# C_2022346EN.01001201.xml

| 9.9.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 346/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.9.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 346/12

---

Publication of an application for approval of an amendment, which is not minor, to a product specification pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs

(2022/C 346/06)

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

APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF A NON-MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE PRODUCT SPECIFICATION OF A PROTECTED DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN / PROTECTED GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION

Application for approval of an amendment in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012

‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’

EU No: PGI-DE-0722-AM01 - 17.6.2020

PDO ( ) PGI (X)

1.   Applicant group and legitimate interest

Fleischer-Innung Hof-Wunsiedel

The applicant for the amendment is the same as the original applicant. It is an association of producers/processors of the protected products.

Address: Hohe Straße 20, 95030 Hof

Country: Germany

Email address(es): Fleischer-innung-hof@t-online.de

2.   Member state or third country

Germany

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

| ☐ | Name of product |
| --- | --- |

☐

Name of product

| ☒ | Description of product |
| --- | --- |

☒

Description of product

| ☐ | Geographical area |
| --- | --- |

☐

Geographical area

| ☒ | Proof of origin |
| --- | --- |

☒

Proof of origin

| ☒ | Method of production |
| --- | --- |

☒

Method of production

| ☒ | Link |
| --- | --- |

☒

Link

| ☐ | Labelling |
| --- | --- |

☐

Labelling

| ☐ | Other |
| --- | --- |

☐

Other

4.   Type of amendment(s)

| ☒ | Amendment to product specification of a registered PDO or PGI not to be qualified as minor in accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012. |
| --- | --- |

☒

Amendment to product specification of a registered PDO or PGI not to be qualified as minor in accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012.

| ☐ | Amendment to product specification of registered PDO or PGI for which a Single Document (or equivalent) has not been published not to be qualified as minor in accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012. |
| --- | --- |

☐

Amendment to product specification of registered PDO or PGI for which a Single Document (or equivalent) has not been published not to be qualified as minor in accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012.

5.   Amendment(s)

5.1.   Description of product

1.   Amendment

| (1) | In the following sentence in the first paragraph ‘The spreadable sausage meat is packed into a synthetic gut (cellophane), the calibre of which measures from 40 mm to 55 mm’, the word ‘(cellophane)’ is deleted.
  Many producers use artificial casings made of other materials. However, this has no negative impact on the quality of ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Many producers use artificial casings made of other materials. However, this has no negative impact on the quality of ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’.

2.   Amendment

| (2) | The following sentence in the first paragraph is deleted: ‘Depending on the size of calibre, individual “Hofer Rindfleischwurst” measure up to 50 cm in length and weigh from 150 grams to 800 grams.’
  In some cases, longer or lighter/heavier sausages are also produced. Since this has no effect on the quality of the product, there is no need for a restriction in this regard. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In some cases, longer or lighter/heavier sausages are also produced. Since this has no effect on the quality of the product, there is no need for a restriction in this regard.

3.   Amendment

| (3) | In the sixth paragraph, in the sentence ‘The water content is between 50 % and 55 %, the fat content is between 25 % and 30 %’, ‘25 %’ is replaced by ‘20 %’.
  According to their recipes, many producers have always had a slightly lower fat content in the ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’. The minimum fat content has been adjusted so as not to hinder them in their traditional production. This does not affect the quality of the ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

According to their recipes, many producers have always had a slightly lower fat content in the ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’. The minimum fat content has been adjusted so as not to hinder them in their traditional production. This does not affect the quality of the ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’.

4.   Amendment

| (4) | In the sixth paragraph, in the phrase ‘the proportion of pork and back fat is a maximum of 30 %’, ‘30 %’ is replaced by ‘40 %’.
  According to their recipes, many producers have always had a higher proportion of pork and back fat in the ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’. The maximum proportion has been adjusted so as not to hinder them in their traditional production. This does not affect the maximum fat content. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

According to their recipes, many producers have always had a higher proportion of pork and back fat in the ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’. The maximum proportion has been adjusted so as not to hinder them in their traditional production. This does not affect the maximum fat content.

