigward tal-kompatibbiltà potenzjali tal-Miżura 2, l-ESA tinnota li l-kompatibbiltà tal-għajnuna għall-introduzzjoni tan-networks b’banda wiesgħa, għall-finijiet li jiġu żgurati l-kopertura, l-aċċess jew il-konnettività, normalment tiġi vvalutata skont il-Linji Gwida dwar il-Banda Wiesgħa.
B’mod ġenerali, l-objettiv primarju tal-Linji Gwida dwar il-Banda Wiesgħa huwa li tiġi żgurata d-disponibbiltà mifruxa tas-servizzi tal-banda wiesgħa għall-utenti finali jew l-aċċess għal internet b’veloċità ogħla. Għalhekk, huma japplikaw għal miżuri ta’ għajnuna mmirati lejn sitwazzjonijiet fejn is-suq ma jipprovdix kopertura suffiċjenti tal-banda wiesgħa jew fejn il-kundizzjonijiet tal-aċċess ma jkunux adegwati. Min-naħa l-oħra, il-Linji Gwida dwar il-Banda Wiesgħa ma jsemmux il-konnettività internazzjonali, is-sigurtà, it-trasferiment internazzjonali tad-data, jew il-kejbils sottomarini, u ma jistabbilux b’mod speċifiku l-kundizzjonijiet ta’ kompatibbiltà għal miżuri mmirati lejn kwistjonijiet ta’ sigurtà li ġejjin min-nuqqas ta’ diversità ġeografika u robustezza tas-servizzi ta’ konnettività internazzjonali.
Għalhekk, il-Miżura 2, li l-objettiv tagħha huwa żieda fir-ridondanza, fis-sigurtà, u fir-robustezza tas-servizzi ta’ konnettività internazzjonali diġà disponibbli għall-klijenti finali b’veloċitajiet għoljin, tidher li hija differenti mit-tip ġenerali ta’ miżura koperta mil-Linji Gwida dwar il-Banda Wiesgħa, jiġifieri miżuri li jikkonċernaw l-espansjoni jew l-introduzzjoni ta’ networks u servizzi bil-banda wiesgħa.
Madankollu, għall-ESA, mhuwiex ċar f’dan l-istadju sa liema punt il-Linji Gwida dwar il-Banda Wiesgħa japplikaw għall-valutazzjoni tal-kompatibbiltà tal-Miżura 2. Għalhekk, l-ESA stiednet lill-awtoritajiet Iżlandiżi jipprovdu aktar argumenti.
F’każ li l-Linji Gwida dwar il-Banda Wiesgħa ma japplikawx għall-miżura kkonċernata, l-Artikolu 61(3)(c) tal-Ftehim ŻEE jipprevedi li l-ESA tista’ tiddikjara bħala kompatibbli “għajnuna maħsuba biex tiffaċilita l-iżvilupp ta’ ċerti attivitajiet ekonomiċi jew ta’ ċerti żoni ekonomiċi, meta dik l-għajnuna ma tkunx taffettwa ħażin il-kundizzjonijiet tal-kummerċ sa punt li jmur kontra l-interess komuni”. Għalhekk, sabiex l-għajnuna tiġi ddikjarata kompatibbli, l-ewwel, l-għajnuna trid tkun intiża biex tiffaċilita l-iżvilupp ta’ ċerti attivitajiet ekonomiċi jew ta’ ċerti żoni ekonomiċi u, t-tieni, l-għajnuna ma tridx tkun taffettwa b’mod negattiv il-kundizzjonijiet tal-kummerċ b’mod li jmur kontra l-interess komuni.
F’dan ir-rigward, l-ESA kkonkludiet b’mod preliminari li għandha dubji dwar il-ħtieġa tal-Miżura 2. Qabel l-investiment tagħha fil-kejbil IRIS, l-awtoritajiet Iżlandiżi ġew avviċinati minn operatur privat bi proposta biex jinbena t-tielet kejbil sottomarin. Għalhekk, filwaqt li mhuwiex ċar għall-ESA f’dan l-istadju jekk dik l-offerta kinitx komparabbli mal-proġett tal-kejbil IRIS, jew jekk tindikax tentattiv ta’ dħul fis-suq għal servizzi ta’ konnettività tad-data internazzjonali, l-ESA ma tistax teskludi l-possibbiltà li s-suq seta’ wassal l-eżitu li riedet tikseb il-Miżura 2, li jpoġġi fid-dubju d-dikjarazzjoni tal-awtoritajiet Iżlandiżi li kien hemm bżonn li jiġi rrimedjat nuqqas fis-suq definit sew.
Barra minn hekk, l-ESA għandha d-dubji tagħha dwar il-proporzjonalità tal-Miżura 2. Filwaqt li l-awtoritajiet Iżlandiżi fasslu l-Miżura 2 biex jillimitaw l-ammont ta’ għajnuna, l-ESA b’mod preliminari tqis li l-eżistenza ta’ alternattiva allegatament aktar kosteffettiva tpoġġi fid-dubju l-proporzjonalità ġenerali tal-miżura, fin-nuqqas ta’ ġustifikazzjoni għad-differenza fil-prezz.
Fl-aħħar nett, l-ESA kkonkludiet b’mod preliminari li għandha d-dubji kemm l-impatt negattiv tal-miżuri fuq il-kompetizzjoni u l-kummerċ huma limitati biżżejjed.
Konsegwentement, l-ESA kkonkludiet b’mod preliminari li għandha d-dubji kemm l-effetti pożittivi tal-Miżura 2 jegħlbu d-distorsjoni possibbli tal-kompetizzjoni u l-impatt negattiv tagħha fuq il-kummerċ.
Decision No 44/23/COL of 8 March 2023 to open a formal investigation into alleged state aid to Farice
1. Summary
The EFTA Surveillance Authority (“ESA”) wishes to inform Iceland that, having preliminarily assessed the alleged aid to Farice ehf. (“Farice”) for performing a seabed survey (“Measure 1”) and for investment in a third submarine cable (“Measure 2”), it has doubts as to whether Measure 1 constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement and as to whether Measures 1 and 2 are compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. ESA has therefore decided to open a formal investigation procedure pursuant to Articles 4(4), 6 and 13 of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement (“Protocol 3”). ESA has based its decision on the following considerations.
2. Procedure
|
(1) |
By letter dated 27 January 2021, the Icelandic authorities initiated pre-notification discussions with ESA concerning their plans to increase capital in Farice, in order to invest in a third submarine cable between Iceland and Europe (“the IRIS cable”), i.e. Measure 2 (2). |
|
(2) |
On 23 February 2021, ESA received a complaint (“the complaint”) from Sýn hf. (“Sýn”) regarding Farice (3). Sýn alleged that Farice received public service compensation from the Icelandic authorities in violation of the SGEI rules (4), including compensation for costs related to surveys conducted in preparation for a possible third submarine cable. Sýn also alleged a violation of the standstill obligation as regards Farice’s investment in the IRIS cable. |
|
(3) |
On 23 February 2021, ESA forwarded the complaint to the Icelandic authorities and invited them to provide comments by 25 March 2021 (5). |
|
(4) |
On 23 March 2021, ESA received a formal notification from the Icelandic authorities regarding Measure 2 (6). On 26 March 2021, ESA adopted Decision 023/21/COL on Aid to Farice ehf. for investment in a third submarine cable. |
|
(5) |
By email dated 25 March 2021, the Icelandic authorities requested an extension of the deadline to provide comments on the complaint. ESA extended the deadline to 31 March 2021. On 31 March 2021, the Icelandic authorities provided ESA with their initial comments on the complaint (7). |
|
(6) |
On 9 July 2021, Sýn lodged an application with the EFTA Court under Article 36 of the Surveillance and Court Agreement (“SCA”), seeking the annulment of Decision No 023/21/COL of 26 March 2021. |
|
(7) |
On 20 January 2022, ESA sent a request for information to the Icelandic authorities concerning the complaint (8). On 16 March 2022, the Icelandic authorities provided their response to the request for information (9). |
|
(8) |
On 1 June 2022, the EFTA Court annulled Decision No 023/21/COL (10). |
|
(9) |
On 21 June 2022, ESA sent the Icelandic authorities a second request for information concerning the complaint (11). The Icelandic authorities responded on 20 September 2022 (12). |
|
(10) |
On 8 November 2022, ESA had a meeting with a representative of Sýn (13). |
3. Description of the measures
3.1. Background
|
(11) |
Farice is a private limited liability company established in Iceland. It was founded in 2002 by Icelandic and Faroese parties. According to its articles of association, the purpose of Farice is the wholesale of international data transfer between countries through a fibre optic cable, the operations of fibre optic cable systems, and the sale of services in relation to such activities. The Icelandic State acquired Farice in full in March 2019 following the classification of international submarine cables as infrastructure. All of Farice’s long-term borrowing comes from the Icelandic Treasury |
|
(12) |
Farice operates two submarine cables running from Iceland to parts of Europe: FARICE-1 and DANICE. FARICE-1 connects Iceland with Scotland, with a branch unit to the Faroe Islands. DANICE connects Iceland with Denmark. FARICE-1 and DANICE are the only submarine cables running from Iceland to Europe and they intersect in the Atlantic Ocean. A third submarine cable, Greenland Connect, runs from Iceland to Canada via Greenland. Greenland Connect is owned and operated by Tele Greenland. It terminates in Iceland and its traffic is directed through FARICE-1 and DANICE on the way to Europe. It is possible to buy services from Tele Greenland to mainland Canada and from there to New York. |
|
(13) |
Between 2010 and 2012, the Icelandic authorities engaged in a series of measures for the restructuring of Farice, due to its financial difficulties. During the same period, the Icelandic authorities submitted various State aid notifications to ESA. These were later withdrawn because the Icelandic authorities concluded that the SGEI Decision applied to these measures (14). On 19 July 2013, ESA sent a comfort letter to the Icelandic authorities noting that Article 3 of the SGEI Decision exempted the Icelandic authorities from the prior notification obligation under Article 1(3) of Part I of Protocol 3 SCA (15). |
|
(14) |
The first public service contract between Farice and the Telecommunications Fund (“the Fund”), representing the Icelandic authorities, was entered into on 12 April 2012. |
|
(15) |
In November 2018, the Minister for Transport and Local Government submitted a proposal to the Icelandic Parliament for a resolution on an electronic communications policy 2019 to 2033 (“the Telecommunication Policy”). The objectives of the policy are, inter alia, to promote accessible and effective communications and to guarantee the security of infrastructure. To achieve those objectives, the policy emphasises that three active submarine cables are needed to connect Iceland with the rest of Europe from different landing sites. As a geographically remote country, effective international connections are a prerequisite for the development of Iceland as a modern technology-based society. A serious disruption in international connectivity would cause major damage to the Icelandic economy, and society as a whole. |
|
(16) |
Between 2017 and 2020, the Ministry of Transport and Local Government, and the Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs received several proposals from Sýn regarding the construction of a third submarine cable. The proposals included both an independent project and a collaboration with Celtic Norse AS. These proposals did not entail financing in full by private investors but required cooperation with the Icelandic State and/or Farice. |
|
(17) |
On 21 December 2018, Farice signed a new public service contract with the Fund regarding the Icelandic authorities’ work on the Telecommunications Policy (“the 2018 PSO Contract”). Farice was engaged to start preparations for the possible construction of a new submarine cable between Iceland and Europe. Farice was compensated for the costs of the preparation work that it undertook on behalf of the Fund, which also included compensation for seabed research to be carried out by Farice in 2019, i.e. Measure 1. The Icelandic State’s participation in further investment or costs for a third cable was neither secured nor structured at that time. |
|
(18) |
In January 2019, Sýn submitted a formal request for funding of seabed research in preparation for the introduction of the submarine cable project. In February 2019, the Fund refused to engage in any discussions with Sýn, referring to the public service contract concluded with Farice in December 2018, according to which Farice was entrusted with seabed research as an intermediary. |
|
(19) |
On 3 June 2019, the Icelandic Parliament approved the Telecommunications Policy. |
|
(20) |
In December 2019, Sýn and the Board of the Fund had a meeting during which Sýn presented its case for a third submarine cable between Iceland and Ireland. Sýn offered to build a submarine cable for remuneration and required a guarantee that Farice would change its operating model to a so-called “carrier’s carrier” model. |
|
(21) |
In March 2020, the Fund engaged an independent expert to evaluate the feasibility of Sýn’s and Farice’s third cable projects. The expert’s report was delivered in April 2020. According to Sýn, the report concluded that the project proposed by Sýn was more cost effective. According to the Icelandic authorities, the expert was instructed not to make recommendations. However, the report included recommendations and relied on available, but allegedly unverified, data from Farice and Sýn. |
|
(22) |
By letter of 29 April 2020, the Ministry of Transport and Local Government shared the results of the report with Farice and stated that Farice would be responsible for the project and the envisaged owner and operator of the new submarine cable. The Ministry urged Farice to take account of the fact that Sýn’s proposal had been considered more cost effective by the expert. The Ministry stated that it found Sýn’s proposal to change the operational model of Farice unacceptable. |
|
(23) |
In May 2020, Sýn and Farice held a meeting to explore the details and validity of Sýn’s proposal and to confirm pricing and quality from key suppliers. According to the Icelandic authorities, Sýn was not able to confirm the prices because the key suppliers had not been willing to confirm their prices. As the foundation for the discussions between Farice and Sýn was the project’s cost effectiveness, which was based on the prices submitted, the discussions were terminated. |
|
(24) |
Later in May 2020, the Fund communicated to Sýn that it considered the expiry of the offers to be unacceptable. It further stated that it would therefore not engage in any further discussions with Sýn. It was further stressed that the Fund was not responsible for the project since its role was limited to the provision of funds. |
|
(25) |
On 23 February 2021, Sýn lodged a complaint with ESA. Sýn submitted that payments to Farice from the Icelandic State since 2013 had erroneously been classified as a public service compensation as the conditions to be considered as services of a general economic interest had never been met. It further submitted that there was an ongoing breach of State aid rules related to the introduction of a new submarine cable. |
|
(26) |
On 23 March 2021, the Icelandic authorities formally notified ESA of their intention to provide aid to Farice for investment in the third cable, i.e. Measure 2. On 26 March 2021, ESA adopted Decision No 023/21/COL approving the measure. That decision was later annulled by the EFTA Court. |
3.2. Measure 1
|
(27) |
According to Article 1A of the 2018 PSO Contract between Farice and the Fund, the “parties [to the agreement] agree that the Fund will compensate Farice for seabed research to be carried out in 2019 for a possible optic fibre cable between Iceland and Europe (Ireland) according to article 12 of this contract”. |
|
(28) |
In Article 12 of the same contract, it is further stated that “[t]he Fund intends to do a seabed survey on a route between Europe (Ireland) and Iceland for an optic fibre cable to be possibly laid in the near future. Farice undertakes the execution of the projects as an intermediary. Preliminary time and cost schedule is described in annex 1. Farice shall aim to deliver a final marine route survey report to the Fund before December 31, 2019”. The temporal scope of the survey was later extended to 2021. |
|
(29) |
According to annex 1, the compensated costs related to the survey were: 1) a desk top study; 2) survey; 3) inshore survey; 4) main survey (excluding inshore survey); 5) reporting and maps; and 6) overhead costs. The costs were estimated at EUR 1,9 million. |
|
(30) |
In accordance with the contract, Farice undertook the survey in the years 2019, 2020 and 2021. Payments for third party works, for example the work performed by EGS (16) (the main survey contactor) were invoiced to the Fund based on costs incurred. Work performed by Farice employees was invoiced on the basis of an hourly rate. Additionally, Farice invoiced an administration fee for general administration costs in 2019. |
3.3. Measure 2
|
(31) |
In relation to the Icelandic authorities’ work on the Telecommunications Policy, the Icelandic authorities selected Farice to build and operate a third submarine cable connecting Iceland and Europe, i.e. the IRIS cable. Measure 2 relates to the financing by the Icelandic State of the IRIS cable through an estimated EUR 50 million capital increase in Farice, which is wholly owned by the Icelandic State (17). |
|
(32) |
According to the Icelandic authorities, Farice was chosen because it is the only entity that: (i) currently operates submarine cables from Iceland to Europe, (ii) has extensive experience in such operations, and (iii) was able to work fast in seeing the project through within the desired timeframe. |
|
(33) |
Farice is currently operated on commercial terms without financial support from the State (18) and offers services on two distinct markets: the market for international connectivity (“international data transfer market”) and the data centre market (“DC market”). |
|
(34) |
The primary objective of the measure and the IRIS cable project is to enhance security and reduce the vulnerability of international connectivity to and from Iceland. The secondary objective is to shorten the digital distance between Iceland and Europe, by reducing data latency. |
|
(35) |
The new submarine cable is in principle expected to complement the existing submarine cable infrastructure. According to the Icelandic authorities, the interconnection to the new cable will be technologically neutral, provided that instructions and recommendations are followed (19). |
|
(36) |
Moreover, according to the Icelandic authorities, Farice grants effective wholesale access to the system on an open and non-discriminatory basis and those access obligations will be enforced irrespective of any change in ownership, management or operation of the infrastructure. |
|
(37) |
The eligible costs of Measure 2 are the investment costs related to the new cable, costs relating to survey of the seabed and the optimal path of the cable (20), construction of landing sites and project management. The costs are considered investment costs, including project management costs which are directly related to the investment project. The maximum aid intensity is 100 % of the eligible costs. The board of directors of Farice authorised the capital increase for established costs in intervals during the construction period of the new cable. According to the Icelandic authorities, any overcompensation is controlled retroactively through a capital decrease, dividend payments or by other available means. |
|
(38) |
Farice signed a contract with SubCom LLC, a global undersea fibre optic cable system supply company, to lay the IRIS cable, after having elicited offers from three different suppliers. On 11 November 2022, SubCom formally handed over the IRIS cable, which is expected to be ready for service in the first quarter of 2023 (21). |
3.4. The Complaint
|
(39) |
As previously mentioned, on 23 February 2021, Sýn submitted a complaint to ESA regarding alleged unlawful State aid measures in favour of Farice. In summary, the complaint concerns three measures:
|
|
(40) |
The SGEI measure, covered by Sýn’s complaint, was not the subject of the annulled Decision No 023/21/COL, nor the judgment of the EFTA Court in Case E-4/21. Therefore, this measure is not the subject of this Decision, and is currently being processed separately in an open complaint case (22). Conversely, Measures 1 and 2 are the subject of this Decision. |
|
(41) |
As regards Measure 1, Sýn submitted that Iceland had under the 2018 PSO Contract agreed to compensate Farice for seabed research to be carried out in 2019. The agreement was later extended (see section 3.2). |
|
(42) |
Sýn argued in its complaint that the compensation for the seabed research did not fulfil any of the SGEI criteria, whether under the Altmark conditions (23), the SGEI Decision (24), or the SGEI Framework (25). In particular, Sýn argued that seabed research could not be qualified as a service of general economic interest, and even if it could be, no parameters for the calculation of compensation for such a service had been established. |
|
(43) |
As regards Measure 2, Sýn asserted in its complaint that the Icelandic authorities seemed to have entrusted Farice with the roll-out of a new submarine cable funded by the State. In Sýn’s view this constituted a breach of the EEA State aid rules. Sýn was unaware that at the time they submitted the complaint, ESA and the Icelandic authorities were engaged in pre-notification discussion regarding the roll-out to the new submarine cable (26). |
|
(44) |
Therefore, Sýn submitted that the actions of the Icelandic authorities related to the roll-out of a new submarine cable, including the payment for seabed research under the auspices of a public service obligation, constituted a breach of the EEA State aid rules, which called for action by ESA. |
3.5. Comments of the Icelandic authorities
|
(45) |
The Icelandic authorities have provided their views as regards Measures 1 and 2. These views were expressed during the notification procedure leading up to Decision 023/21/COL (27), as well as in replies to questions sent to them by ESA in connection to the complaint (28). |
3.5.1. Regarding Measure 1
|
(46) |
The Icelandic authorities have maintained that the payments to Farice related to the seabed survey did not constitute compensation for a public service, even though contractual provisions related to the survey were included in the 2018 PSO contract (29). |
|
(47) |
Instead, the Icelandic authorities have stated that the work related to the survey was allocated to Farice on market terms, in line with the market economy operator principle. Specifically, the Icelandic authorities contend that the award of the seabed survey did not grant Farice an economic advantage that an undertaking could not have obtained in the absence of State intervention, and that it was, in essence, a service assignment, for which Farice was paid the incurred costs. In the view of the Icelandic authorities, this is demonstrated by the fact that the Fund, and not Farice, retains all ownership of survey results and that Farice did not de facto make a profit for administering the survey. |
|
(48) |
Moreover, the Icelandic authorities have submitted that Measure 1 did not distort or threaten to distort competition and did not have any effect on trade between the Contracting Parties. |
|
(49) |
Specifically, the Icelandic authorities stated that the measure did not grant Farice a stronger competitive position than it would have had if the survey had not been undertaken, and that Farice was not relieved of expenses it would otherwise have had to bear in the course of its day-to-day business operations. The Icelandic authorities had full discretion to utilise the seabed survey in any way they saw fit and no utilization guarantees were granted to Farice. Therefore, the Icelandic authorities contend that the award of the seabed survey did not strengthen the position of Farice as compared with other undertakings. |
|
(50) |
Finally, the Icelandic authorities are of the view that the Fund was exempt from the procurement rules when awarding a contract of carrying out the seabed survey, as it was an essential part of preparing the IRIS cable project and therefore a factor in providing a public communications network. |
|
(51) |
Consequently, the Icelandic authorities argue that Measure 1 does not constitute State aid. |
3.5.2. Regarding Measure 2
|
(52) |
The Icelandic authorities consider Measure 2 to constitute State aid, which is compatible with Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement, and that the measure falls outside the scope of the Guidelines for the application of State aid rules in relation to rapid deployment of broadband networks (“the 2014 Broadband Guidelines”) (30). |
|
(53) |
In this regard, the Icelandic authorities note that the measure contributes to a well-defined objective of common interest, i.e. to enhance the security of international connectivity to and from Iceland. The aid measure serves to significantly reduce the vulnerability of Iceland’s international telecommunications network in case of major failures of the current systems. |
|
(54) |
Further, as regards the need for State intervention, the Icelandic authorities contend that market failure necessitates State participation in the IRIS cable project. Specifically, the Icelandic authorities note that Farice is the only operator of submarine cables connecting Iceland to Europe, and that despite some interest from private parties to lay similar cables in the past, none of those plans have materialised (31). The Icelandic authorities argue that three main causes have adversely affected the feasibility of other submarine projects to the point where none of them materialized: First, laying a single cable to Iceland without having secured redundancy in connections without material cost through another cable has proven problematic. Second, the small size of the Icelandic market is a natural hindrance. Third, the uncertainty of income from international data centre operators disincentivises investment. |
|
(55) |
Moreover, the Icelandic authorities point to the fact that Farice required public service compensation from 2012 to 2018 to operate the two existing cables, i.e. FARICE-1 and DANICE, and that Farice’s current revenues do not support investment in the IRIS cable. |
|
(56) |
Consequently, in the absence of a realistic chance of private actors building the submarine infrastructure needed to secure international connectivity to Iceland, and since Farice’s current revenues do not support investment in a third cable, the Icelandic authorities found it necessary to provide Farice with State aid to lay the IRIS cable. |
|
(57) |
Moreover, the Icelandic authorities contend that Measure 2 was proportional. In this regard, they note that only established costs were financed through the capital increase. Moreover, the ex post control, including a review of any expenses, will keep costs to the minimum necessary. |
|
(58) |
Furthermore, the Icelandic authorities have consistently argued that the IRIS project is not subject to public procurement rules, as it is exempt from the Procurement Act (32), with reference to Article 10 of the Act, cf. Article 8 of the Procurement Directive (33), as the Act and the Directive do not apply to contracts for the principal purpose of permitting the contracting authorities to provide or exploit public communications networks or to provide to the public one or more electronic communications services. |
|
(59) |
However, when choosing a subcontractor to lay the cable, Farice engaged in discussions with three suppliers, and selected the most economically efficient offer, having taken account of all relevant considerations. |
|
(60) |
As regards the expert report that concluded that the proposal of Sýn was more cost effective than the one from Farice, the Icelandic authorities argue that the cost estimate used by the expert was not verified. Further, that Sýn specifically notified the Icelandic authorities that the supposed offer from Vodafone International was no longer valid. Moreover, the conditions on the operational function of the new cable set by the Sýn, as well as concerns regarding national security and critical infrastructure contributed to the decision to entrust Farice with the building of the new submarine cable. Finally, the proposition of Sýn was based on a different business model, not only for the purposes of the new cable but also Farice’s operation through the FARICE-1 and DANICE cables. Therefore, the business proposition of Sýn was not relevant for the purposes of the determination of proportionality of the aid measure. Consequently, the Icelandic authorities consider Measure 2 to be proportional. |
|
(61) |
Finally, as regards limited negative effects on competition, the Icelandic authorities note that the new infrastructure is principally expected to complement the other connections by providing enhanced security for international connectivity favouring the general public and general economic activities in Iceland. Therefore, the Icelandic authorities consider the IRIS cable to not have a material impact on competitiveness of other European markets compared to Iceland. As regards any negative effects the measure might have on the market for international data transfer or the related DC market, the Icelandic authorities consider those effects vastly outweighed by the positive effects of the measure. |
