# Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali C 177/2019

| | ISSN 1977-0987 |
| --- | --- |
| Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali
  tal-Unjoni Ewropea | C 177 |
| | |
| Edizzjoni bil-Malti | Informazzjoni u Avviżi | Volum 6223 ta' Mejju 2019 |

ISSN 1977-0987

Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali

tal-Unjoni Ewropea

C 177

Edizzjoni bil-Malti

Informazzjoni u Avviżi

Volum 6223 ta' Mejju 2019

---

| Werrej | Paġna |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Informazzjoni |
| | INFORMAZZJONI MINN ISTITUZZJONIJIET, KORPI, UFFIĊĊJI U AĠENZIJI TAL-UNJONI EWROPEA |
| | Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea |
| 2019/C 177/01 | Rata tal-kambju tal-euro | 1 |
| 2019/C 177/02 | Deċiżjoni ta’ Implimentazzjoni tal-Kummissjoni tal-14 ta’ Mejju 2019 dwar il-pubblikazzjoni f’Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea tal-applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda mhux minuri fi Speċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott, kif imsemmi fl-Artiklu 53 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill, għall-isem Banon (DOP) | 2 |
| 2019/C 177/03 | Deċiżjoni ta’ Implimentazzjoni tal-Kummissjoni tal-14 ta’ Mejju 2019 dwar il-pubblikazzjoni f’Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea tal-applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda mhux minuri fi speċifikazzjoni tal-prodott imsemmija fl-Artikolu 53 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill għall-isem Beurre d’Isigny (DOP) | 14 |
| | INFORMAZZJONI DWAR IŻ-ŻONA EKONOMIKA EWROPEA |
| | Awtorità ta' Sorveljanza EFTA |
| 2019/C 177/04 | Stedina biex jitressqu kummenti skont l-Artikolu 1(2) fil-Parti I tal-Protokoll 3 tal-Ftehim bejn l-Istati tal-EFTA dwar it-Twaqqif ta’ Awtorità ta’ Sorveljanza u Qorti tal-Ġustizzja dwar kwistjonijiet ta’ għajnuna mill-Istat | 27 |

Werrej

Paġna

IV   Informazzjoni

INFORMAZZJONI MINN ISTITUZZJONIJIET, KORPI, UFFIĊĊJI U AĠENZIJI TAL-UNJONI EWROPEA

Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea

2019/C 177/01

Rata tal-kambju tal-euro

1

2019/C 177/02

Deċiżjoni ta’ Implimentazzjoni tal-Kummissjoni tal-14 ta’ Mejju 2019 dwar il-pubblikazzjoni f’Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea tal-applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda mhux minuri fi Speċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott, kif imsemmi fl-Artiklu 53 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill, għall-isem Banon (DOP)

Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea

2

2019/C 177/03

Deċiżjoni ta’ Implimentazzjoni tal-Kummissjoni tal-14 ta’ Mejju 2019 dwar il-pubblikazzjoni f’Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea tal-applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda mhux minuri fi speċifikazzjoni tal-prodott imsemmija fl-Artikolu 53 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill għall-isem Beurre d’Isigny (DOP)

Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea

14

INFORMAZZJONI DWAR IŻ-ŻONA EKONOMIKA EWROPEA

Awtorità ta' Sorveljanza EFTA

2019/C 177/04

Stedina biex jitressqu kummenti skont l-Artikolu 1(2) fil-Parti I tal-Protokoll 3 tal-Ftehim bejn l-Istati tal-EFTA dwar it-Twaqqif ta’ Awtorità ta’ Sorveljanza u Qorti tal-Ġustizzja dwar kwistjonijiet ta’ għajnuna mill-Istat

27

---

| | V   Avviżi |
| --- | --- |
| | PROĊEDURI AMMINISTRATTIVI |
| | L-Uffiċċju Ewropew għas-Selezzjoni tal-Persunal (EPSO) |
| 2019/C 177/05 | Avviż ta’ kompetizzjoni ġenerali | 55 |
| | PROĊEDURI DWAR L-IMPLIMENTAZZJONI TAL-POLITIKA TAL-KOMPETIZZJONI |
| | Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea |
| 2019/C 177/06 | Notifika minn qabel ta' konċentrazzjoni (Il-Każ M.9323 — RheinEnergie/SPIE/TankE) — Każ li jista' jiġi kkunsidrat għal proċedura ssimplifikata (
  1
  ) | 56 |
| 2019/C 177/07 | Notifika minn qabel ta’ konċentrazzjoni (Il-Każ M.9328 — Platinum Equity Group/Multi-Color Corporation) — Każ li jista’ jiġi kkunsidrat għal proċedura ssimplifikata (
  1
  ) | 58 |

V   Avviżi

PROĊEDURI AMMINISTRATTIVI

L-Uffiċċju Ewropew għas-Selezzjoni tal-Persunal (EPSO)

2019/C 177/05

Avviż ta’ kompetizzjoni ġenerali

55

PROĊEDURI DWAR L-IMPLIMENTAZZJONI TAL-POLITIKA TAL-KOMPETIZZJONI

Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea

2019/C 177/06

Notifika minn qabel ta' konċentrazzjoni (Il-Każ M.9323 — RheinEnergie/SPIE/TankE) — Każ li jista' jiġi kkunsidrat għal proċedura ssimplifikata (
  1
  )

1

56

2019/C 177/07

Notifika minn qabel ta’ konċentrazzjoni (Il-Każ M.9328 — Platinum Equity Group/Multi-Color Corporation) — Każ li jista’ jiġi kkunsidrat għal proċedura ssimplifikata (
  1
  )

1

58

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Test b'rilevanza għaż-ŻEE. |

---

(1)   Test b'rilevanza għaż-ŻEE.

1

| MT | |
| --- | --- |

MT

---

IV Informazzjoni

INFORMAZZJONI MINN ISTITUZZJONIJIET, KORPI, UFFIĊĊJI U AĠENZIJI TAL-UNJONI EWROPEA

Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea

| 23.5.2019 | MT | Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea | C 177/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2019

MT

Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea

C 177/1

---

Rata tal-kambju tal-euro (1)

It-22 ta’ Mejju 2019

(2019/C 177/01)

1 euro =

| | Munita | Rata tal-kambju |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | Dollaru Amerikan | 1,1171 |
| JPY | Yen Ġappuniż | 123,27 |
| DKK | Krona Daniża | 7,4680 |
| GBP | Lira Sterlina | 0,88280 |
| SEK | Krona Żvediża | 10,7600 |
| CHF | Frank Żvizzeru | 1,1252 |
| ISK | Krona Iżlandiża | 138,50 |
| NOK | Krona Norveġiża | 9,7598 |
| BGN | Lev Bulgaru | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Krona Ċeka | 25,793 |
| HUF | Forint Ungeriż | 326,54 |
| PLN | Zloty Pollakk | 4,3038 |
| RON | Leu Rumen | 4,7625 |
| TRY | Lira Turka | 6,8110 |
| AUD | Dollaru Awstraljan | 1,6221 |
| CAD | Dollaru Kanadiż | 1,4952 |
| HKD | Dollaru ta' Hong Kong | 8,7692 |
| NZD | Dollaru tan-New Zealand | 1,7173 |
| SGD | Dollaru tas-Singapor | 1,5399 |
| KRW | Won tal-Korea t'Isfel | 1 329,30 |
| ZAR | Rand ta' l-Afrika t'Isfel | 16,0504 |
| CNY | Yuan ren-min-bi Ċiniż | 7,7108 |
| HRK | Kuna Kroata | 7,4260 |
| IDR | Rupiah Indoneżjan | 16 225,88 |
| MYR | Ringgit Malażjan | 4,6756 |
| PHP | Peso Filippin | 58,610 |
| RUB | Rouble Russu | 71,7625 |
| THB | Baht Tajlandiż | 35,686 |
| BRL | Real Brażiljan | 4,5163 |
| MXN | Peso Messikan | 21,2345 |
| INR | Rupi Indjan | 77,8600 |

Munita

Rata tal-kambju

USD

Dollaru Amerikan

1,1171

JPY

Yen Ġappuniż

123,27

DKK

Krona Daniża

7,4680

GBP

Lira Sterlina

0,88280

SEK

Krona Żvediża

10,7600

CHF

Frank Żvizzeru

1,1252

ISK

Krona Iżlandiża

138,50

NOK

Krona Norveġiża

9,7598

BGN

Lev Bulgaru

1,9558

CZK

Krona Ċeka

25,793

HUF

Forint Ungeriż

326,54

PLN

Zloty Pollakk

4,3038

RON

Leu Rumen

4,7625

TRY

Lira Turka

6,8110

AUD

Dollaru Awstraljan

1,6221

CAD

Dollaru Kanadiż

1,4952

HKD

Dollaru ta' Hong Kong

8,7692

NZD

Dollaru tan-New Zealand

1,7173

SGD

Dollaru tas-Singapor

1,5399

KRW

Won tal-Korea t'Isfel

1 329,30

ZAR

Rand ta' l-Afrika t'Isfel

16,0504

CNY

Yuan ren-min-bi Ċiniż

7,7108

HRK

Kuna Kroata

7,4260

IDR

Rupiah Indoneżjan

16 225,88

MYR

Ringgit Malażjan

4,6756

PHP

Peso Filippin

58,610

RUB

Rouble Russu

71,7625

THB

Baht Tajlandiż

35,686

BRL

Real Brażiljan

4,5163

MXN

Peso Messikan

21,2345

INR

Rupi Indjan

77,8600

---

(1)  Sors: rata tal-kambju ta' referenza ppubblikata mill-Bank Ċentrali Ewropew.

---

| 23.5.2019 | MT | Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea | C 177/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2019

MT

Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea

C 177/2

---

DEĊIŻJONI TA’ IMPLIMENTAZZJONI TAL-KUMMISSJONI

tal-14 ta’ Mejju 2019

dwar il-pubblikazzjoni f’Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea tal-applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda mhux minuri fi Speċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott, kif imsemmi fl-Artiklu 53 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill, għall-isem “Banon” (DOP)

(2019/C 177/02)

IL-KUMMISSJONI EWROPEA,

Wara li kkunsidrat it-Trattat dwar il-Funzjonament tal-Unjoni Ewropea,

Wara li kkunsidrat ir-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill tal-21 ta’ Novembru 2012 dwar skemi tal-kwalità għal prodotti agrikoli u oġġetti tal-ikel (1), u b’mod partikulari l-Artikolu 50(2)(a) flimkien mal-Artikolu 53(2) tiegħu,

Billi:

| (1) | Franza bagħtet applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda mhux minuri fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ta’ “Banon” (DOP) skont l-Artikolu 49(4) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Franza bagħtet applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda mhux minuri fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ta’ “Banon” (DOP) skont l-Artikolu 49(4) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012.

| (2) | Skont l-Artikolu 50 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012, il-Kummissjoni vvalutat l-applikazzjoni u kkonkludiet li din tissodisfa r-rekwiżiti stabbiliti f’dak ir-Regolament. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Skont l-Artikolu 50 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012, il-Kummissjoni vvalutat l-applikazzjoni u kkonkludiet li din tissodisfa r-rekwiżiti stabbiliti f’dak ir-Regolament.

| (3) | Sabiex jingħata lok għat-tressiq ta’ avviżi ta’ oppożizzjoni skont l-Artikolu 51 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012, l-applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda mhux minuri fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott, kif jissemma fl-ewwel subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 10(1) tar-Regolament ta’ Implimentazzjoni tal-Kummissjoni (UE) Nru 668/2014 (2), inkluż id-Dokument Uniku emendat u r-referenza għall-pubblikazzjoni tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott rilevanti, għall-isem irreġistrat “Banon” (DOP), jenħtieġ li tiġi ppubblikata f’Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Sabiex jingħata lok għat-tressiq ta’ avviżi ta’ oppożizzjoni skont l-Artikolu 51 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012, l-applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda mhux minuri fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott, kif jissemma fl-ewwel subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 10(1) tar-Regolament ta’ Implimentazzjoni tal-Kummissjoni (UE) Nru 668/2014 (2), inkluż id-Dokument Uniku emendat u r-referenza għall-pubblikazzjoni tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott rilevanti, għall-isem irreġistrat “Banon” (DOP), jenħtieġ li tiġi ppubblikata f’Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea,

IDDEĊIDIET KIF ĠEJ:

Artikolu Uniku

L-applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda mhux minuri fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott, kif jissemma fl-ewwel subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 10(1) tar-Regolament ta’ Implimentazzjoni tal-Kummissjoni (UE) Nru 668/2014, inkluż id-Dokument Uniku emendat u r-referenza għall-pubblikazzjoni tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott rilevanti, għall-isem irreġistrat “Banon” (DOP), tinsab fl-Anness ta’ din id-Deċiżjoni.

Skont l-Artikolu 51 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012, il-pubblikazzjoni ta’ din id-Deċiżjoni għandha tagħti d-dritt ta’ oppożizzjoni għall-emenda kif jissemma fl-ewwel paragrafu ta’ dan l-Artikolu fi żmien tliet xhur mid-data tal-pubblikazzjoni ta’ din id-Deċiżjoni f’Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea.

Magħmul fi Brussell, l-14 ta’ Mejju 2019.

Għall-Kummissjoni

Phil HOGAN

Membru tal-Kummissjoni

---

(1)  ĠU L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  Ir-Regolament ta’ Implimentazzjoni tal-Kummissjoni (UE) Nru 668/2014 tat-13 ta’ Ġunju 2014 li jistabbilixxi regoli għall-applikazzjoni tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill dwar skemi tal-kwalità għal prodotti agrikoli u oġġetti tal-ikel (ĠU L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

2

---

ANNESS

APPLIKAZZJONI GĦALL-APPROVAZZJONI TA’ EMENDA MHUX MINURI GĦALL-ISPEĊIFIKAZZJONI TA’ DENOMINAZZJONI TA’ ORIĠINI PROTETTA JEW TA’ INDIKAZZJONI ĠEOGRAFIKA PROTETTA

Applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda skont l-ewwel subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 53(2) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012

“BANON”

Nru tal-UE: PDO-FR-0290-AM02 – 10.1.2018

DOP ( X ) IĠP ( )

1.   Grupp applikant u interess leġittimu

| Isem: Syndicat Interprofessionnel de Défense et de Promotion du Banon |
| --- |
| Indirizz: |
| 570, Avenue de la libération |
| 04100 MANOSQUE |
| FRANCE |
| Telefown: +33 492874755 |
| Faks: +33 492727313 |
| Posta elettronika: v.enjalbert@mre-paca.fr |

Isem: Syndicat Interprofessionnel de Défense et de Promotion du Banon

Indirizz:

570, Avenue de la libération

04100 MANOSQUE

FRANCE

Telefown: +33 492874755

Faks: +33 492727313

Posta elettronika: v.enjalbert@mre-paca.fr

Il-grupp huwa magħmul minn produtturi tal-ħalib u minn dawk li jipproċessaw u jieħdu ħsieb il-maturazzjoni, u għaldaqstant għandu d-dritt leġittimu li jitlob emendi fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni.

