# Official Journal C 305/2017

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 305 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6015 September 2017 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 305

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6015 September 2017

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2017/C 305/01 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8570 — CTDI EU/Regenersis EMEA) (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2017/C 305/01

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8570 — CTDI EU/Regenersis EMEA) (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | Council |
| 2017/C 305/02 | Notice for the attention of the persons and entities subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP, as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/1561, and in Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1549 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine | 2 |
| 2017/C 305/03 | Notice for the attention of the data subjects to whom the restrictive measures provided for in Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1549 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine apply | 3 |
| | European Commission |
| 2017/C 305/04 | Euro exchange rates | 4 |
| 2017/C 305/05 | Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union | 5 |
| 2017/C 305/06 | Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 30 January 2015 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39861 — Yen Interest Rate Derivatives — Rapporteur: The Netherlands | 7 |
| 2017/C 305/07 | Final Report of the Hearing Officer — Yen Interest Rate Derivatives (YIRD) (AT.39861) | 8 |
| 2017/C 305/08 | Summary of Commission Decision of 4 February 2015 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39861 — Yen Interest Rate Derivatives) (notified under document C(2015) 432) | 10 |
| | NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES |
| 2017/C 305/09 | Commission communication pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community — Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations (
  1
  ) | 15 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Council

2017/C 305/02

Notice for the attention of the persons and entities subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP, as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/1561, and in Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1549 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine

2

2017/C 305/03

Notice for the attention of the data subjects to whom the restrictive measures provided for in Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1549 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine apply

3

European Commission

2017/C 305/04

Euro exchange rates

4

2017/C 305/05

Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union

5

2017/C 305/06

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 30 January 2015 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39861 — Yen Interest Rate Derivatives — Rapporteur: The Netherlands

7

2017/C 305/07

Final Report of the Hearing Officer — Yen Interest Rate Derivatives (YIRD) (AT.39861)

8

2017/C 305/08

Summary of Commission Decision of 4 February 2015 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39861 — Yen Interest Rate Derivatives) (notified under document C(2015) 432)

(notified under document C(2015) 432)

10

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

2017/C 305/09

Commission communication pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community — Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations (
  1
  )

1

15

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2017/C 305/10 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8630 — Blackstone/MassMutual/Cambourne/Rothesay) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 16 |
| 2017/C 305/11 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8102 — Valeo / FTE Group) (
  1
  ) | 18 |
| 2017/C 305/12 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8638 — Shell Midstream Partners/Crestwood Permian Basin Holdings/Crestwood Permian Basin) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 19 |
| | OTHER ACTS |
| | European Commission |
| 2017/C 305/13 | Publication of an amendment application 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 | 20 |
| 2017/C 305/14 | Publication of an application for approval of a minor amendment in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs | 30 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2017/C 305/10

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8630 — Blackstone/MassMutual/Cambourne/Rothesay) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

16

2017/C 305/11

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8102 — Valeo / FTE Group) (
  1
  )

1

18

2017/C 305/12

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8638 — Shell Midstream Partners/Crestwood Permian Basin Holdings/Crestwood Permian Basin) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

19

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

2017/C 305/13

Publication of an amendment application 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

20

2017/C 305/14

Publication of an application for approval of a minor amendment in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs

30

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN

---

II Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

| 15.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8570 — CTDI EU/Regenersis EMEA)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 305/01)

On 1 September 2017, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

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

—

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

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8570. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8570. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---

IV Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Council

| 15.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/2

---

Notice for the attention of the persons and entities subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP, as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/1561, and in Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1549 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine

(2017/C 305/02)

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons and entities that appear in the Annex to Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP (1), as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/1561 (2), and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 (3), as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1549 (4) concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine.

The Council of the European Union has decided that the persons and entities that appear in the abovementioned Annexes should be included in the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures provided for in Decision 2014/145/CFSP and in Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine. The grounds for designations of those persons appear in the relevant entries in those Annexes.

The attention of the persons and entities concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated in the web sites in Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 269/2014, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 4 of the Regulation).

The persons and entities concerned may submit a request to the Council, together with supporting documentation, that the decision to include them on the abovementioned list should be reconsidered, to the following address before 27 October 2017:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| DG C 1C |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |
| Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

DG C 1C

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

The attention of the persons and entities concerned is also drawn to the possibility of challenging the Council’s decision before the General Court of the European Union, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 275, second paragraph, and Article 263, fourth and sixth paragraphs, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ L 78, 17.3.2014, p. 16.

(2)  OJ L 237, 15.9.2017, p. 72.

(3)  OJ L 78, 17.3.2014, p. 6.

(4)  OJ L 237, 15.9.2017, p. 44.

---

| 15.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/3

---

Notice for the attention of the data subjects to whom the restrictive measures provided for in Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1549 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine apply

(2017/C 305/03)

The attention of data subjects is drawn to the following information in accordance with Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1):

The legal basis for this processing operation is Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 (2), as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1549 (3).

The controller of this processing operation is the Council of the European Union represented by the Director-General of DG C (Foreign Affairs, Enlargement, Civil Protection) of the General Secretariat of the Council and the department entrusted with the processing operation is the Unit 1C of DG C that can be contacted at:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| DG C 1C |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |
| E-mail: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

DG C 1C

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

E-mail: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

The purpose of the processing operation is the establishment and updating of the list of persons subject to restrictive measures in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 269/2014, as implemented by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1549.

The data subjects are the natural persons who fulfil listing criteria as laid down in that Regulation.

The personal data collected includes data necessary for the correct identification of the person concerned, the Statement of Reasons and any other data related thereto.

The personal data collected may be shared as necessary with the European External Action Service and the Commission.

Without prejudice to restrictions provided for in Article 20(1)(a) and (d) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, requests for access, as well as requests for rectification or objection will be answered in accordance with Section 5 of Council Decision 2004/644/EC (4).

Personal data will be retained for 5 years from the moment the data subject has been removed from the list of persons subject to the asset freeze or the validity of the measure has expired, or for the duration of court proceedings in the event they had been started.

Data subjects may have recourse to the European Data Protection Supervisor in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.

---

(1)  OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1.

(2)  OJ L 78, 17.3.2014, p. 6.

(3)  OJ L 237, 15.9.2017, p. 44.

(4)  OJ L 296, 21.9.2004, p. 16.

---

European Commission

| 15.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/4

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

14 September 2017

(2017/C 305/04)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1885 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 131,55 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4399 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,89123 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,5345 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,1496 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,3950 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,103 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 308,28 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2843 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,6017 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 4,1134 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4877 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4501 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,2843 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6474 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6053 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 345,47 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,6609 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,7918 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4835 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 767,83 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,9905 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 60,990 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 68,6480 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,363 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,7295 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 21,1227 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 76,2095 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1885

JPY

Japanese yen

131,55

DKK

Danish krone

7,4399

GBP

Pound sterling

0,89123

SEK

Swedish krona

9,5345

CHF

Swiss franc

1,1496

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,3950

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,103

HUF

Hungarian forint

308,28

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2843

RON

Romanian leu

4,6017

TRY

Turkish lira

4,1134

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4877

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4501

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,2843

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6474

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6053

KRW

South Korean won

1 345,47

ZAR

South African rand

15,6609

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,7918

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4835

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 767,83

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,9905

PHP

Philippine peso

60,990

RUB

Russian rouble

68,6480

THB

Thai baht

39,363

BRL

Brazilian real

3,7295

MXN

Mexican peso

21,1227

INR

Indian rupee

76,2095

---

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

---

| 15.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/5

---

Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union

(2017/C 305/05)

Pursuant to the second indent of Article 9(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 (1), the Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union (2) are hereby amended as follows:

On page 388

The following text shall be inserted:

| ‘9615 | Combs, hair-slides and the like; hairpins, curling pins, curling grips, hair-curlers and the like, other than those of heading 8516, and parts thereof

  See the HS Explanatory Note to heading 9615, fourth paragraph.
  For the purposes of this heading, the expression “hair-slides and the like” includes goods made from solid materials, as articles of this heading are usually made of base metal or plastics. Therefore, this heading does not include headbands and hairbands. These are classified as follows:






  a) | Hairbands and headbands, consisting, for example, of a tubular knitted, elasticated loop (see photo 1), or of a rubber loop covered with textile (see photo 2), or of an elasticated band completely covered by a woven textile fabric (see photo 3), or of a loop made-up of an elastic textile band (see photo 4) are classified as clothing accessories under heading 6117 or 6217.

  Examples: | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | Hairband |

‘9615

Combs, hair-slides and the like; hairpins, curling pins, curling grips, hair-curlers and the like, other than those of heading 8516, and parts thereof

See the HS Explanatory Note to heading 9615, fourth paragraph.

For the purposes of this heading, the expression “hair-slides and the like” includes goods made from solid materials, as articles of this heading are usually made of base metal or plastics. Therefore, this heading does not include headbands and hairbands. These are classified as follows:

a)

Hairbands and headbands, consisting, for example, of a tubular knitted, elasticated loop (see photo 1), or of a rubber loop covered with textile (see photo 2), or of an elasticated band completely covered by a woven textile fabric (see photo 3), or of a loop made-up of an elastic textile band (see photo 4) are classified as clothing accessories under heading 6117 or 6217.

Examples:

Image

Image

Image

Image

1.

Hairband

| 2. | Hairband |
| --- | --- |

2.

Hairband

| 3. | Hairband |
| --- | --- |

3.

Hairband

| 4. | Headband |
| --- | --- |

4.

Headband

| b) | Hairbands and headbands, consisting of a loop or band of a textile fabric of Section XI and having a decoration of, for example, wooden beads, plastic pearls, or leather or textile elements, are considered having the essential character of other made-up clothing accessories and are thus classified under heading 6117 or 6217, by application of GIR 3(b).

  Examples: |
| --- | --- |

b)

Hairbands and headbands, consisting of a loop or band of a textile fabric of Section XI and having a decoration of, for example, wooden beads, plastic pearls, or leather or textile elements, are considered having the essential character of other made-up clothing accessories and are thus classified under heading 6117 or 6217, by application of GIR 3(b).

Examples:

| c) | Hairbands and headbands consisting mainly of, for example, plastic sequins, glued or stitched on a non-elastic textile band and covering nearly all the visible surface of the article and thus giving the article its essential character, are classified under heading 7117, by application of GIR 3(b) and Notes 9(a) and 11 to chapter 71.

  Example: |
| --- | --- |

c)

Hairbands and headbands consisting mainly of, for example, plastic sequins, glued or stitched on a non-elastic textile band and covering nearly all the visible surface of the article and thus giving the article its essential character, are classified under heading 7117, by application of GIR 3(b) and Notes 9(a) and 11 to chapter 71.

Example:

| d) | Hairbands and headbands consisting wholly or partially of natural or cultured pearls, precious or semi-precious stones, precious metals or of metal clad with precious metal, are classified under headings 7113 and 7116, by application of Notes 1 and 9(a) to chapter 71. See also the HS Explanatory Note to heading 9615, fourth paragraph. |
| --- | --- |

d)

Hairbands and headbands consisting wholly or partially of natural or cultured pearls, precious or semi-precious stones, precious metals or of metal clad with precious metal, are classified under headings 7113 and 7116, by application of Notes 1 and 9(a) to chapter 71. See also the HS Explanatory Note to heading 9615, fourth paragraph.

| e) | Hairbands and headbands consisting wholly or partially of fur or of artificial fur are classified under headings 4303 or 4304, by application of Notes 3 and 4 to chapter 43.

  Example: |
| --- | --- |

e)

Hairbands and headbands consisting wholly or partially of fur or of artificial fur are classified under headings 4303 or 4304, by application of Notes 3 and 4 to chapter 43.

Example:

| f) | Hairbands and headbands consisting of other materials, not textile covered, whether or not decorated (with the exception of goods referred to under d) and e)) are classified according to the constituent material of the loop, as the essential character is given by the loop and its function (for example, a plastic loop is classified under heading 3926 (see photos 1 and 2) and a rubber loop is classified under heading 4015 (see photo 3), by application of GIR 3(b)).

  Examples: | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | Hairband |

f)

Hairbands and headbands consisting of other materials, not textile covered, whether or not decorated (with the exception of goods referred to under d) and e)) are classified according to the constituent material of the loop, as the essential character is given by the loop and its function (for example, a plastic loop is classified under heading 3926 (see photos 1 and 2) and a rubber loop is classified under heading 4015 (see photo 3), by application of GIR 3(b)).

Examples:

Image

Image

Image

1.

Hairband

| 2. | Hairband |
| --- | --- |

2.

Hairband

| 3. | Headband |
| --- | --- |

3.

Headband

| g) | Goods, which are classifiable under heading 7117 as imitation jewellery and which can be used, for example, as bracelets or ankle chains, remain classifiable under that heading, even if they can be also used as a headband or hairband.

  Example:


  ’ |
| --- | --- |

g)

Goods, which are classifiable under heading 7117 as imitation jewellery and which can be used, for example, as bracelets or ankle chains, remain classifiable under that heading, even if they can be also used as a headband or hairband.

Example:

Image ’

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ L 256, 7.9.1987, p. 1).

1

(2)  OJ C 76, 4.3.2015, p. 1.