3.6. ESA Decision No 023/21/COL
|
(62) |
On 26 March 2021, ESA adopted Decision No 023/21/COL, concluding that Measure 2, i.e. the capital increase to finance the investment in the IRIS cable, constituted State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. However, as ESA found that no doubts were raised as to the compatibility of the measure with the functioning of the EEA Agreement, it decided not to raise objections to the implementation of the measure. |
|
(63) |
ESA noted that the compatibility of State aid for the introduction of broadband networks was normally assessed under the 2014 Broadband Guidelines. However, since the measure specifically targeted the security issues raised by the lack of geographical diversity, it fell outside the scope of the 2014 Broadband Guidelines. ESA stated that it would nevertheless apply the principles of the 2014 Broadband Guidelines by analogy to the extent that they were relevant, because those guidelines were the most detailed guidance available for assessing the compatibility of State aid to broadband infrastructure projects with the EEA Agreement. |
|
(64) |
Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement provides that ESA may declare compatible “aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas, where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest”. Therefore, in order to declare aid compatible, first, the aid must be intended to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas and, second, the aid must not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest (34). |
|
(65) |
Under the first condition, ESA examines how the aid facilitates the development of certain economic activities or areas. Under the second condition, ESA weighs up the positive effects of the aid for the development of said activities or areas and the negative effects of the aid in terms of distortions of competition and adverse effects on trade (i.e. conducts a balancing test). |
|
(66) |
Concerning the first condition, ESA concluded that Measure 2 facilitated the development in the market for international data transfer services specifically and the markets for electronic communications services in general. Furthermore, ESA found that the selection of Farice, as owner and operator of the third cable, and the selection of a cable manufacturer and installer was exempted from the Icelandic Procurement Act. Further, ESA did not have reasons to believe that the measure was in breach of other relevant EEA provisions. |
|
(67) |
Concerning the second condition, ESA concluded that the amount of aid granted through Measure 2 was limited to what was necessary to achieve its objective and therefore proportional. ESA reached this conclusion, inter alia, on the basis that the aid amount was limited to the actual costs of the measure and subject to ex post control. |
|
(68) |
Furthermore, ESA concluded that Measure 2 would not have a material impact on the competitiveness of other EEA markets compared to Iceland, as investment in the IRIS cable was, in and of itself, unlikely to materially alter the dynamics of intra-EEA trade on the relevant market. |
|
(69) |
As regards the potential effect on the DC market, ESA noted that the data centre market was not a single market of universal services, since the digital needs of businesses were highly dependent on the applications hosted and operated in the data centres. ESA also noted that, while data centres might be more inclined to invest in projects in Iceland, due to extended capacity and security of the international connection network following the construction of a third cable, that was only one of multiple factors that would influence such a decision. Other factors, such as electricity prices, start-up costs and regulatory environment also influenced such decisions. ESA found that those factors were not altered by the measure. |
|
(70) |
Consequently, ESA found that the Icelandic authorities had demonstrated that the socio-economic benefits of Measure 2 outweighed any potential adverse effects on competition or trade between the Contracting Parties, given the safeguards in place to minimise such adverse effects. |
3.7. EFTA Court Judgment in Case E-4/21
|
(71) |
On 1 June 2022, the EFTA Court annulled ESA’s Decision No 023/21/COL. The Court concluded that ESA should have opened a formal investigation procedure, as ESA had at its disposal information and evidence at the time, which should, objectively, have raised doubts or serious difficulties regarding whether the capital increase to finance the laying of the IRIS cable was compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. |
|
(72) |
In particular, the EFTA Court found that ESA was aware of documents that called into question the information at its disposal and on which it relied in the contested decision, without going beyond a mere examination of the information submitted by the Icelandic authorities. These documents related, inter alia, to Sýn’s complaint of 23 February 2022 and annexes thereto. Specifically, the Court noted a document comparing the proposals of Sýn and Farice, and an email dated 29 May 2020, regarding Sýn’s inability to confirm the prices of its proposal. By not obtaining further information on whether Sýn was actually able to confirm its prices, or whether it had been given that opportunity, the Court concluded that ESA failed to satisfy its obligation to conduct a diligent and impartial examination of the notified measure so that it had at its disposal the most complete and reliable information. |
|
(73) |
Furthermore, the Court found that Sýn tried to enter the market for international connectivity services, according to the information available to ESA. Yet, in the contested decision, ESA did not consider factors such as potential competitors on the wholesale market for international connectivity, public consultation of stakeholders and entry barriers to that market. |
|
(74) |
Finally, the Court found that ESA did not adequately state its reasons for concluding that the notified measure fell outside the scope of the 2014 Broadband Guidelines, and that even though ESA stated in the contested decision that it would apply the guidelines by analogy, where relevant, the Court found little, if any, trace of the principles in the guidelines actually being applied. |
|
(75) |
On the basis of, inter alia, the above, the Court concluded that there was consistent and objective evidence that demonstrated that ESA adopted the contested decision despite the existence of doubts. Consequently, the Court annulled the Decision. |
4. Presence of State aid
4.1. Introduction
|
(76) |
Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement reads as follows: “Save as otherwise provided in this Agreement, any aid granted by EC Member States, EFTA States or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Contracting Parties, be incompatible with the functioning of this Agreement”. |
|
(77) |
The qualification of a measure as aid within the meaning of this provision requires the following cumulative conditions to be met: (i) the measure must be granted by the State or through State resources; (ii) it must confer an advantage on an undertaking; (iii) favour certain undertakings (selectivity); and (iv) threaten to distort competition and affect trade. |
4.2. Measure 1
|
(78) |
In the following chapters, ESA will assess whether the payments from the Fund to Farice for carrying out a seabed survey involve State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. |
4.2.1. State resources
|
(79) |
According to Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, a measure must be granted by the State or through State resources to constitute State aid. |
|
(80) |
The Fund has the task of promoting the development of telecommunications in Iceland. The Fund was formed in 2006 on the basis of Act No 132/2005 on the Telecommunication Fund. The main role of the Fund is to allocate funds to: projects aimed at the development of telecommunication infrastructure; projects that contribute to the safety and competitiveness of society in the field of electronic communications; and other telecommunication projects (35). |
|
(81) |
According to Article 1 of Act No 132/2005, the Fund is under the ownership of the Icelandic State and its administration falls under the authority of the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Innovation. |
|
(82) |
ESA therefore preliminarily concludes that the payments from the Fund to Farice for carrying out a seabed survey constitute State resources. |
4.2.2. Advantage
|
(83) |
According to Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, a measure must confer an advantage upon an undertaking. An advantage, within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, is any economic benefit which an undertaking could not have obtained under normal market conditions (36), thus placing it in a more favourable position than its competitors (37). |
|
(84) |
The Icelandic authorities have argued that Measure 1 was concluded on market terms, in line with the market economy operator principle. In order to establish whether or not a transaction carried out by a public body is in line with normal market conditions, ESA will apply the market economy operator test (“MEO test”), comparing the behaviour of the public body to that of similar private economic operators under normal market conditions (38). |
|
(85) |
In that respect, it is not relevant whether the intervention constitutes a rational means for the public bodies to pursue public policy considerations. Similarly, the profitability or unprofitability of the beneficiary is not in itself a decisive indicator for establishing whether or not the economic transaction in question is in line with market conditions. The decisive element is whether the public bodies acted as a market economy operator would have done in a similar situation (39). |
|
(86) |
Moreover, whether a State intervention is in line with market conditions must be examined on an ex ante basis, having regard to the information available at the time the intervention was decided upon. If a State argues that it acted as a market economy operator it must, where there is doubt, provide evidence showing that the decision to carry out the transaction was taken on the basis of economic evaluations comparable to those which, in similar circumstances, a rational market economy operator (with characteristics similar to those of the public body concerned) would have had carried out to determine the profitability or economic advantages of the transaction (40). |
|
(87) |
Concerning Measure 1, it is undisputed that the contractual provisions concerning the seabed survey and the payments for that survey were placed in the 2018 PSO Contract between the Fund and Farice, namely Article 1A, 12 and Annex 1. According to the Icelandic authorities, no other provisions of the 2018 PSO Contract applied to the seabed survey (41). |
|
(88) |
ESA notes that the Icelandic authorities essentially argue that Articles 1A, 12, and annex 1 of the 2018 PSO Contract do not, in fact, form part of that contract, but are instead a separate service contract made on market terms. This fact raises doubts as to whether the Fund was operating as a market economy operator, when it charged Farice with performing the seabed survey, since such operators would in general conclude clear and concise contracts when purchasing a similar service. |
|
(89) |
Indeed, it appears that the Fund contracted Farice to perform a service, without including in the contract any provisions concerning cost overruns, specifics regarding the scope of the survey, contingencies for failure to perform the obligations of the contract, or specifics regarding what costs could be covered by the service contract. According to documentation from and statements made by the Icelandic authorities, the temporal scope of the survey was later extended, and final costs ran over the cost estimate in annex 1. |
|
(90) |
Moreover, ESA has asked the Icelandic authorities to provide all documentation of expert evaluations or independent studies of the cost of carrying out the seabed survey, if any such evaluations or studies were carried out prior to the start of the 2018 PSO Contract. However, according to the Icelandic authorities, no such evaluation exists. Additionally, the Fund does not seem to have considered alternative providers. Therefore, ESA has doubts as to whether the Fund’s decision to carry out the transaction was taken on the basis of economic evaluations comparable to those which, in similar circumstances, a rational market economy operator would have taken, as it appears that the Fund committed to paying Farice for a service, without making an evaluation of eventual costs and alternative providers. |
|
(91) |
Furthermore, the Icelandic authorities have stated that Farice did not de facto make a profit from performing the survey for the Fund. Moreover, it is unclear to ESA whether the Fund derived any economic value from its ownership of the survey results. In fact, since the survey forms part of the preparatory works for a submarine cable, which the Icelandic authorities themselves consider a security measure, it would appear that the purpose of the survey was not economic in nature. Therefore, ESA doubts that the Fund acted as an economic operator, since it rather seems to have been pursuing public policy aims when commissioning the survey. |
|
(92) |
Finally, as the Icelandic authorities have already stated that the payments to Farice for the performance of the subsea survey did not entail compensation for a public service obligation, ESA does not see the need at this time to specifically examine whether Measure 1 fulfils the Altmark criteria, or the provisions of the SGEI Decision or Framework. |
|
(93) |
Consequently, ESA has doubts whether Measure 1 was concluded on market terms and cannot exclude that an advantage may have been granted in favour of Farice. Accordingly, the Icelandic authorities are invited to comment on this and submit relevant evidence. |
4.2.3. Selectivity
|
(94) |
In order for a measure to involve State aid it must be selective in that it favours “certain undertakings or the production of certain goods”. Measure 1 concerns a contract between the Fund and Farice. Therefore, Farice is the only potential beneficiary. Other undertakings have not concluded similar contracts with the Fund or the Icelandic State. Accordingly, the alleged advantage of Measure 1 would be a selective advantage, as it only concerns one particular undertaking. |
|
(95) |
It is therefore ESA’s preliminary view that it cannot be excluded that a selective economic advantage was granted to Farice. |
4.2.4. Distortion of competition and effect on trade between Contracting Parties
|
(96) |
To qualify as State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, a measure must be liable to distort competition and affect trade between the Contracting Parties to the EEA Agreement. According to settled case-law, the mere fact that a measure strengthens the position of an undertaking compared with other undertakings competing in intra-EEA trade is considered to be sufficient, in order to conclude that the measure is likely to distort competition and affect trade between the Contracting Parties (42). |
|
(97) |
The Icelandic authorities have argued that the measure in question did not distort or threaten to distort competition and did not have any effect on trade between the Contracting Parties, as the measure did not grant Farice a stronger competitive position than it would have had if the survey had not been undertaken. Moreover, they argue that Farice was not relieved of expenses it would otherwise have had to bear in the course of its day-to-day business operations. Therefore, the Icelandic authorities contend that the award of the seabed survey did not strengthen the position of Farice as compared with other undertakings, neither financially nor in other aspects. |
|
(98) |
On this point ESA notes that it is not obliged to establish the real effect of the aid on the market, but is only required to show that the aid is liable to distort competition and affect trade. Therefore, for all practical purposes, a distortion of competition within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement is generally found to exist when the State grants a financial advantage to an undertaking in a liberalised sector where there is, or could be, competition (43). |
|
(99) |
Measure 1 concerns payments made to Farice for a seabed survey. The costs covered by those payments included subcontracting costs, as well as Farice’s overhead costs, including hourly rates for Farice staff and a general administration fee. Therefore, Measure 1 seems to have placed Farice in a better financial position than it would have been in the absence of Measure 1. |
|
(100) |
Moreover, there are multiple undertakings active in the EEA that provide seabed survey services. This is also demonstrated by the fact that Farice itself subcontracted a large portion of the survey. |
|
(101) |
Consequently, ESA has doubts as to whether it can be excluded that Measure 1 was liable to distort competition and affect trade within the EEA. The Icelandic authorities are invited to comment and submit relevant evidence on this. |
4.2.5. Conclusion
|
(102) |
In light of the above, ESA cannot exclude that Measure 1 entailed State aid. |
4.3. Measure 2
|
(103) |
It is uncontested between Sýn and the Icelandic authorities that Measure 2, i.e. the capital increase in Farice to facilitate the investment in the IRIS cable, constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement (44). |
|
(104) |
ESA therefore preliminary concludes that Measure 2 constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. |
5. Aid scheme or individual aid
|
(105) |
ESA notes that Measures 1 and 2 were not granted on the basis of a scheme (45). Measure 1, if found to be aid, would therefore be individual aid. Measure 2 constitutes individual aid. |
6. Lawfulness of the aid
|
(106) |
Pursuant to Article 1(3) of Part I of Protocol 3 to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice (“Protocol 3”): “The EFTA Surveillance Authority shall be informed, in sufficient time to enable it to submit its comments, of any plans to grant or alter aid. … The State concerned shall not put its proposed measures into effect until the procedure has resulted in a final decision”. |
|
(107) |
The Icelandic authorities did not notify Measure 1 to ESA. ESA therefore concludes that, in the event that Measure 1 is deemed to involve aid, the Icelandic authorities have not respected their obligations under Article 1(3) of Part I of Protocol 3. In this event, Measure 1 would be unlawful aid. |
|
(108) |
The Icelandic authorities implemented Measure 2 after ESA approved it by Decision 023/21/COL. However, with the annulment of ESA’s approval decision by the EFTA Court, Measure 2 became unlawful. |
7. Compatibility of the aid
7.1. Introduction
|
(109) |
In derogation from the general prohibition of State aid laid down in Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, aid may be declared compatible if it can benefit from one of the derogations enumerated in the Agreement. |
|
(110) |
Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement provides that ESA may declare compatible “aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas, where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest”. Therefore, in order to declare the aid compatible, first, the aid must be intended to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas and, second, the aid must not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest (46). |
|
(111) |
Under the first condition, ESA examines how the aid facilitates the development of certain economic activities or areas. Under the second condition, ESA weighs up the positive effects of the aid for the development of said activities or areas and the negative effects of the aid in terms of distortions of competition and adverse effects on trade. |
7.2. Compatibility of Measure 1
|
(112) |
The Icelandic authorities have maintained that Measure 1 does not constitute State aid (see Section 3.5.1). Further, they have also stated that despite the fact that the contractual obligations concerning Measure 1 were included in the 2018 PSO Contract between the Fund and Farice, the measure does not constitute compensation for a public service obligation. |
|
(113) |
Therefore, it would appear that the compatibility of Measure 1, should it be found to constitute aid, could not be examined under Article 59(2) of the EEA Agreement and even if it were, ESA has doubts that the Measure 1 is in line with the provisions of the SGEI Decision or Framework. The Icelandic authorities have not, at this stage, brought forward any other arguments as regards the potential compatibility of the measure. |
|
(114) |
Therefore, following a preliminary assessment, ESA has doubts at this stage as to whether Measure 1 is compatible with the EEA Agreement. Consequently, ESA invites the Icelandic authorities to provide arguments and evidence to demonstrate that Measure 1 could be considered compatible under the EEA Agreement. |
7.3. Compatibility of Measure 2
7.3.1. Introduction
|
(115) |
The Icelandic authorities have invoked Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement as the basis for the assessment of the compatibility of Measure 2. |
|
(116) |
On this point, ESA notes that the compatibility of aid for the roll-out of broadband networks, for the purposes of securing coverage, access or connectivity, is normally assessed under the 2014 Broadband Guidelines. On 8 February 2023, ESA adopted new Broadband Guidelines (“the 2023 Broadband Guidelines”) (47). |
|
(117) |
ESA will follow the principles and guidelines set out in the 2023 Broadband Guidelines for the compatibility assessment of all notified aid to broadband networks in respect of which it is called upon to take a decision after 8 February 2023 when the 2023 Broadband Guidelines entered into force. Unlawful aid to broadband networks will be assessed in accordance with the rules applicable on the date on which the aid was awarded (48). |
|
(118) |
The 2023 Broadband Guidelines were not in effect at the time when Measure 2 was enacted, and therefore cannot serve as a basis for the compatibility assessment of the measure. Therefore, ESA will apply the 2014 Broadband Guidelines, should Measure 2 be considered to fall within their scope. However, the 2023 Broadband Guidelines are based on existing case-law and decision-making practice of the European Commission. Therefore, the 2023 Broadband Guidelines could still be relevant, should Measure 2 fall under the scope of the 2014 Broadband Guidelines, provided they do not place stricter conditions on the beneficiary. |
|
(119) |
In general, the 2014 Broadband Guidelines’ primary objective is to ensure widespread availability of broadband services to end users or access to higher speed internet. The 2014 Broadband Guidelines state that “[t]hese guidelines summarise the principles of [ESA’s] policy in applying the State aid rules […] to measures that support the deployment of broadband networks in general (Section 2). They explain the application of these principles in the assessment of aid measures for the rapid roll-out of basic broadband and very high speed, next generation access (NGA) networks (in Section 3). [ESA] will apply the guidelines in the assessment of State aid for broadband” (49). This objective has not changed with the adoption of the 2023 Broadband Guidelines, which state that “[t]hese Guidelines provide guidance on how ESA will assess […] the compatibility of State aid for the deployment and take-up of fixed and mobile broadband networks and services” (50). |
|
(120) |
Therefore, the 2014 Broadband Guidelines apply to aid measures that target situations where the market does not provide sufficient broadband coverage or where access conditions are not adequate (51). Conversely, the 2014 Broadband Guidelines do not mention international connectivity, security, international data transfer, or subsea cables, and do not specifically lay down compatibility conditions for measures targeting security issues raised by the lack of geographical diversity and robustness of international connectivity services. Therefore, a measure like the one under assessment, where the objective is increased redundancy, security, and robustness of international connectivity services already available to end customers at high speeds, seems to differ from the general type of measure covered by the 2014 Broadband Guidelines, namely measures concerning the expansion or introduction of broadband networks and services. |
|
(121) |
ESA notes that the European Commission, in its Baltic Cable Decision (52), applied the 2014 Broadband Guidelines in its assessment. However, ESA also notes that the measure under assessment in that decision differed significantly from Measure 2. Specifically, it concerned capacity concerns caused by the expected dramatic increase in traffic that could not be supported by the existing infrastructure. Therefore, in addition to security benefits comparable to the ones present in the case at hand, the Baltic Sea Cable targeted (longterm) broadband availability specifically (53). Conversely, Measure 2 does not specifically concern broadband networks or availability. |
|
(122) |
However, in its judgment in Case E-4/21, when assessing ESA’s conclusion that Measure 2 fell outside the scope of the 2014 Broadband Guidelines, the EFTA Court stated that the conclusion: “[…] is not supported by a sufficient analysis of the scope of application of the Broadband Guidelines. […] Although the contested decision states that ‘[t]he Broadband Guidelines’ primary objective is ensuring widespread availability of broadband services to end users or access to higher speed Internet: ” and “[t]he particularities of the measure and investment at hand demonstrate that the Guidelines target different types of measures than the one under assessment’, it fails to set out what impact these statements should have on the scope of application of the Broadband Guidelines. Accordingly, […] ESA encountered serious difficulties in its preliminary examination” (54). The Court then further noted “that irrespective of whether the notified measure in the present case was outside of the scope of the Broadband Guidelines, those guidelines still may provide useful guidance on considerations that are relevant to the assessment of compatibility in general” (55). |
|
(123) |
Consequently, ESA cannot conclude at this stage to what extent the 2014 Broadband Guidelines apply to the compatibility assessment of Measure 2, and therefore invites the Icelandic authorities to provide further arguments in this regard. |
|
(124) |
In the event that the Broadband Guidelines do not apply to the measure at hand, Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement provides that ESA may declare compatible “aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas, where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest”. Therefore, in order to declare the aid compatible, first, the aid must be intended to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas and, second, the aid must not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest. |
|
(125) |
Under the first condition, ESA examines how the aid facilitates the development of certain economic activities or areas. Under the second condition, ESA weighs up the positive effects of the aid for the development of said activities or areas and the negative effects of the aid in terms of distortions of competition and adverse effects on trade. |
7.3.2. Facilitation of development of certain economic activities or areas
7.3.2.1.