2.   Stat membru jew pajjiż terz

Franza

3.   Intestatura fl-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott affettwata mill-emenda/i

| — | ☒ | Isem il-prodott |
| --- | --- | --- |
| — | ☒ | Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott |
| — | ☒ | Żona ġeografika |
| — | ☒ | Prova tal-oriġini |
| — | ☒ | Metodu ta’ produzzjoni |
| — | ☒ | Rabta |
| — | ☒ | Tikkettar |
| — | ☒ | Oħrajn: aġġornamenti tad-dettalji tal-korp ta’ kontroll u tal-grupp, rekwiżiti nazzjonali. |

—

☒

Isem il-prodott

—

☒

Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott

—

☒

Żona ġeografika

—

☒

Prova tal-oriġini

—

☒

Metodu ta’ produzzjoni

—

☒

Rabta

—

☒

Tikkettar

—

☒

Oħrajn: aġġornamenti tad-dettalji tal-korp ta’ kontroll u tal-grupp, rekwiżiti nazzjonali.

4.   Tip ta’ emenda/i

| — | ☒ | Emenda għall-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ta’ DOP jew IĠP irreġistrata li ma għandhiex tikkwalifika bħala minuri skont it-tielet subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 53(2) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012. |
| --- | --- | --- |
| — | ☐ | Emenda għall-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott ta’ DOP jew IĠP irreġistrata li għaliha ma jkun ġie rreġistrat l-ebda Dokument Uniku (jew ekwivalenti) u li ma għandhiex tikkwalifika bħala minuri skont it-tielet subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 53(2) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012. |

—

☒

Emenda għall-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott ta’ DOP jew IĠP irreġistrata li ma għandhiex tikkwalifika bħala minuri skont it-tielet subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 53(2) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012.

—

☐

Emenda għall-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott ta’ DOP jew IĠP irreġistrata li għaliha ma jkun ġie rreġistrat l-ebda Dokument Uniku (jew ekwivalenti) u li ma għandhiex tikkwalifika bħala minuri skont it-tielet subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 53(2) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012.

5.   Emenda/i

5.1.   Isem

Fl-intestatura “Isem il-prodott”, id-dispożizzjoni li ġejja:

“Id-denominazzjoni ta’ oriġini protetta definita f’din l-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott hija: ‘Banon’.”

hija ssostitwita bi:

“Banon”

Il-paragrafu li ġej tħassar:

“L-isem tal-ġobon ‘Banon’ ġej mill-isem tal-muniċipalità ta’ Banon, li tinsab fid-département ta’ Alpes-de-Haute-Provence, post ta’ fieri u ta’ kummerċ sa mill-Medju Evu.”

L-isem tad-DOP hija meqjusa suffiċjenti f’din l-intestatura tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott.

5.2.   Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott

Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott

Id-dispożizzjoni “Il-qoxra tiegħu hija ta’ lewn isfar fil-krema taħt il-weraq” hija sostitwita bi “Il-qoxra tiegħu hija ta’ lewn isfar fil-krema jew lewn il-bronż taħt il-weraq”.

Rigward il-kulur tal-qoxra taħt il-weraq, il-lewn “isfar fil-krema” huwa kompletat bil-kliem “jew lewn il-bronż” biex jikkaratterizza aħjar il-prodott.

Ġie miżjud il-paragrafu li ġej:

“Huwa ġobon ikkaratterizzat minn ħjiliet ta’ annimali, l-aktar il-mogħoż, li spiss huma akkumpanjati minn irwejjaħ ta’ ammonijaka u ta’ pjanti u siġar żgħar, bi ftit imrar fl-aħħar. Il-konsistenza tiegħu hija kremuża u ddub fil-ħalq.”.

Dawn id-dettalji ġejjin mill-ħidma tal-kummissjoni li wettqet l-eżami organolettiku tal-prodott.

Dawn l-emendi saru wkoll fid-Dokument Uniku.

5.3.   Żona ġeografika

Żona ġeografika

Fl-intestatura “Definizzjoni fil-qosor taż-żona ġeografika”, il-lista tal-muniċipalitajiet taż-żona ġeografika ġiet aġġornata wara bidliet fl-ismijiet ta’ ċerti muniċipalitajiet taż-żona ġeografika. Il-perimetru ma nbidilx.

5.4.   Prova tal-oriġini

Prova tal-oriġini

L-obbligu li jinżamm reġistru għall-kwantitajiet ta’ ħalib mixtrija tneħħa għall-operaturi “bdiewa” peress li r-regolamenti nazzjonali ma jippermettulhomx li jixtru l-ħalib. Madankollu dan inżamm għall-operaturi li mhumiex bdiewa.

5.5.   Metodu ta’ produzzjoni

Metodu ta’ produzzjoni

—   ir-razza tal-mogħoż:

Il-paragrafu li ġej tħassar:

“Sal-31 ta’ Diċembru 2013, il-mogħoż tal-ħalib tar-razez Communes Provençales, Roves, Alpines u t-taħlit bejn dawn ir-razez għandhom jikkostitwixxu ta’ mill-inqas 60 % ta’ kull merħla.”

Il-paragrafu li ġej:

“Sa mill-1 ta’ Jannar 2014, il-ħalib użat għall-produzzjoni tal-‘Banon’ għandu jiġi unikament mill-mogħoż tar-razez Communes Provençales, Roves, Alpines u t-taħlit bejn dawn ir-razez.”

għandu jinbidel bi:

“Il-ħalib użat għall-produzzjoni tal-‘Banon’ għandu jiġi unikament mill-mogħoż tar-razez Communes Provençales, Roves, Alpines u t-taħlit bejn dawn ir-razez.”

L-iskadenzi fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott tħassru għax inqabżu.

Dawn id-dispożizzjonijiet tħassru wkoll mis-sommarju.

—   żmien minimu ta’ ragħa u żmien minimu li matulu l-mogħoż iridu jsibu l-ikel gross tagħhom mir-ragħa:

Il-paragrafu li ġej:

“Il-mogħoż għandhom jirgħu b’mod regolari fil-bwar u l-mergħat taż-żona għal mill-inqas 210 ijiem fis-sena.”

huwa sostitwit bi:

“Il-mogħoż għandhom jirgħu b’mod regolari fil-bwar u l-mergħat taż-żona ġeografika għal mill-inqas 210 ijiem fis-sena.”

Il-kliem “żona ġeografika” huwa aktar preċiż minn “żona” u jippermetti kontroll aktar faċli.

Din l-emenda saret ukoll fid-Dokument Uniku.

Id-dispożizzjonijiet

“Għal ta’ mill-inqas 4 xhur fis-sena għandhom jieħdu l-biċċa l-kbira tal-ikel gross tagħhom mir-ragħa.”

u

“Il-mogħoż għandhom jirgħu b’mod regolari fil-bwar u l-mergħat taż-żona ġeografika għal mill-inqas 210 ijiem fis-sena.”

huma mħassra darba.

Il-perjodu minimu ta’ ragħa u dak li matulu l-mogħoż iridu jsibu l-ikel gross tagħhom mir-ragħa, ippreżentati darbtejn fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott, tneħħew biex tiġi evitata r-ripetizzjoni.

Dawn l-emendi saru wkoll fid-Dokument Uniku.

—   limitazzjoni ta’ għoti ta’ għalf mill-mejjilla:

Is-sentenza

“L-għoti ta’ għalf mill-mejjilla huwa limitat kull sena u kuljum.”

tneħħiet peress li din is-sentenza ma żżid xejn mal-valuri massimi ta’ limitazzjoni li diġà tinsab fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott.

Din l-emenda saret ukoll fid-Dokument Uniku.

—   razzjon supplimentari:

Il-kliem “jew prodott sekondarju taċ-ċereali” ġie miżjud biex ma jiġix eskluż għalf kompost li t-tikketta tiegħu tispeċifika li jinkludi ċereali u prodotti sekondarji taċ-ċereali.

Din l-emenda saret ukoll fid-Dokument Uniku.

—   limitazzjoni tax-xiri ta’ għalf minn barra ż-żona ġeografika:

Is-sentenza “Huwa limitat ukoll ix-xiri ta’ għalf minn barra ż-żona” tneħħiet peress li m’għandhiex valur mixtieq u lanqas xi element ta’ limitazzjoni fattwali. Fil-fatt il-limitazzjoni tax-xiri ta’ għalf minn barra ż-żona ġeografika hija rregolata mid-dispożizzjoni li ġejja tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott:

“L-għoti ta’ għalf u ta’ xnien deidrat minn barra ż-żona ġeografika huwa limitat għal 250 kg ta’ materja prima fis-sena għal kull mogħża adulta preżenti.”

Din l-emenda saret ukoll fid-Dokument Uniku.

—   mod ta’ distribuzzjoni tax-xnien deidrat kuljum:

Id-dispożizzjoni li ġejja:

“L-għoti ta’ xnien deidrat huwa llimitat għal 400 g ta’ materja prima kuljum għal kull mogħża adulta preżenti f’ta’ mill-inqas żewġ porzjonijiet, u għal 60 kg ta’ materja prima fis-sena għal kull mogħża adulta preżenti.”

hija ssostitwita bi:

“L-għoti ta’ xnien deidrat huwa limitat għal 400 g ta’ materja prima kuljum għal kull mogħża adulta preżenti u għal 60 kg ta’ materja prima fis-sena għal kull mogħża adulta preżenti.”

L-obbligu li x-xnien deidrat jitqassam f’darbtejn tneħħa peress li l-kwantitajiet żgħar imqassma ma jiġġustifikawx din il-prekawzjoni (li kienet iddaħħlet peress li kwantità kbira wisq ta’ nitroġenu tista’ tikkawża marda metabolika serja, l-alkalożi).

Din l-emenda saret ukoll fid-Dokument Uniku.

—   għalf ipprojbit:

Il-paragrafu:

“L-għalf miżmum fis-silo u l-għalf marbut b’qafla, il-kruċiferi u pjanti u żrieragħ oħrajn li jistgħu jagħtu togħma ħażina lill-ħalib huma pprojbiti.”

huwa sostitwit bi:

“L-għalf miżmum fis-silo, l-għalf marbut b’qafla u l-kruċiferi tal-għalf huma pprojbiti.”

Peress li l-valur immirat “u pjanti u żrieragħ oħrajn li jistgħu jagħtu togħma ħażina lill-ħalib” mhuwiex daqstant preċiż biex ikun faċilment kontrollabbli, dan tneħħa.

Din l-emenda saret ukoll fid-Dokument Uniku.

—   l-introduzzjoni tal-projbizzjoni ta’ OĠM:

Ġie miżjud il-paragrafu li ġej:

“Fl-għalf tal-annimali huma awtorizzati biss il-pjanti, il-prodotti sekondarji u l-għalf komplementari derivat minn prodotti mhux transġeniċi. It-tħawwil ta’ kultivazzjonijiet transġeniċi huwa projbit fl-uċuħ kollha ta’ azjenda li tipproduċi ħalib li huwa maħsub biex jiġi pproċessat f”Banon’ DOP. Din il-projbizzjoni hija maħsuba għal kull speċi veġetali li tista’ tingħata bħala għalf lill-annimali tal-ħalib tal-azjenda, u kull kultura ta’ speċi li tista’ tikkontaminahom.”

Din id-dispożizzjoni tippermetti li, minn naħa, jinżamm il-karattru tal-għalf tradizzjonali, u min-naħa l-oħra, jinżammu l-metodi tradizzjonali ta’ għalf tal-annimali.

Din l-emenda saret ukoll fid-Dokument Uniku.

—   il-provenjenza tal-għalf:

Il-paragrafu li ġej ġie miżjud fid-Dokument Uniku: “Rigward il-provenjenza tal-għalf, minħabba l-fatturi naturali taż-żona ġeografika, il-produzzjoni ta’ konċentrati hija diffiċli u dik tal-għalf hija limitata. Peress li l-oriġini tal-konċentrati mhijiex speċifikata, jistgħu jkunu ġejjin minn barra ż-żona ġeografika. Ir-razzjon bażiku jiġi essenzjalment miż-żona ġeografika, iżda jista’ jitqassam ukoll tiben li jkun ġej minn barra ż-żona ġeografika lill-mogħoż. Il-limitazzjoni tal-kwantità ta’ konċentrati u l-limitazzjoni tal-kwantità ta’ tiben li jista’ jiġi minn barra ż-żona ġeografika jfissru li l-parti l-kbira tal-għalf ġejja miż-żona. Fil-fatt, il-provvisti li jistgħu jiġu minn barra ż-żona ġeografika jirrappreżentaw għal kull mogħża u kull sena:

| — | 250 kg ta’ materja prima tal-għalf u ta’ xnien deidrat jew madwar 213 kg ta’ materja niexfa (190 kg ta’ għalf b’rata medja ta’ 84 % materja niexfa jikkorrispondu għal 160 kg ta’ materja niexfa, u 60 kg ta’ xnien deidrat b’rata medja ta’ 89 % materja niexfa jikkorrispondu għal 53 kg ta’ materja niexfa), |
| --- | --- |

—

250 kg ta’ materja prima tal-għalf u ta’ xnien deidrat jew madwar 213 kg ta’ materja niexfa (190 kg ta’ għalf b’rata medja ta’ 84 % materja niexfa jikkorrispondu għal 160 kg ta’ materja niexfa, u 60 kg ta’ xnien deidrat b’rata medja ta’ 89 % materja niexfa jikkorrispondu għal 53 kg ta’ materja niexfa),

| — | 250 kg ta’ materjal niexef minn konċentrati (ekwivalenti għal 270 kg ta’ materja prima) minn barra ż-żona ġeografika għal kull mogħża u kull sena. |
| --- | --- |

—

250 kg ta’ materjal niexef minn konċentrati (ekwivalenti għal 270 kg ta’ materja prima) minn barra ż-żona ġeografika għal kull mogħża u kull sena.