2

---

| 15.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/7

---

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 30 January 2015 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39861 — Yen Interest Rate Derivatives

Rapporteur: The Netherlands

(2017/C 305/06)

| 1. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the anticompetitive behaviour covered by the draft decision constitutes agreements and/or concerted practices between relevant undertakings within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 EEA. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the anticompetitive behaviour covered by the draft decision constitutes agreements and/or concerted practices between relevant undertakings within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 EEA.

| 2. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment of the product and geographic scope of the agreements and/or concerted practices contained in the draft decision. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment of the product and geographic scope of the agreements and/or concerted practices contained in the draft decision.

| 3. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the undertakings concerned by the draft decision have participated in one or more of the respective seven separate single and continuous infringements of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 EEA. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the undertakings concerned by the draft decision have participated in one or more of the respective seven separate single and continuous infringements of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 EEA.

| 4. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the object of the agreements and/or concerted practices was to restrict competition within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 EEA. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the object of the agreements and/or concerted practices was to restrict competition within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 EEA.

| 5. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the agreements and/or concerted practices have been capable of appreciably affecting trade between the Member States of the EU and the contracting parties to the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

5.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the agreements and/or concerted practices have been capable of appreciably affecting trade between the Member States of the EU and the contracting parties to the EEA Agreement.

| 6. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment as regards the duration of the infringements. |
| --- | --- |

6.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment as regards the duration of the infringements.

| 7. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s draft decision as regards the addressees. |
| --- | --- |

7.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s draft decision as regards the addressees.

| 8. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that fines should be imposed on the addressees of the draft decision. |
| --- | --- |

8.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that fines should be imposed on the addressees of the draft decision.

| 9. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the application of the 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003. |
| --- | --- |

9.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the application of the 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.

| 10. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amounts of the fines. |
| --- | --- |

10.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amounts of the fines.

| 11. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the determination of the duration for the purpose of calculating the fines. |
| --- | --- |

11.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the determination of the duration for the purpose of calculating the fines.

| 12. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that there are no aggravating circumstances applicable in this case. |
| --- | --- |

12.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that there are no aggravating circumstances applicable in this case.

| 13. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the application of the 2006 Leniency Notice. |
| --- | --- |

13.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the application of the 2006 Leniency Notice.

| 14. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines. |
| --- | --- |

14.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines.

| 15. | The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

15.

The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

---

| 15.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/8

---

Final Report of the Hearing Officer (1)

Yen Interest Rate Derivatives (YIRD)

(AT.39861)

(2017/C 305/07)

1.   Introduction

This case has followed a so-called hybrid settlement procedure. The Commission decided to conclude the case under the settlement procedure for the six settling parties (2) whereas the standard procedure was followed for ICAP.

2.   Investigation

| 2.1. | On 12 February 2013, the European Commission (‘Commission’) initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 11(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (3) against UBS AG, UBS Securities Japan Co., Ltd, The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc, The Royal Bank of Scotland plc, Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft, Citigroup Inc., Citigroup Global Markets Japan Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co, JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, J.P. Morgan Europe Limited, R.P. Martin Holdings Ltd, and Martin Brokers (UK) Ltd, (together ‘the settling parties’). |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

On 12 February 2013, the European Commission (‘Commission’) initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 11(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (3) against UBS AG, UBS Securities Japan Co., Ltd, The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc, The Royal Bank of Scotland plc, Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft, Citigroup Inc., Citigroup Global Markets Japan Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co, JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, J.P. Morgan Europe Limited, R.P. Martin Holdings Ltd, and Martin Brokers (UK) Ltd, (together ‘the settling parties’).

| 2.2. | On 29 October 2013 the Commission initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 11(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 against ICAP plc, ICAP Management Services Ltd, and ICAP New Zealand Ltd (‘ICAP’). |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

On 29 October 2013 the Commission initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 11(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 against ICAP plc, ICAP Management Services Ltd, and ICAP New Zealand Ltd (‘ICAP’).

3.   Settlement procedure

| 3.1. | Following settlement discussions and settlement submissions in accordance with Article 10a(2) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 (4), the Commission adopted a statement of objections (‘SO’), on 29 October 2013, addressed to the settling parties.
  The settling parties were alleged to have participated between 2007 and 2010 in one or more of seven bilateral infringements of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement, distinct and separate from one another. These infringements concern Japanese Yen Interest Rate Derivatives (‘YIRDs’), referenced to the Japanese Yen LIBOR and in the case of one infringement, also YIRDs referenced to the Euroyen TIBOR. The parties sought to influence the levels of the Yen LIBOR and/or Euroyen TIBOR in order to positively affect the banks' trading positions for derivatives that use these rates as part of their settlement terms. |
| --- | --- |

3.1.

Following settlement discussions and settlement submissions in accordance with Article 10a(2) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 (4), the Commission adopted a statement of objections (‘SO’), on 29 October 2013, addressed to the settling parties.

The settling parties were alleged to have participated between 2007 and 2010 in one or more of seven bilateral infringements of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement, distinct and separate from one another. These infringements concern Japanese Yen Interest Rate Derivatives (‘YIRDs’), referenced to the Japanese Yen LIBOR and in the case of one infringement, also YIRDs referenced to the Euroyen TIBOR. The parties sought to influence the levels of the Yen LIBOR and/or Euroyen TIBOR in order to positively affect the banks' trading positions for derivatives that use these rates as part of their settlement terms.

| 3.2. | Following the settling parties' confirmation that the allegations contained in the SO reflected the contents of their settlement submissions, on 4 December 2013, the Commission adopted a settlement decision, addressed to all the settling parties, and imposed fines on Citigroup, DB, JPMorgan, RBS and RP Martin. |
| --- | --- |

3.2.

Following the settling parties' confirmation that the allegations contained in the SO reflected the contents of their settlement submissions, on 4 December 2013, the Commission adopted a settlement decision, addressed to all the settling parties, and imposed fines on Citigroup, DB, JPMorgan, RBS and RP Martin.

| 3.3. | On 12 November 2013, after one meeting with the case team of the Directorate-General for Competition (‘DG Competition’), ICAP withdrew from the settlement procedure. The investigation against ICAP thus reverted and continued under the standard procedure (see hereafter). |
| --- | --- |

3.3.

On 12 November 2013, after one meeting with the case team of the Directorate-General for Competition (‘DG Competition’), ICAP withdrew from the settlement procedure. The investigation against ICAP thus reverted and continued under the standard procedure (see hereafter).

4.   Standard procedure in relation to ICAP

| 4.1. | On 6 June 2014 the Commission adopted a SO against ICAP. The Commission alleges that ICAP participated, as a facilitator, in six separate infringements of Article 101 TFEU, in relation to the YIRD sector. |
| --- | --- |

4.1.

On 6 June 2014 the Commission adopted a SO against ICAP. The Commission alleges that ICAP participated, as a facilitator, in six separate infringements of Article 101 TFEU, in relation to the YIRD sector.

| 4.2. | DG Competition had initially granted ICAP a time-limit of four weeks to reply to the SO, which it extended by two weeks following ICAP's request. Upon ICAP's request, I further extended the time limit to reply to the SO by two extra weeks, until 14 August 2014. |
| --- | --- |

4.2.

DG Competition had initially granted ICAP a time-limit of four weeks to reply to the SO, which it extended by two weeks following ICAP's request. Upon ICAP's request, I further extended the time limit to reply to the SO by two extra weeks, until 14 August 2014.

| 4.3. | In its reply to the SO, ICAP submitted a number of complaints alleging that the Commission had breached the presumption of innocence, ICAP's right of defence and the principles of good administration. All these claims have been duly addressed in the draft decision. |
| --- | --- |

4.3.

In its reply to the SO, ICAP submitted a number of complaints alleging that the Commission had breached the presumption of innocence, ICAP's right of defence and the principles of good administration. All these claims have been duly addressed in the draft decision.

| 4.4. | The oral hearing took place on 12 September 2014. |
| --- | --- |

4.4.

The oral hearing took place on 12 September 2014.

| 4.5. | Following the oral hearing, ICAP requested and obtained access to the settlement decision. DG Competition provided a short time period to ICAP to submit further written observations. In reply to ICAP's request for an extension of the deadline, I informed ICAP that the time limit granted by DG Competition was sufficient to allow it to verify the settlement decision, in particular in relation to the fines methodology that the Commission applied to RP Martin as facilitator and to make further comments in this respect. |
| --- | --- |

4.5.

Following the oral hearing, ICAP requested and obtained access to the settlement decision. DG Competition provided a short time period to ICAP to submit further written observations. In reply to ICAP's request for an extension of the deadline, I informed ICAP that the time limit granted by DG Competition was sufficient to allow it to verify the settlement decision, in particular in relation to the fines methodology that the Commission applied to RP Martin as facilitator and to make further comments in this respect.

| 4.6. | On 9 October 2014, ICAP submitted to DG Competition a late request for further access to an unspecified number of documents concerning certain turnover-related information that had been submitted to the Commission by the settling banks. DG Competition rejected this request and accordingly ICAP referred the matter to me on 17 October 2014. |
| --- | --- |

4.6.

On 9 October 2014, ICAP submitted to DG Competition a late request for further access to an unspecified number of documents concerning certain turnover-related information that had been submitted to the Commission by the settling banks. DG Competition rejected this request and accordingly ICAP referred the matter to me on 17 October 2014.

| 4.7. | On 5 November 2014, I rejected ICAP's request, in particular on the basis that there is no general right for a party to obtain the sales data of the other parties during the administrative phase, even if, after the imposition of a fine in a decision, that data may be considered indirectly relevant for the calculation of the fine of the requesting party. Moreover, in the present case, I considered that the information contained in the SO did not justify the need to access the sales data of the other parties on the basis of ICAP's rights of defence. |
| --- | --- |

4.7.

On 5 November 2014, I rejected ICAP's request, in particular on the basis that there is no general right for a party to obtain the sales data of the other parties during the administrative phase, even if, after the imposition of a fine in a decision, that data may be considered indirectly relevant for the calculation of the fine of the requesting party. Moreover, in the present case, I considered that the information contained in the SO did not justify the need to access the sales data of the other parties on the basis of ICAP's rights of defence.

| 4.8. | Finally, on 8, 9 and 16 October 2014, ICAP made submissions specifically relating to the Commission's allegations in the Statement of Objections. DG Competition considered all these additional submissions in its draft decision. |
| --- | --- |

4.8.

Finally, on 8, 9 and 16 October 2014, ICAP made submissions specifically relating to the Commission's allegations in the Statement of Objections. DG Competition considered all these additional submissions in its draft decision.

5.   Conclusion

| 5.1. | Pursuant to Article 16 of Decision 2011/695/EU, I have examined whether the draft decision addressed to ICAP deals only with objections in respect of which ICAP has been afforded the opportunity of making known its views, and I have come to a positive conclusion. |
| --- | --- |

5.1.

Pursuant to Article 16 of Decision 2011/695/EU, I have examined whether the draft decision addressed to ICAP deals only with objections in respect of which ICAP has been afforded the opportunity of making known its views, and I have come to a positive conclusion.

| 5.2. | In view of the above, I consider that the effective exercise of ICAP's procedural rights in this case has been respected. |
| --- | --- |

5.2.

In view of the above, I consider that the effective exercise of ICAP's procedural rights in this case has been respected.

Brussels, 30 January 2015.

Joos STRAGIER

---

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

1

(2)  Decision of the Commission of 4 December 2013. The Hearing Officer already presented a final report pursuant to Article 16 of Decision 2011/695/EU at the occasion of the adoption of the Decision of the Commission of 4 December 2013.

2

(3)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1).

3

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

4

---

| 15.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/10

---

Summary of Commission Decision

of 4 February 2015

relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement

(Case AT.39861 — Yen Interest Rate Derivatives)

(notified under document C(2015) 432)

(Only the English text is authentic)

(2017/C 305/08)

On 4 February 2015, the Commission adopted a decision relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (the ‘Treaty’) and Article 53 of the Agreement creating the European Economic Area (the ‘EEA Agreement’). In accordance with the provisions of Article 30 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003
   (1), the Commission herewith publishes the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed, having regard to the legitimate interest of undertakings in the protection of their business secrets.

1.   INTRODUCTION

| (1) | The Decision relates to six separate instances of bilateral anticompetitive conduct, relating to Japanese Yen Interest Rate Derivatives (‘Yen Interest Rate Derivatives’ or ‘YIRDs’), referenced to the Japanese Yen LIBOR (‘JPY LIBOR’) in which the addressees of this Decision participated as facilitators. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The Decision relates to six separate instances of bilateral anticompetitive conduct, relating to Japanese Yen Interest Rate Derivatives (‘Yen Interest Rate Derivatives’ or ‘YIRDs’), referenced to the Japanese Yen LIBOR (‘JPY LIBOR’) in which the addressees of this Decision participated as facilitators.

| (2) | The anticompetitive conduct of the banks involved consisted of discussions relating to the level of upcoming JPY LIBOR submissions, revealing their preferences for the direction of future JPY LIBOR movements and exchanges of commercially sensitive information (2). The broker ICAP facilitated the relevant conduct by serving as a conduit for collusive communications (in one of the instances) and by contacting other JPY LIBOR panel banks or disseminating information via manipulated daily ‘Run Thrus’ (3) with the aim of influencing their JPY LIBOR submissions in directions suitable to the participants in the relevant conduct (in the remaining five instances). |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The anticompetitive conduct of the banks involved consisted of discussions relating to the level of upcoming JPY LIBOR submissions, revealing their preferences for the direction of future JPY LIBOR movements and exchanges of commercially sensitive information (2). The broker ICAP facilitated the relevant conduct by serving as a conduit for collusive communications (in one of the instances) and by contacting other JPY LIBOR panel banks or disseminating information via manipulated daily ‘Run Thrus’ (3) with the aim of influencing their JPY LIBOR submissions in directions suitable to the participants in the relevant conduct (in the remaining five instances).

| (3) | The JPY LIBOR and Euroyen TIBOR are important reference interest rates (also called benchmarks) for many financial instruments denominated in Japanese Yen. The JPY LIBOR was set by the British Bankers Association (BBA) and the Euroyen TIBOR was set by the Japanese Bankers Association (JBA). The rates were set daily for different tenors (loan maturities) on the basis of submissions from banks that were members of the JPY LIBOR and Euroyen TIBOR panels. These banks were asked to submit, each business day and before a certain time, estimates of interest rates at which they believed they could borrow unsecured funds in a reasonable market size on the London interbank money market (in the case of JPY LIBOR) or estimates of what they believed to be prevailing market rates for transactions between prime banks on the Japan offshore market (in the case of Euroyen TIBOR) for various tenors. The BBA and JBA then calculated, on the basis of an average of these submissions, while excluding the four (in the BBA’s case) and two (in the JBA’s case) highest and lowest submissions, the daily JPY LIBOR and Euroyen TIBOR rates for each tenor. The resulting rates were immediately published and available to the public each business day. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The JPY LIBOR and Euroyen TIBOR are important reference interest rates (also called benchmarks) for many financial instruments denominated in Japanese Yen. The JPY LIBOR was set by the British Bankers Association (BBA) and the Euroyen TIBOR was set by the Japanese Bankers Association (JBA). The rates were set daily for different tenors (loan maturities) on the basis of submissions from banks that were members of the JPY LIBOR and Euroyen TIBOR panels. These banks were asked to submit, each business day and before a certain time, estimates of interest rates at which they believed they could borrow unsecured funds in a reasonable market size on the London interbank money market (in the case of JPY LIBOR) or estimates of what they believed to be prevailing market rates for transactions between prime banks on the Japan offshore market (in the case of Euroyen TIBOR) for various tenors. The BBA and JBA then calculated, on the basis of an average of these submissions, while excluding the four (in the BBA’s case) and two (in the JBA’s case) highest and lowest submissions, the daily JPY LIBOR and Euroyen TIBOR rates for each tenor. The resulting rates were immediately published and available to the public each business day.

