# C_2022074EN.01004001.xml

| 15.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 74/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 74/40

---

Publication of an application for a Union amendment to a product specification for a name in the wine sector pursuant to Article 97(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council

(2022/C 74/07)

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

APPLICATION FOR A UNION AMENDMENT TO THE PRODUCT SPECIFICATION

‘Jumilla’

PDO-ES-A0109-AM05

Date of application: 10 February 2021

1.   Applicant and legitimate interest

Consejo Regulador D.O. ‘Jumilla’ (Regulatory Board for the ‘Jumilla’ Designation of Origin)

Association consisting of all of the winegrowers and wineries that grow grapes and produce, store or bottle wine intended for or entitled to the ‘Jumilla’ PDO.

2.   Heading in the product specification affected by the amendment(s)

| ☐ | Name of product |
| --- | --- |

☐

Name of product

| ☐ | Category of the grapevine product |
| --- | --- |

☐

Category of the grapevine product

| ☐ | Link |
| --- | --- |

☐

Link

| ☒ | Marketing restrictions |
| --- | --- |

☒

Marketing restrictions

3.   Description and reasons for amendment

Packaging within the demarcated geographical area and removing the option of moving the protected wine in bulk to wineries not covered by the PDO.

| a) | Product specification headings affected: 8. Applicable requirements |
| --- | --- |

a)

Product specification headings affected: 8. Applicable requirements

| b) | Single document sections affected: 9. Further conditions |
| --- | --- |

b)

Single document sections affected: 9. Further conditions

Reason(s)

It is a Union amendment falling into one of the categories provided for in Article 14(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/33, specifically: further restrictions on the marketing of the product.

Pursuant to Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 2019/33, justification for the amendment is given as follows:

Quality-related reasons

| — | The production of ‘Jumilla’ (PDO) wines does not end with the process of transforming must into wine through alcoholic fermentation and other supplementary processes, but rather with the packaging. This must be considered the final stage in the production of these wines, since it involves other oenological practices that could affect the special characteristics, namely filtering, stabilisation and various types of corrective measures. Furthermore, in many cases, a period of bottle ageing, which takes place in the bottle racks of the certified wineries, is necessary in order to round out the finished wine.
  Indeed, all the lessons learned from the wine being permitted to leave the demarcated area in bulk have shown producers the importance of this final stage in wine production.
  This designation of origin was recognised in Spain in 1966. In common with the rest of the sector, its long history has seen considerable progress in quality requirements to that extent that, these days, careful monitoring of bottling is a prerequisite of quality. For this reason, the sector itself wants to ensure that no wine entitled to bear the name ‘Jumilla’ should escape such monitoring. It is sufficient to point out that 20 years ago, in the 2000-2001 season, 86 % of the wine of this PDO was exported in bulk, whereas now it is only around 4 %. |
| --- | --- |

—

The production of ‘Jumilla’ (PDO) wines does not end with the process of transforming must into wine through alcoholic fermentation and other supplementary processes, but rather with the packaging. This must be considered the final stage in the production of these wines, since it involves other oenological practices that could affect the special characteristics, namely filtering, stabilisation and various types of corrective measures. Furthermore, in many cases, a period of bottle ageing, which takes place in the bottle racks of the certified wineries, is necessary in order to round out the finished wine.

Indeed, all the lessons learned from the wine being permitted to leave the demarcated area in bulk have shown producers the importance of this final stage in wine production.

This designation of origin was recognised in Spain in 1966. In common with the rest of the sector, its long history has seen considerable progress in quality requirements to that extent that, these days, careful monitoring of bottling is a prerequisite of quality. For this reason, the sector itself wants to ensure that no wine entitled to bear the name ‘Jumilla’ should escape such monitoring. It is sufficient to point out that 20 years ago, in the 2000-2001 season, 86 % of the wine of this PDO was exported in bulk, whereas now it is only around 4 %.

| — | Furthermore, it is clear that transport over long distances or for prolonged periods increases the risk of alterations to the product, such as oxidation or temperature changes, which adversely affect quality. Allowing such consignments undermines quality.
  Indeed, the producers are so aware of this that the volume placed on the market in bulk is now a fraction of the total sold by the PDO. |
| --- | --- |

—

Furthermore, it is clear that transport over long distances or for prolonged periods increases the risk of alterations to the product, such as oxidation or temperature changes, which adversely affect quality. Allowing such consignments undermines quality.