Meta wieħed iqis li mogħża għandha kapaċità medja annwali ta’ inġestjoni ta’ 1 100 kg, il-proporzjon ta’ għalf li ġej miż-żona ġeografika jirrappreżenta għalhekk mill-inqas 58 % (f’materja niexfa).”

Din iż-żieda fid-Dokument Uniku tgħin biex jintwera li l-għalf tal-mogħoż ġej l-aktar miż-żona ġeografika. Dan l-għalf ma jistax jiġi kollu miż-żona ġeografika minħabba l-fatturi naturali deskritti fil-punt “Rabta maż-żona ġeografika”.

—   it-temperatura u t-tul ta’ ħin taż-żieda tat-tames:

Il-paragrafu:

“Kwalunkwe trattament fiżiku jew kimiku huwa pprojbit ħlief għall-filtrazzjoni maħsuba biex telimina l-impuritajiet makroskopiċi, għat-tkessiħ għal temperatura pożittiva għall-preservazzjoni u għat-tisħin mill-ġdid tal-ħalib sa massimu ta’ 35 °C qabel iż-żieda tat-tames.”

huwa sostitwit bi:

“Kwalunkwe trattament fiżiku jew kimiku huwa pprojbit ħlief għall-filtrazzjoni maħsuba biex telimina l-impuritajiet makroskopiċi, għat-tkessiħ għal temperatura pożittiva għall-preservazzjoni u għat-tisħin mill-ġdid tal-ħalib qabel iż-żieda tat-tames.”

Peress li l-firxa tat-temperatura taż-żieda tat-tames hija definita strettament fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott irreġistrat skont ir-Regolament (UE) Nru 1211/2013 tat-28 ta’ Novembru 2013 (bejn 29 °C u 35 °C), u l-ħalib użat huwa ħalib tal-mogħża mhux ipproċessat, il-kunċett intermedjarju ta’ temperatura tat-tisħin mill-ġdid tneħħa għaliex mhux meħtieġ: dan huwa t-tisħin mill-ġdid tal-ħalib għall-fażi taż-żieda tat-tames (li t-temperatura tagħha hija diġà speċifikata).

Id-dispożizzjoni:

“Għall-prodotti tal-ħalib, it-tames għandu jiġi miżjud sa massimu ta’ erba’ sigħat wara l-aħħar taħliba miġbura.”

hija sostitwita bi:

“Għall-prodotti tal-ħalib, it-tames għandu jiġi miżjud sa mhux aktar tard minn 18-il siegħa wara li l-ħalib jasal fil-fabbrika tal-ġobon u qabel nofsinhar tal-jum ta’ wara l-aħħar taħliba miġbura.”

It-tul ta’ ħin għaż-żieda tat-tames għall-prodotti tal-ħalib ġie emendat biex l-impriżi jkunu jistgħu jadattaw l-organizzazzjoni tagħhom għaż-żmien li fih jinġabar il-ħalib u għall-iżgħar volum ta’ ħalib użat f’kull żieda tat-tames. Fil-fatt, l-iskeda attwali tal-ġbir tinvolvi l-ġbir tal-ħalib billejl. L-aħħar taħliba tinġabar għal xi s-sagħtejn u nofs ta’ filgħodu u tiġi miżjuda bit-tames fil-borma l-kbira (1 000 litru), mas-sitta u nofs ta’ filgħodu. Iżda minħabba t-tnaqqis fin-numru ta’ bdiewa involuti u l-volumi żgħar, huwa rrakkomandat li x-xogħol ta’ billejl jiġi limitat u li ż-żieda tat-tames fil-ħalib tkun tista’ ssir mit-tmienja ta’ filgħodu, fi kwantità żgħira (borom ta’ 80 l), li jista’ jtawwal il-proċess sa nofsinhar.

—   il-fażi tal-iffurmar

Il-paragrafu:

“L-iffurmar iseħħ direttament wara t-tiswib tax-xorrox. Il-ġobnijiet jiġu ffurmati manwalment fil-qwieleb. L-użu tas-separaturi u tal-forom multipli huwa permess. Kull forma ta’ ffurmar mekkaniku huwa pprojbit.”

Ġie sostitwit bi:

“L-iffurmar iseħħ direttament wara t-tiswib tax-xorrox. Il-ġobnijiet jiġu ffurmati manwalment fil-qwieleb. L-użu tas-separaturi u tal-forom multipli huwa permess bl-għajnuna mekkanika għall-iffurmar (il-lifter tal-borma, it-trasportatur). Kwalunkwe forma ta’ ffurmar kompletament mekkaniku hija pprojbita; l-intervent tal-bniedem għat-tqassim tal-baqta fil-forom multipli huwa obbligatorju.”

Biex l-operaturi jkunu jistgħu jadattaw għat-tekniki l-ġodda, qed jiġi speċifikat li l-għajnuna mekkanika hija permessa waqt il-fażi tal-iffurmar (il-lifter tal-borma, it-trasportatur), iżda l-intervent tal-bniedem huwa obbligatorju għat-tqassim tal-baqta fil-forom: kwalunkwe forma ta’ ffurmar kompletament mekkaniku hija pprojbita.

—   il-fażi tat-tqattir u tat-tneħħija mill-forom

Il-paragrafu:

“It-tqattir isir f’minimu ta’ 20 °C. It-tneħħija mill-forom issir bejn 24 siegħa u 48 siegħa mit-tqegħid fil-forom.”

huwa sostitwit bi:

“It-tqattir isir f’minimu ta’ 20 °C u għandu jdum bejn 18-il siegħa u massimu ta’ 48 siegħa wara t-tqegħid fil-forom. It-tneħħija mill-forom issir biss wara din il-fażi. Il-ġobnijiet imbagħad jitħallew jinxfu f’temperatura ta’ mill-inqas 13 °C għal mill-inqas 24 siegħa.”

It-tul ta’ ħin ta’ kull fażi (bejn 18 u 48 siegħa għat-tqattir, mill-inqas 24 siegħa għat-tnixxif), kif ukoll it-temperatura tat-tnixxif (minimu ta’ 13 °C) ġew miżjuda skont l-għarfien biex jiġu rregolati l-prattiki tal-operaturi.

—   it-tul ta’ ħin tat-tmelliħ

It-tul ta’ ħin tat-tmelliħ tneħħa biex l-operaturi jkunu jistgħu jadattawh skont il-konċentrazzjoni tas-salmura użata biex jinkiseb l-istess riżultat.

—   il-fażi tal-maturazzjoni

Il-paragrafu:

“Il-maturazzjoni, li ddum mill-inqas 15-il jum wara ż-żieda tat-tames, issir fiż-żona ġeografika u tiżvolġi f’żewġ fażijiet:

| — | Qabel it-tgeżwir, il-ġobna mikxufa timmatura bejn ħames u għaxart ijiem wara ż-żieda tat-tames f’temperatura minima ta’ 8 °C. Wara din il-fażi, il-ġobna għandu jkollha kisja omoġenja bi flora fil-wiċċ stabbilita sew, qoxra fina ta’ kulur abjad lewn il-krema, u polpa ratba fil-qalba. |
| --- | --- |

—

Qabel it-tgeżwir, il-ġobna mikxufa timmatura bejn ħames u għaxart ijiem wara ż-żieda tat-tames f’temperatura minima ta’ 8 °C. Wara din il-fażi, il-ġobna għandu jkollha kisja omoġenja bi flora fil-wiċċ stabbilita sew, qoxra fina ta’ kulur abjad lewn il-krema, u polpa ratba fil-qalba.

| — | Wara t-tgeżwir, il-ġobon jimmatura għal mill-inqas għaxart ijiem fil-weraq f’temperatura ta’ bejn 8 u 14 °C. Il-livell tal-umdità jrid ikun ogħla minn 80 %.” |
| --- | --- |

—

Wara t-tgeżwir, il-ġobon jimmatura għal mill-inqas għaxart ijiem fil-weraq f’temperatura ta’ bejn 8 u 14 °C. Il-livell tal-umdità jrid ikun ogħla minn 80 %.”

huwa sostitwit bi:

“Il-maturazzjoni, li ddum mill-inqas 15-il jum wara ż-żieda tat-tames, issir f’żewġ fażijiet:

| — | Qabel it-tgeżwir, il-ġobna mikxufa timmatura bejn ħames u għaxart ijiem wara ż-żieda tat-tames f’temperatura minima ta’ 8 °C. Wara din il-fażi, din għandu jkollha kisja omoġenja bi flora fil-wiċċ stabbilita sew; |
| --- | --- |

—

Qabel it-tgeżwir, il-ġobna mikxufa timmatura bejn ħames u għaxart ijiem wara ż-żieda tat-tames f’temperatura minima ta’ 8 °C. Wara din il-fażi, din għandu jkollha kisja omoġenja bi flora fil-wiċċ stabbilita sew;

| — | Wara t-tgeżwir, il-ġobon jimmatura għal mill-inqas għaxart ijiem fil-weraq f’temperatura ta’ bejn 8 u 14 °C. Wara din il-fażi, il-ġobon għandu jkollu qoxra fina ta’ kulur abjad lewn il-krema jew lewn il-bronż. Il-livell tal-umdità jrid ikun ogħla minn 80 %.” |
| --- | --- |

—

Wara t-tgeżwir, il-ġobon jimmatura għal mill-inqas għaxart ijiem fil-weraq f’temperatura ta’ bejn 8 u 14 °C. Wara din il-fażi, il-ġobon għandu jkollu qoxra fina ta’ kulur abjad lewn il-krema jew lewn il-bronż. Il-livell tal-umdità jrid ikun ogħla minn 80 %.”

Ir-referenza għaż-żona ġeografika tneħħiet għax hija inutli f’din il-parti tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott. Id-deskrizzjoni tal-qoxra ġiet imċaqalqa wara d-deskrizzjoni tal-parametri tal-fażi tal-maturazzjoni u tqabblet mal-intestatura dwar id-deskrizzjoni tal-prodott. Id-deskrizzjoni tal-qalba tneħħiet peress li dan il-kriterju li jeħtieġ il-qtugħ tal-ġobon ma jiġix ivverifikat f’dan l-istadju.

Il-paragrafu:

“Il-ġobnijiet jistgħu jixxarbu fil-brandy tal-inbid jew fir-residwu tal-għasra qabel jitqiegħdu fil-weraq.”

huwa sostitwit bi:

“Il-ġobnijiet jistgħu jixxarbu fl-ispirtu tal-inbid jew fir-residwu tal-għasra jew sprejjati bl-ispirtu tal-inbid jew bir-residwu tal-għasra qabel ma jitqiegħdu fil-weraq.”

Minbarra l-prattika tat-tixrib fl-ispirtu tal-inbid jew fir-residwu tal-għasra, ġiet miżjuda dik tal-isprejjar bl-ispirtu tal-inbid jew bir-residwu tal-għasra, peress li t-tnejn jagħtu riżultati simili.

5.6.   Rabta

Rabta

L-intestatura “Elementi li jiġġustifikaw ir-rabta mal-ambjent ġeografiku” inkitbet kollha mill-ġdid biex tintwera b’mod aktar evidenti r-rabta bejn il-“Banon” u ż-żona ġeografika tiegħu, mingħajr ma sar tibdil sostanzjali fir-rabta u lanqas ma tneħħew xi elementi. Din id-dimostrazzjoni tenfasizza b’mod partikolari r-rabta bejn l-ambjent ġeografiku Mediterranju favorevoli għat-trobbija tal-mogħoż u għar-ragħa, u l-għarfien partikolari tal-manifattura u l-maturazzjoni meħtieġa biex isir il-“Banon”.

L-ewwel parti tiddeskrivi l-ispeċifiċità taż-żona ġeografika, u tispjega l-fatturi naturali taż-żona ġeografika kif ukoll il-fatturi umani billi tenfasizza l-għarfien speċifiku tat-trobbija tal-mogħoż u tal-manifattura tal-ġobnijiet.

It-tieni parti tiddeskrivi l-ispeċifiċità tal-prodott billi tenfasizza ċerti elementi introdotti fid-deskrizzjoni tal-prodott.

Fl-aħħar nett, l-aħħar parti tispjega r-rabta kawżali, jiġifieri l-interazzjonijiet bejn il-fatturi naturali u umani u l-prodott.

Ir-rabta kollha li tidher fl-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott tad-DOP hija ripetuta fil-punt 5 tad-Dokument Uniku.

5.7.   Tikkettar

Tikkettar

Fl-intestatura “Regoli speċifiċi dwar it-tikkettar”, il-frażi “ta’ denominazzjoni” għall-ġobnijiet tneħħiet peress li din l-intestatura u l-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott inġenerali jirrigwardaw biss ġobnijiet tad-denominazzjoni ta’ oriġini; għaldaqstant hija frażi inutli.

Din l-emenda saret ukoll fid-Dokument Uniku.

5.8.   Modifiki oħra

Modifiki oħra

Fl-intestatura “Grupp applikant”: id-dettalji ta’ kuntatt tal-grupp ġew emendati.