| (4) | JPY LIBOR and Euroyen TIBOR rates are, among others, reflected in the pricing of YIRDs, which are globally traded financial products used by corporations, financial institutions, hedge funds, and other undertakings to manage their interest rate risk exposure (hedging, for both borrowers and investors) or for speculation purposes. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

JPY LIBOR and Euroyen TIBOR rates are, among others, reflected in the pricing of YIRDs, which are globally traded financial products used by corporations, financial institutions, hedge funds, and other undertakings to manage their interest rate risk exposure (hedging, for both borrowers and investors) or for speculation purposes.

| (5) | The most common YIRDs are: (i) forward rate agreements; (ii) interest rate swaps; (iii) interest rate options; and (iv) interest rate futures. YIRDs may be traded over the counter or, in the case of interest rate futures, exchange traded. All these products usually involve a floating rate (the reference interest rate of the contract) and a fixed rate. The fixed rates reflect the market expectations of future reference interest rates and are normally calculated by the financial institutions that take part in YIRD trading on the basis of the so-called yield curves. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

The most common YIRDs are: (i) forward rate agreements; (ii) interest rate swaps; (iii) interest rate options; and (iv) interest rate futures. YIRDs may be traded over the counter or, in the case of interest rate futures, exchange traded. All these products usually involve a floating rate (the reference interest rate of the contract) and a fixed rate. The fixed rates reflect the market expectations of future reference interest rates and are normally calculated by the financial institutions that take part in YIRD trading on the basis of the so-called yield curves.

| (6) | This Decision is addressed to the following legal entities belonging to the ICAP undertaking (hereinafter, ‘the addressees’):






  (a) | ICAP plc; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(6)

This Decision is addressed to the following legal entities belonging to the ICAP undertaking (hereinafter, ‘the addressees’):

(a)

ICAP plc;

| (b) | ICAP Management Services Ltd; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

ICAP Management Services Ltd;

| (c) | ICAP New Zealand Limited. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

ICAP New Zealand Limited.

2.   CASE DESCRIPTION

2.1.   Procedure

| (7) | The case was opened on the basis of an immunity application by UBS on 17 December 2010. On 20 April 2011, the Commission sent requests for information to a number of undertakings active in the YIRD sector. On [...], Citigroup submitted an application for immunity and or leniency. On [...], Deutsche Bank applied for a reduction of fines. On [...], RP Martin applied for a reduction of fines. On [...], RBS applied for a reduction of fines. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

The case was opened on the basis of an immunity application by UBS on 17 December 2010. On 20 April 2011, the Commission sent requests for information to a number of undertakings active in the YIRD sector. On [...], Citigroup submitted an application for immunity and or leniency. On [...], Deutsche Bank applied for a reduction of fines. On [...], RP Martin applied for a reduction of fines. On [...], RBS applied for a reduction of fines.

| (8) | On 12 February 2013, the Commission initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 11(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 against UBS AG and UBS Securities Japan Co., Ltd, The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc and The Royal Bank of Scotland plc; Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft; Citigroup Inc. and Citigroup Global Markets Japan Inc.; JPMorgan Chase & Co. and JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association and J.P. Morgan Europe Limited; and R.P. Martin Holdings Ltd and Martin Brokers (UK) Ltd. On 29 October 2013, the Commission adopted a statement of objections, with reference C(2013)7395, addressed to these undertakings. |
| --- | --- |

(8)

On 12 February 2013, the Commission initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 11(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 against UBS AG and UBS Securities Japan Co., Ltd, The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc and The Royal Bank of Scotland plc; Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft; Citigroup Inc. and Citigroup Global Markets Japan Inc.; JPMorgan Chase & Co. and JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association and J.P. Morgan Europe Limited; and R.P. Martin Holdings Ltd and Martin Brokers (UK) Ltd. On 29 October 2013, the Commission adopted a statement of objections, with reference C(2013)7395, addressed to these undertakings.

| (9) | On 29 October 2013, the Commission initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 11(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 against ICAP plc, ICAP Management Services Ltd and ICAP New Zealand Limited. |
| --- | --- |

(9)

On 29 October 2013, the Commission initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 11(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 against ICAP plc, ICAP Management Services Ltd and ICAP New Zealand Limited.

| (10) | On 31 October 2013, a settlement meeting with ICAP took place. On 12 November 2013, ICAP informed the Commission that it wished to discontinue the settlement discussions. |
| --- | --- |

(10)

On 31 October 2013, a settlement meeting with ICAP took place. On 12 November 2013, ICAP informed the Commission that it wished to discontinue the settlement discussions.

| (11) | On 4 December 2013 the Commission adopted a prohibition and fining Decision, with reference C(2013) 8602/7 (‘Settlement Decision’) addressed to the undertakings identified in recital 8. |
| --- | --- |

(11)

On 4 December 2013 the Commission adopted a prohibition and fining Decision, with reference C(2013) 8602/7 (‘Settlement Decision’) addressed to the undertakings identified in recital 8.

| (12) | On 6 June 2014 the Commission adopted a statement of objections addressed to ICAP plc, ICAP Management Services Ltd and ICAP New Zealand Limited, with reference C(2014) 3768 final. ICAP made known to the Commission its views on the objections raised against it in writing on 14 August 2014 and orally during a hearing that took place on 12 September 2014. |
| --- | --- |

(12)

On 6 June 2014 the Commission adopted a statement of objections addressed to ICAP plc, ICAP Management Services Ltd and ICAP New Zealand Limited, with reference C(2014) 3768 final. ICAP made known to the Commission its views on the objections raised against it in writing on 14 August 2014 and orally during a hearing that took place on 12 September 2014.

| (13) | The Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions issued a favourable opinion on 30 January 2015 and the Commission adopted the Decision on 4 February 2015. |
| --- | --- |

(13)

The Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions issued a favourable opinion on 30 January 2015 and the Commission adopted the Decision on 4 February 2015.

2.2.   Addressees and duration

| (14) | In this case, the Commission has identified the following six bilateral infringements (4) and the duration of the undertaking’s involvement in each of the infringements is as follows:






  (a) | [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2007 infringement:






  — | [non-addressee]: 8 February 2007 – 1 November 2007 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

(14)

In this case, the Commission has identified the following six bilateral infringements (4) and the duration of the undertaking’s involvement in each of the infringements is as follows:

(a)

[non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2007 infringement:

—

[non-addressee]: 8 February 2007 – 1 November 2007

| — | [non-addressee]: 8 February 2007 – 1 November 2007 |
| --- | --- |

—

[non-addressee]: 8 February 2007 – 1 November 2007

| — | ICAP: 14 August 2007 – 1 November 2007 |
| --- | --- |

—

ICAP: 14 August 2007 – 1 November 2007

| (b) | [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2008 infringement:






  — | [non-addressee]: 7 May 2008 – 3 November 2008 |
| --- | --- | --- |

(b)

[non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2008 infringement:

—

[non-addressee]: 7 May 2008 – 3 November 2008

| — | [non-addressee]: 7 May 2008 – 3 November 2008 |
| --- | --- |

—

[non-addressee]: 7 May 2008 – 3 November 2008

| — | ICAP: 28 August 2008 – 3 November 2008 |
| --- | --- |

—

ICAP: 28 August 2008 – 3 November 2008

| (c) | [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2008-2009 infringement:






  — | [non-addressee]: 18 September 2008 – 10 August 2009 |
| --- | --- | --- |

(c)

[non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2008-2009 infringement:

—

[non-addressee]: 18 September 2008 – 10 August 2009

| — | [non-addressee]: 18 September 2008 – 10 August 2009 |
| --- | --- |

—

[non-addressee]: 18 September 2008 – 10 August 2009

| — | [non-addressee]: 29 June 2009 – 10 August 2009 |
| --- | --- |

—

[non-addressee]: 29 June 2009 – 10 August 2009

| — | ICAP: 22 May 2009 – 10 August 2009 |
| --- | --- |

—

ICAP: 22 May 2009 – 10 August 2009

| (d) | [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement:






  — | [non-addressee]: 3 March 2010 – 22 June 2010 |
| --- | --- | --- |

(d)

[non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement:

—

[non-addressee]: 3 March 2010 – 22 June 2010

| — | [non-addressee]: 3 March 2010 – 22 June 2010 |
| --- | --- |

—

[non-addressee]: 3 March 2010 – 22 June 2010

| — | ICAP: 3 March 2010 – 22 June 2010 |
| --- | --- |

—

ICAP: 3 March 2010 – 22 June 2010

| (e) | [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement:






  — | [non-addressee]: 26 March 2010 – 18 June 2010 |
| --- | --- | --- |

(e)

[non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement:

—

[non-addressee]: 26 March 2010 – 18 June 2010

| — | [non-addressee]: 26 March 2010 – 18 June 2010 |
| --- | --- |

—

[non-addressee]: 26 March 2010 – 18 June 2010

| — | ICAP: 7 April 2010 – 7 June 2010 |
| --- | --- |

—

ICAP: 7 April 2010 – 7 June 2010

| (f) | [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement:






  — | [non-addressee]: 28 April 2010 – 3 June 2010 |
| --- | --- | --- |

(f)

[non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement:

—

[non-addressee]: 28 April 2010 – 3 June 2010

| — | [non-addressee]: 28 April 2010 – 3 June 2010 |
| --- | --- |

—

[non-addressee]: 28 April 2010 – 3 June 2010

| — | ICAP: 28 April 2010 – 2 June 2010 |
| --- | --- |

—

ICAP: 28 April 2010 – 2 June 2010

2.3.   Summary of the infringements

2.3.1.   
  The anticompetitive practice of the participating banks

| (15) | The parties (banks) to the respective infringements engaged in the following anticompetitive practices:






  (a) | Traders of the banks participating in the respective infringements on certain occasions discussed directly (and in the case of [non-addressee] and [non-addressee] in the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement — indirectly — through the broker ICAP) the JPY LIBOR submissions for certain tenors of at least one of the respective banks, in the understanding that this might be beneficial to the YIRD trading positions of at least of one of the traders involved in the communications. To this end, at least one of the traders approached, or indicated a willingness to approach, the JPY LIBOR submitters at his respective bank to request a submission to the BBA towards a certain direction or on a few occasions at a specific level. |
| --- | --- | --- |

(15)

The parties (banks) to the respective infringements engaged in the following anticompetitive practices:

(a)

Traders of the banks participating in the respective infringements on certain occasions discussed directly (and in the case of [non-addressee] and [non-addressee] in the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement — indirectly — through the broker ICAP) the JPY LIBOR submissions for certain tenors of at least one of the respective banks, in the understanding that this might be beneficial to the YIRD trading positions of at least of one of the traders involved in the communications. To this end, at least one of the traders approached, or indicated a willingness to approach, the JPY LIBOR submitters at his respective bank to request a submission to the BBA towards a certain direction or on a few occasions at a specific level.

| (b) | Traders of the banks participating in the respective infringements communicated and/or received from each other (in the case of [non-addressee] and [non-addressee] in the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement — indirectly — through the broker ICAP), on certain occasions, commercially sensitive information relating either to trading positions or to the future JPY LIBOR submissions of at least one of their respective banks. In the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement, this communication and/or receipt of information related also to certain future Euroyen TIBOR submissions of at least one of the respective banks. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

Traders of the banks participating in the respective infringements communicated and/or received from each other (in the case of [non-addressee] and [non-addressee] in the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement — indirectly — through the broker ICAP), on certain occasions, commercially sensitive information relating either to trading positions or to the future JPY LIBOR submissions of at least one of their respective banks. In the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement, this communication and/or receipt of information related also to certain future Euroyen TIBOR submissions of at least one of the respective banks.

2.3.2.   
  Facilitation of the different infringements by cash brokers

2.3.2.1.   [non-addressee]’s facilitation

| (16) | [non-addressee] facilitated the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2008-2009 infringement in the period from 29 June 2009 until 10 August 2009, whereby at the request of [non-addressee], [non-addressee] promised to, and at least on a few occasions did, contact a number of JPY LIBOR panel banks that did not participate in the infringement, with the aim of influencing their JPY LIBOR submissions. [non-addressee] was not aware of this circumstance. |
| --- | --- |

(16)

[non-addressee] facilitated the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2008-2009 infringement in the period from 29 June 2009 until 10 August 2009, whereby at the request of [non-addressee], [non-addressee] promised to, and at least on a few occasions did, contact a number of JPY LIBOR panel banks that did not participate in the infringement, with the aim of influencing their JPY LIBOR submissions. [non-addressee] was not aware of this circumstance.