Indeed, the producers are so aware of this that the volume placed on the market in bulk is now a fraction of the total sold by the PDO.

| — | In order to fully safeguard product quality, bottling should be carried by the certified producers belonging to the PDO, meaning within the demarcated area. Such producers are directly responsible for, and beneficiaries of, the prestige of the product, which might otherwise be compromised. |
| --- | --- |

—

In order to fully safeguard product quality, bottling should be carried by the certified producers belonging to the PDO, meaning within the demarcated area. Such producers are directly responsible for, and beneficiaries of, the prestige of the product, which might otherwise be compromised.

Guarantee of origin

| — | Appointed by the competent Spanish authority and accredited by the National Accreditation Body under ISO 17065 on product certification, the control body is active within the confines of the demarcated area. Full traceability is necessary to guarantee the actual origin of the raw material and the production. Only the control body can conduct these exercises and, for logistical and financial reasons, it cannot attend wineries in other Member States or third countries in order to guarantee the origin of the wine bottled there. |
| --- | --- |

—

Appointed by the competent Spanish authority and accredited by the National Accreditation Body under ISO 17065 on product certification, the control body is active within the confines of the demarcated area. Full traceability is necessary to guarantee the actual origin of the raw material and the production. Only the control body can conduct these exercises and, for logistical and financial reasons, it cannot attend wineries in other Member States or third countries in order to guarantee the origin of the wine bottled there.

| — | Where wine in bulk is sent to operators outside of its scope, the control body provides a guarantee in the form of a consignment note confirming the origin of the product and its compliance with the specifications for ‘Jumilla’ up to the point of dispatch. However, where there is no subsequent control, this guarantee of origin is useless for the purposes of the PDO and loses its validity.
  It is true that EU rules provide for cooperation with the control bodies in the destination countries. Yet experience shows that this is limited to the usual controls carried out by producers. There is no proper check on the requirements for the bottling stage according to the relevant specification.
  Specifically, every bottle has to display a guarantee of origin in the form of a secondary label or numbered seal. However, bottling operations outside of the demarcated area do not request these items from the control body. This means that secondary labels and numbered seals are not used despite being required by the specification.
  The situation is even worse where bottling takes place in a third country, and some 75 % of ‘Jumilla’ sold in bulk goes to countries outside the EU. In such cases, there is not even a mechanism in place for conducting controls on these wines.
  Furthermore, it is impossible for the control body to know how such products will end up on the market: under the name of the PDO, under another name or blended with other wines. |
| --- | --- |

—

Where wine in bulk is sent to operators outside of its scope, the control body provides a guarantee in the form of a consignment note confirming the origin of the product and its compliance with the specifications for ‘Jumilla’ up to the point of dispatch. However, where there is no subsequent control, this guarantee of origin is useless for the purposes of the PDO and loses its validity.

It is true that EU rules provide for cooperation with the control bodies in the destination countries. Yet experience shows that this is limited to the usual controls carried out by producers. There is no proper check on the requirements for the bottling stage according to the relevant specification.

Specifically, every bottle has to display a guarantee of origin in the form of a secondary label or numbered seal. However, bottling operations outside of the demarcated area do not request these items from the control body. This means that secondary labels and numbered seals are not used despite being required by the specification.

The situation is even worse where bottling takes place in a third country, and some 75 % of ‘Jumilla’ sold in bulk goes to countries outside the EU. In such cases, there is not even a mechanism in place for conducting controls on these wines.

Furthermore, it is impossible for the control body to know how such products will end up on the market: under the name of the PDO, under another name or blended with other wines.

Guaranteeing control

| — | Prior to this amendment application, bulk consignments of the protected wine were accompanied by a certificate of origin at the request of the registered operator.
  Based on the reasons set out above, and on experience, and given the lack of quality assurance and control inherent in bulk consignments, it seems inappropriate to continue issuing certificates for wines that cease to be subject to any control before being placed on the market. |
| --- | --- |

—

Prior to this amendment application, bulk consignments of the protected wine were accompanied by a certificate of origin at the request of the registered operator.