Fl-intestatura “Referenzi għall-korp ta’ kontroll”, l-isem u d-dettalji tal-korpi uffiċjali ta’ kontroll ġew aġġornati. Din l-intestatura ssemmi d-dettalji ta’ kuntatt tal-awtoritajiet kompetenti ta’ kontroll Franċiżi: L-Institut national de l’origine et de la qualité (INAO) u d-Direction générale de la concurrence, de la consommation et de la répression des fraudes (DGCCRF). Ġie miżjud li l-isem u d-dettalji tal-korp ta’ ċertifikazzjoni jistgħu jiġu kkonsultati fuq is-sit tal-INAO u fuq il-bażi tad-data tal-Kummissjoni Ewropea.

data

It-tabella tal-punti ewlenin li jridu jiġu kkontrollati ġiet aġġornata biex tinkludi emenda introdotta (it-tneħħija tat-temperatura massima tat-tisħin mill-ġdid), u ġie miżjud punt ewlieni ieħor li jrid jiġi kkontrollat, skont l-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott fis-seħħ, li jirrigwarda t-tip ta’ ħalib (ħalib mhux ipproċessat u sħiħ, mhux standardizzat fi proteini u xaħam)

DOKUMENT UNIKU

“BANON”

“BANON”

Nru tal-UE: PDO-FR-0290-AM02 – 10.1.2018

Nru tal-UE: PDO-FR-0290-AM02 – 10.1.2018

DOP ( X ) IĠP ( )

DOP ( X ) IĠP ( )

1.   Isem/Ismijiet

Isem/Ismijiet

“Banon”

2.   Stat Membru jew pajjiż terz

Stat Membru jew pajjiż terz

Franza

3.   Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott agrikolu jew tal-oġġett tal-ikel

Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott agrikolu jew tal-oġġett tal-ikel

3.1.   Tip ta’ prodott

Tip ta’ prodott

Klassi 1.3. Ġobon

3.2.   Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott bid-denominazzjoni msemmija fil-punt 1

Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott bid-denominazzjoni msemmija fil-punt 1

Il-“Banon” huwa ġobon b’polpa ratba magħmul mill-ħalib tal-mogħża mhux imsajjar u sħiħ. Dan jinkiseb permezz tal-produzzjoni tal-baqta’ b’mod rapidu (baqta’ biż-żieda tal-kimożina). Il-ġobon maturat jitgeżwer (jiġifieri jitgħatta għal kollox b’weraq mitwi madwaru) b’weraq naturali kannella tas-siġra tal-qastan, marbut b’raffja naturali li tikkonsisti minn 6 sa 12-il fibra.

Il-“Banon”, wara mill-inqas 15-il jum ta’ maturazzjoni, li minnhom 10 ijiem ikunu taħt il-weraq, ikollu polpa omoġenja, kremuża u ratba. Il-qoxra tiegħu hija ta’ lewn isfar fil-krema jew lewn il-bronż taħt il-weraq. Huwa ġobon ikkaratterizzat minn ħjiliet ta’ annimali, l-aktar il-mogħoż, li spiss huma akkumpanjati minn irwejjaħ ta’ ammonijaka u ta’ pjanti u siġar żgħar, bi ftit imrar fl-aħħar. Il-konsistenza tiegħu hija kremuża u ddub fil-ħalq. Id-dijametru tal-ġobon bil-weraq huwa ta’ bejn 75 u 85 mm, u t-tul huwa ta’ bejn 20 u 30 mm. Il-piż nett tal-“Banon” mingħajr il-weraq u wara l-perjodu tal-maturazzjoni huwa ta’ bejn 90 u 110 g.

Il-ġobon fih ta’ mill-inqas 40 gramma ta’ materjal niexef għal 100 gramma ta’ ġobon u 40 gramma ta’ materjal xaħmi għal kull 100 gramma ta’ ġobon wara tnixxif totali.

3.3.   Għalf (għall-prodotti li joriġinaw mill-annimali biss) u materja prima (għall-prodotti pproċessati biss)

Għalf (għall-prodotti li joriġinaw mill-annimali biss) u materja prima (għall-prodotti pproċessati biss)

Ir-razzjon bażiku tal-għalf tal-mogħoż jiġi essenzjalment miż-żona ġeografika. Din hija kkostitwita esklużivament mir-ragħa fil-mergħat u/jew bwar, għalf niexef ta’ legumuniżi u/jew ta’ ħaxix u/jew ta’ flora spontanja miżmuma f’kundizzjonijiet tajbin.

Meta l-kundizzjonijiet klimatiċi u l-istadju tal-veġetazzjoni jkunu jippermettu, il-mogħoż għandhom ikunu fil-mergħat u/jew fil-bwar. Huma għandhom jirgħu b’mod regolari fil-bwar u l-mergħat taż-żona għal mill-inqas 210 ijiem fis-sena.

Huma għandhom jirgħu:

| — | fil-mergħat komposti minn speċji spontanji annwali jew perenni, bis-siġar, siġar baxxi jew ħaxix; |
| --- | --- |

—

fil-mergħat komposti minn speċji spontanji annwali jew perenni, bis-siġar, siġar baxxi jew ħaxix;

| — | fuq il-bwar permanenti bi flora indiġena; |
| --- | --- |

—

fuq il-bwar permanenti bi flora indiġena;

| — | fuq il-mergħat temporanji ta’ ħaxix, leguminużi jew imħalltin. |
| --- | --- |

—

fuq il-mergħat temporanji ta’ ħaxix, leguminużi jew imħalltin.

Għal ta’ mill-inqas 4 xhur fis-sena għandhom jieħdu l-biċċa l-kbira tal-ikel gross tagħhom mir-ragħa.

Matul il-perjodu fejn ir-razzjon gross irid ikun ikkostitwit fil-biċċa l-kbira mir-ragħa, is-sehem ta’ tiben ma għandux jaqbeż 1,25 kg ta’ materja prima kuljum u għal kull mogħża adulta preżenti.

L-għoti tat-tiben huwa llimitat għal 600 kg ta’ materjal mhux ipproċessat għal kull mogħża adulta preżenti fis-sena.

Id-distribuzzjoni tal-għalf aħdar mill-mejjilla huwa awtorizzat biss għal 30 jum mhux konsekuttivi fis-sena.

L-għoti ta’ supplimenti huwa llimitat għal 800 g ta’ materja prima kuljum għal kull mogħża adulta preżenti u għal 270 kg ta’ materja prima fis-sena għal kull mogħża adulta preżenti.

Ir-razzjon supplimentari annwali għandu jkun kompost ta’ mill-inqas minn 60 % ċereali jew prodotti sekondarji taċ-ċereali. L-għoti ta’ xnien deidrat huwa llimitat għal 400 g ta’ materja prima kuljum għal kull mogħża adulta preżenti u għal 60 kg ta’ materja prima fis-sena għal kull mogħża adulta preżenti.

L-għoti ta’ għalf u ta’ xnien deidrat minn barra ż-żona ġeografika huwa llimitat għal 250 kg ta’ materja prima fis-sena għal kull mogħża adulta preżenti.

L-għalf miżmum fis-silo, l-għalf marbut b’qafla u l-kruċiferi tal-għalf huma pprojbiti.

Fl-għalf tal-annimali huma awtorizzati biss il-pjanti, il-prodotti sekondarji u l-għalf komplementari derivat minn prodotti mhux transġeniċi. It-tħawwil ta’ kultivazzjonijiet transġeniċi huwa projbit fl-uċuħ kollha ta’ azjenda li tipproduċi ħalib li huwa maħsub biex jiġi pproċessat f’Banon DOP. Din il-projbizzjoni hija maħsuba għal kull speċi veġetali li tista’ tingħata bħala għalf lill-annimali tal-ħalib tal-azjenda, u kull kultura ta’ speċi li tista’ tikkontaminahom.

Fl-impriża agrikola l-erja fejn tintgħalef il-merħla tal-mogħoż għandha tkun ta’ mill-inqas ettaru ta’ mergħa naturali u/jew artifiċjali għal kull tmien mogħżiet u ta’ ettaru ta’ mergħa għal kull żewġ mogħżiet.

Rigward il-provenjenza tal-għalf, minħabba l-fatturi naturali taż-żona ġeografika, il-produzzjoni ta’ konċentrati hija diffiċli u dik tal-għalf hija limitata. Peress li l-oriġini tal-konċentrati mhijiex speċifikata, jistgħu jkunu ġejjin minn barra ż-żona ġeografika. Ir-razzjon bażiku jiġi essenzjalment miż-żona ġeografika, iżda jista’ jitqassam ukoll tiben li jkun ġej minn barra ż-żona ġeografika lill-mogħoż.

Il-limitazzjoni tal-kwantità ta’ konċentrati u l-limitazzjoni tal-kwantità ta’ tiben li jista’ jiġi minn barra ż-żona ġeografika jfissru li l-parti l-kbira tal-għalf ġejja miż-żona.

Fil-fatt, il-provvisti li jistgħu jiġu minn barra ż-żona ġeografika jirrappreżentaw għal kull mogħża u kull sena:

| — | 250 kg ta’ materja prima tal-għalf u ta’ xnien deidrat jew madwar 213 kg ta’ materja niexfa (190 kg ta’ għalf b’rata medja ta’ 84 % materja niexfa jikkorrispondu għal 160 kg ta’ materja niexfa, u 60 kg ta’ xnien deidrat b’rata medja ta’ 89 % materja niexfa jikkorrispondu għal 53 kg ta’ materja niexfa), |
| --- | --- |

—

250 kg ta’ materja prima tal-għalf u ta’ xnien deidrat jew madwar 213 kg ta’ materja niexfa (190 kg ta’ għalf b’rata medja ta’ 84 % materja niexfa jikkorrispondu għal 160 kg ta’ materja niexfa, u 60 kg ta’ xnien deidrat b’rata medja ta’ 89 % materja niexfa jikkorrispondu għal 53 kg ta’ materja niexfa),

| — | 250 kg ta’ materjal niexef minn konċentrati (ekwivalenti għal 270 kg ta’ materja prima) minn barra ż-żona ġeografika għal kull mogħża u kull sena. |
| --- | --- |

—

250 kg ta’ materjal niexef minn konċentrati (ekwivalenti għal 270 kg ta’ materja prima) minn barra ż-żona ġeografika għal kull mogħża u kull sena.

Meta wieħed iqis li mogħża għandha kapaċità medja annwali ta’ inġestjoni ta’ 1 100 kg il-proporzjon ta’ għalf li ġej miż-żona ġeografika jirrappreżenta għalhekk mill-inqas 58 % (f’materja niexfa).

3.4.   Passi speċifiċi fil-produzzjoni li jridu jsiru fiż-żona ġeografika ddefinita

Passi speċifiċi fil-produzzjoni li jridu jsiru fiż-żona ġeografika ddefinita

Il-produzzjoni tal-ħalib, il-manifattura, il-maturazzjoni tal-ġobon isiru fiż-żona ġeografika deskritta fil-punt 4.

3.5.   Regoli speċifiċi dwar it-tqattigħ, it-tħakkik, l-ippakkjar, eċċ. tal-prodott li għalih tirreferi d-denominazzjoni

Regoli speċifiċi dwar it-tqattigħ, it-tħakkik, l-ippakkjar, eċċ. tal-prodott li għalih tirreferi d-denominazzjoni

—

3.6.   Regoli speċifiċi dwar it-tikkettar tal-prodott li għalih jirreferi l-isem

Regoli speċifiċi dwar it-tikkettar tal-prodott li għalih jirreferi l-isem

Kull ġobon jiġi kkummerċjalizzat b’tikketta individwali li tkun tinkludi l-isem tad-denominazzjoni ta’ oriġini, miktub b’karattri ta’ dimensjoni ta’ mill-inqas daqs kull karattru ieħor li jinsab fuq it-tikketta.

L-użu tas-simbolu DOP tal-Unjoni Ewropea huwa obbligatorju fit-tikkettjar tal-ġobon li jibbenefika mid-denominazzjoni ta’ oriġini protetta “Banon”.

L-isem “Banon” għandu jidher b’mod obbligatorju fuq il-fatturi u d-dokumenti kummerċjali.

4.   Deskrizzjoni fil-qosor taż-żona ġeografika

Deskrizzjoni fil-qosor taż-żona ġeografika

Iż-żona ġeografika hija komposta mill-communes segwenti:

Id-département ta’ Alpes-de-Haute-Provence (04)

Il-communes kollha inklużi fiż-żona: Aiglun, Allemagne-en-Provence, Archail, Aubenas-les-Alpes, Aubignosc, Banon, Barras, Beaujeu, Bevons, Beynes, Bras-d’Asse, Brunet, Céreste, Champtercier, Châteaufort, Châteauneuf-Miravail, Châteauneuf-Val-Saint-Donat, Châteauredon, Clamensane, Cruis, Curel, Dauphin, Digne-les-Bains, Draix, Entrepierres, Entrevennes, Esparron-de-Verdon, Estoublon, Fontienne, Forcalquier, Hautes-Duyes, La Javie, La Motte-du-Caire, Lardiers, La Rochegiron, Le Brusquet, Le Castellard-Mélan, Le Castellet, Le Chauffaut-Saint-Jurson, L’Escale, Les Omergues, L’Hospitalet, Limans, Malijai, Mallefougasse-Augès, Mallemoisson, Mane, Marcoux, Mézel, Mirabeau, Montagnac-Montpezat, Montfuron, Montjustin, Montlaux, Montsalier, Moustiers-Sainte-Marie, Nibles, Niozelles, Noyers-sur-Jabron, Ongles, Oppedette, Peipin, Pierrerue, Pierrevert, Puimichel, Puimoisson, Quinson, Redortiers, Reillanne, Revest-des-Brousses, Revest-du-Bion, Revest-Saint-Martin, Riez, Roumoules, Sainte-Croix-à-Lauze, Sainte-Croix-du-Verdon, Saint-Étienne-les-Orgues, Saint-Jeannet, Saint-Julien-d’Asse, Saint-Jurs, Saint-Laurent-du-Verdon, Saint-Maime, Saint-Martin-de-Brômes, Saint-Martin-les-Eaux, Saint-Michel-l’Observatoire, Saint-Vincent-sur-Jabron, Salignac, Saumane, Sigonce, Simiane-la-Rotonde, Sisteron, Sourribes, Thoard, Vachères, Valbelle, Valernes, Villemus u Volonne.

Il-communes li jinsabu parzjalment fiż-żona: Château-Arnoux-Saint-Auban, Ganagobie, Gréoux-les-Bains, La Brillanne, Les Mées, Lurs, Manosque, Montfort, Oraison, Peyruis, Valensole, Villeneuve u Volx.

Għal dawn il-communes, il-limitu taż-żona ġeografika jinsab fil-pjanti ddepożitati mal-kunsill lokali tal-communes ikkonċernati.

Id-département ta’ Hautes-Alpes (05)

Barret-sur-Méouge, Bruis, Chanousse, Val Buëch-Méouge (għat-territorju ta’ dik li qabel kienet il-commune ta’ Châteauneuf-de-Chabre), Éourres, Étoile-Saint-Cyrice, Garde-Colombe, La Piarre, Laragne-Montéglin, Le Bersac, L’Épine, Méreuil, Montclus, Montjay, Montmorin, Montrond, Moydans, Nossage-et-Bénévent, Orpierre, Ribeyret, Rosans, Saint-André-de-Rosans, Sainte-Colombe, Sainte-Marie, Saint-Pierre-Avez, Saléon, Salérans, Serres, Sigottier, Sorbiers, Trescléoux.