2.3.2.2.   ICAP’s facilitation

| (17) | ICAP facilitated the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2007 infringement in the period from 14 August 2007 until 1 November 2007, whereby at the request of [non-addressee], ICAP aimed to influence certain JPY LIBOR panel banks that did not participate in the infringement to submit JPY LIBOR rates in line with the requests from [non-addressee] by (i) disseminating misleading information to them via the so-called ‘Run Thrus’; and/or (ii) directly contacting them. [non-addressee] was not aware of this circumstance. |
| --- | --- |

(17)

ICAP facilitated the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2007 infringement in the period from 14 August 2007 until 1 November 2007, whereby at the request of [non-addressee], ICAP aimed to influence certain JPY LIBOR panel banks that did not participate in the infringement to submit JPY LIBOR rates in line with the requests from [non-addressee] by (i) disseminating misleading information to them via the so-called ‘Run Thrus’; and/or (ii) directly contacting them. [non-addressee] was not aware of this circumstance.

| (18) | ICAP facilitated the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2008 infringement in the period from 28 August 2008 until 3 November 2008, whereby at the request of [non-addressee], ICAP aimed to influence certain JPY LIBOR panel banks that did not participate in the infringement to submit JPY LIBOR rates in line with the requests from [non-addressee] by (i) disseminating misleading information to them via the so-called ‘Run Thrus’; and/or (ii) directly contacting them. [non-addressee] was not aware of this circumstance. |
| --- | --- |

(18)

ICAP facilitated the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2008 infringement in the period from 28 August 2008 until 3 November 2008, whereby at the request of [non-addressee], ICAP aimed to influence certain JPY LIBOR panel banks that did not participate in the infringement to submit JPY LIBOR rates in line with the requests from [non-addressee] by (i) disseminating misleading information to them via the so-called ‘Run Thrus’; and/or (ii) directly contacting them. [non-addressee] was not aware of this circumstance.

| (19) | ICAP facilitated the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2008-2009 infringement in the period from 22 May 2009 until 10 August 2009, whereby at the request of [non-addressee], ICAP aimed to influence certain JPY LIBOR panel banks that did not participate in the infringement to submit JPY LIBOR rates in line with the requests from [non-addressee] by (i) disseminating misleading information to them via the so-called ‘Run Thrus’; and/or (ii) directly contacting them. [non-addressee] was not aware of this circumstance. |
| --- | --- |

(19)

ICAP facilitated the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2008-2009 infringement in the period from 22 May 2009 until 10 August 2009, whereby at the request of [non-addressee], ICAP aimed to influence certain JPY LIBOR panel banks that did not participate in the infringement to submit JPY LIBOR rates in line with the requests from [non-addressee] by (i) disseminating misleading information to them via the so-called ‘Run Thrus’; and/or (ii) directly contacting them. [non-addressee] was not aware of this circumstance.

| (20) | ICAP facilitated the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement in the period from 3 March 2010 until 22 June 2010 by serving as a communications channel between a trader of [non-addressee] and a trader of [non-addressee], thus enabling the anticompetitive practices between them. |
| --- | --- |

(20)

ICAP facilitated the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement in the period from 3 March 2010 until 22 June 2010 by serving as a communications channel between a trader of [non-addressee] and a trader of [non-addressee], thus enabling the anticompetitive practices between them.

| (21) | ICAP facilitated the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement in the period from 7 April 2010 until 7 June 2010, whereby at the request of [non-addressee], ICAP aimed to influence certain JPY LIBOR panel banks that did not participate in the infringement to submit JPY LIBOR rates in line with the requests from [non-addressee] by (i) disseminating misleading information to them via the so-called ‘Run Thrus’; and/or (ii) directly contacting them. [non-addressee] was not aware of this circumstance. |
| --- | --- |

(21)

ICAP facilitated the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement in the period from 7 April 2010 until 7 June 2010, whereby at the request of [non-addressee], ICAP aimed to influence certain JPY LIBOR panel banks that did not participate in the infringement to submit JPY LIBOR rates in line with the requests from [non-addressee] by (i) disseminating misleading information to them via the so-called ‘Run Thrus’; and/or (ii) directly contacting them. [non-addressee] was not aware of this circumstance.

| (22) | ICAP facilitated the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement with respect to YIRDs referenced to the JPY LIBOR (5) in the period from 28 April 2010 until 2 June 2010, whereby at the request of [non-addressee], ICAP aimed to influence certain JPY LIBOR panel banks that did not participate in the infringement to submit JPY LIBOR rates in line with the requests from [non-addressee] by (i) disseminating misleading information to them via the so-called ‘Run Thrus’; and/or (ii) directly contacting them. [non-addressee] was not aware of this circumstance. |
| --- | --- |

(22)

ICAP facilitated the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement with respect to YIRDs referenced to the JPY LIBOR (5) in the period from 28 April 2010 until 2 June 2010, whereby at the request of [non-addressee], ICAP aimed to influence certain JPY LIBOR panel banks that did not participate in the infringement to submit JPY LIBOR rates in line with the requests from [non-addressee] by (i) disseminating misleading information to them via the so-called ‘Run Thrus’; and/or (ii) directly contacting them. [non-addressee] was not aware of this circumstance.

2.3.3.   
  Geographic scope

| (23) | The geographic scope of each of the six infringements and for all the respective participants therein covered the entire EEA. |
| --- | --- |

(23)

The geographic scope of each of the six infringements and for all the respective participants therein covered the entire EEA.

2.4.   Remedies

| (24) | The Decision applies the 2006 Guidelines on Fines (6). The Commission imposes fines on the undertakings to which this Decision is addressed. |
| --- | --- |

(24)

The Decision applies the 2006 Guidelines on Fines (6). The Commission imposes fines on the undertakings to which this Decision is addressed.

2.4.1.   
  Basic amount of the fine

| (25) | The Guidelines on fines provide only limited guidance on the calculation of the fines which can be imposed on facilitators like ICAP, which was not directly active on the sector covered by the cartel, i.e. interest rate derivatives, for the purposes of the infringements. As a result, ICAP’s basic amount for each of the infringements is determined in accordance with the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, the case-law and point 37 of the 2006 Guidelines on fines, reflecting the gravity, duration and nature of its involvement, as well as the need to ensure that fines have a sufficiently deterrent effect. |
| --- | --- |

(25)

The Guidelines on fines provide only limited guidance on the calculation of the fines which can be imposed on facilitators like ICAP, which was not directly active on the sector covered by the cartel, i.e. interest rate derivatives, for the purposes of the infringements. As a result, ICAP’s basic amount for each of the infringements is determined in accordance with the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, the case-law and point 37 of the 2006 Guidelines on fines, reflecting the gravity, duration and nature of its involvement, as well as the need to ensure that fines have a sufficiently deterrent effect.

| (26) | In assessing the gravity of the infringements, the Commission takes into account of the fact that each of the infringements is, by its very nature, among the most harmful restrictions of competition, the fact that each of the infringements covered the entire EEA and the fact that the collusive activities related to financial benchmarks. |
| --- | --- |

(26)

In assessing the gravity of the infringements, the Commission takes into account of the fact that each of the infringements is, by its very nature, among the most harmful restrictions of competition, the fact that each of the infringements covered the entire EEA and the fact that the collusive activities related to financial benchmarks.

| (27) | In calculating the fines to be imposed on the addressees of this Decision, the Commission also takes into consideration the duration of ICAP’s participation in each of the six infringements. |
| --- | --- |

(27)

In calculating the fines to be imposed on the addressees of this Decision, the Commission also takes into consideration the duration of ICAP’s participation in each of the six infringements.

| (28) | With respect to each of the infringements, the Commission takes into account that ICAP participated in the infringements as a facilitator, which is a role that is not of the same nature as that of the banks participating in the relevant infringements. As such, in determining ICAP’s basic amount for each infringement, the Commission applies an appropriate reduction factor. |
| --- | --- |

(28)

With respect to each of the infringements, the Commission takes into account that ICAP participated in the infringements as a facilitator, which is a role that is not of the same nature as that of the banks participating in the relevant infringements. As such, in determining ICAP’s basic amount for each infringement, the Commission applies an appropriate reduction factor.

2.4.2.   
  Adjustment to the basic amount: aggravating or mitigating circumstances

| (29) | With respect to the addressees of the present Decision, there are no aggravating or attenuating circumstances in relation to any of the infringements. |
| --- | --- |

(29)

With respect to the addressees of the present Decision, there are no aggravating or attenuating circumstances in relation to any of the infringements.

2.4.3.   
  Application of the 10 % turnover limit

| (30) | Article 23(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 provides that the fine imposed for each infringement shall not exceed 10 % of ICAP’s total turnover relating to the business year preceding the date of the Commission decision. |
| --- | --- |

(30)

Article 23(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 provides that the fine imposed for each infringement shall not exceed 10 % of ICAP’s total turnover relating to the business year preceding the date of the Commission decision.

| (31) | In this case, none of the fines exceed 10 % of ICAP’s total turnover relating to the business year preceding the date of this Decision. |
| --- | --- |

(31)

In this case, none of the fines exceed 10 % of ICAP’s total turnover relating to the business year preceding the date of this Decision.

3.   CONCLUSION: final amount of individual fines to be imposed in this Decision

| (32) | The following fines are imposed pursuant to Article 23(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003:






  Infringement | Fines (in EUR) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2007 infringement | 1 040 000 |
| [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2008 infringement | 1 950 000 |
| [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2008-2009 infringement | 8 170 000 |
| [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement | 1 930 000 |
| [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement | 1 150 000 |
| [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement | 720 000 |

(32)

The following fines are imposed pursuant to Article 23(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003:

Infringement

Fines (in EUR)

[non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2007 infringement

1 040 000

[non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2008 infringement

1 950 000

[non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2008-2009 infringement

8 170 000

[non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement

1 930 000

[non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement

1 150 000

[non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement

720 000

---

(1)  OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1.

(2)  One of the infringements also concerned YIRDs referenced to the Euroyen TIBOR.

(3)  A spreadsheet circulated each business day by ICAP to a number of financial institutions, which contained information on the prevailing borrowing rates for Japanese and offshore banks for all the JPY LIBOR tenors as well as a table titled ‘suggested libors’, which consisted of suggested JPY LIBORs submissions for all tenors on the relevant business day.

(4)  In addition, the decision adopted on 4 December 2013 also identified the ‘[non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2007 infringement’, in which ICAP was not involved.

(5)  Although the anticompetitive practices of [non-addressee] and [non-addressee] in the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement concerned YIRDs referenced to the JPY LIBOR and Euroyen TIBOR, ICAP’s facilitation of the [non-addressee]/[non-addressee] 2010 infringement concerned only YIRDs referenced to the JPY LIBOR.

(6)  OJ C 210, 1.9.2006, p. 2.

---

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

| 15.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/15

---

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

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

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 305/09)

| Member State | Sweden |
| --- | --- |
| Concerned routes | Arvidsjaur-Stockholm (Arlanda)
  Gällivare-Stockholm (Arlanda) |
| Period of validity of the contract | December 2017-October 2019 |
| Deadline for submission of tenders | 60 days after the date of publication of this tender invitation |
| Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation related to the public tender can be obtained | For further information please contact:





  The Swedish Transport Administration |
| SE-781 87 Borlänge |
| SVERIGE |
| http://www.trafikverket.se/Foretag/Upphandling/Aktuella-upphandlingar/ |
| RFT reference: CTM:146241 |
| Tel. +46 771921921 |
| Contacts: |
| Håkan Jacobsson: hakan.jacobsson@trafikverket.se |
| Anna Fällbom: anna.fallbom@trafikverket.se |

Member State

Sweden

Concerned routes

Arvidsjaur-Stockholm (Arlanda)

Gällivare-Stockholm (Arlanda)

Period of validity of the contract

December 2017-October 2019

Deadline for submission of tenders

60 days after the date of publication of this tender invitation

Address where the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation related to the public tender can be obtained

For further information please contact:

The Swedish Transport Administration

SE-781 87 Borlänge

SVERIGE

http://www.trafikverket.se/Foretag/Upphandling/Aktuella-upphandlingar/

RFT reference: CTM:146241

Tel. +46 771921921

Contacts:

Håkan Jacobsson: hakan.jacobsson@trafikverket.se

Anna Fällbom: anna.fallbom@trafikverket.se

---

V Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

| 15.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/16

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.8630 — Blackstone/MassMutual/Cambourne/Rothesay)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 305/10)

| 1. | On 8 September 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
  This notification concerns the following undertakings:






  — | Cambourne Life Investment Pte. Ltd (Singapore) controlled by GIC Pte. Ltd, |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

On 8 September 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

—

Cambourne Life Investment Pte. Ltd (Singapore) controlled by GIC Pte. Ltd,

| — | Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company (United States), |
| --- | --- |

—

Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company (United States),

| — | Rothesay HoldCo UK Ltd (United Kingdom). |
| --- | --- |

—

Rothesay HoldCo UK Ltd (United Kingdom).

Cambourne Life Investment Pte. Ltd (‘Cambourne’) and Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company (‘MassMutual’) acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of Rothesay HoldCo UK Ltd (United Kingdom (‘Rothesay’), whereby the Blackstone Group LP (‘Blackstone’) is already a controlling shareholder. The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

| 2. | The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
  —   for Blackstone: asset management,
  —   for Cambourne: a company ultimately controlled by GIC Pte. Ltd, a global investment management company.
  —   for MassMutual: life insurance, retirement and investment products, primarily active in the United States,
  —   for Rothesay: insurance, focussed primarily on defined benefit pension risk transfers within the United Kingdom. Rothesay offers a range of products, including (i) insurance buy-out solutions, (ii) insurance buy-in solutions, and (iii) longevity swaps. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—   for Blackstone: asset management,

—   for Cambourne: a company ultimately controlled by GIC Pte. Ltd, a global investment management company.

—   for MassMutual: life insurance, retirement and investment products, primarily active in the United States,

—   for Rothesay: insurance, focussed primarily on defined benefit pension risk transfers within the United Kingdom. Rothesay offers a range of products, including (i) insurance buy-out solutions, (ii) insurance buy-in solutions, and (iii) longevity swaps.

| 3. | On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.
  Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice. |
| --- | --- |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

| 4. | The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
  Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:
  M.8630 — Blackstone/MassMutual/Cambourne/Rothesay
  Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:





  Email: |
| --- | --- |
| COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu |
| Fax |
| +32 22964301 |
| Postal address: |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.8630 — Blackstone/MassMutual/Cambourne/Rothesay

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email:

COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax

+32 22964301

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

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

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

---

| 15.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/18

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.8102 — Valeo / FTE Group)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 305/11)

| 1. | On 7 September 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Valeo Holding GmbH (Germany) controlled by Valeo S.A. (‘Valeo’, France) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of FTE Group Holding GmbH (‘FTE’, Germany) by way of purchase of shares.
  The same concentration was already notified to the Commission on 10 October 2016, but the notification was subsequently withdrawn on 29 November 2016. |
| --- | --- |

1.

On 7 September 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Valeo Holding GmbH (Germany) controlled by Valeo S.A. (‘Valeo’, France) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of FTE Group Holding GmbH (‘FTE’, Germany) by way of purchase of shares.