5.   Amendment

| (5) | The last sentence in the eighth paragraph ‘Meat from young bovines is therefore not employed in the production of “Hofer Rindfleischwurst”’ is deleted.
  The meat of younger animals for slaughter, i.e. young bovines, has always been used in the production process. Since this has no adverse effect on the quality of the product, the existing restriction is not required. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

The meat of younger animals for slaughter, i.e. young bovines, has always been used in the production process. Since this has no adverse effect on the quality of the product, the existing restriction is not required.

6.   Amendment

| (6) | In the first sentence in the ninth paragraph, ‘The main raw material contained in “Hofer Rindfleischwurst” is R 1 grade beef low in fatty tissue and free of sinews (two-thirds) and S Vlll grade pork back fat (one third)’, the words ‘two-thirds’ are replaced by ‘at least 60 %’ and ‘S Vlll grade’ is replaced by ‘S Vlll and S 1 grade (combined share max. 40 %)’.
  The adjustment and amendment of the percentages follows from the change in the percentage specified in point 4 and serves to harmonise and clarify the entire specification. According to their recipes, many producers have always had a higher proportion of pork and back fat in the ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’. The maximum proportion has been adjusted so as not to hinder them in their traditional production. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

The adjustment and amendment of the percentages follows from the change in the percentage specified in point 4 and serves to harmonise and clarify the entire specification. According to their recipes, many producers have always had a higher proportion of pork and back fat in the ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’. The maximum proportion has been adjusted so as not to hinder them in their traditional production.

7.   Amendment

| (7) | In the ninth paragraph, the last sentence ‘Although it is possible to add a small amount of S 1 grade pigmeat together with pork back fat, this is not often the practice’ is deleted.
  Certainly some producers have traditionally added pigmeat. Since the previous sentence covered the inclusion of pigmeat (see amendment number 6), this sentence is superfluous and can therefore be deleted. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

Certainly some producers have traditionally added pigmeat. Since the previous sentence covered the inclusion of pigmeat (see amendment number 6), this sentence is superfluous and can therefore be deleted.

8.   Amendment

| (8) | Paragraph 10 ‘The beef used comes predominantly from cows, rarely from bulls. The cut to use is beef round, which has a fat content of approx. 5 %. If pork is used, it is taken from the leg, which has a fat content of approx. 4 %. The back fat used has a fat content of 70 %’ is deleted.
  Since the individual cuts and the sex of the carcases used have no significant influence on the quality of the final product, there is no need for detailed requirements in respect of these. The same applies to the fat content of the individual cuts. |
| --- | --- |

(8)

Since the individual cuts and the sex of the carcases used have no significant influence on the quality of the final product, there is no need for detailed requirements in respect of these. The same applies to the fat content of the individual cuts.

5.2.   Proof of origin

1.   Amendment

| (1) | In the first paragraph, in the second sentence ‘The slaughterhouse receives a copy of the cattle passport and reports to Munich via the cattle database that it has carried out the slaughter’, the words ‘to Munich’ are deleted.
  The specification of where the cattle database has its seat is irrelevant and can therefore be omitted. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The specification of where the cattle database has its seat is irrelevant and can therefore be omitted.

2.   Amendment

| (2) | In the third sentence of the first paragraph ‘During the cutting, sorting and further processing of the raw materials for the production of “Hofer Rindfleischwurst”, batch formation and written documentation ensure proof of traceability’, the words ‘batch formation and written documentation ensure proof of traceability’ are replaced by ‘traceability meets the legal requirements’.
  Smaller artisan businesses in particular cannot always guarantee such detailed documentation. Meeting the legal requirements is sufficient. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Smaller artisan businesses in particular cannot always guarantee such detailed documentation. Meeting the legal requirements is sufficient.