Id-département ta’ Drôme (26)

Aulan, Ballons, Barret-de-Lioure, Eygalayes, Ferrassières, Izon-la-Bruisse, Laborel, Lachau, La Rochette-du-Buis, Mévouillon, Montauban-sur-l’Ouvèze, Montbrun-les-Bains, Montfroc, Montguers, Reilhanette, Rioms, Saint-Auban-sur-l’Ouvèze, Séderon, Vers-sur-Méouge, Villebois-les-Pins, u Villefranche-le-Château.

Id-département ta’ Vaucluse (84)

Aurel, Auribeau, Buoux, Castellet, Gignac, Lagarde-d’Apt, Monieux, Saignon, Saint-Christol, Saint-Martin-de-Castillon, Saint-Trinit, Sault, Sivergues u Viens.

5.   Rabta maż-żona ġeografika

Rabta maż-żona ġeografika

Il-“Banon” joriġina fl-Haute-Provence madwar il-komun ta’ Banon. Dan huwa post semi-muntanjuż niexef b’pajsaġġi magħmulin minn għoljiet u altipjani bi klima Mediterranja.

Iż-żona hija kkaratterizzata minn nuqqas ta’ ilma, l-ilma ta’ taħt l-art jinsab midfun fil-fond ħafna u l-ilma tal-wiċċ huwa soġġett għal xita eċċezzjonali u ferm irregolari kkonċentrata prinċipalment fil-ħarifa u fir-rebbiegħa, b’nuqqas kbir fis-sajf.

Iż-żona tal-“Banon” hija kkaratterizzata minn artijiet li mhumiex wisq fertili, essenzjalment tal-ġir, u permeabbli, li għandhom kapaċità eċċezzjonali li jassorbu x-xita.

Dan huwa ambjent fejn insibu taħlita ta’ veġetazzjoni tal-foresti b’densità baxxa inklużi siġar taż-żnuber, ballut, is-siġra buxus u pjanti li jfewħu, imsaġar folti u siġar baxxi mxerrda u kultivazzjonijet adattati għall-ħruxija ta’ klima tal-Provence f’altitudni medja, niexfa, xemxija, spiss pjuttost kiesħa fix-xitwa u li toffri spazji favorevoli għar-ragħa fl-aħrax ta’ merħliet ta’ mogħoż.

Il-kundizzjonijiet naturali ta’ dan ir-reġjun jispjegaw il-fatt li l-ekonomija ġenerali ta’ din iż-żona hija favorevoli għar-ragħa u għall-kultivazzjonijiet li jrendu ftit.

Għal min irabbi l-mogħoż, il-mergħat tar-ragħa u tal-għalf huma l-bażi tal-ikel tal-mogħoż. B’hekk, dawk li jrabbu l-mogħoż stabbilixxew sistema partikolari ta’ produzzjoni li tikkombina din id-diversità ta’ riżorsi naturali. Ir-ragħa tikkombina tliet tipi ta’ riżorsi: mergħat naturali, boskijiet u leguminużi rikki fin-nitroġenu. Il-biċċa l-kbira ta’ dawk li jrabbu l-mogħoż joqogħdu għassa magħhom, li jippermettilhom, skont kemm jieklu fl-aħrax u l-avvanz tal-istaġun, li jikkumplimentaw l-ikel tagħhom billi jirgħu fil-mergħat tas-sainfoin jew tax-xnien.

Provence tinsab f’żona ta’ kultura “tal-kimożina”, meta mqabbla mat-Tramuntana ta’ Franza fejn tiddomina kultura “lattika” (koagulazzjoni bil-mod ta’ madwar 24 siegħa). Sa mis-seklu XV, kienu jiġu offruti lir-Re René “ġobniet żgħar rotob, kimożini”; ir-referenza għall-kimożina hija ċara.

Tradizzjonalment, l-għarbiela użati fi Provence kien ikollhom toqob kbar, li jindika li l-baqta’ kienet miksuba bil-kimożina (baqta’ lattika “taħrab” minn dawk l-għarbiela).

Barra minn hekk, il-kisi tal-ġobon bil-weraq, li huwa partikolari għall-“Banon”, għandu żewġ għanijiet: minn naħa waħda, huwa teknika ta’ konservazzjoni, u min-naħa l-oħra, huwa teknika ta’ produzzjoni. Dan huwa pproċessar ta’ ġobon frisk li jqis kemm l-iskop li jiġi kkonservat kif ukoll li jittejjeb il-ġobon.

L-ipproċessar tal-prodott jikkonsisti prinċipalment f’li jintrabat mal-weraq tal-qastan u “jitgeżwer”. Dan il-metodu jikkaratterizza l-bidla tal-ġobna f’“Banon”. Dan il-weraq għandu rwol bħala fattur ta’ iżolament tal-arja u għandu rwol ta’ adġuvant, peress li jippermetti l-iżvilupp ta’ karatteristiċi aromatiċi tal-ġobon.

Għalkemm diversi weraq jistgħu jiġu assoċjati mal-ġobon (dielja, qastan, platanus, ġewż...), jintużaw il-weraq tal-qastan, minħabba s-sodezza tal-istruttura tagħhom u l-kwalità tat-tannin tagħhom.

L-istorja tal-“Banon” tmur lura għal tmiem is-seklu XIX. Fuq din l-art b’potenzjal agronomiku dgħajjef, il-pajżani ppruvaw japprofittaw bl-aħjar mod mir-riżorsi ambjentali naturali batuti: il-polikultivazzjoni ta’ sussistenza fuq xi ftit pakketti ta’ raba’ tajbin, u fiż-żoni aktar selvaġġi tal-foresta jew tal-art, ġbir tal-injam, annimali tal-kaċċa, faqqiegħ, frott żgħir, tartufi jew lavender. Minbarra majjal u ftit tjur, kull familja kienet trabbi wkoll merħla żgħira domestika komposta minn nagħaġ kif ukoll xi mogħoż, annimali li huma utli kemm fuq l-art, fejn jagħmlu l-aħjar użu mill-art u mill-boskijiet tal-madwar, kif ukoll mill-funzjonalità ekonomika tagħhom. Waqt li l-muntun jintuża għal-laħam, il-mogħża fil-kwalità tagħha bħala “baqra tal-fqar” qiegħda hemmhekk biex tipproduċi l-ħalib. Dak il-ħalib iservi għall-bżonnijiet tal-familja fi stat frisk u jiġi ttrasformat ukoll f’ġobon, l-uniku mod kif jista’ jiġi pprolongat il-valur nutrittiv tiegħu.

Jekk il-ġobon ikun għal użu domestiku, il-valur kummerċjali tiegħu jiġi mill-ammont żejjed tal-produzzjoni li ma kienx għall-konsum tal-familja. Dak l-ammont żejjed tal-produzzjoni b’hekk jittieħed lejn is-swieq lokali biex jinbiegħ.

Huwa f’dan il-kuntest li Banon, il-post prinċipali tal-canton u ċentru ġeografiku tal-pajjiżi ta’ Lure u Albion, salib it-toroq ta’ komunikazzjoni importanti, jieħu postu bħala l-aktar wieħed importanti minn dawn il-postijiet ta’ fieri u swieq tal-ġobon.

L-ewwel referenza għal ġobon tal-mogħoż miksi bil-weraq, assoċjat mal-isem “Banon”, tinsab fil-Cuisinière provençale ta’ Marius MORARD fl-1886.

Il-perjodu ta’ wara l-gwerra kien ikkaratterizzat mill-introduzzjoni progressiva ta’ progress tekniku fil-metodi ta’ manifattura tal-ġobon. Il-merħliet tal-mogħoż bdew isiru speċjalizzati, u kien hemm ħruġ mill-qafas tal-produzzjoni domestika: waqt li qabel il-produzzjoni tal-ġobon kienet issir prinċipalment bħala ikel għall-familja, u fuq bażi sekondarja biex jinbiegħ, f’dan l-istadju l-ġdid il-produzzjoni bdiet issir prinċipalment għall-bejgħ (waqt li ż-żejjed jintuża bħala ikel għall-familja).

Jekk wieħed jirreferi għall-istudju ta’ JM MARIOTTINI “A la Recherche d’un fromage: le ‘Banon’ - éléments d’histoire et d’ethnologie”, il-“Banon” minn dejjem kien ġobon b’teknoloġija ta’ kimożina, u jibqa’ wieħed mill-ġobnijiet rari maħduma permezz ta’ din it-teknika.

Il-“Banon” huwa ġobon b’polpa ratba magħmul mill-ħalib tal-mogħża mhux imsajjar u sħiħ. Jinkiseb permezz tal-produzzjoni tal-baqta b’mod rapidu (baqta tal-kimożina jew baqta ħelwa). Il-ġobon maturat jitgeżwer (jiġifieri jitgħatta għal kollox b’weraq naturali kannella tas-siġra tal-qastan, marbut b’raffja naturali li tikkonsisti minn 6 sa 12-il fibra).

Il-“Banon” huwa kkaratterizzat minn:

| — | qoxra ta’ lewn isfar fil-krema jew lewn il-bronż taħt il-weraq; |
| --- | --- |

—

qoxra ta’ lewn isfar fil-krema jew lewn il-bronż taħt il-weraq;

| — | qalba b’konsistenza kremuża u li tinħall fil-ħalq; |
| --- | --- |

—

qalba b’konsistenza kremuża u li tinħall fil-ħalq;

| — | ħjiliet ta’ annimali, l-aktar il-mogħoż, li spiss huma akkumpanjati minn irwejjaħ ta’ ammonijaka u ta’ pjanti u siġar żgħar, bi ftit imrar fl-aħħar. |
| --- | --- |

—

ħjiliet ta’ annimali, l-aktar il-mogħoż, li spiss huma akkumpanjati minn irwejjaħ ta’ ammonijaka u ta’ pjanti u siġar żgħar, bi ftit imrar fl-aħħar.

Iż-żona ġeografika tinsab taħt influwenza Mediterranja b’art mhux wisq fertili, komposta prinċipalment minn ġebel tal-ġir, li spiss jidher mill-wiċċ u ma jżommx l-ilma. Dawn l-elementi jwasslu għal veġetazzjoni kkostitwita minn xagħri kompost minn xewk, żagħrun, pruna selvaġġa, warda tal-blat, ġniebru, lavanda, ħabaq selvaġġ, sagħtar... u qastan. Dan huwa ambjent ideali għat-trobbija tal-mogħoż u l-prattika tar-ragħa.

It-teknika tal-baqta’ ħelwa hija imposta mill-kundizzjonijiet klimatiċi (temperatura għolja u nixfa tal-klima ambjentali). Effettivament, huwa impossibbli f’dan ir-reġjun, mingħajr mezzi tekniċi speċifiċi, li jiġi mkessaħ il-ħalib u li jinżamm f’temperatura baxxa, biex il-fermenti lattiċi jitħallew jaġixxu mingħajr ma jiqras. B’hekk irid jiġi attivat il-proċess li permezz tiegħu l-ħalib isir baqta’, jiġifieri l-koagulazzjoni, permezz tal-kimożina.

It-tgeżwir tal-ġobniet kien jgħin biex ikun hemm ikel għas-sena sħiħa, u b’mod partikolari l-perjodu diffiċli tax-xitwa fejn il-mogħoż ikunu xotti.

Il-“Banon” huwa r-riżultat tat-taħlita ta’ dawn il-fatturi kollha: ambjent fqir favorevoli għat-trobbija estensiva tal-mogħoż u vvalorizzat mill-bniedem, klima sħuna u niexfa li twassal naturalment għall-prattika ta’ baqta bil-kimożina, u teknika ta’ pproċessar (it-tgeżwir) li tippermetti l-konservazzjoni tal-ġobon fit-tul.

Referenza għall-pubblikazzjoni tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni

Referenza għall-pubblikazzjoni tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni

(it-tieni subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 6(1) ta’ dan ir-Regolament)

https://info.agriculture.gouv.fr/gedei/site/bo-agri/document_administratif-3ab11b39-00cf-48f7-a2b3-ac5e71b90836

---

| 23.5.2019 | MT | Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea | C 177/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2019

MT

Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea

C 177/14

---

DEĊIŻJONI TA’ IMPLIMENTAZZJONI TAL-KUMMISSJONI

tal-14 ta’ Mejju 2019

dwar il-pubblikazzjoni f’Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea tal-applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda mhux minuri fi speċifikazzjoni tal-prodott imsemmija fl-Artikolu 53 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill għall-isem “Beurre d’Isigny” (DOP)

(2019/C 177/03)

IL-KUMMISSJONI EWROPEA,

Wara li kkunsidrat it-Trattat dwar il-Funzjonament tal-Unjoni Ewropea,

Wara li kkunsidrat ir-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill tal-21 ta’ Novembru 2012 dwar skemi tal-kwalità għal prodotti agrikoli u oġġetti tal-ikel (1), u b’mod partikulari l-Artikolu 50(2)(a) flimkien mal-Artikolu 53(2) tiegħu,

Billi:

| (1) | Franza bagħtet applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda mhux minuri fl-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott bl-isem ta’ “Beurre d’Isigny” (DOP) skont l-Artikolu 49(4) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Franza bagħtet applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda mhux minuri fl-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott bl-isem ta’ “Beurre d’Isigny” (DOP) skont l-Artikolu 49(4) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012.

| (2) | Skont l-Artikolu 50 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012, il-Kummissjoni eżaminat dik l-applikazzjoni u kkonkludiet li din tissodisfa l-kundizzjonijiet stabbiliti f’dak ir-Regolament. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Skont l-Artikolu 50 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012, il-Kummissjoni eżaminat dik l-applikazzjoni u kkonkludiet li din tissodisfa l-kundizzjonijiet stabbiliti f’dak ir-Regolament.

| (3) | Sabiex ikunu jistgħu jintbagħtu avviżi ta’ oppożizzjoni skont l-Artikolu 51 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012, jenħtieġ li l-applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda mhux minuri fl-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott imsemmija fl-ewwel subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 10(1) tar-Regolament ta’ Implimentazzjoni tal-Kummissjoni (UE) Nru 668/2014 (2), fosthom id-Dokument Uniku emendat u r-referenza għall-pubblikazzjoni tal-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott rilevanti, għall-isem irreġistrat “Beurre d’Isigny” (DOP), tiġi ppubblikata f’Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Sabiex ikunu jistgħu jintbagħtu avviżi ta’ oppożizzjoni skont l-Artikolu 51 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012, jenħtieġ li l-applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda mhux minuri fl-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott imsemmija fl-ewwel subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 10(1) tar-Regolament ta’ Implimentazzjoni tal-Kummissjoni (UE) Nru 668/2014 (2), fosthom id-Dokument Uniku emendat u r-referenza għall-pubblikazzjoni tal-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott rilevanti, għall-isem irreġistrat “Beurre d’Isigny” (DOP), tiġi ppubblikata f’Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea,

IDDEĊIDIET KIF ĠEJ:

Artikolu uniku

L-applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda mhux minuri fl-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott imsemmija fl-ewwel subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 10(1) tar-Regolament ta’ Implimentazzjoni tal-Kummissjoni (UE) Nru 668/2014, fosthom id-Dokument Uniku emendat u r-referenza għall-pubblikazzjoni tal-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott rilevanti, għall-isem irreġistrat “Beurre d’Isigny” (DOP), tinsab fl-Anness ta’ din id-Deċiżjoni.