The same concentration was already notified to the Commission on 10 October 2016, but the notification was subsequently withdrawn on 29 November 2016.

| 2. | The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
  —   for Valeo: the design, manufacture and sale of automotive equipment, including in particular thermal systems, powertrain systems, comfort and driving assistance systems, and visibility systems;
  —   for FTE: the design, manufacture and sale of (i) clutch actuation products; (ii) brake actuation products; (iii) electric transmission oil pumps and other components for gearboxes and powertrain based on electro-hydraulic technology. FTE is also active in the remanufacturing of brake calipers. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—   for Valeo: the design, manufacture and sale of automotive equipment, including in particular thermal systems, powertrain systems, comfort and driving assistance systems, and visibility systems;

—   for FTE: the design, manufacture and sale of (i) clutch actuation products; (ii) brake actuation products; (iii) electric transmission oil pumps and other components for gearboxes and powertrain based on electro-hydraulic technology. FTE is also active in the remanufacturing of brake calipers.

| 3. | On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. |
| --- | --- |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

| 4. | The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
  Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference M.8102 — Valeo / FTE Group, to the following address:





  European Commission |
| --- | --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference M.8102 — Valeo / FTE Group, to the following address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

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

---

| 15.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/19

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.8638 — Shell Midstream Partners/Crestwood Permian Basin Holdings/Crestwood Permian Basin)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 305/12)

| 1. | On 8 September 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).
  This notification concerns the following undertakings:






  — | Shell Midstream Partners (Shell Midstream, United States), controlled by Royal Dutch Shell plc (Shell, United Kingdom), |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

On 8 September 2017, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1).

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

—

Shell Midstream Partners (Shell Midstream, United States), controlled by Royal Dutch Shell plc (Shell, United Kingdom),

| — | Crestwood Permian Basin Holdings (United States) controlled by First Reserve Management LP (First Reserve, Cayman Islands) and Crestwood Equity Partners LP (Crestwood, United States), |
| --- | --- |

—

Crestwood Permian Basin Holdings (United States) controlled by First Reserve Management LP (First Reserve, Cayman Islands) and Crestwood Equity Partners LP (Crestwood, United States),

| — | Crestwood Permian Basin LLC (United States) controlled by Crestwood Permian Basin Holdings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Crestwood Permian Basin LLC (United States) controlled by Crestwood Permian Basin Holdings.

Shell Midstream acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control over Crestwood Permian Basin. The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

| 2. | The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:






  — | Shell is a global group of energy and petrochemical companies listed in the London, Amsterdam and New York Stock Exchanges. |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—

Shell is a global group of energy and petrochemical companies listed in the London, Amsterdam and New York Stock Exchanges.

| — | Crestwood Permian Basin Holdings is a joint venture controlled by First Reserve and Crestwood, currently the sole owner of Crestwood Permian Basin. |
| --- | --- |

—

Crestwood Permian Basin Holdings is a joint venture controlled by First Reserve and Crestwood, currently the sole owner of Crestwood Permian Basin.

| — | Crestwood Permian Basin was formed to construct, own and operate a natural gas gathering system in the Permian Basin, located in the western part of the United States. It will provide gathering, dehydration, compression and liquids handling services. |
| --- | --- |

—

Crestwood Permian Basin was formed to construct, own and operate a natural gas gathering system in the Permian Basin, located in the western part of the United States. It will provide gathering, dehydration, compression and liquids handling services.

| 3. | On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.
  Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice. |
| --- | --- |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

| 4. | The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
  Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:
  M.8638 — Shell Midstream Partners/Crestwood Permian Basin Holdings/Crestwood Permian Basin
  Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:





  Email: |
| --- | --- |
| COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu |
| Fax |
| +32 22964301 |
| Postal address: |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.8638 — Shell Midstream Partners/Crestwood Permian Basin Holdings/Crestwood Permian Basin

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email:

COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax

+32 22964301

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

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

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

---

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

| 15.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/20

---

Publication of an amendment application 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

(2017/C 305/13)

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).

APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE PRODUCT SPECIFICATION OF PROTECTED DESIGNATIONS OF ORIGIN/PROTECTED GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS WHICH IS NOT MINOR

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

‘PANE DI MATERA’

EU No: PGI-IT-02100 — 10.12.2015

PDO ( ) PGI ( X )

1.   Applicant group and legitimate interest

| Consorzio di Tutela del Pane di Matera IGP (Consortium for the protection of Pane di Matera PGI) |
| --- |
| Via De Amicis, 54 |
| 75100 Matera |
| ITALIA |

Consorzio di Tutela del Pane di Matera IGP (Consortium for the protection of Pane di Matera PGI)

Via De Amicis, 54

75100 Matera

ITALIA

The Consorzio di Tutela del Pane di Matera IGP is entitled to submit an amendment application pursuant to Article 13(1) of Decree No 12511 of 14 October 2013 of the Ministry of Agricultural, Food and Forestry Policy.

2.   Member State or Third Country

Italy

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

| — | ☐ | Name of product |
| --- | --- | --- |
| — | ☒ | Product description |
| — | ☐ | Geographical area |
| — | ☐ | Proof of origin |
| — | ☒ | Production method |
| — | ☐ | Link |
| — | ☐ | Labelling |
| — | ☒ | Other [Packaging; Inspection body; Geographical area] |

—

☐

Name of product

—

☒

Product description

—

☐

Geographical area

—

☐

Proof of origin

—

☒

Production method

—

☐

Link

—

☐

Labelling

—

☒

Other [Packaging; Inspection body; Geographical area]

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 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 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.

5.   Amendment(s)

Product description

| — | The following sentence in Article 2 of the current specification:

  ‘This system requires the use of durum wheat flour (Triticum durum) only, the quality characteristics of which must be in line with the following parameters:






  Gluten (%) | Value ≥ 11 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Yellow index | Value ≥ 21 |
| Moisture (%) | Value ≤ 15,50 |
| Ash (% in the dry matter) | Value ≤ 2 % in the dry matter’ |

—

The following sentence in Article 2 of the current specification:

‘This system requires the use of durum wheat flour (Triticum durum) only, the quality characteristics of which must be in line with the following parameters:

Gluten (%)

Value ≥ 11

Yellow index

Value ≥ 21

Moisture (%)

Value ≤ 15,50

Ash (% in the dry matter)

Value ≤ 2 % in the dry matter’

is replaced by the following Article 2 of the amended product specification:

‘This system requires the use of durum wheat flour (Triticum durum) or semolina only, the quality characteristics of which must be in line with the following parameters:

| Protein (%) nitrogen × 5,70  (*2) | Value ≥ 11 |
| --- | --- |
| Yellow index (*1) | Value ≥ 20 |
| Moisture (%) (*2) | Value ≤ 14,50 |
| Ash (% in the dry matter) (*2) | Value ≤ 1,35 in the dry matter |

Protein (%) nitrogen × 5,70  (*2)

Value ≥ 11

Yellow index (*1)

Value ≥ 20

Moisture (%) (*2)

Value ≤ 14,50

Ash (% in the dry matter) (*2)

Value ≤ 1,35 in the dry matter

It is specified that durum wheat flour and/or semolina may be used for the production of ‘Pane di Matera’. This specification improves the description of the raw material used to produce ‘Pane di Matera’. The use of semolina for bread making, is a widespread practice for bakery products especially in the southern regions of Italy, and also in the Province of Matera. Therefore, further to a request by producers, it is considered that there is no reason not to allow the use durum wheat semolina for the production of ‘Pane di Matera’ PGI.

Furthermore, the chemical parameters of the flours and semolina have been better defined and updated. In particular:

| — | Gluten has been replaced by the protein value which remains 11 % and the method of determination has been indicated. |
| --- | --- |

—

Gluten has been replaced by the protein value which remains 11 % and the method of determination has been indicated.

| — | The yellow index has been reduced from ≥ 21 to ≥ 20 and the method of determination has been specified. |
| --- | --- |

—

The yellow index has been reduced from ≥ 21 to ≥ 20 and the method of determination has been specified.

| — | Moisture content has been reduced from ≤ 15,5 % to ≤ 14,5 % in order to have better preserved grain of higher quality; |
| --- | --- |

—

Moisture content has been reduced from ≤ 15,5 % to ≤ 14,5 % in order to have better preserved grain of higher quality;

| — | Ash has been reduced from ≤ 2 % to ≤ 1,35 % and the method of determination has been specified. |
| --- | --- |

—

Ash has been reduced from ≤ 2 % to ≤ 1,35 % and the method of determination has been specified.

The updated chemical parameters of the flours and semolina proposed in the amendment are designed to adapt the product specification to the actual characteristics of the raw materials used to make ‘Pane di Matera’ PGI.

| — | The following tables:

  ‘Composition of 100 g of Pane di Matera | Range |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Protein (2) | 8,2 -8,3 |
| Carbohydrates | 51,3 -53,4 |
| of which fibre (total) | 2,9 -3,7 |
| Fat | 1,0 -1,2 |
| Ash (% in the dry matter) | 2,24 -2,51 |

—

The following tables:

‘Composition of 100 g of Pane di Matera

Range

Protein (2)

8,2 -8,3

Carbohydrates

51,3 -53,4

of which fibre (total)

2,9 -3,7

Fat

1,0 -1,2

Ash (% in the dry matter)

2,24 -2,51

Sensory properties of samples of Pane di Matera

| Sensory indicators | Range |
| --- | --- |
| Crunchiness of the crust | 4,8 to 5,7 |
| Acidic aroma | 1,3 to 1,6 |
| Burnt aroma | 3,2 to 4,3 |
| Acidic taste | 1,3 to 2,0 ’ |

Sensory indicators

Range

Crunchiness of the crust

4,8 to 5,7

Acidic aroma

1,3 to 1,6

Burnt aroma

3,2 to 4,3

Acidic taste

1,3 to 2,0 ’

are amended as follows:

‘Composition of 100 g of Pane di Matera

| Protein (%) nitrogen × 5,70 | Value ≥ 8,1 |
| --- | --- |
| Carbohydrates (%) | Value ≥ 51,3 |
| of which fibre | Value ≥ 2,9 |
| Fats (%) | Value ≥ 1,0 |
| Ash (% in the dry matter) | Value ≥ 2,24 ’ |

Protein (%) nitrogen × 5,70

Value ≥ 8,1

Carbohydrates (%)

Value ≥ 51,3

of which fibre

Value ≥ 2,9

Fats (%)

Value ≥ 1,0

Ash (% in the dry matter)

Value ≥ 2,24 ’

The amendment to the table setting out the composition of ‘Pane di Matera’ has become necessary due to ongoing variation in the characteristics of the raw ingredients available on the market, as noted by bakers. Without prejudice to the obligatory use of at least 20 % durum wheat flour and semolina from local landraces and varieties, producers are given the option of having higher levels of protein, carbohydrate, fat and ash. This is to enable them to make use of new varieties of durum wheat available on the market, as well as allowing them to extend the options for the remaining 80 % of flour and semolina used to produce ‘Pane di Matera’.

‘Sensory profile of “Pane di Matera” PGI

| Sensory indicators | Minimum value | Maximum value |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Acidic aroma | 1,0 | 2,0 |
| Burnt aroma | 3,0 | 4,5 |
| Acidic taste | 1,0 | 2,5 |
| Crunchiness of the crust | 4,5 | 6,0 |

Sensory indicators

Minimum value

Maximum value

Acidic aroma

1,0

2,0

Burnt aroma

3,0

4,5

Acidic taste

1,0

2,5

Crunchiness of the crust

4,5

6,0

Definition of the sensory characteristics of “Pane di Matera” PGI refers to the following standards: ISO 13299:2016; ISO 8589:2007; ISO 5492:2008; ISO/IEC 17025:2005.’

The range of values defined for the sensory descriptors of ‘Pane di Matera’ have been extended based on the bakers' experience of production. For greater accuracy, it was considered appropriate to include in the specifications the official methods for defining the sensory profile of ‘Pane di Matera’.

| — | The following table has been deleted:

  ‘Specific volume of the loaves and rate at which the soft inner part or crumb of “Pane di Matera” hardens over a 7-day period.







  Sample of bread | Specific volume (dm3/kg) | Duration in days consistency (3) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| A | 4,44 b | 1,70 |
| B | 3,80 ab | 1,57 |
| C | 3,70 a | 3,08 |
| D | 3,64 a | 3,77 |

—

The following table has been deleted:

‘Specific volume of the loaves and rate at which the soft inner part or crumb of “Pane di Matera” hardens over a 7-day period.

Sample of bread

Specific volume (dm3/kg)

Duration in days consistency (3)

A

4,44 b

1,70

B

3,80 ab

1,57

C

3,70 a

3,08

D

3,64 a

3,77

In addition to easing the burden of analyses and the subsequent financial costs to producers, removal of the table was necessary on account of the proposed amendments, and especially that of increasing the sizes. The values shown in the table do not take account of the amendments and are therefore inaccurate. For these reasons, it is considered appropriate to remove the table, leaving producers to define the shelf-life of ‘Pane di Matera’ in relation to its size, in accordance with the number of days stated at Article 6 of the specification.

The description of ‘Pane di Matera’ when released for consumption has been amended. The following paragraph of Article 7 of the specification, and corresponding point 3.2 of the single document:

‘“Pane di Matera” must have the following characteristics when released for consumption:

| — | Cone-shaped or “tall”; |
| --- | --- |

—

Cone-shaped or “tall”;

| — | Loaves of between 1 g and 2 kg; |
| --- | --- |

—

Loaves of between 1 g and 2 kg;

| — | A crust at least 3 mm thick; |
| --- | --- |

—

A crust at least 3 mm thick;

| — | Pale yellow crumb with characteristic holes; |
| --- | --- |

—

Pale yellow crumb with characteristic holes;

Moisture no more than 33 %’

is amended as follows:

‘“Pane di Matera” must have the following characteristics when released for consumption:

| — | Cone-shaped or “tall”; |
| --- | --- |

—

Cone-shaped or “tall”;

| — | Loaves of between 500 g and 10 kg; |
| --- | --- |

—

Loaves of between 500 g and 10 kg;

| — | A crust at least 3 mm thick; |
| --- | --- |

—

A crust at least 3 mm thick;

| — | Pale yellow crumb with characteristic holes; |
| --- | --- |

—

Pale yellow crumb with characteristic holes;

| — | The initials “MT”, in printed capitals, impressed into the top of the loaf before baking.’ |
| --- | --- |

—

The initials “MT”, in printed capitals, impressed into the top of the loaf before baking.’