Based on the reasons set out above, and on experience, and given the lack of quality assurance and control inherent in bulk consignments, it seems inappropriate to continue issuing certificates for wines that cease to be subject to any control before being placed on the market.

| — | The volumes of bulk exports have been gradually decreasing over time, as current figures clearly show. As an example, during the 2010-2011 season, 20 704 hectolitres, some 25 % of production, were exported. In the 2019-2020 season, the figure was 8 939 hectolitres, around 4 % of production. Thus far in the 2021 season, there have been no consignments of wine in bulk. This further reduces the justification for any attempts by the certifying body to carry out controls as the volumes are very small and widely dispersed across different destinations. |
| --- | --- |

—

The volumes of bulk exports have been gradually decreasing over time, as current figures clearly show. As an example, during the 2010-2011 season, 20 704 hectolitres, some 25 % of production, were exported. In the 2019-2020 season, the figure was 8 939 hectolitres, around 4 % of production. Thus far in the 2021 season, there have been no consignments of wine in bulk. This further reduces the justification for any attempts by the certifying body to carry out controls as the volumes are very small and widely dispersed across different destinations.

| — | In addition, the control body itself and its competent authority believe that, in reality, these wines end up being placed on the market without the ‘Jumilla’ PDO. Therefore none of the producers that bottle PDO ‘Jumilla’ wine will have to change their practices and nor will their interests be affected.
  None of the producers exporting in bulk disagrees with this measure, which has been approved by all wineries and winegrowers belonging to the Designation of Origin. There were no interventions during the national opposition procedure to approve this amendment to the specification. |
| --- | --- |

—

In addition, the control body itself and its competent authority believe that, in reality, these wines end up being placed on the market without the ‘Jumilla’ PDO. Therefore none of the producers that bottle PDO ‘Jumilla’ wine will have to change their practices and nor will their interests be affected.

None of the producers exporting in bulk disagrees with this measure, which has been approved by all wineries and winegrowers belonging to the Designation of Origin. There were no interventions during the national opposition procedure to approve this amendment to the specification.

| — | The National Accreditation Body, which annually audits the work of the control body, has commented on the loss of control over volumes exported with the control body’s guarantee. This amendment will also resolve such problems, which could undermine the control body’s status as a certifying body for wine. |
| --- | --- |

—

The National Accreditation Body, which annually audits the work of the control body, has commented on the loss of control over volumes exported with the control body’s guarantee. This amendment will also resolve such problems, which could undermine the control body’s status as a certifying body for wine.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

1.   Name of product

Jumilla

2.   Geographical indication type

PDO – Protected Designation of Origin

3.   Categories of grapevine products

| 1. | Wine |
| --- | --- |

1.

Wine

| 3. | Liqueur wine |
| --- | --- |

3.

Liqueur wine

4.   Description of the wine(s)

1.   White wines (‘Jumilla’ and ‘Jumilla Dulce’)

Appearance: ranging from steely to topaz. Clear and bright.

Aroma: fresh fruit. The sweet wines may have dried fruit notes.

Taste: balance of acidity and sweetness. In the sweet wines, sweetness predominates over acidity.

Analytical requirements not included in the table are in accordance with EU wine legislation in force.

| General analytical characteristics |
| --- |
| Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume) | |
| Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume) | 11 |
| Minimum total acidity | 4 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid |
| Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre) | 13,3 |
| Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre) | |

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

11

Minimum total acidity

4 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

13,3

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

2.   Rosé wines (‘Jumilla’ and ‘Jumilla Dulce’)

CONCISE TEXTUAL DESCRIPTION

Appearance: ranging from raspberry-pink to pale salmon. Clear and bright.

Aroma: fresh fruit. Red fruit. The sweet wines may have dried fruit notes.

Taste: balanced acidity. In the sweet wines, sweetness predominates over acidity.

Analytical requirements not included in the table are in accordance with EU wine legislation in force.

| General analytical characteristics |
| --- |
| Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume) | |
| Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume) | 11,5 |
| Minimum total acidity | 4 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid |
| Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre) | 13,3 |
| Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre) | |

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

11,5

Minimum total acidity

4 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

13,3

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

3.   Rosé wines (Jumilla Monastrell)

CONCISE TEXTUAL DESCRIPTION

Appearance: ranging from raspberry-pink to pale salmon. Clear and bright.