Skont l-Artikolu 51 tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012, il-pubblikazzjoni ta’ din id-Deċiżjoni għandha tagħti d-dritt ta’ oppożizzjoni għall-emenda msemmija fl-ewwel paragrafu ta’ dan l-Artikolu fi żmien tliet xhur mid-data tal-pubblikazzjoni ta’ din id-Deċiżjoni f’Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea.

Magħmul fi Brussell, l-14 ta’ Novembru 2019.

Għall-Kummissjoni

Phil HOGAN

Membru tal-Kummissjoni

---

(1)  ĠU L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  Ir-Regolament ta’ Implimentazzjoni tal-Kummissjoni (UE) Nru 668/2014 tat-13 ta’ Ġunju 2014 li jistabbilixxi regoli għall-applikazzjoni tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill dwar skemi tal-kwalità għal prodotti agrikoli u oġġetti tal-ikel (ĠU L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

2

---

ANNESS

APPLIKAZZJONI GĦALL-APPROVAZZJONI TA’ EMENDA MHUX MINURI GĦALL-ISPEĊIFIKAZZJONI TAL-PRODOTT TA’ DENOMINAZZJONI TA’ ORIĠINI PROTETTA JEW TA’ INDIKAZZJONI ĠEOGRAFIKA PROTETTA

Applikazzjoni għall-approvazzjoni ta’ emenda skont l-ewwel subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 53(2) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012

“BEURRE D’ISIGNY”

Nru tal-UE: PDO-FR-0138-AM01 – 19.10.2017

DOP ( X ) IĠP ( )

1.   Grupp applikant u interess leġittimu

| Syndicat Professionnel de Défense des Producteurs de Lait et Transformateurs de Beurre et Crème d’Isigny-sur-Mer – Baie des Veys |
| --- |
| 2, rue du docteur BOUTROIS |
| 14230 Isigny-sur-Mer |
| FRANCE |
| Numru tat-telefown: +33 231513310 |
| Numru tal-faks: +33 231923397 |
| Indirizz tal-posta elettronika: ODG.beurrecremeisigny@isysme.com |

Syndicat Professionnel de Défense des Producteurs de Lait et Transformateurs de Beurre et Crème d’Isigny-sur-Mer – Baie des Veys

2, rue du docteur BOUTROIS

14230 Isigny-sur-Mer

FRANCE

Numru tat-telefown: +33 231513310

Numru tal-faks: +33 231923397

Indirizz tal-posta elettronika: ODG.beurrecremeisigny@isysme.com

Kompożizzjoni: il-grupp huwa magħmul minn produtturi tal-ħalib u minn produtturi tal-butir. Għaldaqstant, għandu d-dritt leġittimu jipproponi l-applikazzjoni għal emenda.

2.   Stat membru jew pajjiż terz

Franza

3.   Intestatura fl-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott affettwata mill-emenda/i

| — | ☐ | Isem il-prodott |
| --- | --- | --- |
| — | ☒ | Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott |
| — | ☒ | Żona ġeografika |
| — | ☒ | Prova tal-oriġini |
| — | ☒ | Metodu ta’ produzzjoni |
| — | ☒ | Rabta |
| — | ☒ | Tikkettar |
| — | ☒ | Oħrajn [id-dettalji tas-servizz kompetenti tal-Istat Membru u tal-grupp applikant, id-dettalji tal-korp ta’ kontroll u r-rekwiżiti nazzjonali] |

—

☐

Isem il-prodott

—

☒

Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott

—

☒

Żona ġeografika

—

☒

Prova tal-oriġini

—

☒

Metodu ta’ produzzjoni

—

☒

Rabta

—

☒

Tikkettar

—

☒

Oħrajn [id-dettalji tas-servizz kompetenti tal-Istat Membru u tal-grupp applikant, id-dettalji tal-korp ta’ kontroll u r-rekwiżiti nazzjonali]

4.   Tip ta’ emenda/i

| — | ☐ | Emenda għall-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott ta’ DOP jew IĠP irreġistrata li ma għandhiex tikkwalifika bħala minuri skont it-tielet subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 53(2) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| — | ☒ | Emenda għall-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott ta’ DOP jew IĠP irreġistrata li għaliha ma jkun ġie rreġistrat l-ebda Dokument Uniku (jew ekwivalenti) u li ma għandhiex tikkwalifika bħala minuri skont it-tielet subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 53(2) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012 |

—

☐

Emenda għall-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott ta’ DOP jew IĠP irreġistrata li ma għandhiex tikkwalifika bħala minuri skont it-tielet subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 53(2) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012

—

☒

Emenda għall-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott ta’ DOP jew IĠP irreġistrata li għaliha ma jkun ġie rreġistrat l-ebda Dokument Uniku (jew ekwivalenti) u li ma għandhiex tikkwalifika bħala minuri skont it-tielet subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 53(2) tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 1151/2012

5.   Emenda/i

5.1.   
  L-intestatura “Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott”

L-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott li ġiet irreġistrata fl-1996 kienet tirrigwarda ż-żewġ prodotti “Beurre d’Isigny” u “Crème d’Isigny”, madankollu l-kapitolu dwar id-deskrizzjoni tal-karatteristiċi tal-prodott jiffoka biss fuq il-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny”.

Barra minn hekk, sabiex jitqiesu l-varjazzjonijiet staġonali fl-għalf tal-baqar tal-ħalib li jaffettwaw il-kulur tal-butir, twessgħet id-definizzjoni tal-kulur tal-prodott. Minflok ta’ kulur “isfar “lewn iċ-ċfolloq””, dan huwa ddefinit bħala “bejn avorju u isfar “lewn iċ-ċfolloq””. Il-konsistenza “kremuża” tiegħu hija kompluta bil-frażi “jindilek faċilment”. Biex il-prodott ikun ikkaratterizzat aħjar, tneħħiet il-kelma “aromatiċi”, li ma tantx hija deskrittiva. Minflok, ġiet deskritta t-togħma tiegħu bħala “togħma ta’ krema friska u ta’ ġellewż”. Żdied ukoll il-fatt li l-butir “jista’ jingħata konsistenza partikulari biex ikun jista’ jintuża għall-isfiljurar, sabiex jitqiesu l-użijiet kollha possibbli tal-prodott”. F’dan il-kapitolu ġie spjegat ukoll li l-butir “jista’ jkun mielaħ”, li fl-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott attwali tingħad biss fit-taqsima dwar il-“Metodu ta’ produzzjoni”. Fl-aħħar nett, żdied ukoll il-kontenut tax-xaħam tad-diversi kategoriji tal-butir — jiġifieri minimu ta’ 82 % fil-butir mhux mielaħ u minimu ta’ 80 % fil-butir mielaħ.

B’hekk, is-sentenzi li ġejjin tal-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott attwali: “Dawn iż-żewġ prodotti tal-ħalib għandhom karatteristiċi oriġinali. Huma għandhom kulur naturali isfar “lewn iċ-ċfolloq”. Huma aromatiċi u għandhom konsistenza kremuża.”

ġew sostitwiti bis-sentenzi li ġejjin:

“Il-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny” għandu kulur naturali bejn avorju u isfar “lewn iċ-ċfolloq”. Bis-saħħa tal-konsistenza kremuża tiegħu, jista’ jindilek faċilment. Ta’ spiss ikollu togħma ta’ krema friska u ta’ ġellewż. Huwa jista’ jingħata konsistenza partikulari biex ikun jista’ jintuża għall-isfiljurar u jista’ jkun mielaħ.

Il-butir mhux mielaħ għandu kontenut tax-xaħam ta’ iktar minn 82 %, filwaqt li l-butir mielaħ għandu kontenut tax-xaħam ta’ iktar minn 80 %.”.

Dan il-paragrafu żdied ukoll fil-punt 3.2 tad-Dokument Uniku minflok is-sentenza li ġejja tas-sommarju li tiddeskrivi l-prodott: “Butir li għandu kulur naturali “lewn iċ-ċfolloq”, li ġej mill-ammont għoli ferm ta’ karotenojdi fih.”.

Barra minn hekk, ir-referenza għall-“ammont għoli ferm ta’ karotenojdi” ddaħħlet fit-taqsima dwar ir-rabta kawżali tal-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott u tad-Dokument Uniku, peress li t-taqsima tad-deskrizzjoni tal-prodott ma fiha l-ebda valur fil-mira marbut mal-kontenut tal-karotenojdi fil-butir.

5.2.   
  L-intestatura “Żona ġeografika”

L-intestatura “Żona ġeografika”

Il-kapitolu tal-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott imsejjaħ “Żona ġeografika” jippreżenta l-proċessi kollha li jsiru fiż-żona ġeografika. L-ismijiet tad-diversi muniċipalitajiet li jinsabu fiż-żona wkoll ġew aġġornati.

Dawn l-emendi jiċċaraw id-diversi proċessi u jaġġornaw il-lista tal-muniċipalitajiet mingħajr ma jibdlu l-konfini taż-żona ġeografika.

L-ippakkjar irid isir fiż-żona. Din il-proċedura trid issir malajr wara li jintemm il-proċess tal-produzzjoni, minn naħa sabiex jiġi evitat li l-prodott jinbidel minħabba l-ossidazzjoni tax-xaħam, li ta’ spiss isseħħ meta t-trasport jieħu wisq fit-tul, u min-naħa l-oħra biex tiġi evitata l-frodi (permezz tat-taħlit tal-butir). Barra minn hekk, qed jiġi speċifikat li l-iffriżar jew l-iffriżar malajr eventwali jrid isir fiż-żona ġeografika tad-denominazzjoni. Dan huwa meħtieġ biex tiġi żgurata traċċabbiltà aħjar u jiżgura l-kontinwità tal-proċessi li jridu jsiru fiż-żona ġeografika.

5.3.   
  L-intestatura “Prova tal-oriġini”

L-intestatura “Prova tal-oriġini”

Fid-dawl tal-iżviluppi leġiżlattivi u regolatorji nazzjonali, il-kapitolu tal-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott marbut mal-“Elementi li jservu ta’ prova li l-prodott joriġina fiż-żona ġeografika” ġie kkonsolidat u jinkludi l-obbligi marbutin mad-dikjarazzjonijiet u ż-żamma ta’ reġistri marbutin mat-traċċabbiltà tal-prodott u mal-monitoraġġ tal-kundizzjonijiet tal-produzzjoni.

B’hekk żdiedu diversi paragrafi li jirrigwardaw l-affarijiet li ġejjin:

| — | id-dikjarazzjoni tal-identifikazzjoni tal-operaturi u d-diversi obbligi oħrajn li dawn għandhom b’rabta mad-dikjarazzjonijiet, b’mod partikulari dwar il-waqfien temporanju tal-produzzjoni (id-“dikjarazzjoni minn qabel tan-nuqqas ta’ intenzjoni ta’ produzzjoni” u d-“dikjarazzjoni minn qabel tal-issuktar tal-produzzjoni”); |
| --- | --- |

—

id-dikjarazzjoni tal-identifikazzjoni tal-operaturi u d-diversi obbligi oħrajn li dawn għandhom b’rabta mad-dikjarazzjonijiet, b’mod partikulari dwar il-waqfien temporanju tal-produzzjoni (id-“dikjarazzjoni minn qabel tan-nuqqas ta’ intenzjoni ta’ produzzjoni” u d-“dikjarazzjoni minn qabel tal-issuktar tal-produzzjoni”);

| — | iż-“żamma ta’ reġistri”, li fihom ġew speċifikati l-obbligi ta’ dawk li jrabbu l-bhejjem u d-dispożizzjonijiet nazzjonali li huma fis-seħħ għall-produtturi tal-butir; |
| --- | --- |

—

iż-“żamma ta’ reġistri”, li fihom ġew speċifikati l-obbligi ta’ dawk li jrabbu l-bhejjem u d-dispożizzjonijiet nazzjonali li huma fis-seħħ għall-produtturi tal-butir;

| — | il-metodi ta’ kontroll diġà previsti fid-dispożizzjonijiet nazzjonali li huma fis-seħħ, kif ġej: “Din il-proċedura kollha hija kkumplimentata minn eżamijiet analitiċi u organolettiċi mwettqin għall-għarrieda u billi jittieħdu kampjuni mill-prodotti ppakkjati lesti għall-bejgħ.”. |
| --- | --- |

—

il-metodi ta’ kontroll diġà previsti fid-dispożizzjonijiet nazzjonali li huma fis-seħħ, kif ġej: “Din il-proċedura kollha hija kkumplimentata minn eżamijiet analitiċi u organolettiċi mwettqin għall-għarrieda u billi jittieħdu kampjuni mill-prodotti ppakkjati lesti għall-bejgħ.”.

5.4.   
  L-intestatura “Metodu ta’ produzzjoni”

L-intestatura “Metodu ta’ produzzjoni”

L-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott tiżviluppa għadd ta’ punti dwar il-metodu tal-produzzjoni sabiex tiddeskrivi aħjar il-kundizzjonijiet tal-produzzjoni tal-ħalib u tal-ipproċessar tal-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny”. Dawn l-elementi kollha jikkontribwixxu biex isaħħu r-rabta maż-żona ġeografika.