The moisture parameters are those laid down in the relevant legislation.

Specifically, the range of loaf sizes has been increased, from 1-2 kg to 500 g-10 kg, to meet the new needs of consumers and caterers. This amendment is intended to satisfy both the demands of small households, that require small loaves to avoid waste, and the demands of the catering sector that calls for large loaves that keep for longer and are better for slicing.

The parameter specifying moisture content of not more than 33 % has been deleted and reference made to the relevant legislation (Law No 580 of 4 July 1967, Article 16).

In addition, a requirement for the loaves to bear the trademark initials ‘MT’ has been added to the characteristics of the product in order to make it more easily recognisable. The initials ‘MT’ are impressed into the dough at the top of the loaf before baking.

Production method

Production method

Preparation of the sourdough starter

| — | In order to allow the use of other containers for the leavening of the dough that are more compatible with hygiene rules, the term ‘tall and narrow jute cylinder’ has been replaced by ‘graduated food container’. |
| --- | --- |

—

In order to allow the use of other containers for the leavening of the dough that are more compatible with hygiene rules, the term ‘tall and narrow jute cylinder’ has been replaced by ‘graduated food container’.

| — | The amount of water used in the mixture has been increased from 40 to 50 % of the weight of the dough as a result of the decrease in moisture content of the durum wheat flour and/or semolina. |
| --- | --- |

—

The amount of water used in the mixture has been increased from 40 to 50 % of the weight of the dough as a result of the decrease in moisture content of the durum wheat flour and/or semolina.

| — | The following paragraph has been deleted and replaced by a more clearly worded description that is easier for producers to follow:

  ‘The sourdough starter may be used up to three times. This involves using part of the original dough, which has been previously leavened, together with another dough of flour and water, and letting this rise for the next batch of bread to be baked. The quantities of sourdough and flour, as percentages of the dough, are between 7-8 % and 45-47 % respectively. Using the starter three times allows the fermenting dough to be increased by adding water and durum wheat flour, at a rate of 15-25 % of the quantity of durum wheat flour to be used in the mixture. At the end of leavening, a portion of the dough (1,2-1,8 % depending on the temperature of the environment) is kept at 3-5 °C for the next batch.’

  Replaced by:

  ‘The amount of sourdough starter produced for use in the bread-making process is obtained by adding water and flour to a part of the original sourdough starter; this can be repeated up to three times before incorporating the starter into the bread dough. A portion of the sourdough starter produced is kept in the refrigerator, at a positive temperature, for use in the following day's baking.’ |
| --- | --- |

—

The following paragraph has been deleted and replaced by a more clearly worded description that is easier for producers to follow:

‘The sourdough starter may be used up to three times. This involves using part of the original dough, which has been previously leavened, together with another dough of flour and water, and letting this rise for the next batch of bread to be baked. The quantities of sourdough and flour, as percentages of the dough, are between 7-8 % and 45-47 % respectively. Using the starter three times allows the fermenting dough to be increased by adding water and durum wheat flour, at a rate of 15-25 % of the quantity of durum wheat flour to be used in the mixture. At the end of leavening, a portion of the dough (1,2-1,8 % depending on the temperature of the environment) is kept at 3-5 °C for the next batch.’

Replaced by:

‘The amount of sourdough starter produced for use in the bread-making process is obtained by adding water and flour to a part of the original sourdough starter; this can be repeated up to three times before incorporating the starter into the bread dough. A portion of the sourdough starter produced is kept in the refrigerator, at a positive temperature, for use in the following day's baking.’

Production process ingredients

| — | The minimum amount of salt to be used in the production process has been reduced from 2,5 to 2 kg, in line with changing dietary advice. |
| --- | --- |

—

The minimum amount of salt to be used in the production process has been reduced from 2,5 to 2 kg, in line with changing dietary advice.

| — | It was considered advisable to delete the reference to the use of cotton or wool cloths to cover the dough. This amendment is needed to allow producers to use cloths also made of other materials which are more versatile and more suitable from a hygiene/health point of view. The sentence:

  ‘The dough must then be left to rise in the bowl for 25-35 minutes, covered with cotton or wool cloths’

  has been amended as follows:

  ‘The dough must then be left to rise in the bowl for 25-35 minutes’. |
| --- | --- |

—

It was considered advisable to delete the reference to the use of cotton or wool cloths to cover the dough. This amendment is needed to allow producers to use cloths also made of other materials which are more versatile and more suitable from a hygiene/health point of view. The sentence:

‘The dough must then be left to rise in the bowl for 25-35 minutes, covered with cotton or wool cloths’

has been amended as follows:

‘The dough must then be left to rise in the bowl for 25-35 minutes’.

| — | The weight range of the loaves has been increased to meet the needs both of families who prefer smaller loaves and the catering industry which prefers larger loaves. The sentence:

  ‘It is then separated into 1,2 kg or 2,4 kg portions, roughly in the shape of the final product, to produce loaves weighing 1 kg and 2 kg respectively, with a variation range of 10 %.’

  has been amended as follows:

  ‘It is then separated into portions of between 0,6 kg and a maximum of 12 kg, roughly in the shape of the final product, to produce loaves weighing between 0,5 kg and a maximum of 10 kg respectively, with a variation range of 10 %.’ |
| --- | --- |

—

The weight range of the loaves has been increased to meet the needs both of families who prefer smaller loaves and the catering industry which prefers larger loaves. The sentence:

‘It is then separated into 1,2 kg or 2,4 kg portions, roughly in the shape of the final product, to produce loaves weighing 1 kg and 2 kg respectively, with a variation range of 10 %.’

has been amended as follows:

‘It is then separated into portions of between 0,6 kg and a maximum of 12 kg, roughly in the shape of the final product, to produce loaves weighing between 0,5 kg and a maximum of 10 kg respectively, with a variation range of 10 %.’

| — | It was considered advisable to reword the following sentence to allow the use of other tools and materials (containers and cloths) in the production process that producers may prefer to wooden boards, whether for reasons of complying with hygiene standards or for technical reasons. Containers made of wood or stainless steel and cloths of any material suitable for food use are now allowed. The sentence:

  ‘The loaves, which are shaped by hand, are then left, covered with a cotton cloth, on wooden boards for 25-35 minutes’

  has therefore been amended as follows:

  ‘The loaves, which are shaped by hand, are then left in suitable wooden or stainless steel containers for 25-35 minutes. The leavening container and the loaves are covered with cloths’. |
| --- | --- |

—

It was considered advisable to reword the following sentence to allow the use of other tools and materials (containers and cloths) in the production process that producers may prefer to wooden boards, whether for reasons of complying with hygiene standards or for technical reasons. Containers made of wood or stainless steel and cloths of any material suitable for food use are now allowed. The sentence:

‘The loaves, which are shaped by hand, are then left, covered with a cotton cloth, on wooden boards for 25-35 minutes’

has therefore been amended as follows:

‘The loaves, which are shaped by hand, are then left in suitable wooden or stainless steel containers for 25-35 minutes. The leavening container and the loaves are covered with cloths’.

| — | In order to make the product more recognisable, the stage of marking the loaves with the initials ‘MT’ has been included in the product specification with the following sentence:

  ‘The loaves are then formed by hand into the characteristic shape of “Pane di Matera” and the initials “MT”, in printed capitals, are impressed into the dough at the top; they are then baked in wood-fired ovens or in indirectly heated ovens.’ |
| --- | --- |

—

In order to make the product more recognisable, the stage of marking the loaves with the initials ‘MT’ has been included in the product specification with the following sentence:

‘The loaves are then formed by hand into the characteristic shape of “Pane di Matera” and the initials “MT”, in printed capitals, are impressed into the dough at the top; they are then baked in wood-fired ovens or in indirectly heated ovens.’

| — | The following sentence has been deleted: ‘After a final leavening period of 30 minutes, the loaves are baked in a wood-fired or gas oven’, as it is not very clear. The sentence in fact refers to the stage prior to marking. After being shaped, the loaves are not subject to any further leavening stages. The stage after marking is baking. |
| --- | --- |

—

The following sentence has been deleted: ‘After a final leavening period of 30 minutes, the loaves are baked in a wood-fired or gas oven’, as it is not very clear. The sentence in fact refers to the stage prior to marking. After being shaped, the loaves are not subject to any further leavening stages. The stage after marking is baking.

| — | In order to extend the types of ovens that may be used to bake the bread, the references to ‘gas ovens’ have been replaced by ‘indirectly heated ovens’. This means that both gas ovens and other types of oven can be used by producers. In addition, baking times have been reviewed to take into account the different loaf sizes of the bread.
  The text:

  ‘In the case of wood-fired ovens, after one and a half hours of cooking, the door is opened for a period of 10-30 minutes to let the steam escape; it is then closed again and baking continues for another half an hour. In the case of gas ovens, on the other hand, the vents are opened after one hour to let the steam escape. The oven is closed again for another half an hour with the valves open’

  is amended as follows:

  ‘The baking time varies according to the size of the loaf and the type of oven, from a minimum of 1 hour for the 500 g loaves to a maximum of 4 hours and 30 minutes for the 10 kg loaves. Regardless of the type of loaf used, the flues or the oven door must be opened in the last 15-30 minutes of cooking to allow the steam produced to escape.’ |
| --- | --- |

—

In order to extend the types of ovens that may be used to bake the bread, the references to ‘gas ovens’ have been replaced by ‘indirectly heated ovens’. This means that both gas ovens and other types of oven can be used by producers. In addition, baking times have been reviewed to take into account the different loaf sizes of the bread.

The text:

‘In the case of wood-fired ovens, after one and a half hours of cooking, the door is opened for a period of 10-30 minutes to let the steam escape; it is then closed again and baking continues for another half an hour. In the case of gas ovens, on the other hand, the vents are opened after one hour to let the steam escape. The oven is closed again for another half an hour with the valves open’

is amended as follows:

‘The baking time varies according to the size of the loaf and the type of oven, from a minimum of 1 hour for the 500 g loaves to a maximum of 4 hours and 30 minutes for the 10 kg loaves. Regardless of the type of loaf used, the flues or the oven door must be opened in the last 15-30 minutes of cooking to allow the steam produced to escape.’

| — | The reference to the pores of the crumb having a diameter of ‘from 2-3 mm to as much as 60 mm’ has been deleted. This information is totally irrelevant given that the size of the air bubbles created as the bread rises varies greatly. Therefore, the sentence:

  ‘The characteristics of the bread thus obtained, thanks to the ingredients used and the specific nature of the production process, are its yellow colour, its typical, very uneven porosity (with pores inside the bread varying in diameter from 2-3 mm to as much as 60 mm) and its highly distinctive taste and aroma.’

  has been amended as follows:

  ‘The characteristics of the bread thus obtained, thanks to the ingredients used and the specific nature of the production process, are its yellow colour, its typical, very uneven porosity (with pores inside the bread varying in diameter) and its highly distinctive taste and aroma.’ |
| --- | --- |

—

The reference to the pores of the crumb having a diameter of ‘from 2-3 mm to as much as 60 mm’ has been deleted. This information is totally irrelevant given that the size of the air bubbles created as the bread rises varies greatly. Therefore, the sentence:

‘The characteristics of the bread thus obtained, thanks to the ingredients used and the specific nature of the production process, are its yellow colour, its typical, very uneven porosity (with pores inside the bread varying in diameter from 2-3 mm to as much as 60 mm) and its highly distinctive taste and aroma.’

has been amended as follows:

‘The characteristics of the bread thus obtained, thanks to the ingredients used and the specific nature of the production process, are its yellow colour, its typical, very uneven porosity (with pores inside the bread varying in diameter) and its highly distinctive taste and aroma.’

| — | The shelf life of the bread has been adapted to the new loaf sizes introduced.
  Specifically, the sentence:

  ‘The shelf life of the bread thus obtained can be up to 7 days for the 1 kg loaves and up to 9 days for the 2 kg loaves.’

  has been amended as follows:
  ‘The shelf life of the bread thus obtained can be up to 7 days for the 1 kg loaves and up to 14 days for the 10 kg loaves.’ The shelf life of the intermediate loaf sizes is established by the baker respecting the abovementioned periods. |
| --- | --- |

—

The shelf life of the bread has been adapted to the new loaf sizes introduced.

Specifically, the sentence:

‘The shelf life of the bread thus obtained can be up to 7 days for the 1 kg loaves and up to 9 days for the 2 kg loaves.’

has been amended as follows:

‘The shelf life of the bread thus obtained can be up to 7 days for the 1 kg loaves and up to 14 days for the 10 kg loaves.’ The shelf life of the intermediate loaf sizes is established by the baker respecting the abovementioned periods.

Packaging

Packaging

| — | In order to allow the use of different materials for packaging, the reference to the bread being ‘packaged either in micro-perforated plastic, partly coloured and partly transparent to aid product visibility, or in windowed multilayered paper’
  is amended as follows:

  ‘The product must be packaged using food-grade micro-perforated plastic film or in a food-grade paper bag.’

  The details regarding the characteristics of micro-perforated plastic have been deleted to allow producers greater flexibility as to the presentation of the packaged product. |
| --- | --- |

—

In order to allow the use of different materials for packaging, the reference to the bread being ‘packaged either in micro-perforated plastic, partly coloured and partly transparent to aid product visibility, or in windowed multilayered paper’

is amended as follows:

‘The product must be packaged using food-grade micro-perforated plastic film or in a food-grade paper bag.’

The details regarding the characteristics of micro-perforated plastic have been deleted to allow producers greater flexibility as to the presentation of the packaged product.

Inspection body

Inspection body

Update of information on inspection body.