|
(126) |
Under Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement, in order to be considered compatible, a measure must contribute to the development of certain economic activities or areas. |
|
(127) |
The primary objective of the measure is to enhance security and reduce the vulnerability of international connectivity to and from Iceland by building a third submarine cable from Iceland to Europe. The secondary objective is to shorten the digital distance between Iceland and Europe allowing Icelandic people and businesses to make better use of international digital services available in Europe. |
|
(128) |
ESA generally considers the construction of a telecommunication infrastructure with a view to its future commercial exploitation to constitute an economic activity (56). Furthermore, the telecommunications market in general constitutes an economic activity. The measure facilitates development in the market for international data transfer services specifically and the markets for electronic communications services in general. |
|
(129) |
In view of the above, ESA preliminarily concludes that the measure constitutes aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities, as required by Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement. |
7.3.2.2.
|
(130) |
State aid is only compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement if it has an incentive effect and so effectively facilitates the development of certain economic activities. To establish whether the measure has an incentive effect, it must be demonstrated that it changes the behaviour of the undertaking concerned in such a way that it engages in an activity which it would not carry out without the aid or which it would carry out in a restricted or different manner. |
|
(131) |
In Section 6.2.2 of ESA’s Decision No 023/21/COL, ESA stated that Measure 2 had an incentive effect. ESA stated that: 1) Farice had historically proven to be unprofitable; 2) the operation of submarine cables in the region was generally unprofitable; 3) the investment in the IRIS cable was unlikely to achieve a profit; 4) the main objective of the cable was to provide enhanced security, which was an externality that did not heavily factor into investment decisions;) and 5) few stakeholders had signalled interest in operating submarine cables without State support in the past. |
|
(132) |
In light of this, ESA is generally inclined to conclude that Measure 2 had an incentive effect, as it incentivised Farice to make an investment it would not have entered into otherwise. However, the Icelandic authorities are invited to provide further information and reasoning on the incentive effect of the measure. |
7.3.2.3.
|
(133) |
The Icelandic authorities consider that the selection of Farice, as owner and operator of the IRIS cable, as well as the selection of cable manufacturer and installer, is exempt from the procurement rules, with reference to Article 10 of the Procurement Act (see also Article 8 of the Procurement Directive). |
|
(134) |
Specifically, Article 8 of the Procurement Directive states: “This Directive shall not apply to public contracts and design contests for the principal purpose of permitting the contracting authorities to provide or exploit public communications networks or to provide to the public one or more electronic communications services. For the purposes of this Article, ‘public communications network’ and ‘electronic communications service’ shall have the same meaning as in Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council”. Furthermore, ESA notes that in accordance with Article 2(m) of Directive 2002/12/EC, “provision of an electronic communications network” means the establishment, operation, control or making available such network. |
|
(135) |
The primary objective of the measure in question is to increase security of international connectivity in Iceland by building a third submarine cable, which in turn will provide the public with more electronic communication services. Therefore, the investment in the submarine cable seems to permit Farice to “provide or exploit public communications networks”, as defined in Article 2(a) of Directive 2002/21/EC. However, ESA cannot conclusively conclude at this stage whether all conditions for the application of the exemption are fulfilled. |
|
(136) |
Moreover, according to paragraph 74(c) of the 2014 Broadband Guidelines, “[w]henever the granting authorities select a third party operator to deploy and operate the subsidised infrastructure, the selection process shall be conducted in line with the spirit and the principles of the Public Procurement Directives. It ensures that there is transparency for all investors wishing to bid for the implementation and/or management of the subsidised project. Equal and non-discriminatory treatment of all bidders and objective evaluation criteria are indispensable conditions”. |
|
(137) |
However, despite this provision, footnote 91 to paragraph 74(c) states: “[t]he situation is different when the public authority decides to deploy and manage the network directly (or through a fully owned entity) […] In such cases, [..] (i) the publicly owned network operators shall limit their activity on the pre-defined target areas and shall not expand to other commercially attractive regions; (ii) the public authority shall limit its activity to maintain the passive infrastructure and to grant access to it, but shall not engage in competition on the retail levels with commercial operators and (iii) to have an accounting separation between the funds used for the operation of the networks and the other funds at the disposal of the public authority”. |
|
(138) |
Therefore, the applicability of procurement rules in the context of an assessment under the 2014 Broadband Guidelines seems to depend on whether or not the the conditions, listed in footnote 91, are fulfilled. The Icelandic authorities have not provided sufficient information in this regard. |
|
(139) |
Consequently, ESA has doubts as to whether or not Measure 2 falls under the exemption from procurement rules described above, and as to whether the provisions of the 2014 Broadband Guidelines have effect in this regard. Therefore, ESA invites the Icelandic authorities to provide further information and rationale in this regard. |
7.3.3. Whether the aid adversely affects trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest
7.3.3.1.
|
(140) |
ESA has not only identified positive effects of the planned aid for the development of the abovementioned economic activities and economic areas, but also possible negative effects that it may have in terms of distortions of competition and adverse effects on trade. These positive and negative effects must then be weighed up. |
7.3.3.2.
|
(141) |
The measure mainly has an effect on the wholesale market for international connectivity and the telecommunication market, both national and international. Additionally, the measure may have an effect on the DC market. |
7.3.4. Positive effects of the aid
|
(142) |
Measure 2 contributes to the development of a submarine cable between Iceland and Europe, thereby enhancing both redundancy and the security of the submarine cable network that Iceland relies on to participate in the global economy. This is in line with the Icelandic Government’s Telecommunications Policy, whose objective is, inter alia, to promote accessible and effective communications and to guarantee the security of telecommunications infrastructures. |
|
(143) |
To achieve those objectives, the Icelandic authorities have emphasised that three active submarine telecommunications cables will connect Iceland with Europe from different landing sites. As a geographically remote country, effective international connections are a prerequisite for the development of Iceland as a modern technologically based society. A serious disruption in international connectivity would cause major damage to the Icelandic economy and society as a whole. |
|
(144) |
According to the Icelandic authorities, the main vulnerabilities of the current international connections relate to human error, malfunctions, accidents, natural disasters and other unforeseen events. The Icelandic authorities have provided ESA with a detailed description of the various and multiple disruptions that have happened in the past and disrupted the functionality of the two existing submarine cables (57). ESA considers these vulnerabilities both realistic and probable. |
|
(145) |
Furthermore, the absolute lengths of the submarine cables from Iceland to Europe increase the probability of incidents compared to shorter cables going from Scandinavia and the UK to mainland Europe. Moreover, other countries in the EEA are connected to major international network connection points via diversified networks of multiple land and/or submarine cables while Iceland is wholly dependent on only two submarine cables. |
|
(146) |
By implementing the measure and adding a third submarine cable to the network, the Icelandic authorities expect the security of international connectivity increases circa tenfold. In particular, a third submarine cable will: (i) increase the projected uptime to 99,9993 %, (ii) reduce the probability of a total outage in a 10-year period to 0,2–1,5 %, and (iii) diversify the land routes in Iceland, decreasing risks associated with a single route failure (58). |
|
(147) |
In addition to enhanced security, the Icelandic authorities contend that the addition of a third submarine cable will also improve the competitiveness of Iceland as whole, as the Icelandic digital market will become “closer” to major network hubs in Europe. Data latency in communications between Iceland and Europe will be reduced as a result of shorted cable length and simpler network structure than is available through the current system connecting Reykjavík with Europe. ESA considers this factor positive, as it contributes to the development of the Icelandic economy as a whole. |
7.3.4.1.
7.3.4.1.1. Introduction
|
(148) |
Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement requires an assessment of any negative effects on competition and on trade. The aid must not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest. |
7.3.4.1.2. Necessity of the aid
|
(149) |
To assess whether State aid is effective to achieve its objective, it is necessary to first identify the problem that needs to be addressed. A State aid measure is necessary if it is targeted towards situations where aid can bring about a material improvement that the market cannot deliver itself, for example by remedying a well-defined market failure. |
|
(150) |
A market failure exists if markets, left to their own devices, without intervention fail to deliver an efficient outcome for society. This may arise, for instance, when certain investments are not being undertaken even though the economic benefit for society exceeds the cost (59). |
|
(151) |
The Icelandic authorities have explained that Farice would not have undertaken the investment in the IRIS cable in the absence of aid, as it cannot support such an investment with its own funds. This, inter alia, is an indication of the market failure associated with providing international connectivity services in Iceland. |
|
(152) |
However, the fact that a specific company may not be capable of undertaking a project without aid does not mean that there is a market failure. For instance, the decision of a company not to invest in a project with low profitability or in a region with limited market demand and/or poor cost competitiveness may not be an indication of a market failure, but rather of a market that functions well (60). |
|
(153) |
Concerning the ability of the market to deliver an efficient outcome for society, the Icelandic authorities have pointed to the fact that Iceland was, prior to the IRIS cable project, only connected to Europe through two submarine cables. Furthermore, over the past decade, few stakeholders signalled interest in investing in international data connectivity services between Iceland and Europe or America. These projects did not materialise primarily due to problems with constructing a sound business case for such an investment. Furthermore, these planned and aborted projects by market actors would have been dependent on financial participation by the State (see paragraph (54)). |
|
(154) |
However, while it is a fact that no privately funded subsea cables from Iceland have been built in the last 10 years, it is also clear that Sýn approached the Icelandic State with plans to build a subsea cable. Negotiations and discussions between the State and Sýn continued over two years, but were then terminated. Therefore, while it is unclear to ESA whether Sýn’s offer was comparable to the IRIS cable project, or if it indicates an attempt to enter the market for international data connectivity services, ESA cannot exclude the possibility that the market could have delivered the outcome sought by Measure 2. |
|
(155) |
Consequently, ESA must preliminarily conclude that it has doubts as to the necessity of Measure 2. The Icelandic authorities are invited to provide further arguments and information relating to this point. |
7.3.4.1.3. Appropriateness of the aid
|
(156) |
EFTA States can make different choices with regard to policy instruments, and State aid control does not impose a single way to intervene in the economy. However, State aid under Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement can only be justified by the appropriateness of a particular instrument to contribute to the development of the targeted economic activities or areas. |
|
(157) |
ESA normally considers a measure appropriate where the EFTA State can demonstrate that alternative policy options would not be equally suitable, and that alternative, less distortive, aid instruments would not deliver equally efficient outcomes. |
|
(158) |
Due to the general unprofitability of submarine cable infrastructure investments and projects from Iceland to Europe, ESA is inclined to conclude that an alternative policy instrument, such as regulations, would neither trigger investment in the IRIS cable project, nor other similar investment projects. Further, ESA is equally inclined to conclude that a loan or guarantee would not be a more appropriate aid instrument (61). |
|
(159) |
Therefore, ESA preliminarily concludes that State aid in the form of a capital increase is the appropriate instrument to facilitate the development of the economic activities that the measure concerns. However, the Icelandic authorities are invited to elaborate on this point. |
7.3.4.1.4. Proportionality of the aid
|
(160) |
State aid is proportionate if the aid amount per beneficiary is limited to the minimum needed to incentivise the additional investment or activity in the area concerned. |
|
(161) |
Measure 2 constitutes a capital increase in Farice. The board of directors of Farice were authorised to increase the capital in intervals during the construction period of the new cable. The financing needs of the recipient were assessed at each interval and only established costs were granted through the capital increase. The granting authority reviews any expenses and controls overcompensation retroactively. This aid granting method and claw-back mechanism contributes to the proportionality of the aid. Moreover, when seeking subcontracting offers, Farice engaged in a competitive selection procedure whereby it selected a contractor who will manufacture and lay the IRIS cable. The selection procedure resulted in Farice opting to contract with the lowest bidder. |
|
(162) |
However, according to paragraph 74 of the 2014 Broadband Guidelines, multiple conditions must be fulfilled in order to demonstrate the proportionality of a measure. Failure to meet any of those conditions would in most cases require a detailed assessment (62). These conditions include mapping an analysis of coverage, public consultation, and a competitive selection process. |
|
(163) |
ESA is not aware of any mapping analysis or public consultation performed by the Icelandic authorities prior to the implementation of Measure 2. Moreover, as Iceland selected an “in house entity”, namely Farice, to own and operate the infrastructure, it is clear that no competitive selection process was followed in relation to Measure 2. However, ESA notes that there is no need for a competitive selection process if the State chooses to manage a network directly (or through a wholly owned entity). |
|
(164) |
Nevertheless, where the aid is granted without a competitive selection procedure, to a public authority that deploys and manages a broadband network at wholesale level directly, or through an in-house entity, the State must justify its choice of network and technological solution. |
|
(165) |
Moreover, according to paragraph 74(d) of the 2014 Broadband Guidelines, granting authorities should generally select the most economically advantageous offer. However, this only applies within the context of a competitive tender, and not when the State selects a wholly owned entity to own and operate the network. |
|
(166) |
As described in Section 3.1, the Icelandic authorities were approached by Sýn with an offer to build the third submarine cable, which following an examination by an independent expert, was considered to be cost effective than Farice’s offer. The Icelandic authorities have argued that the independent report was based on unconfirmed prices, and when asked to confirm prices, Sýn was unable to do so. Discussions between the Icelandic State and Sýn were terminated as a result. Sýn has argued that it was not given any time or opportunity to renew offers and provide confirmation on prices (63). |
|
(167) |
On this point, the EFTA Court stated that: “ESA has not touched upon this issue at all or disputed that it was aware of this information, as alleged by Sýn. ESA has merely reiterated that Sýn’s proposal relied on ‘unverified figures’ without explaining why, if it considered that the figures were unverified, it did not seek to verify them by obtaining further information from Sýn, which had already submitted a complaint to ESA” (64). The EFTA Court then concluded that “it must be held that Sýn has established that ESA was aware of documents that called into question the information at its disposal and on which it relied in the contested decision, without going beyond a mere examination of the information submitted by the Icelandic authorities. By not obtaining further information on whether Sýn was actually able to confirm its prices, or whether it had been given that opportunity, ESA failed to satisfy its obligation to conduct a diligent and impartial examination of the notified measure so that it had at its disposal the most complete and reliable information” (65). |
|
(168) |
Therefore, while the Icelandic authorities might not have been required to conduct a competitive tender, nor select the most economically advantageous offer, ESA must preliminarily conclude that the existence of an allegedly more economically viable offer from Sýn puts into doubt the proportionality of Measure 2, as the Icelandic authorities have not sufficiently explained the price differences between Sýn’s offer, and the eventual cost of the IRIS cable project. |
|
(169) |
Consequently, as ESA has doubts as regards the proportionality of Measure 2 and invites the Icelandic authorities to further elaborate on the proportionality of the measure, and, in particular, to provide arguments and information explaining the aid amount in comparison to Sýn’s allegedly more economical offer. |
7.3.4.1.5. Limited negative effect on intra-EEA trade
|
(170) |
As ESA preliminary considers Measure 2 to constitute State aid, the measure has an effect on intra-EEA trade. However, in order to be compatible, a measure should limit those effects. |
|
(171) |
As stated previously, the primary objective of the measure is to enhance the security of international connections in Iceland, and while a third submarine cable will increase capacity, ESA notes that the capacity of the current network is not fully utilised; the new infrastructure is principally expected to complement the other connections currently in operation. Therefore, the addition of a third cable does not materially alter the structure of the market for international connectivity, but rather enhances the security of the infrastructure already present. |
|
(172) |
Moreover, even though a third cable will allow Iceland to be better connected to Europe, it will not change the fact that Iceland remains an island approximately 1 200 km from the nearest European country and 2 000 km from the European continent. The improved communication to Iceland will not bridge the natural data latency gap that exists between communication on the European continent compared with communication from the continent to Iceland. Therefore, ESA finds it hard to see how the IRIS cable will have a material impact on the competitiveness of other EEA markets compared to Iceland. Therefore, the third cable, in and of itself, should not materially alter the dynamics of intra EEA-trade on the relevant market. |
|
(173) |
ESA notes that there are no other companies, established in the EEA, that currently operate, or have shown concrete plans to operate without State support, a submarine cable similar to the IRIS cable. Therefore, market participants have not to date demonstrated any concrete plans to invest in a submarine cable between Iceland and Europe prior to the implementation of the measure. |
|
(174) |
However, as mentioned in paragraph (54), one of the factors that lead to reduced investment in subsea cables from Iceland to Europe is the need to secure redundancy. An undertaking wishing to establish its own subsea cable network needs to build two cables, or secure redundancy using an existing cable. Since Farice is the only operator of subsea cables from Iceland to Europe, it is most likely that any possible new entrant would opt to secure redundancy through one of Farice’s exiting cables, in lieu of building two cables at once. ESA does not have information regarding whether Farice offers redundancy services. However, if Farice does not provide such services, it could call into question the limited negative effects of the measure on competition in general due to potential entry barriers. |
|
(175) |
Moreover, paragraph 74 of the 2014 Broadband Guidelines lists a number of conditions aimed at limiting distortion of competition and trade, including the need for detailed mapping and public consultation. Failure to comply with any of the conditions is likely to trigger the need for a detailed analysis by ESA. Therefore, regardless of the eventual scope of the 2014 Broadband Guidelines, the apparent omission of the Icelandic authorities to comply with at least some of the conditions listed in paragraph 74 of the 2014 Broadband Guidelines when implementing Measure 2 leads ESA to doubt the overall limitation of negative effects on competition and trade. |
7.3.4.1.6. Conclusion on limited negative effects
|
(176) |
With reference to the foregoing, ESA has doubts that the effects of the measure on intra EEA-trade are sufficiently limited to a minimum. Therefore, ESA invites the Icelandic authorities to provide further arguments and information in this regard. |
7.3.4.2.
|
(177) |
For the aid to be compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement, the limited negative effects of the aid measure in terms of distortion of competition and adverse impact on trade between Contracting Parties must be outweighed by positive effects, in terms of contribution to the facilitation of the development of economic activities or areas. It must be verified that the aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest. |
|
(178) |
As follows from the above, ESA is preliminarily inclined to conclude that Measure 2 has directly facilitated the economic activities of Farice and that is has had many positive effects. |
|
(179) |
However, in respect of the negative effects, ESA doubts whether the negative effects of Measure 2 on competition and trade are sufficiently limited. Specifically, ESA doubts whether the market failure addressed by the measure is clearly present, and whether the aid was on the whole proportional. Moreover, the effects of the measure on the markets it affects needs to be further examined. |
|
(180) |
At this stage, ESA therefore doubts that the positive effects of the measure outweigh its possible distortion of competition and adverse impact on trade. |
8. Conclusion
|
(181) |
As set out above, ESA has doubts as to whether Measure 1 constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. Further, if the measure is found to involve aid, ESA also has doubts as to whether the measure would be compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. |
|
(182) |
Furthermore, ESA has doubts as to whether the Measure 2 is compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. |
|
(183) |
Consequently, and in accordance Article 4(4) of Part II of Protocol 3, ESA hereby opens the formal investigation procedure provided for in Article 1(2) of Part I of Protocol 3. The decision to open a formal investigation procedure is without prejudice to the final decision of ESA, which may conclude that Measures 1 and 2 do not constitute State aid or are compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. |
|
(184) |
ESA, acting under the procedure laid down in Article 1(2) of Part I of Protocol 3, invites the Icelandic authorities to submit their comments by 14 April 2023, and to provide all documents, information and data needed for the assessment of the measures in light of the State aid rules. |
|
(185) |
The Icelandic authorities are requested to immediately forward a copy of this decision to the aid recipient. |
|
(186) |
The Icelandic authorities have confirmed that this opening decision does not contain any business secrets or other confidential information that should not be published. |
|
(187) |
Finally, ESA will inform interested parties by publishing a meaningful summary in the Official Journal of the European Union and the EEA Supplement thereto. All interested parties will be invited to submit their comments within one month of the date of such publication. The comments will be communicated to the Icelandic authorities. |
For the EFTA Surveillance Authority,
Arne Røksund
President
Responsible College Member
Stefan Barriga
College Member
Árni Páll Árnason
College Member
Melpo-Menie Joséphidès
Countersigning as Director,
Legal and Executive Affairs
(1) Sentenza tal-Qorti tal-EFTA fil-Kawża E-4/21 Sýn hf. vs l-Awtorità ta’ Sorveljanza tal-EFTA [għadha ma ġietx irrapportata].
(2) Document No 1176447.
(3) Document No 1182556.
(4) “SGEI” stands for “Services of General Economic Interest”.
(5) Document No 1182715.
(6) Document No 1189996.
(7) Document No 1192410.
(8) Document No 1256678.
(9) Document No 1276074.
(10) Judgment of the EFTA Court in Case E-4/21 Sýn hf. v EFTA Surveillance Authority (not yet reported).