Iddaħħlu dispożizzjonijiet dwar l-immaniġġjar tal-merħla tal-ħalib (ir-razza u l-għalf) biex jiġu rreġistrati l-prattiki tradizzjonali.

L-immaniġġjar tal-merħla

L-immaniġġjar tal-merħla

Il-merħla tal-ħalib hija ddefinita kif ġej:

“Għall-finijiet ta’ din l-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott, merħla tfisser il-merħla kollha tal-baqar tal-ħalib ta’ azjenda magħmula minn baqar li jaħilbu u baqar nexfin.”

Din id-dispożizzjoni tal-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott għandha l-għan li tistabbilixxi b’mod ċar għal liema annimali jirreferu l-frażijiet “merħla tal-ħalib” u “baqar tal-ħalib”, u tippermetti li jiġi rregolat il-kontroll u li tiġi evitata l-konfużjoni.

Bil-għan li tiġi kkonfermata r-rabta bejn il-prodott u ż-żona ġeografika, il-konsum tal-ħaxix (ir-ragħa, il-ħuxlief, eċċ.) marbut mat-tradizzjoni tat-trobbija fil-bwar fiż-żona ġeografika huwa rregolat mid-dispożizzjonijiet li ġejjin:

| — | “Il-merħla trid titħalla tirgħa għal mill-inqas seba’ xhur”. |
| --- | --- |

—

“Il-merħla trid titħalla tirgħa għal mill-inqas seba’ xhur”.

| — | “Iż-żona ewlenija tal-għalf ta’ kull azjenda jrid ikun fiha tal-inqas 50 % ħaxix. Kull baqra li taħleb għandu jkollha mill-inqas 3 500 metru kwadru ta’ bwar (naturali, temporanji jew annwali) għad-dispożizzjoni tagħha, li 2 000 metru kwadru minnhom ikunu jintużaw għar-ragħa jew mill-inqas 1 000 metru kwadru minnhom ikunu jintużaw għar-ragħa biż-żieda tal-ħaxix bħala għalf supplimentari”. |
| --- | --- |

—

“Iż-żona ewlenija tal-għalf ta’ kull azjenda jrid ikun fiha tal-inqas 50 % ħaxix. Kull baqra li taħleb għandu jkollha mill-inqas 3 500 metru kwadru ta’ bwar (naturali, temporanji jew annwali) għad-dispożizzjoni tagħha, li 2 000 metru kwadru minnhom ikunu jintużaw għar-ragħa jew mill-inqas 1 000 metru kwadru minnhom ikunu jintużaw għar-ragħa biż-żieda tal-ħaxix bħala għalf supplimentari”.

Ir-razza

Ir-razza

Sabiex jiġi żgurat li, biex isir il-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny”, jintuża ammont sinifikanti ta’ ħalib mill-baqar tar-razza tan-Normandija, li huwa element tar-rabta bejn iż-żona ġeografika u l-prodott, żdied dan li ġej:

“Għand il-produttur, il-ħalib minn kull ġabra li jintuża biex isir il-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny” għandu jiġi minn merħla li fiha tal-inqas 30 % mill-baqar ikunu baqar tal-ħalib tar-razza tan-Normandija.”.

Biex jiġi ddefinit il-kunċett ta’ ġabra tal-ħalib u jiġi speċifikat il-kontroll tad-dispożizzjoni, żdied ukoll dan li ġej:

“Ġabra tal-ħalib tfisser il-ħalib kollu miġbur u użat minn produttur fi żmien 48 siegħa.”.

Dawn id-dettalji żdiedu wkoll fil-punt 3.3 tad-Dokument Uniku.

L-għalf tal-merħla

L-għalf tal-merħla

Bil-għan li tiġi kkonfermata r-rabta tal-prodott maż-żona ġeografika permezz ta’ għalf tal-baqar tal-ħalib li joriġina fil-biċċa l-kbira tiegħu miż-żona ġeografika, żdied li 80 % mir-razzjon bażiku tal-merħla għandu jiġi miż-żona u li l-ħaxix frisk jew ippreservat irid jikkostitwixxi bħala medja mill-inqas 40 % mir-razzjon matul il-perjodu tar-ragħa u mill-inqas 20 % kuljum matul il-bqija tas-sena. Barra minn hekk, sabiex tiġi ddefinita aħjar in-natura tal-għalf użat, ġiet stabbilita lista pożittiva tal-foraġġ permess. Għalhekk żdiedu d-dispożizzjonijiet li ġejjin fl-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott:

“80 % mir-razzjon bażiku tal-merħla, mogħti bħala materja niexfa, għandu jiġi miż-żona ġeografika. Dan għandu jkun magħmul mill-foraġġ frisk jew ippreservat li ġej: mill-ħaxix, mill-qamħirrum, miċ-ċereali jew mill-għelejjel li fihom il-proteini li jkun għadhom ma sarux (il-pjanti sħaħ), mit-tiben u mill-alfalfa, kif ukoll mill-pitravi tal-għalf, mill-ħaxix tal-għeruq u mill-polpa tal-pitravi mnixxfa.”.

“Bħala medja, il-ħaxix frisk jew ippreservat għandu jikkostitwixxi mill-inqas 40 % mir-razzjon tal-għalf, mogħti bħala materja niexfa, matul il-perjodu minimu ta’ seba’ xhur ta’ ragħa. Matul il-bqija tas-sena, il-proporzjon tiegħu ma jridx ikun ta’ inqas minn 20 % mir-razzjon tal-għalf ta’ kuljum, mogħti bħala materja niexfa.”.

Dawn id-dispożizzjonijiet dwar l-għalf tal-merħla huma spjegati wkoll fil-punt 3.3 tad-Dokument Uniku.

Fil-każ tal-baqar tal-ħalib, l-għalf addizzjonali li dawn jistgħu jingħataw huwa limitat għal 1 800 kg ta’ materja niexfa f’sena kalendarja għal kull baqra tal-merħla. L-għan huwa li jiġi evitat li dan l-għalf jingħata rwol importanti wisq fid-dieta u b’hekk li tingħata preferenza lir-razzjon bażiku li jiġi miż-żona ġeografika.

Żdied il-paragrafu li ġej:

“L-għalf addizzjonali li l-baqar jistgħu jingħataw huwa limitat għal 1 800 kg f’sena kalendarja għal kull baqra tal-merħla, mogħti bħala materja niexfa.”.

Din id-dispożizzjoni żdiedet ukoll fil-punt 3.3 tad-Dokument Uniku.

Minħabba l-effetti negattivi ta’ diversi prodotti u tipi ta’ materja prima fuq il-karatteristiċi organolettiċi tal-ħalib, l-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott tispeċifika li dawn ma jistgħux jintużaw bħala għalf għall-baqar li jaħilbu. Għalhekk żdied il-paragrafu li ġej:

“Dawn li ġejjin la jistgħu jintużaw fir-razzjon bażiku u lanqas ma jistgħu jintużaw bħala għalf addizzjonali: il-kaboċċi, in-nevew, il-lift u l-kolza mqassma friska.

Il-materja prima li ġejja ma tistax tintuża fl-għalf addizzjonali, skont il-klassifikazzjoni tal-Anness C tar-Regolament (UE) Nru 68/2013 dwar il-Katalgu tal-materjali tal-għalf:

| — | iż-żejt tal-palm, iż-żejt tal-karawett, iż-żejt taż-żerriegħa tal-ġirasol u ż-żejt taż-żebbuġa fl-istat naturali tagħhom jew l-isomeri tagħhom (il-klassi 2.20.1); |
| --- | --- |

—

iż-żejt tal-palm, iż-żejt tal-karawett, iż-żejt taż-żerriegħa tal-ġirasol u ż-żejt taż-żebbuġa fl-istat naturali tagħhom jew l-isomeri tagħhom (il-klassi 2.20.1);

| — | il-prodotti tal-ħalib u l-prodotti derivati minnhom (il-klassi 8); |
| --- | --- |

—

il-prodotti tal-ħalib u l-prodotti derivati minnhom (il-klassi 8);

| — | il-prodotti tal-annimali tal-art u l-prodotti derivati minnhom (il-klassi 9); |
| --- | --- |

—

il-prodotti tal-annimali tal-art u l-prodotti derivati minnhom (il-klassi 9);

| — | il-ħut, annimali akkwatiċi oħrajn u l-prodotti derivati minnhom (il-klassi 10), ħlief għaż-żejt tal-fwied tal-merluzz; |
| --- | --- |

—

il-ħut, annimali akkwatiċi oħrajn u l-prodotti derivati minnhom (il-klassi 10), ħlief għaż-żejt tal-fwied tal-merluzz;

| — | komponenti mixxellanji (il-klassi 13), ħlief għall-melassa tal-glukożju. |
| --- | --- |

—

komponenti mixxellanji (il-klassi 13), ħlief għall-melassa tal-glukożju.

Fl-aħħar nett huma pprojbiti l-urea u d-derivattivi tagħha bħala addittivi nutrizzjonali ddefiniti fl-Anness I tar-Regolament (KE) Nru 1831/2003 fuq l-addittivi għall-użu fl-għalf tal-annimali.”.

Dawn l-elementi differenti ddaħħlu fil-punt 3.3 tad-Dokument Uniku.

Sabiex jiġu deskritti aħjar il-prattiki attwali, żdiedu żewġ kapitoli li jiddeskrivu l-istadji differenti tal-produzzjoni tal-butir, jiġifieri “l-ġbir u l-wasla tal-ħalib” u “l-produzzjoni u l-ippakkjar”.

Il-ġbir u l-wasla tal-ħalib

Il-ġbir u l-wasla tal-ħalib

Qed jiġi rregolat it-tul ta’ żmien tal-ħażna tal-ħalib użat fil-produzzjoni tal-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny” biex jiġu evitati l-problemi ta’ bidla fil-materja prima fir-razzett.

Barra minn hekk, biex ikun hemm traċċabbiltà aħjar, qed jiġi speċifikat li t-trażbord tal-ħalib bejn l-azjendi u l-fabbrika tal-butir huwa pprojbit.

Fl-aħħar nett, żdied ukoll kriterju marbut mal-aċidità tal-ħalib mhux ipproċessat sabiex jiġi żgurat li l-materja prima ma tinbidilx.

Dawn l-elementi differenti ddaħħlu fid-dispożizzjoni li ġejja:

“Il-ġbir għandu jseħħ mhux aktar tard minn kull 48 siegħa wara l-ewwel ħlib. Il-ħalib miġbur fl-azjendi għandu jiġi ddepożitat direttament fl-impjant tal-ixkumar mingħajr trażbord. Mal-wasla, il-ħalib mhux ipproċessat għandu jkollu aċidità ta’ bejn 14 u 16-il° Dornic, jiġifieri valur tal-pH ta’ bejn 6,6 u 6,85.”.

Din id-dispożizzjoni ddaħħlet kollha kemm hi fil-punt 3.3 tad-Dokument Uniku.

Il-produzzjoni u l-ippakkjar

Il-produzzjoni u l-ippakkjar

L-ixkumar u l-pastorizzazzjoni

L-ixkumar u l-pastorizzazzjoni

Żdied kapitolu dwar l-ixkumar u l-pastorizzazzjoni. Fih ġie speċifikat li, sabiex tinżamm il-kwalità tal-materja prima, “il-ħin ta’ stennija tal-ħalib qabel l-ixkumar għandu jkun ta’ mhux aktar minn 48 siegħa minn meta jasal”.

Żdiedu d-dettalji li ġejjin dwar iż-żewġ stadji tal-pastorizzazzjoni li jippermettu li jinkiseb il-prodott iddefinit:

“Qabel l-ixkumar, il-ħalib sħiħ miġbur jista’ jgħaddi minn stadju ta’ prepastorizzazzjoni f’temperatura ta’ 74 °C. Wara l-ixkumar, il-krema għandha tiġi ppastorizzata f’temperatura ta’ bejn 86 u 95 °C għal 30 sa 180 sekonda.”.

Din id-dispożizzjoni tikkompleta dik tal-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott attwali, li tgħid hekk: “Il-ħalib u l-krema jridu jiġu ppastorizzati.”.

Barra minn hekk, tneħħew ir-referenzi għar-rekwiżiti legali u regolatorji nazzjonali dwar il-bhejjem, il-ħalib u l-butir.

Biex tinżamm il-kwalità tal-materja prima, ġie speċifikat ukoll il-ħin massimu li jista’ jgħaddi bejn tmiem l-ixkumar tal-ħalib u l-proċess tal-pastorizzazzjoni: “Dan l-aħħar proċess irid isir sa mhux aktar tard minn 36 siegħa minn meta jintemm l-ixkumar tal-ħalib.”.

Biex jiġu ddefiniti t-tipi ta’ krema li jistgħu jintużaw għall-produzzjoni tal-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny”, ġie speċifikat li “Il-kontenut minimu tax-xaħam fil-krema maħsuba għall-produzzjoni tal-butir għandu jkun ta’ mill-inqas 35 gramma għal kull 100 gramma tal-prodott.”.

F’dak li għandu x’jaqsam mal-użijiet differenti tal-prodott waqt l-ixkumar u l-pastorizzazzjoni, żdied dan li ġej: “Il-krema b’inqas xaħam, il-krema mhux ipproċessata, il-krema sterilizzata u l-krema sterilizzata f’temperatura ultra għolja (UHT) ma jistgħux jintużaw għall-produzzjoni tal-butir”.

Din is-sentenza żdiedet fil-punt 3.3 tad-Dokument Uniku.

Il-lista tas-sustanzi pprojbiti għall-produzzjoni tal-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny” ġiet kompluta wkoll billi ġie speċifikat li huwa pprojbit ix-xorrox tal-butir, kif ukoll li huwa pprojbit li jiżdiedu addittivi, għajnuniet għall-ipproċessar u ingredjenti oħrajn minbarra l-fermenti lattiċi.