Labelling

Labelling

| — | The wording ‘pane cotto in forno a legna’ (bread baked in a wood-fired oven) was already permitted by the product specification but the following sentence has been added to regulate its use:

  ‘The wording “pane cotto in forno a legna” (bread baked in a wood-fired oven) may appear near to the product logo and it must be clearly distinguishable from the protected geographical indication “Pane di Matera”’. |
| --- | --- |

—

The wording ‘pane cotto in forno a legna’ (bread baked in a wood-fired oven) was already permitted by the product specification but the following sentence has been added to regulate its use:

‘The wording “pane cotto in forno a legna” (bread baked in a wood-fired oven) may appear near to the product logo and it must be clearly distinguishable from the protected geographical indication “Pane di Matera”’.

| — | It has been specified that for products intended for international markets, the wording ‘indicazione geografica protetta’ (protected geographical indication) may be used in the language of the country concerned. The phrase inserted is as follows:

  ‘For products intended for international markets, the wording “protected geographical indication” may be used in the language of the country concerned.’ |
| --- | --- |

—

It has been specified that for products intended for international markets, the wording ‘indicazione geografica protetta’ (protected geographical indication) may be used in the language of the country concerned. The phrase inserted is as follows:

‘For products intended for international markets, the wording “protected geographical indication” may be used in the language of the country concerned.’

Geographical area

Geographical area

| — | Article 3 of the product specification has been amended to bring it into line with Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012; the second paragraph containing references to packaging and labelling has been moved to Article 6 of the product specification.
  As regards the geographical production area of Pane di Matera, no changes have been made to the version of the specification currently in force. |
| --- | --- |

—

Article 3 of the product specification has been amended to bring it into line with Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012; the second paragraph containing references to packaging and labelling has been moved to Article 6 of the product specification.

As regards the geographical production area of Pane di Matera, no changes have been made to the version of the specification currently in force.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

‘PANE DI MATERA’

‘PANE DI MATERA’

EU No: PGI-IT-02100 — 10.12.2015

EU No: PGI-IT-02100 — 10.12.2015

PDO ( ) PGI ( X )

PDO ( ) PGI ( X )

1.   Name

Name

‘Pane di Matera’

2.   Member State or Third Country

Member State or Third Country

Italy

3.   Description of the agricultural product or foodstuff

Description of the agricultural product or foodstuff

3.1.   Type of product

Type of product

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

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

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

‘Pane di Matera’ is obtained by using only durum wheat flour or semolina, the quantities of which must be in line with the following parameters:

| Protein (%) nitrogen × 5,70  (*4) | Value ≥ 11 |
| --- | --- |
| Yellow index (*3) | Value ≥ 20 |
| Moisture (%) (*4) | Value ≤ 14,50 |
| Ash (% in the dry matter) (*4) | Value ≤ 1,35 in the dry matter |

Protein (%) nitrogen × 5,70  (*4)

*4

Value ≥ 11

Yellow index (*3)

*3

Value ≥ 20

Moisture (%) (*4)

*4

Value ≤ 14,50

Ash (% in the dry matter) (*4)

*4

Value ≤ 1,35 in the dry matter

The characteristics of ‘Pane di Matera’ are its yellow colour, its typical, very uneven porosity (with pores inside the bread varying in diameter) and its highly distinctive taste and aroma.

‘Pane di Matera’ must have the following characteristics when released for consumption:

| — | Cone-shaped or ‘tall’; |
| --- | --- |

—

Cone-shaped or ‘tall’;

| — | Loaves of between 500 g and 10 kg; |
| --- | --- |

—

Loaves of between 500 g and 10 kg;

| — | A crust at least 3 mm thick; |
| --- | --- |

—

A crust at least 3 mm thick;

| — | Pale yellow crumb with characteristic holes; |
| --- | --- |

—

Pale yellow crumb with characteristic holes;

| — | The initials ‘MT’, in printed capitals, impressed into the top of the loaf before baking. |
| --- | --- |

—

The initials ‘MT’, in printed capitals, impressed into the top of the loaf before baking.

The moisture parameters are those laid down in the relevant legislation.

Composition of 100 g of ‘Pane di Matera’

Composition of 100 g of ‘Pane di Matera’

| Protein (%) nitrogen × 5,70 | Value ≥ 8,1 |
| --- | --- |
| Carbohydrates (%) | Value ≥ 51,3 |
| of which fibre | Value ≥ 2,9 |
| Fats (%) | Value ≥ 1,0 |
| Ash (% in the dry matter) | Value ≥ 2,24 |

Protein (%) nitrogen × 5,70

Value ≥ 8,1

Carbohydrates (%)

Value ≥ 51,3

of which fibre

Value ≥ 2,9

Fats (%)

Value ≥ 1,0

Ash (% in the dry matter)

Value ≥ 2,24

Sensory profile of ‘Pane di Matera’

Sensory profile of ‘Pane di Matera’

| Sensory indicators | Minimum value | Maximum value |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Acidic aroma | 1,0 | 2,0 |
| Burnt aroma | 3,0 | 4,5 |
| Acidic taste | 1,0 | 2,5 |
| Crunchiness of the crust | 4,5 | 6,0 |

Sensory indicators

Minimum value

Maximum value

Acidic aroma

1,0

2,0

Burnt aroma

3,0

4,5

Acidic taste

1,0

2,5

Crunchiness of the crust

4,5

6,0

Definition of the sensory characteristics of ‘Pane di Matera’ PGI refers to the following standards: ISO 13299:2016; ISO 8589:2007; ISO 5492:2008; ISO/IEC 17025:2005.

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

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

At least 20 % of the flour and/or semolina used for the production of ‘Pane di Matera’ must come from local landraces and old varieties such as Cappelli, Duro Lucano, Capeiti and Appulo, grown in the Province of Matera.

Flour produced from genetically modified organisms may not be used.

The ingredients are as follows:

| Durum wheat flour and/or semolina | 100 kg |
| --- | --- |
| Sourdough starter | 20-30 kg |
| Salt | 2-3 kg |
| Water | 75-85 l |
| Baker's yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) | 0,5 -1 kg |

Durum wheat flour and/or semolina

100 kg

Sourdough starter

20-30 kg

Salt

2-3 kg

Water

75-85 l

Baker's yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae)

0,5 -1 kg

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

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

All of the stages in the production of ‘Pane di Matera’ take place in the Province of Matera.

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

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

The product must be packaged using food-grade micro-perforated plastic film or in a food-grade paper bag.

Packaging plays a key role in ensuring that the characteristics and typical nature of ‘Pane di Matera’ remain intact and constant and it must be carried out in the defined geographical area.

The purpose of this is to avoid, in line with tradition, any delays between preparation and packaging to preserve all the special characteristics of the bread, and to ensure direct and immediate control over the packaging process, which must in no way be at odds with the preparation of the product or alter its special characteristics or quality. Failure to package the product immediately would mean that the conservation period of at least 1 week, which is a specific characteristic of the bread, could no longer be guaranteed.

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

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

The labels to be affixed to the packaging must contain the wording ‘Indicazione Geografica Protetta’ (Protected Geographical Indication) and ‘Pane di Matera’, plus the EU symbol and the product logo, which must be used only in conjunction with the PGI. The product logo is shown below.

Provided the product has been baked in a wood-fired oven, the wording ‘pane cotto in forno a legna’ (bread baked in a wood-fired oven) may be added to the Protected Geographical Indication ‘Pane di Matera’.

The wording ‘pane cotto in forno a legna’ (bread baked in a wood-fired oven) may appear near to the product logo and must be clearly distinguishable from the protected geographical indication ‘Pane di Matera’.

4.   Concise definition of the geographical area

Concise definition of the geographical area

The production area of ‘Pane di Matera’ covers the whole of the Province of Matera.

5.   Link with the geographical area

Link with the geographical area

The reputation that ‘Pane di Matera’ PGI enjoys is linked to the combination of environmental and production factors in the production area.

Thanks to human endeavour and creativity which, in the context of a well-established tradition, have made it possible to combine environmental factors with cultural and lifestyle needs, ‘Pane di Matera’ is the typical product of a well-defined geographical area and the authentic expression of Matera rural life, as well as a prime economic resource.

The production area of ‘Pane di Matera’ has a major impact on its characteristics and specific features as it influences the qualitative composition of the natural yeast used to produce the bread, the suitability for bread-making of the flour obtained from wheat grown in the hills of Matera, thanks to the soil (clay-rich land) and climate conditions (average annual precipitation 350 mm and average temperature between 5,7 and 24,1 °C) and the production of wood used in the traditional wood-fired ovens that bring out the product's characteristic aroma, and the traditional use of fruit to prepare the sourdough starter.

‘Pane di Matera’, in addition to being the symbol of the peasant-farmer tradition of Matera, is known and appreciated by consumers for its long shelf life.

Proof of the origin and special characteristics of ‘Pane di Matera’ can be found in historical references showing a long tradition of producing this bread dating from the Kingdom of Naples and earlier. As early as 1857, Matera already had four ‘maestri di centimoli’ (master millers) and thus four mills. In every farm, in every home, there was a mortar chiselled into the rock which served to mill the family's wheat. The first industrial mill came onto the scene in 1884, employed around 50 people and had a siren indicating the start and end of the day's work. In those bygone days, every family or group of families had to have its own oven. Then came public bakeries, to which the family's home-made bread would be sent for baking. Every bakery oven was chiselled into the rock and was hermetically sealed. The wood used as fuel consisted mainly of Mediterranean maquis, which produced a particular aroma. Having left their bread there, the women would go back home and the baker hermetically sealed the oven door. After about three hours the oven door would be removed and tall, round loaves of bread would be taken out, now golden in colour and with an unmistakeable aroma. The women identified their bread by putting the initials of the head of the family into the dough beforehand. In 1857 Pietro Antonio Ridola counted eleven bakeries; in 1959-65 there were around fifteen. The inhabitants of Matera did not abandon the bread-making tradition even when living conditions substantially improved around 1969-70 and other foods became a staple. Thus tradition, culture and quality won out.

Reference to publication of the specification

Reference to publication of the specification

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

The Ministry launched the national objection procedure with the publication of the proposal for amending the product specification for the ‘Pane di Matera’ PGI in Official Gazette of the Italian Republic No 235 of 9 October 2015.

Official Gazette of the Italian Republic

The consolidated text of the product specification can be consulted on the following website: http://www.politicheagricole.it/flex/cm/pages/ServeBLOB.php/L/IT/IDPagina/3335

or alternatively:

by going directly to the homepage of the Ministry of Agricultural, Food and Forestry Policy (www.politicheagricole.it) and clicking on ‘Prodotti DOP e IGP’ (top right of the screen), and then on Prodotti DOP, IGP e STG (to the left of the screen), and finally on ‘Disciplinari di Produzione all'esame dell'UE’.

---

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

1

(*1)  The yellow index must be determined on the part of the flour remaining on the sieve with a 0,180 mm mesh.

*1

(*2)  Values determined on 100 parts of the dry matter.’

*2

(2)  The protein content is determined as “total nitrogen”, by multiplying the nitrogen content by the processing coefficient of 5,7.

2

(3)  The consistency of the crumb was assessed by its firmness, measured as the force (N) needed to compress by 25 % the middle of a slice 25 mm thick.’

3

(*3)  The yellow index must be determined on the part of the flour remaining on the sieve with a 0,180 mm mesh.

*3

(*4)  Values determined on 100 parts of the dry matter.

*4

---

| 15.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/30

---

Publication of an application for approval of a minor amendment in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs

(2017/C 305/14)

The European Commission has approved this minor amendment in accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 664/2014 (1).

APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF A MINOR AMENDMENT

Application for approval of a minor amendment in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council
   (2)

‘MARRONI DEL MONFENERA’

EU No: PGI-IT-02282 — 19.1.2017

PDO ( ) PGI ( X ) TSG ( )

1.   Applicant group and legitimate interest

| Associazione Produttori Marroni della Marca Trevigiana |
| --- |
| Piazza Case Rosse 14 |
| 31040 Onigo di Pederobba (TV) |
| ITALIA |
| E-mail | : | marronimonfenera.igp@pec.it
  info@asso-marronimonfenera-igp.it |

Associazione Produttori Marroni della Marca Trevigiana

Piazza Case Rosse 14

31040 Onigo di Pederobba (TV)

ITALIA

E-mail

:

marronimonfenera.igp@pec.it

info@asso-marronimonfenera-igp.it

The producer association Produttori Marroni della Marca Trevigiana is entitled to submit an amendment application pursuant to Article 13(1) of Ministry of Agricultural, Food and Forestry Policy Decree No 12511 of 14 October 2013.

2.   Member State or Third Country

Italy

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

| — | ☒ | Description of product |
| --- | --- | --- |
| — | ☐ | Proof of origin |
| — | ☐ | Method of production |
| — | ☐ | Link |
| — | ☒ | Labelling |
| — | ☒ | Other [packaging] |

—

☒

Description of product

—

☐

Proof of origin

—

☐

Method of production

—

☐

Link

—

☒

Labelling

—

☒

Other [packaging]

4.   Type of amendment(s)

| — | ☐ | Amendment to product specification of registered PDO or PGI to be qualified as minor in accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, that requires no amendment to the published single document. |
| --- | --- | --- |
| — | ☒ | Amendment to product specification of registered PDO or PGI to be qualified as minor in accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, that requires an amendment to the published single document. |
| — | ☐ | Amendment to product specification of registered PDO or PGI to be qualified as minor in accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, for which a single document (or equivalent) has not been published. |
| — | ☐ | Amendment to product specification of registered TSG to be qualified as minor in accordance with the fourth subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012. |

—

☐

Amendment to product specification of registered PDO or PGI to be qualified as minor in accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, that requires no amendment to the published single document.

—

☒

Amendment to product specification of registered PDO or PGI to be qualified as minor in accordance with the third subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, that requires an amendment to the published single document.

—

☐

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

—

☐

Amendment to product specification of registered TSG to be qualified as minor in accordance with the fourth subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012.

5.   Amendment(s)

Description of product

The following two paragraphs of Article 2 of the product specification:

| 1. | ‘Fruit: generally ovoid in shape, with apex protruding only slightly, with one largely flat side and the other markedly convex. Number of fruit per kilogram: 90 or fewer.’ [...]
  ‘The following are eligible for the PGI: fruit belonging to the “Extra” category (fruit size greater than 3 cm — maximum 4 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 3 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp) and category I (fruit size between 2,8 cm and 3 cm — maximum 6 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 5 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp).’
  and of point 3.2 of the Single Document: |
| --- | --- |

1.

‘Fruit: generally ovoid in shape, with apex protruding only slightly, with one largely flat side and the other markedly convex. Number of fruit per kilogram: 90 or fewer.’ [...]