(11) Document No 1285878.
(12) Document No 1313840 and attachments.
(13) Document No 1326167.
(14) Commission Decision 2012/21/EU on the application of Article 106(2) of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union to State aid in the form of public service compensation to certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest (OJ L 7, 11.1.2012, p. 3, and EEA Supplement No 43, 2.8.2012, p. 56).
(15) Document No 664512.
(16) EGS is an international group of companies with offices in Europe, the Americas, Asia and Australia. EGS provides global specialist multi-disciplinary marine survey support, and delivers solutions to the Telecommunications, Renewables, Oil and Gas, Charting and Marine Infrastructure market sectors. See also http://www.egssurvey.com/.
(17) For a more detailed description of Measure 2, see Section 3 of ESA’s Decision No 023/21/COL.
(18) In 2013–2018, Farice received public service compensation from the Fund for offering electronic communications connectivity between Iceland and Europe through FARICE-1 and DANICE. The last payment on this basis was made on 4 October 2018.
(19) The new IRIS cable will be based on an open cable architecture which means that customers can be given an access to the infrastructure by using their own terminal equipment. Access to infrastructure can be granted by own fibre pair or fractional fibre pair (spectrum). Furthermore, the technology to use the submarine cable is standardised and based on Ethernet, which is the technology commonly used. A more advanced interface in the form of OTU2, OTU3 and OTU4 is also offered.
(20) This refers to different surveys than those covered by Measure 1.
(21) See Farice press release dated 11 November 2022.
(22) Case No 86451.
(23) Judgment of 24 July 2003, Altmark, C-280/00, ECLI:EU:C:2003:415, paragraphs 87-93.
(24) Commission Decision 2012/21/EU on the application of Article 106(2) of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union to State aid in the form of public service compensation to certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest (OJ L 7, 11.1.2012, p. 3, and EEA Supplement No 43, 2.8.2012, p. 56).
(25) Framework for State aid in the form of public service compensation (OJ L 161, 13.6.2013, p. 12 and EEA Supplement No 34, 13.6.2013, p. 1).
(26) See the Judgment of the EFTA Court in Case E-4/21 Sýn hf. v EFTA Surveillance Authority, paragraph 67.
(27) Cases 86220 and 86598.
(28) Case 86451.
(29) Document No 1276074, Section 6.1.
(30) ESA’s Guidelines on the application of the State aid rules in relation to rapid deployment of broadband networks (OJ L 135, 8.5.2014, p. 49 and EEA Supplement No 27, 8.5.2014, p. 1).
(31) The Icelandic authorities mention specifically earlier interest shown by Emerald and Nordic Networks in 2010-2016, and proposals from Sýn, both independently and in collaboration with Celtic Norse AS, in 2018-2020. These proposals were all dependant on some kind of financial participation by the Icelandic State. For further information see Section 3.2.4 in ESA’s Decision No 023/21/COL.
(32) The Act on Public Procurement No 120/2016.
(33) Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 65, and EEA Supplement No 73, 16.11.2017, p. 53).
(34) Judgment of 22 September 2020 in Austria v Commission (Hinkley Point C), C-594/18 P, ECLI:EU:C:2020:742, paragraphs 18–20.
(35) https://www.stjornarradid.is/verkefni/samgongur-og-fjarskipti/fjarskiptasjodur/.
(36) ESA’s Guidelines on the notion of State aid as referred to in Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement (“NoA”) (OJ L 342, 21.12.2017, p. 35 and EEA Supplement No 82, 21.12.2017, p. 1), paragraph 66.
(37) See for instance Judgment of 5 June 2012, Commission v EDF, C-124/10 P, ECLI:EU:C:2012:318, paragraph 90; Judgment of 15 March 1994, Banco Exterior de España, C-387/92, ECLI:EU:C:1994:100, paragraph 14; and Judgment of 19 May 1999, Italy v Commission, C-6/97, ECLI:EU:C:1999:251, paragraph 16.
(38) NoA, Section 4.2.1.
(39) NoA, paragraph 76.
(40) NoA, paragraph 79.
(41) Document No 1313844.
(42) Judgment of the EFTA Court in Case E-6/98 Norway v EFTA Surveillance Authority [1999] Ct. Rep. 76, paragraph 59, where it is stated that “[w]hen State financial aid strengthens the position of an undertaking compared with other undertakings competing in intra-Community trade the latter must be regarded as affected by that aid”.
(43) NoA, paragraph 187.
(44) The EFTA Court, in its judgment in Case E-4/21, did not suggest anything to the contrary.
(45) See Article 1(e) of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice (“Protocol 3”).
(46) Judgment of 22 September 2020, Austria v Commission (Hinkley Point C), C-594/18 P, ECLI:EU:C:2020:742, paragraphs 18–20.
(47) See ESA Decision No 004/23/COL amending the substantive rules in the field of State aid by introducing new Guidelines on State aid for broadband networks (not yet reported).
(48) Ibid, Article 1(2).
(49) See the 2014 Broadband Guidelines, paragraph 4.
(50) See the 2023 Broadband Guidelines, paragraph 14.
(51) See the 2014 Broadband Guidelines, paragraphs 34–35. See also the pre-requisites for defining a service as an SGEI in paragraph 16.
(52) Commission Decision SA.36918 (Finland), Baltic Sea Backbone Cable (OJ C 422, 8.12.2017, p.1).
(53) Ibid, paragraph 91: “Thus, the measure facilitates the development of certain economic activities, i.e the provision of electronic communications services and networks, including the provision of international connectivity, and indirectly the provision of broadband services”. (emphasis added).
(54) Judgment of the EFTA Court in Case E-4/21 Sýn hf. v EFTA Surveillance Authority, paragraph 72.
(55) Ibid, paragraph 73.
(56) NoA, paragraphs 202 and 216, and the 2014 Broadband Guidelines, paragraph 7.
(57) See Section 3.2.3 of ESA’s Decision No 023/21/COL for details.
(58) See ESA’s Decision No 023/21/COL, paragraph 22.
(59) See 2014 Broadband Guidelines, paragraph 33.
(60) See 2014 Broadband Guidelines, footnote 45.
(61) See ESA Decision No 023/21/COL, Section 6.3.4.3.
(62) Similar conditions can also be found in the 2023 Broadband Guidelines, Section 5.2.4.
(63) Judgment of the EFTA Court in Case E-4/21 Sýn hf. v EFTA Surveillance Authority, paragraph 64.
(64) Ibid, paragraph 66.
(65) Ibid, paragraph 68.
V Avviżi
ATTI OĦRAJN
Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea
|
13.4.2023 |
MT |
Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea |
C 129/47 |
Pubblikazzjoni ta’ applikazzjoni għal approvazzjoni ta’ emenda, li ma hijiex minuri, għal Speċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott skont l-Artikolu 50(2)(a) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill dwar skemi tal-kwalità għal prodotti agrikoli u oġġetti tal-ikel
(2023/C 129/05)
Din il-pubblikazzjoni tikkonferixxi d-dritt ta’ oppożizzjoni għall-applikazzjoni għal emenda skont l-Artikolu 51 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill (1) fi żmien 3 xhur mid-data ta’ din il-pubblikazzjoni.
APPLIKAZZJONI GĦALL-APPROVAZZJONI TA’ EMENDA LI MA HIJIEX MINURI GĦALL-ISPEĊIFIKAZZJONI TAL-PRODOTT TA’ DENOMINAZZJONIJIET TA’ ORIĠINI PROTETTI JEW TA’ INDIKAZZJONIJIET ĠEOGRAFIĊI PROTETTI
Applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda f’konformità mal-ewwel subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 53(2) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012
“ALCACHOFA DE TUDELA”
Nru tal-UE: PGI-ES-0139-AM01 — 9.9.2021
DOP ( ) IĠP (X)
1. Grupp applikant u interess leġittimu
|
Consejo Regulador de la Indicación Geográfica Protegida “Alcachofa de Tudela” [Bord Regolatorju tal-Indikazzjoni Ġeografika Protetta “Alcachofa de Tudela”] |
|
Avda. Serapio Huici, 22 Edificio Peritos |
|
31610 Villava (Navarre) |
|
SPANJA |
Tel. +34 948013045
Indirizz elettroniku: ajuanena@intiasa.es
Il-grupp applikant jirrappreżenta l-interessi kollettivi tal-produtturi tal-“Alcachofa de Tudela” u għandu interess leġittimu f’din l-applikazzjoni għall-emendar tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott tal-Identifikazzjoni Ġeografika Protetta “Alcachofa de Tudela”. Huwa wkoll il-grupp li oriġinarjament kien applika għall-istatus protett għal dan il-prodott.
Il-Bord Regolatorju tal-IĠP “Alcachofa de Tudela” huwa assoċjazzjoni magħmula mill-produtturi li jaħdmu bl-“Alcachofa de Tudela”. L-għanijiet tal-Bord jinkludu t-titjib tal-valur tal-prodott u t-titjib tal-prestazzjoni tal-iskema tal-IĠP, f’konformità mal-Artikolu 45 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012.
Skont il-leġiżlazzjoni nazzjonali applikabbli, il-Bord huwa inkarigat bil-kompitu li jippromwovi l-kwalità tal-“Alcachofa de Tudela” u jissorvelja u jiddefendi r-reputazzjoni tal-prodott. Dan huwa rifless fir-regoli ta’ proċedura tiegħu, li ġew irratifikati permezz tal-Ordni tat-30 ta’ Mejju 2001 tal-Ministeru tal-Agrikoltura, tas-Sajd u tal-Ikel.
2. Stat membru jew pajjiż terz
Spanja
3. Intestatura fl-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott affettwata mill-emenda/i
|
☐ |
Isem il-prodott |
|
☒ |
Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott |
|
☒ |
Żona ġeografika |
|
☒ |
Prova tal-oriġini |
|
☒ |
Metodu ta’ produzzjoni |
|
☒ |
Rabta |
|
☒ |
Tikkettar |
|
☒ |
Oħrajn [speċifika]: I. Leġiżlazzjoni nazzjonali applikabbli; G. Korp ta’ kontroll |
4. Tip ta’ emenda/i
|
☒ |
Emenda għall-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ta’ DOP jew IĠP irreġistrata li ma għandhiex tikkwalifika bħala minuri skont it-tielet subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 53(2) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012. |
|
☐ |
Emenda għall-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ta’ DOP jew IĠP irreġistrata, li ma għandhiex tikkwalifika bħala minuri, skont it-tielet subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 53(2) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012, li għaliha ma ġie ppubblikat l-ebda Dokument Uniku (jew ekwivalenti) |
5. Emenda/i
5.1. Emendi li jaffettwaw elementi essenzjali
|
5.1.A.1. |
It-test li ġej żdied mal-paragrafu 11 tat-taqsima “Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott” tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott, wara d-deskrizzjoni tal-kummerċjalizzazzjoni tal-qaqoċċ mingħajr zkuk: “c) Qaqoċċ lest għat-tisjir: Il-qaqoċċ irid ikun imqaxxar u ppakkjat b’tali mod li jżomm id-dehra u l-freskezza tiegħu sakemm jiġi kkunsmat.”
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Żdiedet l-għażla li l-qaqoċċ mingħajr zkuk jiġi kkummerċjalizzat f’għamla mqaxxra. Il-kummerċjalizzazzjoni ta’ dan il-format tippermetti lill-konsumaturi jixtru qaqoċċ frisk u lest biex jissajjar, u tista’ tkun mezz effettiv biex jintlaħqu gruppi ta’ konsumaturi li ma għandhomx il-ħin jew il-kapaċità li jqaxxru l-qaqoċċ. Jingħad li l-qaqoċċ irid ikun ippakkjat b’tali mod li jżomm id-dehra u l-freskezza tiegħu sakemm jiġi kkunsmat. Attwalment, dan normalment ikun ippakkjat bil-vakwu f’imballaġġ tal-plastik. Madankollu, ma hemm l-ebda xewqa li jiġi eskluż l-użu potenzjali ta’ tipi oħra ta’ imballaġġ mhux tal-plastik li qed jiġu żviluppati. Dan il-qaqoċċ jissodisfa l-istess rekwiżiti bħall-qaqoċċ mhux imqaxxar ikkummerċjalizzat bħala prodott frisk; huwa nofs triq bejn dan u l-qaqoċċ ippreżervat kopert ukoll mill-IĠP “Alcachofa de Tudela”. It-test “jista’ jiġi ppreżentat f’żewġ għamliet” inbidel għal “jista’ jiġi ppreżentat fi tliet għamliet” biex jinkludi dan it-tielet format. |
5.2. Emendi li ma jaffettwawx elementi essenzjali
5.2.A
|
5.2.A.1 |
Il-kelma “għandhom” inbidlet għal “normalment ikollhom” fir-raba’ paragrafu tad-deskrizzjoni tal-prodott fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Din l-emenda saret biex tagħmilha ċara li l-paragrafu jipprovdi deskrizzjoni ġenerali tal-varjetà Blanca de Tudela u ma jistabbilixxi l-ebda restrizzjoni fuq id-daqs tal-irjus li jistgħu jinqatgħu. Id-daqs tal-irjus ivarja matul l-istaġun tal-ħsad, billi rjus akbar jew iżgħar jinqatgħu skont id-domanda tas-suq u l-kundizzjonijiet tat-temp. Xi swieq jippreferu qaqoċċ akbar, filwaqt li l-qaqoċċ iżgħar huwa ppreferut f’oħrajn u jintużaw fil-preżervazzjoni. Fi kwalunkwe każ, qatt ma jkun kbir ħafna. Hija karatteristika tal-varjetà li ma tipproduċix qaqoċċ kbir, peress li l-pjanta tibda tiffjorixxi – u b’hekk ma tibqax tajba għall-kummerċjalizzazzjoni – ladarba l-qaqoċċ jilħaq id-daqs medju. |
|
5.2.A.2 |
L-10 paragrafu tad-deskrizzjoni tal-prodott fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott, li jindirizza l-preżentazzjoni tal-qaqoċċ ikkummerċjalizzat bħala prodott frisk, ġie emendat biex isir aktar ċar, iżda ma ddaħħlet l-ebda restrizzjoni ġdida.
Id-deskrizzjoni tal-qaqoċċ biz-zkuk issa taqra “a) Qaqoċċ biz-zkuk.- L-irjus jista’ jkollhom zokk twil madwar 18 cm, b’mill-inqas werqa sħiħa waħda jew tnejn. Irid jinbiegħ bit-tużżana.” Żdied il-kliem “madwar” u “mill-inqas”, u tħassret l-aħħar frażi (“bil-mod tradizzjonali, jiġifieri f’faxex”). Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Din l-emenda għalhekk ma tintroduċi l-ebda restrizzjoni ġdida. Pjuttost, saret biex jiġi ċċarat li l-prodott normalment jinbiegħ biz-zokk u bil-weraq. Għalkemm dawn ma jiġux ikkunsmati, il-prodott tradizzjonalment jiġi kkummerċjalizzat bihom. L-“Alcachofa de Tudela” tradizzjonalment jinbiegħ bit-tużżana, u kull qaqoċċa jkollha zokk ta’ madwar 18-il ċentimetru. Madankollu, peress li t-tul taz-zokk ma huwiex deċiżiv għall-kwalità tal-prodott, żdiedet il-kelma “madwar” biex tagħti aktar libertà. It-tul taz-zokk jiddependi fuq il-punt fl-istaġun li fih jinħasad il-prodott. Iz-zkuk ikunu itwal aktar kmieni fl-istaġun u jiqsaru hekk kif jidħol aktar l-istaġun, li jirrifletti l-iżvilupp naturali tal-pjanta. B’kuntrast għal dan, il-preżenza tal-weraq hija importanti meta l-qaqoċċ jinbiegħ bit-tużżana. Filwaqt li l-weraq normalment ma jiġix ikkunsmat, il-qaqoċċ frisk jibqa’ tajjeb għal aktar żmien meta jkun preżenti. Għalhekk huwa importanti li jiġi indikat li l-qaqoċċ frisk irid ikollu mill-inqas werqa sħiħa jew tnejn u li l-qaqoċċ mingħajr weraq ma huwiex permess. Żdied il-kliem “mill-inqas” biex jirrifletti dan. Il-frażi “bil-mod tradizzjonali, jiġifieri f’faxex” tħassret minħabba li ma huwiex meħtieġ li l-qaqoċċ jiġi kkummerċjalizzat f’faxex. Il-qaqoċċ ġeneralment iħalli l-bini tal-kumpaniji tal-kummerċjalizzazzjoni rreġistrati f’ippakkjar li jippermettilu jiġi ttrasportat b’mod sikur mingħajr ma tiġi kompromessa l-kwalità tiegħu. Il-qaqoċċ qabel kien jiġi kkummerċjalizzat f’faxex, iżda issa normalment jintbagħat lis-swieq f’kaxxi għax jivvjaġġa aħjar b’dan il-mod. Ladarba jasal fil-post tal-bejgħ, jinbiegħ bit-tużżana, iżda mhux neċessarjament f’faxex. |
|
5.2.A.3 |
Il-11-il paragrafu tad-deskrizzjoni tal-prodott fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott, li jindirizza l-preżentazzjoni tal-qaqoċċ ikkummerċjalizzat bħala prodott frisk, ġie emendat biex isir aktar ċar, iżda ma ddaħħlet l-ebda restrizzjoni ġdida. Il-frażi “u mingħajr weraq” inbidlet għal “u mingħajr weraq żviluppati”. Il-frażi “Jinbiegħ bil-kilogramma” tħassret.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Il-formulazzjoni nbidlet minn “huwa limitat għal” għal “huwa iqsar minn” biex ikun ċar li z-zokk irid ikun inqas twil minn 10 cm. Għandu jiġi ċċarat li għall-kuntrarju tal-qaqoċċ biz-zkuk, il-qaqoċċ mibjugħ f’din l-għamla ma għandux weraq żviluppati. Dan il-prodott ġeneralment jinbiegħ skont il-piż. Ma għandux weraq żviluppati. Madankollu, il-qaqoċċ spiss ikollu xi weraq żgħar u immaturi li jagħmlu parti miz-zokk (li jkun inqas twil minn 10 cm). Peress li l-qaqoċċ jinbiegħ biz-zkuk tiegħu, dawn il-weraq ma jistgħux jitneħħew mingħajr ma tiġi affettwata l-preżervazzjoni tal-qaqoċċ. Għandu jiġi ċċarat li filwaqt li l-qaqoċċ ikkummerċjalizzat mingħajr zkuk ma jistax ikollu weraq kompletament żviluppati, ma hemmx bżonn li jinqatgħu l-weraq żgħar u immaturi li jagħmlu parti miz-zokk. Ġiet inkluża stampa ta’ qaqoċċa b’xi weraq żviluppati u xi weraq żgħar mhux żviluppati. Dan sabiex jintwera li ma huwiex possibbli li l-qaqoċċ jinħasad u li jitħalla t-tul minimu taz-zokk meħtieġ għall-preżervazzjoni tiegħu mingħajr ma jiġu inklużi l-weraq mhux żviluppati. Il-frażi “Jinbiegħ bil-kilogramma” tħassret minħabba li ma tistabbilixxix rekwiżit. Din kienet fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott oriġinali minħabba x-xebh mal-qaqoċċ biz-zkuk u l-weraq, li jiġu kkummerċjalizzati bit-tużżana. Madankollu, ma hemmx bżonn li tinżamm minħabba li l-qaqoċċ normalment jiġi kkummerċjalizzat b’dan il-mod. |
5.2.B
|
5.2.B.1 |
Is-sentenza “It-togħma tiegħu hija eċċellenti, inkluż meta jkun aħdar [jiġifieri frisk]” tħassret minn tmiem ir-raba’ paragrafu tad-deskrizzjoni tal-prodott fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Is-sentenza “It-togħma tiegħu hija eċċellenti, inkluż meta jkun aħdar” tħassret. Huwa ċar li din suppost kellha tindika li t-togħma tal-prodott mhux imsajjar hija eċċellenti, peress li l-qaqoċċ tal-varjetà Blanca de Tudela dejjem ikun aħdar. Ikun aħjar li titħassar minħabba li tqarraq bil-qarrej, u la tistabbilixxi rekwiżit u lanqas ma tiddeskrivi karatteristika distintiva. |
|
5.2.B.2 |
Fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott, il-ħames paragrafu, li jirreferi għar-Regolament (KE) Nru 1466/2003, tħassar u l-frażi “fil-Klassi I” tħassret mis-seba’ paragrafu.