3.   Amendment

| (3) | The last sentence in the first paragraph ‘The processing company can thus state precisely which raw materials from which animal, specifying its place of origin, were processed in its “Hofer Rindfleischwurst”’ is deleted.
  Smaller artisan businesses in particular cannot always guarantee such detailed documentation. Meeting the legal requirements is also sufficient in this respect. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Smaller artisan businesses in particular cannot always guarantee such detailed documentation. Meeting the legal requirements is also sufficient in this respect.

4.   Amendment

| (4) | In the second sentence of the second paragraph ‘“Hofer Rindfleischwurst” and the name of the producer are printed on the synthetic casing’, the words ‘and the name of the producer’ are deleted.
  Not all producers have specially printed casings imprinted with their names, for cost reasons, for example. The imprint ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ is sufficient, provided the name of the producer is indicated elsewhere (such as on the label). |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Not all producers have specially printed casings imprinted with their names, for cost reasons, for example. The imprint ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ is sufficient, provided the name of the producer is indicated elsewhere (such as on the label).

5.3.   Method of production

1.   Amendment

| (1) | In the second sentence of the first paragraph, ‘This raw material comes from cattle and pigs that were born and raised mainly in the defined geographical area and beyond mainly in the districts of Oberfranken, Oberpfalz and Thuringia’, the word ‘preferably’ is inserted before the word ‘born’ and the word ‘mainly’ is deleted. In addition, the words ‘and beyond mainly’ are replaced by ‘or’ and the words ‘and Thuringia’ are replaced by ‘or in the Länder Thuringia or Saxony’.
  The fact that the cattle or pigs used can now also come from Saxony is not an extension, since the previous specification was openly worded (‘mainly’). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The fact that the cattle or pigs used can now also come from Saxony is not an extension, since the previous specification was openly worded (‘mainly’).

2.   Amendment

| (2) | The third sentence in the first paragraph ‘These cattle and pigs are slaughtered only in the defined geographical area’ is deleted.
  Since the slaughterhouse in Hof stopped slaughtering cattle, only very small numbers may be slaughtered by the Helmbrecht slaughterhouse within the defined geographical area. This is not enough to deal with the quantities to be processed. The previous restriction, whereby the slaughter had to take place exclusively in the geographical area, must therefore be abandoned. This does not affect the quality and freshness of ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’, since there are a lot of slaughterhouses in the immediate vicinity (particularly in neighbouring Saxony and Thuringia). |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Since the slaughterhouse in Hof stopped slaughtering cattle, only very small numbers may be slaughtered by the Helmbrecht slaughterhouse within the defined geographical area. This is not enough to deal with the quantities to be processed. The previous restriction, whereby the slaughter had to take place exclusively in the geographical area, must therefore be abandoned. This does not affect the quality and freshness of ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’, since there are a lot of slaughterhouses in the immediate vicinity (particularly in neighbouring Saxony and Thuringia).

3.   Amendment

| (3) | The last sentence of the first paragraph, ‘Also the entire production process takes place within the defined geographical area’, is replaced by the sentence ‘The production of “Hofer Rindfleischwurst” takes place in the geographical area’. This means that the entire production process, including the actual slaughter, must take place in holdings within the geographical area. In particular, the production processes are taken to mean the meat cutting, the meat grading and the manufacturing process. The lean meat is crushed and mixed with all the ingredients (except nitrite curing salt) in the cutter and/or mincer. Then the nitrite curing salt is added and it is mixed again. The spreadable sausages obtained in this way are stuffed into artificial casings. The final touch for the ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ is the cold smoking process, which gives it a pleasant smoke flavouring.’
  This is a necessary amendment, since the preceding deletions would have meant it was no longer clear which particular production steps must take place in the defined geographical area. This strict delimitation is set intentionally to emphasise the exclusive character of this particular sausage product. This should expressly preclude its being offered for sale outside the region. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

This is a necessary amendment, since the preceding deletions would have meant it was no longer clear which particular production steps must take place in the defined geographical area. This strict delimitation is set intentionally to emphasise the exclusive character of this particular sausage product. This should expressly preclude its being offered for sale outside the region.