‘The following are eligible for the PGI: fruit belonging to the “Extra” category (fruit size greater than 3 cm — maximum 4 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 3 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp) and category I (fruit size between 2,8 cm and 3 cm — maximum 6 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 5 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp).’

and of point 3.2 of the Single Document:

| 2. | ‘fruit: ovoid in shape, with apex protruding only slightly, with one largely flat side and the other markedly convex. Number of fruit per kilogram: 90 or fewer.’ [...]
  ‘The following are eligible for the PGI: fruit belonging to the “Extra” category (fruit size greater than 3 cm — maximum 4 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 3 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp) and category I (fruit size between 2,8 cm and 3 cm — maximum 6 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 5 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp).’
  are amended as follows:
  ‘Fruit: generally ovoid in shape, with apex protruding only slightly, with one largely flat side and the other markedly convex. Number of fruit per kilogram: 120 or fewer.’ [...]
  ‘The following are eligible for the PGI: fruit belonging to the “Extra” category (fruit size greater than 3 cm — maximum 4 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 3 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp), category I (fruit size between 2,8 cm and 3 cm — maximum 6 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 5 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp), and category II (fruit size between 2,6 and 2,8 cm — maximum 6 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 5 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp).’
  Grounds:
  The amendments in points 1 and 2 are due to the fruit having become smaller, which means that there is a larger number of fruit in 1 kg of product. Indeed, the particularly dry summers of recent years have resulted in smaller fruit, making it necessary to also market chestnuts of smaller sizes under the protected geographical indication.
  Moreover, an inconsistency between the description of the shape of the fruit in the Single Document and that in the technical specification has been corrected. This being a natural product, it is not possible to guarantee absolute regularity in terms of shape, which is why the wording ‘Fruit: generally ovoid in shape’, already contained in the product specification, has been taken over into the Single Document.
  As the other characteristics set out in Article 2 and in point 3.2 of the Single Document are not affected either by the shape or by the size of the fruit, its specific quality characteristics remain unchanged. It is therefore considered that the amendment can be classified as ‘minor’ under points (a)-(e) of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012. |
| --- | --- |

2.

‘fruit: ovoid in shape, with apex protruding only slightly, with one largely flat side and the other markedly convex. Number of fruit per kilogram: 90 or fewer.’ [...]

‘The following are eligible for the PGI: fruit belonging to the “Extra” category (fruit size greater than 3 cm — maximum 4 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 3 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp) and category I (fruit size between 2,8 cm and 3 cm — maximum 6 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 5 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp).’

are amended as follows:

‘Fruit: generally ovoid in shape, with apex protruding only slightly, with one largely flat side and the other markedly convex. Number of fruit per kilogram: 120 or fewer.’ [...]

‘The following are eligible for the PGI: fruit belonging to the “Extra” category (fruit size greater than 3 cm — maximum 4 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 3 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp), category I (fruit size between 2,8 cm and 3 cm — maximum 6 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 5 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp), and category II (fruit size between 2,6 and 2,8 cm — maximum 6 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 5 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp).’

Grounds:

The amendments in points 1 and 2 are due to the fruit having become smaller, which means that there is a larger number of fruit in 1 kg of product. Indeed, the particularly dry summers of recent years have resulted in smaller fruit, making it necessary to also market chestnuts of smaller sizes under the protected geographical indication.

Moreover, an inconsistency between the description of the shape of the fruit in the Single Document and that in the technical specification has been corrected. This being a natural product, it is not possible to guarantee absolute regularity in terms of shape, which is why the wording ‘Fruit: generally ovoid in shape’, already contained in the product specification, has been taken over into the Single Document.

As the other characteristics set out in Article 2 and in point 3.2 of the Single Document are not affected either by the shape or by the size of the fruit, its specific quality characteristics remain unchanged. It is therefore considered that the amendment can be classified as ‘minor’ under points (a)-(e) of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012.

Labelling and packaging

Article 8 of the product specification — Points 3.6 and 3.7 of the Single Document

| 3. | ‘The product must be packaged in net bags intended for food use, the tops of which must be heat sealed or sewn shut.’
  is amended as follows:
  ‘The product must be packaged in net bags intended for food use or in containers suited for food use of various sizes and material. All types of packaging are sealed in such a way that the fruit cannot be removed without breaking the seal.’ |
| --- | --- |

3.

‘The product must be packaged in net bags intended for food use, the tops of which must be heat sealed or sewn shut.’

is amended as follows:

‘The product must be packaged in net bags intended for food use or in containers suited for food use of various sizes and material. All types of packaging are sealed in such a way that the fruit cannot be removed without breaking the seal.’

| 4. | ‘The product is marketed in net bags for food use, in packages weighing 1 kg, 2 kg, 3 kg (heat sealed), 5 kg or 10 kg (sewn shut).’
  is amended as follows:
  ‘The packages may weigh 0,5 kg, 1 kg, 2 kg, 3 kg, 5 kg, 10 kg or 25 kg.’
  Grounds:
  Amendments 3 and 4 reflect the need not to limit the type of packaging, given that the availability of packaging material may vary (heat-sealing systems are no longer available on the Italian market, for example) and that other types of packaging material could become an option in future, for instance material that is more environmentally-friendly. As the amendment affects only the packaging and weight of the product, it is considered that it can be classified as ‘minor’ under points (a)-(e) of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012. |
| --- | --- |

4.

‘The product is marketed in net bags for food use, in packages weighing 1 kg, 2 kg, 3 kg (heat sealed), 5 kg or 10 kg (sewn shut).’

is amended as follows:

‘The packages may weigh 0,5 kg, 1 kg, 2 kg, 3 kg, 5 kg, 10 kg or 25 kg.’

Grounds:

Amendments 3 and 4 reflect the need not to limit the type of packaging, given that the availability of packaging material may vary (heat-sealing systems are no longer available on the Italian market, for example) and that other types of packaging material could become an option in future, for instance material that is more environmentally-friendly. As the amendment affects only the packaging and weight of the product, it is considered that it can be classified as ‘minor’ under points (a)-(e) of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012.

| 5. | The point:






  ‘— | the commercial category (“Extra” or “I”);’ |
| --- | --- | --- |

5.

The point:

‘—

the commercial category (“Extra” or “I”);’

is amended as follows:

| ‘— | the commercial category (“Extra”, “I” or “II”);’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

the commercial category (“Extra”, “I” or “II”);’

A reference to category II is inserted. As this amendment is designed to ensure consistency with the amendments in points 1 and 2 and affects only the labelling of the product, it is considered that it can be classified as ‘minor’ under points (a)-(e) of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

‘MARRONI DEL MONFENERA’

EU No: PGI-IT-02282 — 19.1.2017

PDO ( ) PGI ( X )

1.   Name

‘Marroni del Monfenera’

2.   Member State or Third Country:

Italy

3.   Description of the agricultural product or foodstuff

3.1.   Type of product

Class 1.6: Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed.

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

‘Marroni del Monfenera’ are fresh chestnuts from the local ecotype of plants of the species Castanea sativa Mill. var. sativa. When released for consumption, they must have the following characteristics: kernel: one per fruit, largely smooth or slightly rough; flesh: light hazel colour tending towards straw yellow, pasty/floury texture, sweet and pleasant taste; pellicle: hazel colour, fibrous and resistant pellicular structure, penetrating to only a very minor degree into the kernel; pericarp: bright brown colour, with darker vertical streaks, a coriaceous and resistant structure and a tomentose surface with tomentose style remnants; hilum: largely ovoid in shape, lighter in colour than the pericarp, with more or less evident ‘rays’ spreading out from the centre towards the edge, and which does not extend to the sides of the fruit; fruit: generally ovoid in shape, with apex protruding only slightly, with one largely flat side and the other markedly convex. Number of fruit per kilogram: 120 or fewer. The husk contains at most three fruit.

The following are eligible for the PGI: fruit belonging to the ‘Extra’ category (fruit size greater than 3 cm — maximum 4 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 3 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp), category I (fruit size between 2,8 cm and 3 cm — maximum 6 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 5 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp), and category II (fruit size between 2,6 and 2,8 cm — maximum 6 % by weight of fruit with endocarp affected by insects; maximum 5 % by weight of fruit with damage to the pericarp).

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

—

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

Harvesting, grading, cleaning, sizing and ‘curatura’ soaking must take place in the geographical production area. Produce not placed on the market within 48 hours of harvest undergoes ‘curatura’. This consists in immersing the ‘Marroni del Monfenera’ in water at room temperature for a maximum of nine days. Subsequently, the ‘Marroni del Monfenera’ are removed from the water and dried using a dryer. This process allows the product to be stored fresh for up to three months. ‘Curatura’ must be carried out within a few hours of harvesting, in order to prevent the onset of fermentation inside transport vehicles, especially in years when harvesting occurs during rainy periods or when the temperature is still high.

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

The product must be packaged in net bags intended for food use or in containers suited for food use of various sizes and material. All types of packaging are sealed in such a way that the fruit cannot be removed without breaking the seal. The packages may weigh 0,5 kg, 1 kg, 2 kg, 3 kg, 5 kg, 10 kg or 25 kg.

The product may not be released for consumption before 15 September each year.

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

In addition to the EU graphic symbol and the relevant wordings and information required by law, the following additional information/wordings must feature on the label of the packages: ‘Marroni del Monfenera’ followed by the acronym ‘IGP’ (Italian for ‘PGI’) in characters larger than all the others on the label, such as the name, the company name, the address of the packaging firm, the relevant category, i.e. Extra, I or II, and the gross weight as sold.

The logo is made up of two concentric ovals, inside which are depicted the hills of the Pedemontana del Grappa area. The plain below is divided by the Piave river, which flows down the centre and splits the logo into two asymmetrical parts. There are two chestnut trees, one on the left of the river and one on its right, on which chestnuts are growing abundantly. There are two husks and ten chestnuts, wrapped in two leaves. The drawing extends slightly towards the left beyond the edge of the oval.

4.   Concise definition of the geographical area

The geographical area for ‘Marroni del Monfenera’ is made up of the territory of the following municipalities in Treviso province: Borso del Grappa, Crespano del Grappa, Paderno del Grappa, Possagno, Cavaso del Tomba, Pederobba, San Zenone degli Ezzelini, Fonte, Asolo, Maser, Castelcucco, Monfumo, Cornuda, Montebelluna, Caerano di San Marco, Crocetta del Montello, Volpago del Montello, Giavera del Montello and Nervesa della Battaglia.

5.   Link with the geographical area

The majority of the areas in which ‘Marroni del Monfenera’ are produced come under category No 21 in the Soil Map of Italy (Carta dei Suoli d’Italia), i.e. ‘acidic brown soils, leached brown soils, brown soils and lithosols’. In this zone, this category is to be found exclusively on the hilly right bank of the Piave river along the foothill level, occupying the majority of the geographical production area. These areas are characterised by reactivity ranging from very acidic to acidic, low base saturation and a high rate of mineralisation of organic substances. The area has a lower subalpine, hyper-humid climate, influenced by the steep, very high south-facing slopes of the Alpine foothills. This particular configuration and exposure means that air masses rise up from the plain, causing abundant precipitation, that spring frosts are limited, and that rainwater drains away quickly. This environmental balance makes the land areas and the surrounding environment particularly well suited to the cultivation of ‘Marroni del Monfenera’.

The characteristics that render the protected geographical indication product ‘Marroni del Monfenera’ unique and sets it apart it from other products in the same category are the very sweet flavour of the flesh, the uniform, compact structure of the fruit and its pasty/floury texture. These characteristics, and in particular the flavour, are the result of the distinctive average chemical composition of ‘Marroni del Monfenera’. A comparison by INRAN (Istituto Nazionale di Ricerca per gli Alimenti e la Nutrizione (National Research Institute for Food and Nutrition)) with the chemical composition values of other chestnuts shows that ‘Marroni del Monfenera’ have a higher carbohydrate, lipid and potassium content, and less sodium.

The chemical composition of the fruit, and thus its quality, is linked to the fact that the chestnut tree, a markedly acidophile species, benefits within the ‘Marroni del Monfenera’ cultivation area from the presence of largely acidic foothill soils, with opposite reactivity from those of the bordering areas, which are not present in other foothill areas of Treviso province. This leads to a higher quantity of potassium and a lower quantity of sodium in ‘Marroni del Monfenera’ as compared to other chestnuts, as demonstrated by a comparison between the chemical composition values for the two products, based, in the case of the other chestnuts, on the INRAN tables. The quality of the fruit also derives from the fact that the chestnut trees benefit from the abundant annual average precipitation, which allows leaching of the bedrock of the land, thereby keeping it acidic. Moreover, the particular configuration and exposure of the foothills significantly reduces spring frosts, to which the plant is especially susceptible.

In addition to these important environmental factors, the human factor is also fundamentally important. ‘Marroni del Monfenera’ have been grown since medieval times, as proven by a document from 1351 regulating the harvest between heads of family in the area. The protection of chestnut woods in the ‘Marroni del Monfenera’ area is also confirmed by notarial sources from subsequent centuries, setting out complaints to the relevant authorities concerning illegal cutting in the chestnut woods or the presence of grazing animals out of season which were detrimental to the chestnut harvest. The tradition of such cultivation has been maintained to the present day, in part as a result of the development of numerous events, including the ‘Marroni del Monfenera’ Fair, inaugurated in 1970. The importance of ‘Marroni del Monfenera’ chestnuts to the local economy and their reputation are demonstrated by the many initiatives that take place every year. Furthermore, to mark the 30th anniversary of the Fair, the Municipality of Pederobba, which hosted the event, issued a series of postcards and a special postal cancellation mark.

Reference to publication of the specification

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

The Ministry has launched the national objection procedure with the publication of the proposal for recognising ‘Marroni del Monfenera’ as a protected geographical indication in Official Gazette of the Italian Republic No 256 of 2 November 2016.

The consolidated text of the product specification can be consulted on the following website: http://www.politicheagricole.it/flex/cm/pages/ServeBLOB.php/L/IT/IDPagina/3335

or alternatively:

by going directly to the homepage of the Ministry of Agricultural, Food and Forestry Policy (www.politicheagricole.it) and clicking on ‘Prodotti DOP e IGP’ (at the top right-hand side of the screen), then on ‘Prodotti DOP, IGP e STG’ (on the left-hand side of the screen), and finally by clicking on ‘Disciplinari di Produzione all’esame dell’UE’.

---

(1)  OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 17.

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

---