Raġunijiet għal dan it-tħassir: Il-paragrafu tħassar minħabba li r-Regolament li jirreferi għalih tħassar u r-Regolament attwalment fis-seħħ, ir-Regolament Delegat tal-Kummissjoni (UE) Nru 2019/428 tat-12 ta’ Lulju 2018, ma jistabbilixxix klassijiet kummerċjali għall-qaqoċċ ikkummerċjalizzat bħala prodott frisk, u għalhekk ma jservix bħala referenza għall-istabbiliment ta’ klassijiet kummerċjali għall-qaqoċċ. Il-frażi “fil-Klassi I” tħassret minħabba li, kif jissemma hawn fuq, il-klassifikazzjoni kienet ibbażata fuq leġiżlazzjoni li ma għadhiex fis-seħħ. |
|
5.2.B.3 |
Iddaħħlet il-frażi “Qaqoċċ ikkummerċjalizzat bħala prodott frisk” fil-bidu tas-sitt paragrafu tat-taqsima “Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott” tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott biex it-test isir aktar ċar.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: It-test ġie emendat għal raġunijiet ta’ ċarezza peress li tħassar il-paragrafu preċedenti, li kien jirreferi għal regolament Ewropew li tħassar. Iddaħħlet il-frażi “Qaqoċċ ikkummerċjalizzat bħala prodott frisk” biex ikun ċar li l-karatteristiċi deskritti fil-paragrafu jirrelataw mal-qaqoċċ ikkummerċjalizzat bħala prodott frisk. |
5.2.C
|
5.2.C.1 |
L-informazzjoni irrilevanti kollha tħassret minn din it-taqsima tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott. Issa sempliċement telenka l-muniċipalitajiet li jiffurmaw iż-żona ġeografika ddefinita. It-tmiem tat-test ġie emendat ukoll: “l-istess distrett agrikolu, jiġifieri V jew Ribera” nbidel għal “żona tal-produzzjoni”.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: L-ewwel paragrafu, li jiddeskrivi l-post ta’ Navarra u d-distretti li jiffurmawh, tħassar. It-test issa sempliċement jelenka l-muniċipalitajiet li jiffurmaw iż-żona koperta mill-IĠP “Alcachofa de Tudela”; il-bqija tal-informazzjoni bl-ebda mod ma ddefiniet din iż-żona ġeografika. Min-naħa l-oħra, filwaqt li ż-żona ġeografika ma nbidlitx, id-diviżjoni amministrattiva ta’ Navarra f’distretti agrikoli ma għadhiex l-istess bħal dik deskritta fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott. Ir-referenzi kollha għad-distretti agrikoli għalhekk tneħħew mit-test, li issa sempliċement jelenka l-muniċipalitajiet li jiffurmaw iż-żona ġeografika ddefinita kollha. Il-paragrafu li jiddeskrivi d-distribuzzjoni tal-għelejjel fiż-żona ddefinita tħassar ukoll, minħabba li d-distribuzzjoni tal-għelejjel tvarja minn sena għall-oħra u l-informazzjoni ma żżid xejn mal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott. It-tmiem tal-aħħar paragrafu tħassar sabiex titneħħa r-referenza għad-distretti agrikoli. Minflok, issa hemm referenza għaż-żona tal-produzzjoni. Kif issemma qabel, it-tqassim f’distretti nbidel mill-pubblikazzjoni tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ’l hawn. |
5.2.D
|
5.2.D.1 |
It-Taqsima D. “Prova li l-prodott oriġina miż-żona” tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ġiet irriformulata kompletament: it-test irrilevanti kollu tħassar u l-formulazzjoni issa tiffoka fuq l-elementi li jiggarantixxu t-traċċabbiltà, l-oriġini u l-karatteristiċi tal-prodott. It-tħassir ma jaffettwax l-elementi essenzjali.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Din il-bidla hija maħsuba biss biex tipprovdi spjegazzjoni aħjar u aktar preċiża ta’ kif jintwera li l-prodott joriġina fiż-żona ġeografika ddefinita u jikkonforma mar-rekwiżiti l-oħra stabbiliti fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott. Il-formulazzjoni preċedenti ta’ din it-taqsima tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott kienet pjuttost vaga u ma kinitx tagħti stampa ċara tal-kontrolli u t-testijiet imwettqa mill-korp ta’ kontroll biex tiġi żgurata l-konformità mal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott. Il-formulazzjoni l-ġdida proposta tipprovdi spjegazzjoni aktar dettaljata tal-kontrolli u t-testijiet li verament jitwettqu mill-ispezzjoni ta’ kontroll bħala parti mill-proċedura taċ-ċertifikazzjoni, li hija konformi mal-istandard UNE-EN ISO/IEC 17065:2012, u li ġiet akkreditata mill-Korp ta’ Akkreditazzjoni Nazzjonali. Ġew ipprovduti wkoll dettalji dwar is-sistema ta’ spezzjoni, li hija bbażata fuq: spezzjonijiet fuq il-post tal-għelieqi tal-qaqoċċ; spezzjonijiet imwettqa fl-impjanti tal-ipproċessar; u teħid ta’ kampjuni u analiżi matul l-istaġun tal-ipproċessar. Din is-sistema hija kkomplementata mis-sistemi ta’ spezzjoni interna proprji tal-impjanti tal-ipproċessar. It-test issa jispeċifika wkoll ir-reġistri fejn l-operaturi involuti fil-produzzjoni tal-qaqoċċ tal-IĠP għandhom jiġu elenkati sabiex is-sistema ta’ spezzjoni tkun tista’ tiġi implimentata. |
5.2.E
|
5.2.E.1 |
L-ewwel parti biss tat-Taqsima E, it-tieni paragrafu, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott, li tiddeskrivi r-rekwiżit li l-prodott jitkabbar bħala għalla annwali, tħalliet intatta. Il-bqija tal-paragrafu tħassar minħabba li ma hemmx bżonnu.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: It-test tħassar minħabba li ma jistabbilixxi l-ebda rekwiżit rigward il-metodu tal-produzzjoni: dan jiddikjara li n-newba hija tradizzjonalment rakkomandata u jinnota li ma ġiet osservata l-ebda problema attribwibbli għall-produzzjoni ripetuta tal-istess għalla meta ma ssirx in-newba. |
|
5.2.E.2 |
It-taqsima “Ħamrija” tat-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott oriġinali tħassret minħabba li ma tistabbilixxi l-ebda rekwiżit għall-prodott protett.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: It-test tħassar minħabba li ma jistabbilixxi l-ebda rekwiżit rigward il-metodu tal-produzzjoni. Ma huwiex il-Bord Regolatorju li jiddetermina liema ħamrija hija adatta għall-kultivazzjoni; il-produttur huwa responsabbli għall-għażla tal-irqajja’ art b’karatteristiċi tal-ħamrija li jippermettu li l-għalla tiżviluppa b’tali mod li tkun tista’ tipproduċi rjus tal-qaqoċċ li jissodisfaw il-karatteristiċi tal-kwalità meħtieġa mill-IĠP. |
|
5.2.E.3 |
It-taqsima “Fertilizzazzjoni” tat-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott oriġinali tħassret minħabba li ma tistabbilixxi l-ebda rekwiżit għall-prodott protett.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: It-test tħassar minħabba li ma jistabbilixxi l-ebda rekwiżit rigward il-metodu tal-produzzjoni. It-test l-antik jiddeskrivi kif kienu jiġu applikati l-fertilizzanti meta tfasslet l-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott u jirreferi għal standards li minn dak iż-żmien ’l hawn tħassru. Kemm in-newba kif ukoll l-użu tal-fertilizzanti jridu jsegwu l-aħjar prattiki agrikoli u jikkonformaw mal-leġiżlazzjoni fis-seħħ dak iż-żmien. Peress li ma humiex karatteristiċi speċifiċi tal-produzzjoni tal-Alcachofa de Tudela iżda pjuttost huma rekwiżiti ġenerali, ma hemmx għalfejn jissemmew fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott. |
|
5.2.E.4 |
It-taqsima “Tħawwil” tat-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ġiet emendata: it-test li jiddeskrivi t-tekniki tal-kultivazzjoni tal-qaqoċċ tħassar, u tħallew biss il-karatteristiċi deċiżivi tal-prodott protett.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Il-paragrafi li jiddeskrivu t-tekniki għall-fertilizzazzjoni u t-tħejjija tal-flanni għat-tħawwil tħassru minħabba li jirreferu għat-tekniki tal-kultivazzjoni – fosthom uħud li ma għadhomx rilevanti – li ma humiex speċifiċi għall-IĠP “Alcachofa de Tudela”. Id-densità tat-tħawwil u d-distanza bejn il-pjanti u l-flanni ma jaffettwawx b’mod sostanzjali l-kwalità tal-għalla, iżda minflok jiddependu fuq il-makkinarju disponibbli għall-produttur. Għalhekk id-deskrizzjoni tħassret. Ir-referenza għall-Istitut tat-Teknoloġija u l-Ġestjoni Agrikola ta’ Navarra bħala l-korp responsabbli għas-sorveljanza tat-tnissil tal-pjanti tħassret; din kienet kumpanija pubblika li tirrapporta lill-Gvern ta’ Navarra u ma għadhiex teżisti. Issa, il-bdiewa li jipproduċu l-irjus tal-għeruq huma responsabbli għall-għażla tal-pjanta li titħalla f’postha biex tipproduċi l-irjus tal-għeruq. Dawn il-bdiewa spiss jinvolvu lil partijiet terzi indipendenti biex jiċċertifikaw li l-pjanta ntgħażlet kif suppost. Tħalliet deskrizzjoni tal-istaġun tat-tħawwil. Madankollu, ma tpoġġiet l-ebda restrizzjoni fuq id-dati għaliex jiddependu fuq meta l-pjanta tal-qaqoċċ tkun nixfet, fuq meta jkunu nqalgħu l-irjus tal-għeruq u fuq li l-kundizzjonijiet tal-art ikunu adatti għat-tħawwil. |
|
5.2.E.5 |
It-taqsima “Kura” tat-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott tħassret minħabba li ma tistabbilixxi l-ebda rekwiżit, minflok tiddeskrivi kif il-qaqoċċ jiġi kkultivat, u f’ċerti partijiet ma għadhiex valida.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: It-test tħassar minħabba li ma jistabbilixxix rekwiżiti li huma speċifiċi għall-IĠP “Alcachofa de Tudela”; huwa sempliċement jiddeskrivi t-teknika użata fiż-żmien meta ġiet abbozzata l-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott. Illum il-ġurnata, f’ħafna rqajja’ art, il-ħaxix ħażin ma jitneħħiex. Minflok, it-tkabbir ikkontrollat tal-ħaxix ħażin huwa permess sabiex jipprovdi kopertura tal-art u jipprevjeni l-evaporazzjoni tal-ilma. Alternattivament, jistgħu jintużaw materjali ta’ kopertura biex jitrażżan il-ħaxix ħażin u tiġi eliminata l-ħtieġa tal-użu tal-erbiċidi. |
|
5.2.E.6 |
It-taqsima “Irrigazzjoni” tat-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ġiet emendata: il-paragrafi li ma jistabbilixxux rekwiżiti u sempliċement jiddeskrivu ż-żona ddefinita tħassru, u l-formulazzjoni ttejbet biex issir aktar ċara.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: It-test issa jenfasizza li hija meħtieġa l-irrigazzjoni għall-kultivazzjoni tal-qaqoċċ minħabba li ftit tagħmel xita fiż-żona tal-produzzjoni. It-test li jiddeskrivi t-tekniki tal-irrigazzjoni tħassar għax huwa ġenerali, minħabba li t-tekniki tal-irrigazzjoni l-aktar xierqa jiddependu mill-kundizzjonijiet tat-temp f’kull stadju tal-kultivazzjoni. It-test dwar l-irrigazzjoni fl-għelieqi fit-tieni sena tħassar, minħabba li dan ukoll jiddependi mill-kundizzjonijiet tat-temp f’kull stadju tal-kultivazzjoni. |
|
5.2.E.7 |
It-taqsima “Trattament” tħassret mit-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott.
Raġunijiet għal dan it-tħassir: Dan it-test tħassar minħabba li jirreferi għat-trattamenti għall-protezzjoni tal-pjanti li kienu jintużaw meta tfasslet l-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott oriġinali, li wħud minnhom issa huma pprojbiti. Il-leġiżlazzjoni Ewropea qiegħda tpoġġi restrizzjonijiet fuq it-trattamenti għall-protezzjoni tal-pjanti u ħafna produtturi tal-“Alcachofa de Tudela” qegħdin jaqilbu għal trattamenti organiċi. Għalhekk ma tantx jagħmel sens li jissemmew it-trattamenti għall-protezzjoni tal-pjanti, peress li dawn jistgħu jinbidlu maż-żmien u ma hemm l-ebda rekwiżit speċifiku relatat magħhom għall-IĠP “Alcachofa de Tudela”. |
|
5.2.E.8 |
Partijiet mit-taqsima “Ħsad” tat-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott tħassru minħabba li huma deskrizzjonijiet ġenerali tal-kultivazzjoni tal-qaqoċċ. Ir-rekwiżiti relatati b’mod speċifiku mal-prodott protett biss tħallew.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Il-paragrafu li jirreferi għall-iżvilupp ottimu tal-irjus tal-qaqoċċ tħassar minħabba li huwa deskrizzjoni ġenerali li tapplika għall-qaqoċċ kollu u ma jistabbilixxi l-ebda rekwiżit speċifiku li għandu jiġi inkluż fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott. Il-paragrafi li jirreferu għall-perjodi tal-ħsad u l-użi maħsuba tal-qaqoċċ maħsud tħassru. Il-ħsad jibda meta jkun hemm qaqoċċ kompletament żviluppat fuq il-pjanta; iż-żmien meta dan iseħħ ivarja ħafna skont it-temp fil-ħarifa u skont il-ġlata tax-xitwa, peress li l-ħsad tal-qaqoċċ għaċ-ċertifikazzjoni jista’ jibda biss meta l-ġlata tkun spiċċat. L-użu li jsir mill-qaqoċċ maħsud jiddependi mid-domanda tas-suq. Is-suq tal-prodotti friski normalment jieħu preċedenza. Meta ma jkunx jista’ jassorbi l-qaqoċċ kollu li jkun ġie prodott, dan imur għas-suq tal-preżervazzjoni, fejn il-prezzijiet għandhom it-tendenza li jkunu kemxejn aktar baxxi. Żewġ kelmiet fil-paragrafu nbidlu biex tittejjeb il-formulazzjoni tiegħu: “imneħħija” nbidlet għal “maqtugħa” minħabba li l-qaqoċċ jinħasad b’sikkina, u “ta’ kuljum” inbidlet għal “kostanti” minħabba li l-għelieqi ma jinħasdux kuljum; il-kundizzjonijiet tat-temp jistgħu jwasslu biex il-qaqoċċ jiżviluppa aktar malajr jew aktar bil-mod, u b’hekk ikun neċessarju li tiżdied jew titnaqqas il-frekwenza tal-ħsad. |
|
5.2.E.9 |
Il-formulazzjoni tat-taqsima “Qlugħ tal-pjanti” tat-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ġiet emendata biex jitneħħa test żejjed u biex jiġu enfasizzati r-rekwiżiti speċifiċi li japplikaw għall-“Alcachofa de Tudela”.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Din it-taqsima ġiet emendata biex jiġi enfasizzat li l-irjus tal-għeruq imħawlin taħt l-IĠP “Alcachofa de Tudela” jridu jiġu minn irqajja’ art li fihom il-qaqoċċ jitkabbar bħala għalla annwali u mhux bħala għalla biennali. Ġiet miżjuda referenza għal Lulju minħabba li t-tħawwil isir f’Lulju u f’Awwissu. Id-deskrizzjoni tal-produzzjoni tal-irjus tal-għeruq tħassret minħabba li dan il-proċess ma huwiex kopert mill-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott. |
|
5.2.E.10 |
L-intestatura u l-formulazzjoni tat-taqsima “Preżentazzjoni tal-prodott għall-bejgħ bħala prodott frisk” tat-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ġew emendati biex isir enfasi akbar fuq il-karatteristiċi tal-prodott protett, u jitneħħew il-paragrafi li ma jistabbilixxux rekwiżiti deċiżivi dwar il-karatteristiċi tal-“Alcachofa de Tudela”.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: It-test issa jenfasizza li l-qaqoċċ irid jiġi minn irqajja’ art irreġistrati u l-kultivar irid ikun Blanca de Tudela: dawn huma karatteristiċi distintivi tal-prodott protett. Id-definizzjonijiet tat-tipi ta’ ppakkjar permessi tħassru, biex b’hekk l-operaturi jitħallew liberi li jiddeċiedu liema tip ta’ ppakkjar se jużaw biex jikkummerċjalizzaw il-qaqoċċ. Issa jridu jinnotifikaw lill-korp ta’ kontroll dwar l-ippakkjar li jużaw. Issa li l-qaqoċċ qed jinbiegħ bħala prodott frisk fis-supermarkets, hemm domanda għal unitajiet tal-bejgħ iżgħar minn dawk użati għall-kummerċjalizzazzjoni tal-qaqoċċ meta ġiet abbozzata l-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott. L-ippakkjar ma jitqiesx bħala karatteristika distintiva tal-“Alcachofa de Tudela” frisk. It-test issa jinkludi r-rekwiżit li, bħal fil-każ tal-“Alcachofa de Tudela” ppreżervat, ma jistgħux jiżdiedu aċidulanti mal-qaqoċċ ikkummerċjalizzat bħala prodott frisk. Ir-rekwiżit relatat mad-daqs ma nbidilx. |
|
5.2.E.11 |
L-ewwel paragrafu tat-taqsima “Qaqoċċ ippreżervat” tat-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ġie emendat: żdiedet in-numerazzjoni biex it-test isir aktar koerenti, u r-referenza għat-“taqsima B” tħassret minħabba li ma tistabbilixxi l-ebda rekwiżit.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: In-numerazzjoni żdiedet mal-intestatura u r-referenza għat-“taqsima B” tħassret minħabba li ma tistabbilixxi l-ebda rekwiżit. It-test issa jispeċifika li jistgħu jintużaw biss prodotti tal-“Klassi Ekstra” u l-“Klassi I”. Tradizzjonalment, ma kienx permess li jintużaw prodotti tal-“Klassi II” biex isir il-prodott ippreżervat protett. Għalhekk żdied rekwiżit dwar dan mal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott. |
|
5.2.E.12 |
It-tieni paragrafu tat-taqsima “Qaqoċċ ippreżervat” tat-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ġie emendat: żdiedet in-numerazzjoni, it-test ġie ristrutturat biex isir aktar koerenti, u tħassar kwalunkwe test li ma jistabbilix rekwiżiti.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Din it-taqsima ġiet ristrutturata biex jiġu sseparati l-istadji differenti fil-produzzjoni tal-prodott ippreżervat. It-test issa jenfasizza li l-materja prima trid tiġi minn irqajja’ art irreġistrati u li trid tkun tal-kultivar protett. Ir-referenza għall-klassi kummerċjali tal-qaqoċċ frisk, li tneħħiet mit-taqsima rilevanti, tħassret hawnhekk ukoll. Din il-bidla saret minħabba li l-leġiżlazzjoni li tiddefinixxi l-“Klassi I” għall-qaqoċċ ikkummerċjalizzat bħala prodott frisk tħassret. |
|
5.2.E.13 |
It-tielet paragrafu tat-taqsima “Qaqoċċ ippreżervat” tat-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott tħassar.
Raġunijiet għal dan it-tħassir: Issa li t-taqsima ġiet ristrutturata, dan il-paragrafu ma għadux jagħmel sens. Ir-rekwiżiti tal-isterilizzazzjoni huma spjegati aktar ’il quddiem fit-test. |
|
5.2.E.14 |
Ir-raba’ paragrafu tat-taqsima “Qaqoċċ ippreżervat” tat-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ġie ristrutturat: inqasam f’żewġ partijiet.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: L-istruttura tal-paragrafi biss inbidlet; ma żdiedet l-ebda informazzjoni ġdida. Il-paragrafu oriġinali nqasam fi tnejn minħabba li jiddeskrivi żewġ stadji fl-ipproċessar tal-“Alcachofa de Tudela” ppreżervat: il-ħasil u s-smit. |
|
5.2.E.15 |
Il-ħames paragrafu tat-taqsima “Qaqoċċ ippreżervat” tat-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ġie ristrutturat: inqasam f’żewġ partijiet.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Dan il-paragrafu ġie ristrutturat, iżda xorta waħda għad fih l-informazzjoni oriġinali. Issa jiċċara wkoll li d-daqs tal-qaqoċċ huwa ddeterminat abbażi tad-dijametru tal-qlub. Il-paragrafu oriġinali nqasam fi tnejn minħabba li jiddeskrivi żewġ stadji fl-ipproċessar tal-“Alcachofa de Tudela” ppreżervat: id-determinazzjoni tad-daqs u t-tqattigħ. |
|
5.2.E.16 |
Is-sitt paragrafu tat-taqsima “Qaqoċċ ippreżervat” tat-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ġie ristrutturat: inqasam f’żewġ partijiet. Parti mit-test ġiet emendata biex jiġu enfasizzati r-rekwiżiti għall-“Alcachofa de Tudela”.