4.   Amendment

| (4) | The second paragraph ‘As stated earlier, the “Hofer Rindfleischwurst” is distinguished by its particular quality and freshness. This requires that the cattle and pigs be slaughtered at slaughterhouses in the defined geographical area and also that the production process takes place there’, is deleted.
  See amendment No (2). |
| --- | --- |

(4)

See amendment No (2).

5.   Amendment

| (5) | In the fifth paragraph, in the sentence ‘The lean meat is crushed and mixed with all the ingredients (except nitrite pickling salt) in the cutter’, the words ‘and/or in the mincer’ are inserted after the word ‘cutter’.
  As a result of the changes in number 6 below, the reference to the mincer is added in this sentence to reflect all the possible processing steps. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

As a result of the changes in number 6 below, the reference to the mincer is added in this sentence to reflect all the possible processing steps.

6.   Amendment

| (6) | The previous sixth paragraph ‘The mass thus obtained is then minced through the 0,6 mm cutting disc in the mincer. The mass is then put into the cutter again, the spices mixed in and the nitrite pickling salt added for redness and colour stability. To achieve optimal fineness and uniform granulation, the mass is finely chopped in the cutter using the high gear at an end temperature of 12 degrees Celsius (cutter method), whereby sharp cutting tools must be used’ is replaced by the sentence ‘The nitrite pickling salt is then added and mixed again’.
  The production process described here is very detailed and unnecessarily restrictive, and it does not cover the spectrum of traditionally differing production methods. This means that at present some traditional producers are no longer able to supply their product in the long-standing way. Furthermore, some of the parameters described for the quality and the appearance of the product are irrelevant and thus unnecessarily restrict producers in the exercise of their craft. In order to avoid making the production unnecessarily difficult, the detailed descriptions are omitted. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

The production process described here is very detailed and unnecessarily restrictive, and it does not cover the spectrum of traditionally differing production methods. This means that at present some traditional producers are no longer able to supply their product in the long-standing way. Furthermore, some of the parameters described for the quality and the appearance of the product are irrelevant and thus unnecessarily restrict producers in the exercise of their craft. In order to avoid making the production unnecessarily difficult, the detailed descriptions are omitted.

5.4.   Link

Amendment

In point (2) ‘Specificity of the product’, in the third sentence of the second paragraph, in the German-language original the word ‘Prämienprodukt’ is replaced by the word ‘Premiumprodukt’. [This change does not affect the English-language version].

This amendment is simply to rectify a clerical error. ‘Premiumprodukt’ was what was (always) meant.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’

EU No: PGI-DE-0722-AM01 - 17.6.2020

PDO ( ) PGI (X)

1.   Name(s)

‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’

2.   Member state or third country

Germany

3.   Description of the agricultural product or foodstuff

3.1.   Type of product

Class 1.2. Meat products (cooked, salted, smoked, etc.)

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

‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ is a spreadable uncooked sausage. The ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ is elongated in shape. The spreadable sausage meat is packed into a synthetic gut, the calibre of which measures from 40 mm to 55 mm. Its colour is an intense but pleasantly meat-coloured shade of red.

The ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ is distinguished by its unique finely spiced flavour typical of this kind of sausage, seasoned with a hint of pepper. Cold smoking on beech wood also lends the ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ a pleasant smoky aroma.

‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ is a finely minced, spreadable uncooked sausage, distinguished by its freshness. It retains its special flavour and unique aroma for only 2 to 3 days and is therefore not intended for long-term storage.

When vacuum-packed, ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ can be stored for slightly longer periods, up to at least 10 days, provided however that the vacuum-packed sausage is kept refrigerated.

Further quality criteria that must be demonstrated by ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ are a stable reddening, high spreadability and uniform consistency.

Since lean beef is used as the base material for the production of ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’, the resulting product has a high level of meat protein free of connective tissue protein. This level must not be below 10 %. Analyses carried out by the independent operations and quality test board for specialist butcher’s shops in the Bavarian butcher’s trade (Neutrale Betriebs- und Qualitätsprüfung für Fleischerfachgeschäfte im bayerischen Fleischerhandwerk, NBQP) show the following values as technical characteristics of ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’: the water content is between 50 % and 55 %, the fat content is between 20 % and 30 % and the proportion of pork and back fat is no more than 40 %.