Aroma: fresh fruit. Red fruit. The sweet wines may have dried fruit notes.

Taste: balanced acidity. In the sweet wines, sweetness predominates over acidity.

Analytical requirements not included in the table are in accordance with EU wine legislation in force.

| General analytical characteristics |
| --- |
| Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume) | |
| Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume) | 12 |
| Minimum total acidity | 4 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid |
| Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre) | 13,3 |
| Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre) | |

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

12

Minimum total acidity

4 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

13,3

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

4.   Red wines (Jumilla Monastrell)

CONCISE TEXTUAL DESCRIPTION

Appearance: ranging from violet to brick-red, sweet wines may develop an ochre shade. Clear and bright.

Aroma: red fruit. Black fruit. The sweet wines have dried fruit notes.

Taste: balanced acidity. Tannic. In the sweet wines, sweetness predominates over acidity.

Analytical requirements not included in the table are in accordance with EU wine legislation in force.

| General analytical characteristics |
| --- |
| Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume) | |
| Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume) | 12,5 |
| Minimum total acidity | 4 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid |
| Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre) | 13,3 |
| Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre) | |

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

12,5

Minimum total acidity

4 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

13,3

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

5.   Red wines (‘Jumilla’ and ‘Jumilla Dulce’)

CONCISE TEXTUAL DESCRIPTION

Appearance: ranging from violet to brick-red, sweet wines may develop an ochre shade. Clear and bright.

Aroma: red fruit. Black fruit. The sweet wines have dried fruit notes.

Taste: balanced acidity. Tannic. In the sweet wines, sweetness predominates over acidity.

Analytical requirements not included in the table are in accordance with EU wine legislation in force.

| General analytical characteristics |
| --- |
| Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume) | |
| Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume) | 12 |
| Minimum total acidity | 4 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid |
| Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre) | 13,3 |
| Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre) | |

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

12

Minimum total acidity

4 grams per litre expressed as tartaric acid

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

13,3

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

6.   Liqueur wines (Tinto Monastrell)

CONCISE TEXTUAL DESCRIPTION

Appearance: ranging from cherry red to ochre. Clear and bright.

Aroma: black fruit. Dried fruit.

Taste: sweetness predominates over acidity. Tannic.

Analytical requirements not included in the table are in accordance with EU wine legislation in force.

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

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

15

Minimum total acidity

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

5.   Wine making practices

a.   Specific oenological practices

Cultivation method

Vineyards covered by the ‘Jumilla’ protected designation of origin can be subject to extensive cultivation or intensive cultivation methods.

Extensive cultivation: for vineyards in which, for reasons of terrain, altitude, rainfall and other environmental factors, planting density complies with the following agricultural parameters: maximum 1 900 plants per hectare and minimum 1 100 plants per hectare.

Intensive cultivation: for vineyards which, again according to environmental conditions, comply with the following agricultural parameters: planting density between 3 350 and 1 500 plants per hectare.

Grapes are harvested in a way that does not harm their quality. For wines covered by the PDO, only healthy grapes are used which are sufficiently ripe and at a minimum of 10,70o Baumé for white grapes, and 11o Baumé for red grapes.

Monastrell grapes intended to be used for liqueur wine must be at a minimum of 13o Baumé when harvested.

In pressing, the must and wine are subject to pressures giving a maximum yield that, following transformation, cannot exceed 74 litres of finished wine per 100 kilograms of grapes.

For the purpose of calculating the ageing processes, the first day of October of each year is taken as the start.

b.   Maximum yields

| 1. | Widely cultivated red varieties
  5 000 kilograms of grapes per hectare
  37 hectolitres per hectare |
| --- | --- |

1.

5 000 kilograms of grapes per hectare

37 hectolitres per hectare

| 2. | Widely cultivated white varieties
  5 625 kilograms of grapes per hectare
  41,62 hectolitres per hectare |
| --- | --- |

2.

5 625 kilograms of grapes per hectare

41,62 hectolitres per hectare

| 3. | Intensive cultivation
  8 750 kilograms of grapes per hectare
  64,75 hectolitres per hectare |
| --- | --- |

3.