Raġunijiet għal dawn l-emendi: L-istruttura ġiet emendata. It-taqsima li tittratta l-ippakkjar u ż-żieda tal-likwidu tal-preżervazzjoni nfirdet mit-taqsima dwar it-tisħin minn qabel minħabba li dawn huma żewġ stadji differenti fil-proċess tal-produzzjoni tal-“Alcachofa de Tudela” ppreżervat. It-taqsima dwar l-ippakkjar tenfasizza li l-prodott ma jistax ikun fih aċidulanti jew regolaturi tal-aċidità, peress li n-nuqqas tagħhom huwa karatteristika tal-prodott protett. It-test issa jenfasizza li l-kontenitur irid ikun magħmul mill-ħġieġ u jinnota li l-proċess ta’ tisħin minn qabel ma huwiex obbligatorju. It-tisħin minn qabel ineħħi b’mod aktar effettiv l-arja maqbuda fil-kontenituri, iżda jekk jgħaddi żmien twil minn meta l-prodott jiġi ppakkjat sa meta l-kontenituri jingħalqu u jiġu sterilizzati, ikun aħjar li ma tiżdiedx it-temperatura tal-prodott minħabba r-riskju mikrobijoloġiku assoċjat. It-tisħin minn qabel iżomm il-kontenituri sħan għal żmien twil biżżejjed biex jikbru l-mikroorganiżmi termofiliċi, li sussegwentement jista’ jwassal biex il-prodott jitħassar. |
|
5.2.E.17 |
Is-seba’ paragrafu tat-taqsima “Qaqoċċ ippreżervat” tat-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ġie ristrutturat: inqasam f’żewġ partijiet. Id-definizzjoni tat-terminu “sterilizzazzjoni” ġiet estiża biex isir aktar ċar.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Intużat l-istess struttura bħal fil-paragrafi preċedenti. It-test issa jinkludi r-rekwiżit li t-trattament bis-sħana jrid ikun biżżejjed biex jiżgura li l-prodott ippreżervat ikun sterili għall-kummerċjalizzazzjoni; dan diġà huwa meħtieġ skont il-proċeduri ta’ ċertifikazzjoni attwali. Ikun aħjar li l-proċessuri jitħallew jiddeċiedu liema forma ta’ trattament bis-sħana jużaw għall-prodott ippreżervat, minflok ma huma speċifikati t-temperaturi kif kien il-każ fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott oriġinali. Din kienet tistipula li t-temperatura għall-isterilizzazzjoni kienet bejn 115 °C u 121 °C: għalkemm din hija l-firxa tat-temperatura tas-soltu għall-isterilizzazzjoni tal-qaqoċċ ippreżervat, fil-futur jista’ jkun hemm awtoklavi ġodda li joffru metodi ta’ trattament aktar adatti u li jużaw inqas enerġija li jżommu s-sawra tal-prodott ippreżervat, kif meħtieġ għall-istatus protett. |
|
5.2.E.18 |
Fit-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott, il-kolonna li tiddefinixxi l-“Klassi II” tneħħiet mit-tabella dwar l-“Alcachofa de Tudela” ppreżervat.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Ir-rekwiżiti għall-klassi kummerċjali “Klassi II” tneħħew mit-tabella minħabba li l-IĠP ma tkoprix din il-klassi u jekk tissemma tista’ toħloq konfużjoni. |
|
5.2.E.19 |
Fit-taqsima E, “Metodu tal-produzzjoni”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott, il-punt (2) tad-deskrizzjoni tal-uniformità tad-daqs ġie estiż biex isir aktar ċar.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Il-qalb hija l-parti l-aktar apprezzata tal-qaqoċċ, u l-qaqoċċ b’weraq kbar ħafna taħt il-fjura huwa meqjus li huwa ta’ kwalità agħar mill-qaqoċċ b’weraq iżgħar taħt il-fjura minħabba li tinqata’ inqas mill-weraq taħt il-fjura meta l-qlub jiġu pproċessati. Din hija r-raġuni għaliex it-test issa jenfasizza li l-uniformità titkejjel billi tiġi kkunsidrata l-uniformità tat-tul tal-weraq taħt il-fjura. Il-kejl jitwettaq bħal qabel, jiġifieri billi jittieħdu 20 % tal-qaqoċċ b’weraq itwal taħt il-fjura u 20 % ta’ dawk b’weraq iqsar taħt il-jfura u r-riżultat jintwera bħala proporzjon bejniethom it-tnejn. |
5.2.F
L-emendi ta’ hawn taħt jikkonċernaw prinċipalment it-tħassir ta’ paragrafi li, filwaqt li huma parti mit-taqsima “Rabta”, ma jaffettwawx elementi ewlenin u ma jaffettwawx in-natura tar-rabta.
|
5.2.F.1 |
L-ewwel tliet paragrafi tat-taqsima “1. Storika” tat-taqsima F, “Rabta”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott tħassru.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Dawn il-paragrafi tħassru minħabba li ma jipprovdu l-ebda informazzjoni speċifika dwar l-“Alcachofa de Tudela”, iżda pjuttost jiddiskutu l-irrigazzjoni f’Navarra. |
|
5.2.F.2 |
Ir-referenza għall-Mapep 2 u 5 tħassret mit-taqsima “2. Naturali” tat-taqsima F, “Rabta”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott peress li dawn ma għadhomx inklużi bħala annessi, u l-formulazzjoni tat-taqsima ġie emendat biex jirreferi għaż-żona ddefinita biss.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Ir-referenza għaż-żewġ mapep tħassret u t-test issa sempliċement jiddeskrivi ż-żona ddefinita. Il-mapep fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott oriġinali huma qodma u r-riżoluzzjoni tagħhom hija fqira, u ma jżidu l-ebda informazzjoni mal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott. |
|
5.2.F.3 |
Ir-referenza għall-Mappa 5 tħassret mit-taqsima “2. Naturali b) Ħamrija 1. Ġeoloġija u litoloġija” tat-taqsima F, “Rabta”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott, peress li ma għadhiex inkluża bħala anness.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Ir-referenza għall-mapep tħassret. Il-mapep fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott oriġinali huma qodma u r-riżoluzzjoni tagħhom hija fqira, u ma jżidu l-ebda informazzjoni mal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott. |
|
5.2.F.4 |
L-ewwel ħames paragrafi tat-taqsima “2. Naturali b) Ħamrija 2. Karatteristiċi tal-ħamrija” tat-taqsima F, “Rabta”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott tħassru.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Dawn il-paragrafi tħassru minħabba li ma jiddeskrivux il-karatteristiċi tal-ħamrija fiż-żona ddefinita u minflok jiddeskrivu l-klassifikazzjoni ġenerali tal-ħamrija. Għal darba oħra, ir-referenzi għall-mapep tħassru kif ġie spjegat hawn fuq; ma għadhomx inklużi bħala annessi. |
|
5.2.F.5 |
Ir-referenza għall-Mappa 8 u l-aħħar erba’ paragrafi tħassru mit-taqsima “2. Naturali c) Klima” tat-taqsima F, “Rabta”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott.
Raġunijiet għal dan it-tħassir: Ir-referenza għall-mapep tħassret minħabba li ma għadhomx parti mill-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott. Il-paragrafi li jiddeskrivu l-klima abbażi tal-għelejjel li jistgħu jitkabbru tħassru wkoll minħabba li huma ġenerali: huma jiddiskutu l-potenzjal li jitkabbru għelejjel oħra minbarra l-“Alcachofa de Tudela”, jiġifieri l-għelejjel koperti mill-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott. |
|
5.2.F.6 |
Xi paragrafi u r-referenza għall-Mappa 11 tħassru mit-taqsima “2. Naturali d) Idrografija” tat-taqsima F, “Rabta”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Il-paragrafi li jittrattaw il-ġestjoni tar-riżorsi tal-ilma tneħħew mit-taqsima li tiddeskrivi l-idrografija, peress li ma humiex rilevanti għall-karatteristiċi tal-“Alcachofa de Tudela”. Ir-referenza għall-Mappa 11 tħassret minħabba li ma għadhiex inkluża bħala anness, peress li hija mappa antika li ma kienet tipprovdi l-ebda informazzjoni. |
|
5.2.F.7 |
It-taqsima “2. Naturali e) Flora u mergħat naturali” tat-taqsima F, “Rabta”, tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott tħassret.
Raġunijiet għal dan it-tħassir: It-taqsima dwar il-flora u l-mergħat naturali tħassret. Filwaqt li tipprovdi deskrizzjoni dettaljata tal-flora u tal-mergħat naturali preżenti fiż-żona ddefinita, ma hija relatata mal-ebda karatteristika speċifika tal-“Alcachofa de Tudela”. |
5.2.G
It-test l-antik tat-taqsima “Korp ta’ kontroll” inbidel kompletament: l-informazzjoni irrilevanti kollha tħassret u d-dettalji tal-korp ta’ kontroll ġew aġġornati.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: It-taqsima “Korp ta’ kontroll” fil-verżjoni preċedenti tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott kien fiha informazzjoni li ma hijiex rilevanti f’dan il-kuntest, jiġifieri deskrizzjoni tal-istruttura, tas-setgħat u tad-dmirijiet tal-korp maniġerjali tal-IĠP kif huwa stabbilit fil-leġiżlazzjoni nazzjonali. Din l-informazzjoni tħassret u ġiet issostitwita b’dettalji dwar il-korp ta’ spezzjoni li jivverifika l-konformità mal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott f’konformità mal-Artikolu 37(1)(b) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill tal-21 ta’ Novembru 2012 dwar skemi tal-kwalità għal prodotti agrikoli u oġġetti tal-ikel.
5.2.H
|
5.2.H.1 |
L-ewwel żewġ punti tat-taqsima “Tikkettar” tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott tħassru.
Raġunijiet għal dan it-tħassir: Dawn iż-żewġ punti tħassru minħabba li ma jipprovdu l-ebda informazzjoni addizzjonali u jistgħu jwasslu għal interpretazzjonijiet żbaljati. Jistgħu jintużaw żewġ elementi differenti għaċ-ċertifikazzjoni tal-qaqoċċ, jiġifieri t-tikketta taċ-ċertifikazzjoni u l-faxxa, li t-tnejn huma enumerati u jinħarġu mill-Bord Regolatorju. Dawn huma deskritti aktar ’il quddiem. |
|
5.2.H.2 |
It-tielet punt tat-taqsima “Tikkettar” tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ġie emendat: l-aħħar sentenza tħassret u l-frażi “jew faxex” żdiedet mal-ewwel sentenza.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Kif issemma fil-paragrafu preċedenti, l-ippakkjar kollu tal-“Alcachofa de Tudela”, kemm jekk għall-qaqoċċ frisk kif ukoll jekk għall-qaqoċċ ippreżervat, irid ikollu jew il-faxxxa jew it-tikketta taċ-ċertifikazzjoni, u għalhekk żdiedet il-frażi “jew faxex”. L-aħħar sentenza tħassret minħabba li ma żżid xejn. Huwa ovvju li l-qaqoċċ li la jkollu t-tikketta taċ-ċertifikazzjoni u lanqas il-faxxa taċ-ċertifikazzjoni ma huwiex prodott iċċertifikat. |
|
5.2.H.3 |
Ir-raba’ u l-ħames punti tat-taqsima “Tikkettar” tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ġew emendati. L-aħħar frażi tħassret mir-raba’ punt u l-formulazzjoni tal-ħames punt ġiet emendata, peress li ma jirriflettux is-sistema ta’ ċertifikazzjoni attwali.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: L-aħħar parti tar-raba’ punt tħassret minħabba li tirreferi għal kunċetti li ma jidhrux fis-sistema ta’ ċertifikazzjoni attwali, bħall-awtorizzazzjoni tal-faċilitajiet u l-iskwalifika tal-prodotti mill-Bord Regolatorju. Il-Bord Regolatorju ma huwiex responsabbli għall-awtorizzazzjoni ta’ faċilitajiet reġistrati, u lanqas għall-kwalifika jew l-iskwalifika tal-prodott; id-deċiżjonijiet dwar il-kwalifika/skwalifika jittieħdu mill-operatur reġistrat. It-test xorta waħda jiddikjara li t-tikkettar irid isir fil-faċilitajiet irreġistrati. Sabiex tiġi rreġistrata, faċilità trid tgħaddi mill-ispezzjonijiet kollha u tiġi ċċertifikata bħala impjant tal-ipproċessar jew faċilità tal-kummerċjalizzazzjoni tal-“Alcachofa de Tudela”, kif huwa deskritt fit-taqsima “Spezzjonijiet”. Din hija wkoll ir-raġuni għat-tneħħija tar-rekwiżit rigward l-awtorizzazzjoni tat-tikketti kummerċjali mill-Bord Regolatorju. Minflok, it-test issa jiddikjara li t-tikketti jridu jiġu ppreżentati lill-Bord Regolatorju għar-reġistrazzjoni. Filwaqt li l-Bord Regolatorju ma jawtorizzax it-tikketti kummerċjali, huwa jeħtieġlu jirreġistra t-tikketti kollha permezz ta’ marki. Il-paragrafu għalhekk ġie emendat biex jispeċifika li t-tikketti jridu jiġu ppreżentati lill-Bord Regolatorju. Matul il-proċess tar-reġistrazzjoni, l-awtorizzazzjoni għall-użu tal-logo tal-IĠP tista’ tiġi miċħuda jekk it-tikketti jistgħu jħawdu lill-konsumaturi. Fl-aħħar nett, il-paragrafu li jsemmi r-rifjut mill-Bord Regolatorju li japprova t-tikketti tħassar minħabba li skont il-leġiżlazzjoni attwali, il-Bord Regolatorju ma huwiex responsabbli għall-approvazzjoni jew għar-rifjut tal-approvazzjoni tat-tikketti. |
|
5.2.H.5 |
L-aħħar punt tat-taqsima “Tikkettar” tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ġie emendat: il-frażi “u faxex” ġiet miżjuda hawnhekk ukoll, u l-grafika ġiet inkluża fit-test minflok ma tidher bħala anness (kif kien il-każ fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott oriġinali).
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Għal darba oħra, ġiet miżjuda l-frażi “u l-faxxa” minħabba li l-elementi taċ-ċertifikazzjoni huma t-tikketta taċ-ċertifikazzjoni msemmija fit-test oriġinali u l-faxxa. Il-grafika għal-logo, it-tikketta taċ-ċertifikazzjoni u l-faxxa taċ-ċertifikazzjoni ddaħħlu fid-dokument ewlieni minflok bħala anness. |
5.2.I
Ir-referenzi għal-leġiżlazzjoni nazzjonali mħassra tneħħew. Żdiedet referenza għal-leġiżlazzjoni dwar l-istandards tal-kwalità għall-ħxejjex ippreżervati, li hija rilevanti peress li tistabbilixxi l-klassijiet kummerċjali għall-prodotti friski ppreżervati.
Raġunijiet għal din l-emenda: Il-leġiżlazzjoni kollha msemmija fil-lista preċedenti tħassret.
Minkejja l-fatt li l-Ispeċifikazzjonijiet tal-Prodott ma għadhomx meħtieġa li jinkludu din it-taqsima dwar il-leġiżlazzjoni nazzjonali applikabbli skont ir-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill tal-21 ta’ Novembru 2012 dwar skemi tal-kwalità għal prodotti agrikoli u oġġetti tal-ikel, din inżammet sabiex tinżamm ir-referenza għall-Ordni tal-Uffiċċju tal-Prim Ministru tal-21 ta’ Novembru 1984 li tapprova l-istandards tal-kwalità dwar il-prodotti friski ppreżervati, peress li din hija l-leġiżlazzjoni li hija speċifikament applikabbli għall-“Alcachofa de Tudela” ppreżervat.
DOKUMENT UNIKU
“ALCACHOFA DE TUDELA”
Nru tal-UE: PGI-ES-0139-AM01 — 9.9.2021
DOP ( ) IĠP (X)
1. Isem/ismijiet
“Alcachofa de Tudela”
2. Stat membru jew pajjiż terz
Spanja
3. Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott agrikolu jew tal-oġġett tal-ikel
3.1. Tip ta’ prodott
Klassi 1.6. Frott, ħaxix u ċereali, friski jew ipproċessati
3.2. Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott li għalih japplika l-isem f’(1)
L-“Alcachofa de Tudela” jinkiseb minn qaqoċċ tal-kultivar Blanca de Tudela, imkabbar fi pjantaġġuni rreġistrati.
Il-qaqoċċ huwa l-irjus tal-fjuri tal-ispeċi Cynara scolymus L. “Blanca de Tudela”. Huma ffurmati tajjeb, ta’ kulur aħdar u forma tonda u kemxejn elissojdali li hija tipika tal-kultivar.
L-“Alcachofa de Tudela” jista’ jiġi ppreżentat kif ġej:
|
— |
bħala prodott frisk, jew b’zokk (meta jkun ikkummerċjalizzat b’zokk twil madwar 18 cm) jew mingħajr zokk (meta z-zokk ikun iqsar minn 10 cm); |
|
— |
f’għamla lesta għat-tisjir, meta jkun imqaxxar u ppakkjat b’tali mod li l-prodott jibqa’ frisk; |
|
— |
f’għamla ppreżervata, jew bħala qlub tal-qaqoċċ jew nofsijiet tal-qaqoċċ, mingħajr aċidifikazzjoni. Il-pH finali tal-prodott ippreżervat irid ikun aktar minn 5,0. |
3.3. Għalf (għall-prodotti li joriġinaw mill-annimali biss) u materja prima (għall-prodotti pproċessati biss)
Il-materja prima għall-“Alcachofa de Tudela” hija qaqoċċ tal-varjetà Blanca de Tudela, li joriġina esklużivament miż-żona ġeografika ddefinita. Il-qaqoċċ imkabbar bħala għalla annwali biss jista’ jiġi kkummerċjalizzat bħala prodott frisk, filwaqt li jista’ jintuża qaqoċċ imkabbar bħala għalla annwali jew biennali għall-prodott ippreżervat.
Il-qaqoċċ li jkun se jinbiegħ bħala prodott frisk irid ikun sħiħ, sod, mingħajr ħsara kkawżata minn mard jew pesti, nadif, u mingħajr riħa u togħma barranija.
Il-qaqoċċ lest għat-tisjir irid jitqaxxar u jiġi ppakkjat b’tali mod li jibqa’ frisk. Il-karatteristiċi tiegħu jridu jkunu simili għal dawk tal-qaqoċċ maħsub għall-konsum bħala prodott frisk.
Il-qaqoċċ ippreżervat irid ikun prodott tal-“Klassi Ekstra” jew tal-“Klassi I”, ippakkjat f’kontenituri tal-ħġieġ mingħajr aċidulanti miżjuda, u sterilizzat bis-sħana. Jista’ jinbiegħ sħiħ jew f’nofsijiet.
3.4. Passi speċifiċi tal-produzzjoni li jridu jsiru fiż-żona ġeografika ddefinita
Il-pjantaġġuni li fihom jitkabbar l-“Alcachofa de Tudela” jridu jkunu jinsabu fit-33 muniċipalità ddefinita.
L-imħażen u l-faċilitajiet industrijali li fihom jiġi ppreparat il-prodott ippreżervat u fejn il-prodott frisk jew lest għat-tisjir jiġi ppakkjat iridu jkunu jinsabu f’Navarra.
3.5. Regoli speċifiċi dwar it-tqattigħ, it-taħkik, l-ippakkjar, eċċ.
Il-kontenut ta’ kull pakkett ta’ qaqoċċ frisk, lest għat-tisjir jew ippreżervat li jitqiegħed fis-suq irid ikun uniformi u jrid ikun jikkonsisti biss minn qaqoċċ imkabbar fiż-żona tal-produzzjoni, tal-varjetà Blanca de Tudela, u jissodisfa r-rekwiżiti tal-kwalità applikabbli għall-klassi kummerċjali indikata.
3.6. Regoli speċifiċi dwar it-tikkettar
L-ippakkjar kollu użat għall-prodotti friski u ppreżervati, ikun xi jkun il-format tiegħu, irid ikollu fuqu t-tikketti jew il-faxex taċ-ċertifikazzjoni enumerati maħruġa mill-Bord Regolatorju, li jikkostitwixxu ċ-ċertifikat ta’ garanzija għall-prodott protett.
It-tikketti u t-tikketti taċ-ċertifikazzjoni għall-qaqoċċ protett iridu jitwaħħlu f’faċilitajiet irreġistrati. Dan japplika kemm għall-qaqoċċ mibjugħ bħala prodott frisk kif ukoll għall-qaqoċċ ippreżervat.
Il-kumpaniji rreġistrati tal-ipproċessar u/jew tal-preparazzjoni jridu jissottomettu t-tikketti lill-Bord Regolatorju għar-reġistrazzjoni qabel ma jibdew jiċċirkolawhom.
Il-logo tal-IĠP u t-tikketta u l-faxxa taċ-ċertifikazzjoni enumerati maħruġa mill-Bord Regolatorju bħala garanzija taċ-ċertifikazzjoni tal-prodott protett jidhru hawn taħt:
|
|
|
|
Il-logo tal-IĠP “Alcachofa de Tudela” |
It-tikketta taċ-ċertifikazzjoni |
|
|
|
|
Il-faxxa |
|
4. Definizzjoni fil-qosor taż-żona ġeografika
Iż-żona ġeografika li fiha jridu jkunu jinsabu l-pjantaġġuni hija aktar ristretta miż-żona ġeografika li fiha jridu jkunu jinsabu l-imħażen u l-faċilitajiet industrijali li jippreparaw il-prodott ippreżervat u jippakkjaw il-prodott frisk jew lest għat-tisjir.
Iż-żona tat-tkabbir li fiha jridu jkunu jinsabu l-pjantaġġuni tal-“Alcachofa de Tudela” tikkonsisti minn 33 muniċipalità, li kollha jinsabu f’Navarra: Ablitas, Andosilla, Arguedas, Azagra, Barillas, Buñuel, Cabanillas, Cadreita, Cárcar, Cascante, Castejón, Cintruénigo, Corella, Cortes, Falces, Fitero, Fontellas, Funes, Fustiñana, Lodosa, Marcilla, Mendavia, Milagro, Monteagudo, Murchante, Peralta, Ribaforada, San Adrián, Sartaguda, Tudela, Tulebras, Valtierra u Villafranca.
L-imħażen u l-faċilitajiet industrijali fejn jiġi ppreparat il-prodott ippreżervat u fejn il-prodott frisk jew lest għat-tisjir jiġi ppakkjat iridu jkunu jinsabu f’Navarra.
5. Rabta maż-żona ġeografika
Ir-rabta bejn iż-żona ġeografika u l-“Alcachofa de Tudela” hija bbażata fuq il-kwalità tal-prodott, li tiddependi mill-karatteristiċi taż-żona ġeografika u l-mod kif jitkabbar il-qaqoċċ.
5.1. Speċifiċità tal-prodott
L-unika varjetà permessa hija l-Blanca de Tudela, li toriġina miż-żona ġeografika tat-tkabbir u ġiet żviluppata permezz tat-tnissil, fuq perjodu ta’ ħafna snin, mill-bdiewa fiż-żona ddefinita.
Il-qaqoċċ imkabbar bħala għalla annwali biss jista’ jiġi kkummerċjalizzat bħala prodott frisk, filwaqt li jista’ jintuża qaqoċċ imkabbar bħala għalla annwali jew biennali għall-prodott ippreżervat. Il-qlugħ tal-pjanti u l-eliminazzjoni ta’ pjanti “barra t-tip” jagħmluha possibbli li jinkiseb qaqoċċ ta’ kwalità għolja li juri l-karatteristiċi distintivi tal-varjetà: kulur aħdar u forma tonda u kemxejn elissojdali.
Il-prodott ippreżervat huwa ppakkjat f’kontenituri tal-ħġieġ u ma huwiex aċidifikat. Dan huwa l-metodu tradizzjonali tal-produzzjoni tal-qaqoċċ ippreżervat fiż-żona ddefinita. Dan jagħmilha possibbli li tinżamm it-togħma naturali tal-prodott, li hija aktar simili għal dik ta’ qaqoċċ frisk minħabba li la jintużaw aċidulanti u lanqas regolaturi tal-aċidità.
5.2. Speċifiċità taż-żona ġeografika
Fiż-żona ġeografika ddefinita, is-sistema tal-ilma ffurmata mix-xmara Ebro u mit-tributarji tagħha l-Ega, l-Aragón u l-Arga ppermettiet li jfeġġ metodu ta’ kultivazzjoni fornut mill-ilmijiet tagħha. It-taħlita ta’ ħamrija tal-ġir, klima xemxija u differenzi notevoli fit-temperatura bejn ix-xitwa u s-sajf tipprovdi l-kundizzjonijiet ideali għall-qaqoċċ.
L-unika varjetà protetta, il-Blanca de Tudela, ġiet żviluppata permezz ta’ għażla mill-produtturi lokali, li ħolqu varjetà li hija perfettament adattata għaż-żona ddefinita.