The main additives used are nitrite curing salt, with ascorbic acid used as a further reddening agent. The quantities contained of these additives are 2,5 % for nitrite curing salt and 0,5 % for ascorbic acid (reddening agent). The main raw spices added are salt and finely ground pepper. In order to refine the sausage and give it its individual flavour, it is possible to use small amounts of additional mixed spices.

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

The type of raw materials – the meat and fat – used is of crucial importance to the proper production of ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’. Preference is given to meat from mature and older slaughter animals. The advantages are an intense meat colour and mature meat. Beef and pork are used.

The main base material contained in ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ is R I-grade beef low in fatty tissue and free of sinews (at least 60 %) and S Vlll and S 1-grade pork back fat and pork (together accounting for no more than 40 %).

‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ is distinguished by its particular quality and freshness. Only freshly slaughtered meat is used in the production of ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’. No mature, hung or frozen meat is used in the production process.

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

‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ is produced in the geographical area. This means that the entire production process, including the actual slaughter, must take place in holdings within the geographical area. In particular, the production processes are taken to mean the meat cutting, the meat grading and the entire rest of the manufacturing process.

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

—

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

—

4.   Concise definition of the geographical area

The urban area of Hof and the rural district of Hof.

5.   Link with the geographical area

(1)   Specificity of the geographical area:

‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ has been made in the defined geographical area for over 50 years.

In 1950, the Hof master butcher Hans Millitzer was the first to make ‘Rindfleischwurst’ from lean beef. This tradition was continued by his former assistant Gottfried Rädlein, who produced ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ from 1962 to 1993 in his own firm in Hof and made it famous well beyond the city limits.

Demand for ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ was so great that Gottfried Rädlein processed up to 15 hindquarters of beef per week to make the product, and sometimes even worked on Sundays and public holidays to produce ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ according to his special recipe. As a fine, spreadable uncooked sausage, ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ was an especially fresh product and as such retained its special flavour and its unique aroma for only 2 to 3 days. ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ is particularly low in fat and easily digestible, and its consumption was even recommended by doctors at that time.

In the years that followed, other butchers in the region caught on and wanted also to make traditional ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ and offer it for sale. In January 1993 Gottfried Rädlein passed his specialist butcher’s shop on to the renowned Hof butcher’s Albert Schiller, which to this day continues to make ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’, in particular, in the same way as Gottfried Rädlein. As a result of the efforts of the then head of the Hof Butchers’ Guild, in 1993, ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ was included in the German Federal guidelines on meat and meat products under guideline number 2.2120.1.

(2)   Specificity of the product:

As described, ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ is a high-quality product with a special flavour; it is held in high regard and is very well known as a regional speciality, particularly in the City of Hof and the rural district of Hof. Not only is it very popular and in great demand among locals; it is also especially appreciated by guests and visitors from outside the town. Its inclusion in the Guidelines of the German Food Code is also indicative of its importance and renown.

‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ has already won prizes at various sausage competitions. Butchers from the designated geographical area enter ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ in the Bavarian Butchers Association’s annual quality test. In previous years it has always been awarded a gold or silver medal. It has achieved similar results at national level in the German Food Association (DLG) quality tests. A public sausage tasting was held at the last Upper Franconia exhibition in April 2009 in Hof and the local media reported in detail on ‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ as an outstanding regional product.

(3)   Causal link:

‘Hofer Rindfleischwurst’ is a product typical of the Hof region. It originates from that area and has been made by local producers traditionally for over 50 years using a special recipe and technique. The renown and reputation of the product are therefore firmly rooted in its origins in the defined geographical area.

Reference to publication of the product specification

https://register.dpma.de/DPMAregister/geo/detail.pdfdownload/41939

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

---