8 750 kilograms of grapes per hectare

64,75 hectolitres per hectare

6.   Demarcated geographical area

The production area for wines covered by the protected designation of origin ‘Jumilla’ comprises land situated within the municipalities of Jumilla, in the province of Murcia, and Fuentealamo, Albatana, Ontur, Hellín, Tobarra and Montealegre del Castillo in the province of Albacete.

7.   Wine grape variety(ies)

AIRÉN

CABERNET SAUVIGNON

CHARDONNAY

GARNACHA TINTA

GARNACHA TINTORERA

MACABEO - VIURA

MALVASIA AROMATICA - MALVASIA DE SITGES

MERLOT

MONASTRELL

MOSCATEL DE GRANO MENUDO

PEDRO XIMENEZ

PETIT VERDOT

SAUVIGNON BLANC

SYRAH

TEMPRANILLO - CENCIBEL

VERDEJO

8.   Description of the link(s)

8.1.   Wine

The most important grape is Monastrell, a very hardy variety that is perfectly adapted to the harsh conditions of the area, with its drought, very hot summers and spring frosts. It produces full bodied, fleshy wines, rich in alcohol and acidity with highly characteristic aromas of ripe fruit and a well-integrated astringency.

The other authorised varieties perfectly complement Monastrell, stabilising the colour and adding acidity and ageing capacity, as well as harmonising the aromas perfectly.

8.2.   Liqueur wines

These wines are made from Monastrell, a variety which gives them colour intensity ranging from medium to very high, potentially almost opaque, as a result of the high temperatures characteristic of the area.

9.   Specific further requirements (packaging, labelling, other requirements)

Labelling

Legal framework:

In national legislation

Type of further condition:

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition:

The name of the protected designation of origin must appear prominently on the labels, in a font that must be a minimum of 3 millimetres and a maximum of 10 millimetres in height.

The name must appear next to the words ‘Denominación de Origen Protegida’ or ‘Denominación de Origen’, which must be in a font of a minimum of 2 millimetres in height, but which must always be smaller than the accompanying name of the PDO.

Other references will be those laid down in the general legislation on wine labelling, and in the specific rules and regulations on labelling established by the Regulatory Board and currently in force.

Packaging must include quality seals, secondary labels or numbered labels issued by the Regulatory Board. These must be affixed by the winery and be visible on the packaging in a way that prevents their re-use.

Transporting wines

Legal framework

For an organisation that manages PDOs/PGIs, when thus provided for by Member States.

Type of further condition

Packaging within the demarcated geographical area

Description of the condition

The protected wine must be packaged exclusively in facilities located within the production area of PDO ‘Jumilla’.

In order to ensure appropriate use of the PDO, all protected wines must be dispatched in the packaging.

Production of the wines with the designation of origin does not end with the process of transforming must into wine through alcoholic fermentation and other, supplementary processes, but rather with packaging. This must be considered the final stage in the production of these wines, since it involves other oenological practices that could affect the special characteristics, namely: filtering, stabilisation and various types of corrective measures. Furthermore, in many cases, a period of bottle ageing is necessary in order to round out the finished wine. In addition, it is clear that transport over long distances or for prolonged periods increases the risk of alterations to the product, such as oxidation or temperature changes, which adversely affect the quality. Therefore, in order to preserve the quality of the wine, it is necessary to bottle it within the demarcated area of the PDO.

The control body is appointed by the competent Spanish authority and accredited by the National Accreditation Body under ISO 17065 on product certification. In the case of bulk volumes dispatched to operators outside the demarcated area, the control body can only guarantee origin and compliance with the ‘Jumilla’ PDO up to the point of dispatch. However, for reasons of logistics and cost, the control body cannot operate in destination countries where, in practice, the national competent authorities do not carry out controls either. Some 75 % of consignments in bulk go to third countries. Consequently, the control body does not know how these wines are placed on the market. What it does know is that the bottles do not display the secondary label or numbered seal as required since there are no requests for these from the bottling operations. This means that there should not be bottling operations involving ‘Jumilla’ (PDO) outside of the demarcated area. Therefore, in order to guarantee the origin and to safeguard control, it is necessary for all the wine to be bottled within the demarcated area.

Link to the product specification

https://www.mapa.gob.es/es/alimentacion/temas/calidad-diferenciada/pcdopjumillamodificacionmayoram05limpio_tcm30-556674.pdf

---

(1)  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

---