5.3. Kif il-karatteristiċi speċifiċi taż-żona ġeografika jinfluwenzaw il-prodott
Iż-żona ġeografika li fiha jitkabbar l-“Alcachofa de Tudela” tagħtih għadd ta’ karatteristiċi distintivi. Ir-raqda tax-xtieli fix-xitwa, li hija indotta b’mod naturali mit-temperaturi baxxi taż-żona tat-tkabbir fix-xitwa, tagħti lill-qaqoċċ, meta jiffjorixxi fl-aħħar tax-xitwa, kwalità li tiddistingwih mill-għelejjel imkabbra f’żoni aktar moderati u li, mingħajr dubju, huma aktar produttivi. Il-qaqoċċ li jinkiseb għandu weraq taħt il-fjuri li huma eqreb ta’ xulxin u għandu togħma aħjar.
Il-metodu użat għall-produzzjoni tal-prodott ippreżervat – jiġifieri li ma jiġix aċidifikat il-prodott, u li jiġi ppakkjat f’kontenituri tal-ħġieġ – huwa karatteristiku taż-żona ddefinita u jagħmilha possibbli li jinkiseb prodott b’karatteristiċi sensorji simili għal dawk tal-qaqoċċ frisk.
L-“Alcachofa de Tudela”, u speċjalment il-varjetà Blanca de Tudela, huma perfettament adatti għall-kundizzjonijiet tal-ħamrija u tal-klima fiż-żona ddefinita meta din tiġi irrigata. Ilu jitkabbar f’din iż-żona sa mill-inqas mill-Medjuevu.
Insibu bosta referenzi bibljografiċi għall-“Alcachofa de Tudela”. Il-kritiku Caius Apicius (Cristiano Alvarez) jirreferi għall-“Alcachofa de Tudela” bħala r-“reġina tal-varjetajiet kollha tal-qaqoċċ”. Ħafna riċetti tradizzjonali fiż-żona ddefinita huma bbażati fuq l-“Alcachofa de Tudela” u, kif jinnota Victor Manuel Sarobe fil-ktieb “La cocina popular navarra” [Il-kċina tradizzjonali ta’ Navarra], l-“Alcachofa de Tudela” huwa ingredjent fil-menestra [stuffat tal-ħxejjex u tal-legumi] awtentika ta’ Tudela.
Referenza għall-pubblikazzjoni tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott
https://bit.ly/3iY2g7O
|
13.4.2023 |
MT |
Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea |
C 129/61 |
Pubblikazzjoni tad-Dokument Uniku msemmi fl-Artikolu 94(1)(d) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1308/2013 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill u tar-referenza għall-pubblikazzjoni tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott għal isem fis-settur tal-inbid
(2023/C 129/06)
Din il-pubblikazzjoni tikkonferixxi d-dritt ta’ oppożizzjoni għall-applikazzjoni skont l-Artikolu 98 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1308/2013 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill (1) fi żmien xahrejn mid-data ta’ din il-pubblikazzjoni.
DOKUMENT UNIKU
Schouwen-Duiveland
PDO-NL-02775
Data tal-applikazzjoni: 10.6.2021
1. Isem/ismijiet għar-reġistrazzjoni
Schouwen-Duiveland
2. Tip ta’ indikazzjoni ġeografika
DOP - Denominazzjoni ta’ Oriġini Protetta
3. Kategoriji tal-prodotti tad-dwieli
|
1. |
Inbid |
|
5. |
Inbid spumanti ta’ kwalità |
4. Deskrizzjoni tal-inbid/inbejjed
Kategorija 1: Inbid, Tip ta’ nbid: Inbid abjad, xott, b’togħma ta’ frott
Varjetajiet ta’ għeneb: il-varjetajiet bojod fuq il-lista tal-varjetajiet (il-proporzjon ivarja skont is-sena)
Karatteristiċi organolettiċi:
Dehra viżiva: aħdar/isfar
Riħa: tuffieħ aħdar, grapefruit u għasel
Togħma: xotta, friska u mielħa, b’aċidi bbilanċjati u ħjiliet ta’ ħawħ, lanġas u ġibs
Karatteristiċi analitiċi tal-inbejjed:
Kontenut ta’ zokkor: minn 0 sa 9 grammi għal kull litru
Il-karatteristiċi ta’ hawn taħt li għalihom ma huwa speċifikat l-ebda valur huma konformi mal-limiti stabbiliti fir-Regolamenti tal-UE.
|
Karatteristiċi analitiċi |
|
|
Qawwa alkoħolika totali massima (f’% tal-volum) |
|
|
Qawwa alkoħolika proprja minima (f’% tal-volum) |
11,5 |
|
Aċidità totali minima |
73,15 f’milliekwivalenti għal kull litru |
|
Aċidità volatili massima (f’milliekwivalenti għal kull litru) |
|
|
Total massimu ta’ diossidu tal-kubrit (f’milligrammi għal kull litru) |
|
Kategorija 1: Inbid, Tip ta’ nbid: Inbid abjad, xott, imqaddem fil-btieti tal-injam
Varjetajiet ta’ għeneb: il-varjetajiet bojod fuq il-lista tal-varjetajiet (il-proporzjon ivarja skont is-sena)
Karatteristiċi organolettiċi:
Dehra viżiva: minn isfar ċar sa isfar
Riħa: vanilla, ċitru, b’noti affumikati
Togħma: inbid xott u robust, bi ħjiliet tal-injam, aċidi rotob u ġibs
Karatteristiċi analitiċi tal-inbejjed:
Kontenut taz-zokkor minn 0 sa 9 grammi għal kull litru
Il-karatteristiċi ta’ hawn taħt li għalihom ma huwa speċifikat l-ebda valur huma konformi mal-limiti stabbiliti fir-Regolamenti tal-UE.
|
Karatteristiċi analitiċi |
|
|
Qawwa alkoħolika totali massima (f’% tal-volum) |
|
|
Qawwa alkoħolika proprja minima (f’% tal-volum) |
12 |
|
Aċidità totali minima |
73,15 f’milliekwivalenti għal kull litru |
|
Aċidità volatili massima (f’milliekwivalenti għal kull litru) |
|
|
Total massimu ta’ diossidu tal-kubrit (f’milligrammi għal kull litru) |
|
Kategorija 1: Inbid, Tip ta’ nbid: Inbid abjad nofsu misjur, ħelu mezzan, b’karattru tal-frott
Varjetajiet ta’ għeneb: il-varjetajiet bojod fuq il-lista tal-varjetajiet (il-proporzjon ivarja skont is-sena)
Karatteristiċi organolettiċi:
Dehra viżiva: minn pallidu, kważi bla kulur sa isfar ċar
Riħa: ward, tuffieħ isfar, liċċi u frotta tal-passjoni
Togħma: inbid robust b’finitura ħelwa, bi ħjiliet ta’ ħawħ/lanġas u aċidi rotob
Karatteristiċi analitiċi tal-inbejjed:
Kontenut taz-zokkor minn 10 sa 45 grammi għal kull litru
Il-karatteristiċi ta’ hawn taħt li għalihom ma huwa speċifikat l-ebda valur huma konformi mal-limiti stabbiliti fir-Regolamenti tal-UE.
|
Karatteristiċi analitiċi |
|
|
Qawwa alkoħolika totali massima (f’% tal-volum) |
|
|
Qawwa alkoħolika proprja minima (f’% tal-volum) |
12 |
|
Aċidità totali minima |
73,15 f’milliekwivalenti għal kull litru |
|
Aċidità volatili massima (f’milliekwivalenti għal kull litru) |
|
|
Total massimu ta’ diossidu tal-kubrit (f’milligrammi għal kull litru) |
|
Kategorija 1: Inbid, Tip ta’ nbid: Inbid abjad, ħelu, b’karattru ta’ frott
Varjetajiet ta’ għeneb: il-varjetajiet bojod fuq il-lista tal-varjetajiet (il-proporzjon ivarja skont is-sena)
Karatteristiċi organolettiċi:
Dehra viżiva: minn isfar ċar sa isfar
Riħa: sfarġel, berquq u tuffieħ
Togħma: inbid ħelu bi ħjiliet ta’ sfarġel, għasel, bżar u frott tal-konfettura
Karatteristiċi analitiċi tal-inbejjed:
Kontenut taz-zokkor ta’ aktar minn 45 gramma għal kull litru
Il-karatteristiċi ta’ hawn taħt li għalihom ma huwa speċifikat l-ebda valur huma konformi mal-limiti stabbiliti fir-Regolamenti tal-UE.
|
Karatteristiċi analitiċi |
|
|
Qawwa alkoħolika totali massima (f’% tal-volum) |
|
|
Qawwa alkoħolika proprja minima (f’% tal-volum) |
12 |
|
Aċidità totali minima |
73,15 f’milliekwivalenti għal kull litru |
|
Aċidità volatili massima (f’milliekwivalenti għal kull litru) |
|
|
Total massimu ta’ diossidu tal-kubrit (f’milligrammi għal kull litru) |
|
Kategorija 5: Inbid spumanti ta’ kwalità, Tip ta’ nbid: Inbid spumanti, b’togħma ta’ frott
Varjetajiet ta’ għeneb: il-varjetajiet bojod fuq il-lista tal-varjetajiet (il-proporzjon ivarja skont is-sena)
Karatteristiċi organolettiċi:
Dehra viżiva: minn pallidu, kważi bla kulur sa isfar ċar
Riħa: friska, ta’ tuffieħ aħdar, lanġas u berquq
Togħma: Vivaċi u rifreskanti, mielħa, ta’ tuffieħ, lewż, b’ragħwa fina
Karatteristiċi analitiċi:
Kontenut taz-zokkor minn 0 sa 12 grammi għal kull litru
Il-karatteristiċi ta’ hawn taħt li għalihom ma huwa speċifikat l-ebda valur huma konformi mal-limiti stabbiliti fir-Regolamenti tal-UE.
|
Karatteristiċi analitiċi |
|
|
Qawwa alkoħolika totali massima (f’% tal-volum) |
|
|
Qawwa alkoħolika proprja minima (f’% tal-volum) |
11,5 |
|
Aċidità totali minima |
73,15 f’milliekwivalenti għal kull litru |
|
Aċidità volatili massima (f’milliekwivalenti għal kull litru) |
|
|
Total massimu ta’ diossidu tal-kubrit (f’milligrammi għal kull litru) |
|
5. Prattiki tal-produzzjoni tal-inbid
a. Prattiki enoloġiċi speċifiċi użati biex isir l-inbid jew biex isiru l-inbejjed, u r-restrizzjonijiet rilevanti fuq il-produzzjoni tagħhom
Inbid tal-kategorija 1: Inbid, Tip ta’ nbid: Inbid abjad xott, b’karattru ta’ frott / inbid abjad nofsu misjur u ħelu mezzan, b’karattru ta’ frott / inbid abjad ħelu, b’karattru ta’ frott
Prattika enoloġika speċifika
Fermentazzjoni kiesħa f’temperatura taħt l-20 °C (eċċezzjoni: it-temperatura tiżdied fil-bidu tal-fermentazzjoni għall-inbejjed li huma diffiċli li jiġu ffermentati)
Inbid tal-kategorija 1: Inbid, Tip ta’ nbid: Inbid abjad, xott, robust, maħżun fl-injam
Prattika enoloġika speċifika
Fermentazzjoni kiesħa f’temperatura taħt l-20 °C (eċċezzjoni: it-temperatura tiżdied fil-bidu tal-fermentazzjoni għall-inbejjed li huma diffiċli li jiġu ffermentati)
Tqaddim fi btieti tal-injam ta’ mill-inqas 50 % tal-volum għal minimu ta’ 6 xhur
Inbid tal-kategorija 5: Inbid spumanti ta’ kwalità, Tip ta’ nbid: Inbid spumanti ta’ kwalità, abjad, b’karattru sħiħ ta’ frott
Prattika enoloġika speċifika
Fermentazzjoni kiesħa f’temperatura taħt l-20 °C (eċċezzjoni: it-temperatura tiżdied fil-bidu tal-fermentazzjoni għall-inbejjed li huma diffiċli li jiġu ffermentati)
It-tieni fermentazzjoni fil-flixkun permezz tal-metodu tradizzjonali.
b. Rendimenti massimi għal kull ettaru
Għall-varjetajiet kollha tad-dwieli elenkati
75 ettolitru għal kull ettaru
6. Definizzjoni taż-żona demarkata
Iż-żona ġeografika demarkata hija l-gżira kollha ta’ Schouwen-Duiveland, li tikkostitwixxi l-muniċipalità ta’ “Schouwen-Duiveland”.
Id-daqs taż-żona huwa ta’ 48 800 ettaru.
7. Varjetà jew varjetajiet tad-dwieli li minnhom jinkiseb l-inbid/jinkisbu l-inbejjed
|
|
Auxerrois B |
|
|
Cabernet Blanc B (VB-91-26-1) |
|
|
Gewürztraminer Rs |
|
|
Müller Thurgau B |
|
|
Pinot Gris G |
|
|
Pinot Blanc B |
|
|
Souvignier Gris |
8. Deskrizzjoni tar-rabta/rabtiet
Definizzjoni taż-żona demarkata
It-terroir – l-influwenzi kollha fuq id-dielja fil-vinja – għandu impatt kbir fuq il-kwalità tal-inbid. Fiż-żona ġeografika ddefinita ta’ Schouwen-Duiveland, l-aspetti kollha tat-terroir–- il-klima, il-post, il-ħamrija, il-ġestjoni tal-vinji, l-għażla tal-varjetajiet u l-vinifikazzjoni – jikkontribwixxu għall-kwalità tal-inbejjed fiż-żewġ kategoriji tal-inbid (1. Inbid u 5. Inbid spumanti ta’ kwalità).
Klima:
Id-data mill-Istitut Meteoroloġiku Rjali Netherlandiż (Koninklijk Nederlands Meteorologisch Instituut – KNMI) tikkonferma li l-klima moderata tal-baħar, b’sigħat itwal u b’intensità ogħla ta’ dawl tax-xemx, tgħin lill-għeneb isir sew. Il-post tal-gżira jfisser li l-linja tal-għaram tikkawża qsim fis-sħab (li jirriżulta f’aktar dawl tax-xemx) u hemm ftit inqas xita milli f’partijiet oħra tan-Netherlands (li huwa ta’ benefiċċju għas-saħħa tal-għeneb).
Id-data tal-KNMI tagħti l-indiċi Huglin tal-2018 u l-2019 bħala 1 746 u 1 572 (sal-aħħar ta’ Settembru), li jindika l-adegwatezza taż-żona għall-vitikultura (aktar minn 1 500). Fl-istess ħin, hemm medja ta’ 0,5 sigħat aktar xemx kuljum meta mqabbla ma’ żoni oħra fin-Netherlands (li hija tajba għas-sajran permezz tal-fotosinteżi).
Il-ħamrija u l-post:
Il-post, fil-qiegħ ta’ dik li qabel kienet ix-xmara (il-Gouwe) bejn Schouwen u Duiveland, huwa kkaratterizzat minn trab ġulġlieni ramli u tafli kalkarju b’ġir tal-qoxra żejjed sa 80 cm fond (ħamrija matura). It-taħlita ta’ trab ġulġlieni ramli u tafli (trab tafli tal-baħar) mal-ġir tifforma ħamrija ideali minħabba l-kapaċità tagħha li tippreserva l-umdità u r-rikkezza fil-minerali/ġir għat-tkabbir u l-maturazzjoni tal-għeneb.
Il-pożizzjoni qrib il-baħar tipprovdi ambjent mielaħ (żiffa mill-baħar) li jgħin jipprevjeni mard u għandu impatt pożittiv fuq it-togħma tal-inbid.
Ir-riħ frekwenti jiżgura li l-vinja tkun ivventilata sew u tinxef malajr wara l-preċipitazzjoni, u dan jiffaċilita perjodu itwal ta’ maturazzjoni (għeneb f’saħħtu għal maturità fenoloġika ottima).
Il-karatteristika unika ta’ din iż-żona hija li hija gżira mdawra bl-ilma fit-tarf tal-Baħar tat-Tramuntana, bi rjieħ mielħa (li jġibu magħhom il-melħ tal-baħar), aktar sigħat ta’ xemx, u trab ġulġlieni ramli u tafli b’ħafna ġir (mill-frott tal-baħar bil-qoxra). Flimkien dawn l-aspetti jipproduċu freskezza u mineralità notevoli fl-inbejjed. Barra minn hekk, il-marea u l-post tal-għaram iwasslu għal preċipitazzjoni mnaqqsa, silġ mhux frekwenti u aktar xemx, li jirriżulta f’aktar estratt fl-inbejjed. Skont il-varjetà, l-inbejjed għandhom togħmiet profondament friski iżda wkoll ħjiel profond ta’ ħawħ/lanġas b’noti profondament pikkanti/minerali bħal ta’ ribes bix-xewk, mielħa, ta’ lumiċell, ta’ għasel u ta’ aniżetta.
Aspetti umani (kultivazzjoni/vinifikazzjoni)
Il-varjetajiet intgħażlu minħabba li huma adatti għall-klima u l-ħamrija, għalhekk l-għeneb jilħaq sajran ottimu.
Dan jiġi aċċentwat mill-metodu tat-tħawwil (biżżejjed xemx, biżżejjed ħamrija għal kull pjanta) u, jekk ikun meħtieġ, mit-tnaqqis tal-għenieqed.
Il-ġestjoni bir-reqqa tal-ħsad (il-kontroll taz-zokkrijiet, l-aċidi u l-aromi) u l-vinifikazzjoni (il-fermentazzjoni kiesħa, it-tqaddim fi btieti tal-injam) jikkompletaw il-produzzjoni tal-inbejjed ta’ kwalità minn dan l-għeneb.
Id-dettalji tal-azzjonijiet li ttieħdu mill-bnedmin huma kif ġej:
|
— |
L-użu tal-ħsad bikri (tneħħija tal-għenieqed) biex jiġi żgurat li d-dielja tista’ titma’ biżżejjed lil kull għanqud biex jilħaq is-sajran it-tajjeb, itejjeb is-sajran tal-għeneb. |
|
— |
Il-ħin tal-ħsad korrett huwa ddeterminat billi titkejjel il-kombinazzjoni ta’ zokkor/aċidu u aroma, flimkien ma’ tbassir preċiż tat-temp u stampa tajba tas-saħħa tal-għeneb. Dawn il-fatturi huma kollha kkunsidrati meta jiġi deċiż meta għandu jsir il-ħsad (il-ħsad ta’ għeneb misjur bl-aħjar mod). |
|
— |
Il-kultivazzjoni ċirkolari, l-użu tal-irmondar (biċċiet maqtugħa) u l-ilbieba (qxur) fuq il-flanni. |
|
— |
Ir-rimjiet tad-dwieli jiġu miżjuda waqt it-temp tat-tkabbir sabiex jiġi żgurat li n-nutrijenti jidħlu fl-għenieqed. |
Dettalji għall-kategoriji l-oħra tal-inbid (mhux il-kategorija “inbid”)
|
— |
Inbid spumanti ta’ kwalità |
Għall-inbid spumanti ta’ kwalità, l-inbid ta’ bażi għandu l-istess karatteristiċi organolettiċi bħall-kategorija “inbid”. Dan għandu wkoll il-karatteristiċi li jirriżultaw mit-trasformazzjoni tal-inbid ta’ bażi f’inbid spumanti permezz tal-fermentazzjoni tal-flixkun (il-metodu tradizzjonali), li jagħti lill-inbid ir-ragħwa sabiħa tiegħu. L-inbid għandu pressjoni żejda ta’ mill-anqas 3,5 bar. Il-cuvée użata għall-inbid spumanti ta’ kwalità għandha qawwa alkoħolika totali minima skont il-volum ta’ 11 %.
Rabta/sommarju
It-taħlita tal-ħamrija (f’qiegħ il-baħar), il-klima (klima tal-baħar) u l-aspetti umani tirriżulta fi nbejjed varjetali u tal-cuvée li jintgħarfu, robusti u b’togħma ta’ frott, inbejjed b’aroma taċ-ċitru u nbejjed spumanti b’ragħwa karatteristika, li jmorru tajjeb ħafna mal-frott tal-baħar. Din il-freskezza hija unikament sostnuta mill-klima tal-baħar u t-trab tafli tal-baħar li fih il-ġir tal-qoxra (salinità fl-arja u fil-ħamrija).
9. Rekwiżiti oħra applikabbli
-
Link għall-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott
https://www.rvo.nl/sites/default/files/2021/01/Productdossier%20BOB%20Schouwen%20Duiveland.pdf
|
13.4.2023 |
MT |
Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea |
C 129/67 |
Pubblikazzjoni ta’ applikazzjoni għar-reġistrazzjoni ta’ isem skont l-Artikolu 50(2)(a) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill dwar skemi tal-kwalità għal prodotti agrikoli u oġġetti tal-ikel
(2023/C 129/07)
Din il-pubblikazzjoni tikkonferixxi d-dritt ta’ oppożizzjoni għall-applikazzjoni skont l-Artikolu 51 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill (1) fi żmien 3 xhur mid-data ta’ din il-pubblikazzjoni.
DOKUMENT UNIKU
“Българско бяло саламурено сирене / Bulgarsko byalo salamureno sirene”
Nru tal-UE: PDO-BG-02656 — 4.2.2021
DOP (X) IĠP ( )
1. Isem/Ismijiet
“Българско бяло саламурено сирене / Bulgarsko byalo salamureno sirene”
2. Stat Membru jew pajjiż terz
Ir-Repubblika tal-Bulgarija
3. Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott agrikolu jew tal-oġġett tal-ikel
3.1. Tip ta’ prodott
Klassi 1.3 – Ġobon
3.2. Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott li għalih japplika l-isem f’(1)
Il-“Българско бяло саламурено сирене / Bulgarsko byalo salamureno sirene” huwa prodott tal-ħalib iffermentat magħmul minn ħalib sħiħ tal-baqra, tan-nagħaġ, tal-mogħoż, tal-bufli jew imħallat biż-żieda ta’ kulturi starter li fihom il-Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis u l-Lactobacillus casei, kif ukoll starters simbjotiċi mill-batterji Lactoba-cillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus u Streptococcus thermophilus, miksuba permezz tat-tibqit bil-ħmira għall-ġobon, li jkun sarlu t-trattament meħtieġ, immaturat fis-salmura u maħsub għall-konsum.
Karatteristiċi organolettiċi
|
— |
Dehra: Abjad, maqtugħ sew qisu tal-porċellana, bi bwiet ta’ arja maqbuda iżolati kkawżati mill-batterji jew mingħajrhom, mingħajr saffi ovvji, b’kulur speċifiku għat-tip ta’ ħalib. Il-biċċiet huma ffurmati sew, jinqasmu faċilment, u ma jitfarrkux. |
|
— |
Forma: Biċċiet parallelepipediċi b’bażi kwadra u bi ġnub rettangolari – tul: 100 sa 220 mm, wisa’: 100 sa 110 mm, għoli: 80 sa 100 mm. |
|
— |
Daqs: Bejn 0,2 u 2,0 kg. |
|
— |
Kulur: Abjad, bi sfumatura speċifika ta’ kulur speċifika għal kull tip ta’ ħalib. |
|
— |
Sawra: Moderatament iebsa, malleabbli. |
|
— |
Togħma: Speċifika għall-ġobon matur fis-salmura. Moderatament mielħa b’togħma pjaċevoli evidenti ta’ aċidu lattiku. Huma l-kompożizzjoni tal-istarter u l-maturazzjoni fis-salmura li jiddeterminaw it-togħma u l-aroma tal-prodott, aktar milli t-tip ta’ ħalib minn diversi annimali. Il-kulturi starter, li fihom il-Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus u l-iStreptococcus thermophilus għandhom relazzjoni simbjotika, kif ukoll il-proċessi tal-fermentazzjoni, jinfluwenzaw il-proprjetajiet organolettiċi tipiċi tal-prodott. |
Parametri fiżikokimiċi
|
— |
Il-materja niexfa tal-prodott finali trid tkun mill-inqas 46 % għall-“Българско бяло саламурено сирене / Bulgarsko byalo salamureno sirene” magħmul minn ħalib tal-baqra, tal-mogħoż u mħallat, u mhux inqas minn 48 % għall-“Българско бяло саламурено сирене / Bulgarsko byalo salamureno sirene” magħmul minn ħalib tan-nagħaġ u tal-bufli. |
|
— |
Il-kontenut ta’ xaħam fil-materja niexfa ma jistax ikun inqas minn 44 % għall-ħalib tal-baqar u tal-mogħoż, 48 % għall-ħalib tal-bufli u tan-nagħaġ, u 45 % għall-ħalib imħallat. |
|
— |
L-aċidità tal-prodott finali trid tkun ta’ pH bejn 4,2 u 4,4 jew bejn 200 u 300 °T. |
|
— |
Il-preservattivi, l-istabbilizzaturi u l-emulsjonanti ma humiex permessi fil-prodott lest. |
|
— |
Il-perċentwal tal-melħ irid ikun ta’ 3,5 % ± 0,5 % fil-massa totali tal-ġobon u 6 sa 10 % fis-salmura. |
|
— |
Il-grad ta’ maturità (il-proporzjon tal-proteini solubbli mal-proteini totali, f’%) ma huwiex inqas minn 14 % għall-ġobon magħmul minn ħalib tal-baqar, tal-bufli, tal-mogħoż u mħallat u 16 % għall-ġobon magħmul minn ħalib tan-nagħaġ. |
|
— |
Dan il-grad ta’ sajran iseħħ b’perjodu minimu ta’ maturazzjoni ta’ 45 jum għall-ġobon magħmul mill-ħalib tal-baqar u tal-mogħoż u 60 jum għall-ġobon magħmul mill-ħalib tan-nagħaġ, tal-bufli u mħallat. |
3.3. Għalf (għall-prodotti li joriġinaw mill-annimali biss) u materja prima (għall-prodotti pproċessati biss)
L-għalf minn barra ż-żona ġeografika jikkostitwixxi sa 20 % fis-sena. Is-supplimentazzjoni hija meħtieġa f’kundizzjonijiet klimatiċi mhux favorevoli, meta l-għalf prodott fiż-żona ġeografika ma jkunx biżżejjed. Peress li l-annimali jingħataw biss ammont żgħir ta’ għalf minn barra ż-żona ġeografika, il-karatteristiċi tal-prodott li huma dovuti prinċiplament għall-ambjent ġeografiku, ma humiex affettwati.
Minbarra l-għalf, l-annimali jieklu fil-mergħat. Il-mergħat huma mifruxin madwar il-pajjiż kollu. Il-perjodu tar-ragħa jdum minn Marzu sa Novembru. Il-kundizzjonijiet naturali u klimatiċi fil-Bulgarija jiffavorixxu t-trobbija tal-bhejjem u l-għalf tal-annimali matul is-sena kollha b’taħlita ta’ ħaxix, użati kemm friski kif ukoll fil-forma ta’ ħuxlief u silaġġ. Il-perjodu itwal tar-ragħa huwa r-raġuni għad-diversità tal-minerali u l-vitamini fil-kompożizzjoni tal-ħalib mhux ipproċessat. Għandu kontenut ibbilanċjat speċifiku tal-ingredjenti ewlenin bħas-sustanzi minerali (il-potassju, il-manjeżju, il-fosfru u l-kalċju), il-proteini u l-vitamini (A, B, E, D u l-aċidu foliku) li jirriżultaw mir-ragħa ta’ annimali tal-ħalib. Dawn in-nutrijenti huma preżenti fil-prodott finali.
Il-ħalib mhux ipproċessat użat fil-produzzjoni tal-“Българско бяло саламурено сирене / Bulgarsko byalo salamureno sirene” joriġina mir-Repubblika tal-Bulgarija. Karatteristika li tiddistingwi l-ħalib mhux ipproċessat hija l-livell għoli ta’ Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus.
Il-kulturi starter tal-batterji Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis u Lactobacillus casei, kif ukoll il-kulturi starter simbjotiċi tal-batterji Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus u Streptococcus thermophilus, li ma humiex soġġetti għal modifika ġenetika, iridu jiġu prodotti wkoll fit-territorju tar-Repubblika tal-Bulgarija.
3.4. Passi speċifiċi tal-produzzjoni li jridu jsiru fiż-żona ġeografika ddefinita
L-istadji kollha fil-proċess tal-produzzjoni jsiru fit-territorju tar-Repubblika tal-Bulgarija.
|
Stadju 1 – |
Aċċettazzjoni, klassifikazzjoni, standardizzazzjoni u ħażna tal-materja prima |
|
Stadju 2 – |
Pastorizzazzjoni tal-ħalib |
|
Stadju 3 – |
Tibqit tal-ħalib |
|
Stadju 4 – |
Qtugħ u pproċessar tal-baqta tat-tames |
|
Stadju 5 – |
Ippressar tal-baqta |
|
Stadju 6 – |
Tmelliħ – għażla mxarrba jew niexfa |
|
Stadju 7 – |
Qabel il-maturazzjoni |
|
Stadju 8 – |
Tmelliħ addizzjonali u għeluq tal-pakketti |
|
Stadju 9 – |
Maturazzjoni tal-ġobon fis-salmura |
3.5. Regoli speċifiċi dwar it-tqattigħ, it-taħkik, l-ippakkjar, eċċ.
Il-prodott jitqatta’, jiġi ppakkjat u ttikkettat fl-impjant tal-ħalib fir-Repubblika tal-Bulgarija fejn ikun ġie magħmul. L-ippakkjar f’unitajiet tal-konsum wara li jkun tlesta l-istadju tal-maturazzjoni jrid isir fl-impjant tal-ħalib fir-Repubblika tal-Bulgarija fejn ikun ġie magħmul il-prodott. Inkella, ikun hemm riskju ta’ bidliet fil-kwalitajiet fiżikokimiċi, mikrobijoloġiċi u tat-togħma tal-prodott. Il-prodott irid jiġi ppakkjat immedjatament wara li jitneħħa mis-salmura sabiex jiġi limitat il-kuntatt mal-arja. Il-prodott huwa igroskopiku ħafna, jiġifieri jassorbi rwejjaħ oħrajn faċilment, u dan jista’ jagħtih togħma ħażina u jaffettwa l-kwalità tiegħu. Il-ġobon jista’ jiġi ppakkjat f’pakketti b’vakwu ssiġillati sew ta’ rita tal-polietilen, laned tal-metall, kaxxi tal-plastik u btieti tal-injam.
3.6. Regoli speċifiċi dwar it-tikkettar
—
4. Definizzjoni fil-qosor taż-żona ġeografika
Iż-żona ġeografika li fiha jiġi prodott il-“Българско бяло саламурено сирене / Bulgarsko byalo salamureno sirene” hija r-Repubblika tal-Bulgarija.
5. Rabta maż-żona ġeografika
Il-“Българско бяло саламурено сирене / Bulgarsko byalo salamureno sirene” huwa magħruf b’dan l-isem fil-Bulgarija u madwar id-dinja. Kien is-suġġett ta’ bosta ġurnali u pubblikazzjonijiet.
Il-ġobon jiġi prodott fil-Bulgarija kollha skont teknika stabbilita sew. Il-kundizzjonijiet naturali u klimatiċi favorevoli fil-Bulgarija jikkontribwixxu għall-iżvilupp tal-batterji lattiċi Lactobacillicus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus, li jintuża fil-produzzjoni tal-prodott u jaffettwa l-karatteristiċi speċifiċi tiegħu.
Dr Stamen Grigoroff, student tal-mediċina fl-Università ta’ Ġinevra, ingħata l-kreditu għall-iskoperta tal-batterju fl-1905. Ftit wara, fl-1907, il-mikroorganiżmu forma ta’ virga li kien skopra ssemma Bacillus bulgaricus (Grigoroff) għalih, u llum huwa magħruf skont il-klassifikazzjoni ta’ Bergey bħala Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus (fejn l-isem jenfasizza l-konnessjoni mat-territorju).
5.1. Speċifiċità taż-żona ġeografika
Klima relattivament moderata b’ammonti moderati ta’ sħana u umdità hija tipika għall-Bulgarija, iż-żona ġeografika fejn jiġi prodott il-ġobon. It-temperatura medja annwali għall-biċċa l-kbira tal-Bulgarija hija bejn 10 °C u 14 °C, li hija tipika għal latitudnijiet moderati. Il-kundizzjonijiet naturali u klimatiċi huma prerekwiżit għall-preżenza ta’ mergħat kemm fil-pjanuri kif ukoll fiż-żoni muntanjużi, li jiffavorixxu l-produzzjoni tal-ħalib. Il-mergħat u l-bwar naturali u miżrugħin jipprovdu dieta bbilanċjata u varjata għall-annimali minħabba l-preżenza ta’ ħaxix, legumi u ċereali. Dawn il-kulturi jistagħnew kemm f’art b’altitudni baxxa kif ukoll f’żoni muntanjużi għoljin. Aktar minn 2 000 tip ta’ ħxejjex aromatiċi, bħat-trew, l-Artemisia campestris, il-ġarġir il-ġemel u oħrajn jikbru fuq il-bwar naturali. Is-sustanzi bijoloġikament attivi ewlenin responsabbli għall-proprjetajiet antiossidanti tagħhom huma d-derivattivi fenoliċi, u l-vitamini A, E u C. Dawn jibbenefikaw mill-aroma tal-għalf u l-aroma u l-kompożizzjoni tal-ħalib mhux ipproċessat. Ir-ragħa tal-annimali tal-ħalib, kif ukoll it-tagħlif supplimentari tagħhom b’għalf prinċipalment miż-żona ġeografika, jaffettwaw b’mod pożittiv il-kontenut tal-minerali u tal-vitamini tal-kompożizzjoni tal-materja prima. Il-kompożizzjoni kimika, il-proprjetajiet fiżikokimiċi u l-maturità bijoloġika jinfluwenzaw it-togħma u l-kwalità tal-prodott.
Il-kundizzjonijiet klimatiċi jikkontribwixxu għall-iżvilupp ta’ batterji lattiċi bħall-Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus, li jinsab kullimkien fil-Bulgarija. Il-batterju huwa preżenti b’mod naturali fil-Bulgarija, fejn jinstab fi kwantitajiet kbar, fil-flora u fil-fawna tal-pajjiż, u fin-nida fuq il-ħaxix tal-mergħat u fl-ilmijiet tan-nixxigħat. Il-ġurnal xjentifiku speċjalizzat Scripta Scientifica Pharmaceutica (vol. 1, 2014, p. 25) jinnota li “l-Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus jirriproduċi biss fit-territorju tal-Bulgarija moderna [...]. F’partijiet oħra fid-dinja, jgħaddi minn mutazzjonijiet u jieqaf jirriproduċi wara fermentazzjoni waħda jew tnejn.” Huwa l-batterju li jaffettwa l-karatteristiċi speċifiċi tal-prodott.
5.2. Fatturi umani
L-industrija tal-produzzjoni tal-ġobon fil-Bulgarija għandha tradizzjoni storika twila. Ir-referenzi storiċi għall-imħaleb tal-ġobon imorru lura sal-1558. Mgħoddija minn ġenerazzjoni għal oħra, in-know-how u t-tradizzjonijiet tal-farms tal-familja lokali Bulgari huma kruċjali għall-produzzjoni ta’ dan il-ġobon. Il-produtturi tal-ġobon japplikaw il-ħiliet tagħhom fil-proċess teknoloġiku, fit-tibqit tal-ħalib, il-qtugħ tal-baqta tat-tames, l-ippressar tal-baqta u t-tmelliħ tagħha. Meta l-ħalib jitbaqqat, huma jimmonitorjaw it-temperatura tal-ħalib mhux ipproċessat kif ukoll l-ammont ta’ ħmira u starter, peress li dawn huma kruċjali għall-formazzjoni ta’ baqta tat-tames ta’ kwalità. Il-produtturi tal-ġobon iħawdu l-baqta bl-idejn b’movimenti ġentili sabiex jevitaw il-frammentazzjoni tal-baqta tat-tames. L-ipproċessar manwali tajjeb tal-baqta tat-tames huwa importanti biex tinkiseb konsistenza moderatament iebsa u elastika. Għal darba oħra, bl-idejn, bl-użu ta’ skieken speċjali tat-tip multi-cutter, il-baqta tat-tames tinqata’ f’kubi ta’ ċertu daqs. Млекарство [Trobbija ta’ bhejjem tal-ħalib] (Prof. Nikola Dimov et al., Sofia, 1975) jiddeskrivi l-ippressar bħala l-aktar stadju delikat, li “jrid jiġi adattat sabiex ix-xorrox żejjed ikun jista’ jiġi sseparat, il-massa tal-ġobon tkun tista’ tiġi kkompattjata u l-qoxra mixtieqa tkun tista’ tifforma fuq il-wiċċ tal-moffa”. L-għarfien u l-ħiliet tal-produtturi tal-ġobon jidhru wkoll fil-proċess tat-tmelliħ, peress li t-tmelliħ korrett u f’waqtu jikseb togħma speċifika moderatament mielħa. Il-grad ta’ tmelliħ u r-rata li biha l-prodott jiġi mmellaħ jiġu mmonitorjati, u dan jaffettwa b’mod konsiderevoli l-proċessi mikrobijoloġiċi u bijokimiċi matul il-maturazzjoni u l-ħażna. Bl-industrijalizzazzjoni beda jintuża l-makkinarju iżda t-tibqit u l-ipproċessar għadhom isiru bl-idejn. Is-sengħa tal-produzzjoni tal-ġobon tiġi mgħoddija minn persuna tas-sengħa għal oħra, sabiex b’hekk jiġi ppreservat il-metodu tradizzjonali ta’ kif isir il-prodott.
L-għarfien u l-ħiliet meħtieġa għall-produzzjoni tal-ġobon ġew deskritti f’għadd ta’ kotba. Fl-1872, ir-rivista Читалище ppubblikat artiklu intitolat “Производство на сирене” [Il-produzzjoni tal-ġobon] u fl-1903, it-teknika ġiet deskritta minn Hristo G. Tahtunov fil-ktieb tiegħu Как се прави кашкавал и бяло саламурено сирене [Kif tagħmel il-ġobon isfar u l-ġobon abjad fis-salmura]. Sentejn wara, Dr Stamen Grigoroff skopra l-batterju Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus, li r-razez tiegħu ġew iżolati u magħżula fil-Bulgarija. Ikkombinat mal-iStreptococcus thermophilus fi proporzjon ta’ 1:1 u f’temperatura ta’ 39-40 °C, il-Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus jadatta għall-proċess ta’ fermentazzjoni hekk kif jimmatura l-ġobon. Il-maturazzjoni tal-ġobon tagħti lill-“Българско бяло саламурено сирене / Bulgarsko byalo salamureno sirene” t-togħma u l-aroma speċifiċi tiegħu. Fl-1934, il-Kumpanija Agrikola Bulgara introduċiet il-pastorizzazzjoni tal-ħalib mhux ipproċessat u l-użu ta’ kulturi puri fil-produzzjoni. Sussegwentement, riċerka mill-Istitut tal-Industrija tal-Ħalib f’Vidin żvelat ukoll li l-involviment tal-batterju Bulgaru Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus fil-produzzjoni tal-prodott ifforma l-bażi tat-togħma u l-aroma speċifiċi tiegħu.
5.3. Karatteristiċi tal-prodott
It-togħma u s-sawra speċifiċi tal-prodott, bħala l-karatteristiċi ewlenin tiegħu, jinkisbu permezz ta’ teknoloġija ta’ produzzjoni tradizzjonali, li fiha l-batterji tal-aċidu lattiku Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus għandhom rwol deċiżiv.
Il-funzjoni ewlenija tal-batterji lattiċi fil-kulturi starter hija li tipproduċi l-aċidu lattiku matul il-fermentazzjoni lattika. L-enzimi tagħhom huma involuti fil-proteoliżi u fil-konverżjoni tal-aċidi amminiċi f’komposti aromatiċi, u jikkontribwixxu wkoll għall-maturazzjoni tal-ġobon. Il-kisba tat-togħma speċifika tal-ġobon hija proċess kumpless minħabba t-taħlita unika ta’ fatturi mikrobijoloġiċi, bijokimiċi u teknoloġiċi. It-togħma tal-prodott hija ffurmata mhux biss mit-togħma pjaċevoli tal-aċidu lattiku ta’ dan l-istarter u s-salmura, iżda wkoll mill-imrar ħafif u mhux imponenti tal-prodotti ta’ degradazzjoni ta’ proteini kumplessi u ta’ ċerti aċidi amminiċi, b’mod partikolari l-aċidu glutamiku. Waqt il-maturazzjoni, madwar 130 tip ta’ sustanzi volatili: fis-salmura jiffurmaw ammini, aldeidi, alkoħols, aċidi karbossiliċi, ketoni metiliċi, esteri etiliċi, komposti tal-kubrit u idrokarburi aromatiċi, li jagħtu lill-prodott it-togħma u l-aroma karatteristiċi tiegħu. It-taħlita tat-togħma u l-aroma tifforma l-“bouquet” tal-ġobon.
5.4. Rabta kawżali bejn iż-żona ġeografika u l-kwalità jew il-karatteristiċi tal-prodott (għal DOP) jew il-kwalità, ir-reputazzjoni jew karatteristiċi oħra speċifiċi tal-prodott (għal IĠP)
Il-kundizzjonijiet naturali u klimatiċi taż-żona ġeografika, ikkaratterizzati minn ammonti moderati ta’ sħana u ndewwa, jiffavorixxu l-iżvilupp ta’ batterji lattiċi tipiċi tal-mikroflora reġjonali, bħal-Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus. Il-kulturi starter tal-Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus u Streptococcus thermophilus jaffettwaw it-togħma u l-aroma pjaċevoli tal-aċidu lattiku tal-“Българско бяло саламурено сирене / Bulgarsko byalo salamureno sirene”. Dawn jifformaw matul il-proċess tal-maturazzjoni fis-salmura. Dan il-ġobon jiġi prodott permezz ta’ proċessi mikrobijoloġiċi speċifiċi bis-saħħa ta’ kulturi puri bil-Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus u ta’ parametri speċifiċi favorevoli għall-iżvilupp tagħhom.
It-tradizzjonijiet u l-ħiliet tal-produtturi tal-ġobon jassumu rwol kruċjali fil-produzzjoni. Dawn jiġu applikati fil-proċess teknoloġiku, speċifikament fit-tibqit tal-ħalib, il-qtugħ tal-baqta tat-tames, l-ippressar tal-baqta u t-tmelliħ tagħha. Meta l-ħalib jitbaqqat, huma jimmonitorjaw it-temperatura tal-ħalib mhux ipproċessat kif ukoll l-ammont ta’ ħmira u starter, peress li dawn huma kruċjali għall-formazzjoni ta’ baqta tat-tames ta’ kwalità. Dan huwa importanti biex tinkiseb il-konsistenza moderatament iebsa u elastika tiegħu. Il-qtugħ tal-baqta tat-tames bl-idejn bl-użu ta’ skieken speċjali tat-tip multi-cutter huwa importanti wkoll. L-għarfien u l-ħiliet tal-produtturi tal-ġobon jidhru wkoll fil-proċess tat-tmelliħ, li jikseb togħma speċifika moderatament mielħa.
Il-prodott jieħu wkoll il-karatteristiċi speċifiċi tiegħu mill-ħalib mhux ipproċessat, li għandu jiġi miż-żona ġeografika. Ir-ragħa tal-annimali tal-ħalib f’din iż-żona jaffettwa l-aroma u t-togħma tal-ħalib mhux ipproċessat u l-kontenut għoli ta’ Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus. Il-perjodu itwal tar-ragħa huwa r-raġuni għad-diversità tal-minerali u l-vitamini fil-kompożizzjoni tal-ħalib mhux ipproċessat. Għandu kontenut ibbilanċjat speċifiku ta’ sustanzi minerali bħall-potassju, il-manjeżju, il-fosfru u l-kalċju, proteini u vitamini (A, B, E, D u l-aċidu foliku). Il-kompożizzjoni kimika, il-proprjetajiet fiżikokimiċi u l-maturità bijoloġika tal-ħalib, kif ukoll il-kundizzjonijiet ta’ maturazzjoni, jaffettwaw b’mod sinifikanti l-kwalità u t-togħma tal-ġobon.
Il-“Българско бяло саламурено сирене / Bulgarsko byalo salamureno sirene” għandu firxa wiesgħa ta’ użi fit-tisjir, għaliex l-istruttura tiegħu ssir elastika meta jissaħħan. Il-prodott huwa ingredjent fi platti tradizzjonali fir-reġjun fosthom l-insalata shopska, il-“banitsa” [magħmula mill-għaġina], u l-“mish-mash” [bajd imħabbat bil-ħaxix] kif deskritt minn Maria Baltadzhieva.
Referenza għall-pubblikazzjoni tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott
https://www.mzh.government.bg/bg/politiki-i-programi/politiki-i-strategii/politiki-po-agrohranitelnata-veriga/zashiteni-naimenovaniya/blgarsko-byalo-salamureno-sirene/