B’hekk il-paragrafu li ġej:

“L-użu tas-sustanzi li ġejjin huwa pprojbit fil-produzzjoni u fil-kummerċjalizzazzjoni tal-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny”:

| — | il-kremi tax-xorrox, il-kremi rikostitwiti, iffriżati jew iffriżati malajr; |
| --- | --- |

—

il-kremi tax-xorrox, il-kremi rikostitwiti, iffriżati jew iffriżati malajr;

| — | is-sustanzi kuluranti jew l-antiossidanti; |
| --- | --- |

—

is-sustanzi kuluranti jew l-antiossidanti;

| — | is-sustanzi ta’ deaċidifikazzjoni maħsubin biex inaqqsu l-aċidità tal-ħalib jew tal-krema,” |
| --- | --- |

—

is-sustanzi ta’ deaċidifikazzjoni maħsubin biex inaqqsu l-aċidità tal-ħalib jew tal-krema,”

ġie sostitwit b’dan li ġej:

“Il-krema b’inqas xaħam, il-krema mhux ipproċessata, il-krema sterilizzata u l-krema sterilizzata f’temperatura ultra għolja (UHT) ma jistgħux jintużaw għall-produzzjoni tal-butir.

L-użu tal-krema tax-xorrox, tax-xorrox tal-butir, tal-krema rikostitwita, tal-krema ffriżata jew iffriżata malajr, tas-sustanzi kuluranti jew tal-antiossidanti, tas-sustanzi ta’ deaċidifikazzjoni maħsubin biex inaqqsu l-aċidità tal-ħalib jew tal-krema, ta’ addittivi, ta’ għajnuniet għall-ipproċessar jew ta’ kull ingredjent ieħor minbarra l-fermenti lattiċi huwa pprojbit fil-produzzjoni tal-krema maħsuba għall-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny”.”.

Id-dispożizzjoni li tispeċifika li “kull proċess maħsub biex iżid il-kontenut ta’ materja niexfa mhux xaħmija, b’mod partikulari biż-żieda ta’ kulturi u ta’ fermenti lattiċi waqt l-għaġna” ġiet spostata għall-kapitolu msejjaħ “Iż-żieda tal-fermenti u t-tħawwid” li jispjega u jirregola l-istadji differenti tal-produzzjoni tal-butir proprju, b’mod partikulari l-istadju tal-għaġna (jew it-tħawwid).

Id-dispożizzjoni li tispeċifika li “mal-butir jista’ jiżdied massimu ta’ żewġ grammi melħ għal kull 100 gramma” ukoll ġiet spostata għall-kapitolu msejjaħ “Iż-żieda tal-fermenti u t-tħawwid”, filwaqt li tneħħa l-limitu ta’ żewġ grammi għal kull 100 gramma peress li dan huwa rregolat mir-regolamenti ġenerali.

Iż-żieda tal-fermenti u t-tħawwid

Iż-żieda tal-fermenti u t-tħawwid

Inħoloq ukoll kapitolu separat għad-dispożizzjonijiet dwar iż-żieda tal-fermenti u t-tħawwid. Fih ġie speċifikat, b’mod partikulari, li ż-żieda tal-fermenti mal-krema ssir “fil-fabbrika tal-butir” u fi żmien massimu ta’ 48 siegħa minn meta jintemm l-ixkumar. Żdied ukoll il-fatt li ma jridux jgħaddu iktar minn 72 siegħa minn meta l-ħalib jasal sa ma jiżdiedu l-fermenti mal-krema.

Il-metodu ta’ produzzjoni tal-butir ġie spjegat ukoll billi żdied il-fatt li dan jinkiseb billi l-krema miżjuda bil-fermenti u mmaturata titħawwad (fil-magna tal-butir jew fil-mastella), u l-fatt li l-ħbub tal-butir li jinkisbu mbagħad jingħaġnu u wara jinħaslu, jekk ikun hemm bżonn, u li l-butir lest irid ikollu valur massimu tal-pH ta’ 6.

Ġie speċifikat li l-proċessi li jbaxxu l-valur tal-pH tal-butir b’metodi oħrajn minbarra l-maturazzjoni bijoloġika huma pprojbiti. Iż-żieda tal-permeat ikkonċentrat mill-kulturi lattiċi u tal-fermenti aromatiċi waqt il-produzzjoni tal-butir (il-proċess NIZO) hija wkoll ipprojbita b’mod espliċitu. Il-possibbiltà li jiżdied massimu ta’ żewġ grammi melħ għal kull 100 gramma tneħħiet minħabba li din hija rregolata mir-regolamenti ġenerali.

Għalhekk, it-test tal-kapitolu tal-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott imsejjaħ “Iż-żieda tal-fermenti u t-tħawwid” huwa dan li ġej:

“Iż-żieda tal-fermenti mal-krema maħsuba għall-produzzjoni tal-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny” issir fil-fabbrika tal-butir sa mhux aktar tard minn 48 siegħa minn meta jintemm l-ixkumar u sa mhux aktar tard minn 72 siegħa minn meta jasal il-ħalib, f’temperatura ta’ bejn 9 u 15-il °C. Din il-krema tgħaddi minn maturazzjoni bijoloġika għal mill-inqas 12-il siegħa f’temperatura ta’ bejn 9 u 15-il °C qabel ma titħawwad f’magna tal-butir jew f’mastella. Il-ħbub tal-butir imbagħad jingħaġnu u wara jinħaslu, jekk ikun hemm bżonn. Meta tintemm il-produzzjoni, il-butir irid ikollu valur tal-pH ta’ inqas minn 6.

Kull proċess maħsub biex iżid il-kontenut ta’ materja niexfa mhux xaħmija, b’mod partikulari biż-żieda ta’ kulturi u ta’ fermenti lattiċi waqt l-għaġna, huwa pprojbit. Bl-istess mod, kull proċess li jbaxxi l-valur tal-pH tal-butir b’metodi oħrajn minbarra l-maturazzjoni bijoloġika tal-krema, b’mod partikulari biż-żieda tal-permeat ikkonċentrat mill-kulturi lattiċi u tal-fermenti aromatiċi waqt il-produzzjoni tal-butir (il-proċess NIZO), huwa pprojbit.

Mal-butir jista’ jiżdied il-melħ fil-limiti regolatorji.”.

B’rabta mal-għoti ta’ konsistenza partikulari, ġie speċifikat li l-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny” jista’ jgħaddi minn trattament ta’ għoti ta’ konsistenza partikulari biex jiġi adattat għall-użu fil-ħami u fil-produzzjoni tal-ħelu:

“Il-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny” jista’ jgħaddi minn trattament fiżiku ta’ kristallizzazzjoni li bih isir iktar malleabbli u reżistenti għall-magni mingħajr ma jinħall (butir għall-għaġina sfiljurata) biex ikun jista’ jintuża bħala materja prima fil-preparazzjonijiet tal-ikel, b’mod partikulari fil-ħami u fil-produzzjoni tal-ħelu”.

Din il-proċedura hija meħtieġa minħabba li l-punt tat-tidwib tal-butir ivarja ħafna skont l-istaġuni — il-butir ikun iktar artab fis-sajf u iktar iebes fix-xitwa. Din id-differenza fil-punt tat-tidwib ġejja mid-differenza fil-kompożizzjoni tal-aċidi xaħmin fix-xaħam. It-trattament fiżiku tal-butir jippermetti li titnaqqas din il-varjabbiltà u jiżgura li l-butir ikollu l-istess konsistenza tul is-sena kollha. Dan it-tibdil fil-konsistenza tal-butir jippermettilu jkun adattat ferm għall-isfiljurar. Din il-proċedura ma taffettwa bl-ebda mod lit-togħma tal-butir. Din il-proċedura diġà kienet issir meta l-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny” ġie rreġistrat bħala DOP iżda dan id-dettall ma kienx iddaħħal fl-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott irreġistrata. Fil-prodotti moħmija u fil-pasti joħorġu fid-deher il-kwalitajiet kollha tad-DOP “Beurre d’Isigny” f’forma oħra.

L-ippakkjar huwa spjegat bir-reqqa biex jiġu speċifikati ċerti prattiki. Żdied il-fatt li l-butir, ippakkjat f’pakketti ta’ kilogramm sa massimu ta’ 25 kilogramm, jista’ jiġi ffriżat jew iffriżat malajr għal perjodu massimu ta’ 12-il xahar. L-iffriżar jew l-iffriżar malajr irid isir sa mhux aktar tard minn għaxart ijiem wara l-istadju tal-għoti ta’ konsistenza partikulari lill-butir fil-każ tal-butir li jkun ingħata konsistenza partikulari u sa mhux aktar tard minn 30 jum wara l-produzzjoni fil-każ tal-butir li ma jkunx ingħata konsistenza partikulari. Wara dan, il-butir irid jinżamm f’temperatura ta’ bejn -18 u -23 °C.

Bis-saħħa tal-iffriżar tal-butir ippakkjat f’ċangaturi ta’ kilogramm u f’kontenituri ta’ iktar minn 10 kilogrammi tista’ tiġi ssodisfata d-domanda ta’ ċerti impriżi tal-industrija tal-ikel (il-furnara, il-pastiċċiera u d-dulċiera) li jkunu jeħtieġu butir li l-konsistenza tiegħu jkollha ċerti karatteristiċi partikulari marbutin mal-perjodu tal-produzzjoni. L-iffriżar jew l-iffriżar malajr għal perjodu massimu ta’ 12-il xahar ma jaffettwax il-karatteristiċi organolettiċi tal-butir. Fil-fatt din il-prattika komuni, li tintuża ħafna fl-industrija tal-ħalib, sal-lum uriet kemm hi siewja f’termini tal-konservazzjoni u tal-preservazzjoni tal-kwalitajiet organolettiċi.

F’dak li għandu x’jaqsam mal-ippakkjar tal-butir, żdied il-fatt li l-ikbar pakkett għall-bejgħ huwa ta’ 25 kilogramm. Din id-dispożizzjoni hija konformi mat-tradizzjoni tal-ippakkjar tal-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny” f’kontenituri kbar (f’bettiji li kienu jesgħu bejn 20 u 200 litru li kienu jintużaw fis-sekli 18 u 19). Madankollu, fiż-żona ġeografika huwa awtorizzat it-trasport tal-butir minn impjant għall-ieħor f’pakketti li jkunu jiżnu iktar minn hekk.

It-test tad-dispożizzjoni rilevanti tal-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott huwa dan li ġej:

“Il-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny” jiġi ppakkjat f’pakketti għall-bejgħ li jkunu jiżnu mhux aktar minn 25 kilogramm. Huwa awtorizzat it-trasport tal-butir minn impjant għall-ieħor fiż-żona ġeografika ddefinita f’pakketti li jkunu jiżnu iktar minn hekk.

Il-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny” jista’ jiġi ffriżat jew iffriżat malajr u jinżamm f’temperatura ta’ bejn -18 u -23 °C biss jekk ikun ippakkjat f’pakketti ta’ mill-inqas kilogramm u ta’ mhux aktar minn 25 kilogramm u għal perjodu massimu ta’ 12-il xahar. L-iffriżar jew l-iffriżar malajr irid isir sa mhux aktar tard minn għaxart ijiem wara l-produzzjoni fil-każ tal-butir li jkun ingħata konsistenza partikulari u sa mhux aktar tard minn 30 jum wara l-produzzjoni fil-każ tal-butir li ma jkunx ingħata konsistenza partikulari.”.

Parti minn dawn ir-regoli ddaħħlu fil-punt 3.5. tad-Dokument Uniku, imsejjaħ “Regoli speċifiċi dwar it-tqattigħ, it-taħkik, l-ippakkjar, eċċ.”.

5.5.   
  L-intestatura “Rabta”

L-intestatura “Rabta”

Il-kapitolu tal-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott imsejjaħ “Rabta maż-żona ġeografika” nkiteb kollu mill-ġdid biex toħroġ b’mod iktar ċar l-evidenza tar-rabta bejn il-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny” u ż-żona ġeografika tiegħu, mingħajr ma nbidlet is-sustanza tar-rabta. Din l-evidenza tenfasizza b’mod partikulari l-kundizzjonijiet tal-produzzjoni tal-ħalib, u b’mod partikulari l-fatt li għalf ibbażat fuq l-aħjar użu tal-ħaxix b’perjodu twil ta’ ragħa jagħmilha possibbli li jinkiseb ħalib b’xaħam ta’ kwalità li tkun adattata għall-produzzjoni tal-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny”, li għaliha huwa meħtieġ għarfien partikulari. Ittieħdet l-okkażjoni wkoll biex titneħħa r-referenza għall-kontenut għoli ta’ aċidu olejku fil-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny”, minħabba li din il-karatteristika mhix meqjusa bħala speċifika.

Il-punt imsejjaħ “Speċifiċità taż-żona ġeografika” jinkludi l-fatturi naturali taż-żona ġeografika u l-fatturi umani u jagħti sommarju tal-aspett storiku u jenfasizza l-għarfien speċifiku.

Il-punt imsejjaħ “Speċifiċità tal-prodott” jenfasizza ċerti elementi introdotti fid-deskrizzjoni tal-prodott.

Fl-aħħar nett, il-punt imsejjaħ “Rabta kawżali” jispjega l-interazzjonijiet bejn il-fatturi naturali u umani u l-prodott.

It-test kollu tar-rabta mogħti fl-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott tad-DOP huwa mogħti fil-punt 5 tad-Dokument Uniku.

5.6.   
  L-intestatura “Tikkettar”

L-intestatura “Tikkettar”

Biex jiġu ċċarati l-elementi li bihom il-konsumaturi jkunu jistgħu jidentifikaw il-prodott:

| — | żdied il-fatt li l-prodotti li jgawdu mid-denominazzjoni ta’ oriġini jrid ikollhom tikketta li jkun fiha l-isem tad-denominazzjoni ta’ oriġini u li l-ittri użati fuq din it-tikketta jridu jkunu tal-inqas daqs żewġ terzi tad-daqs tal-ikbar ittri li jidhru fuq it-tikketta. Din ir-regola ma tapplikax għall-istikers jekk l-isem tad-denominazzjoni jkun jidher xi mkien ieħor fuq it-tikkettar; |
| --- | --- |

—

żdied il-fatt li l-prodotti li jgawdu mid-denominazzjoni ta’ oriġini jrid ikollhom tikketta li jkun fiha l-isem tad-denominazzjoni ta’ oriġini u li l-ittri użati fuq din it-tikketta jridu jkunu tal-inqas daqs żewġ terzi tad-daqs tal-ikbar ittri li jidhru fuq it-tikketta. Din ir-regola ma tapplikax għall-istikers jekk l-isem tad-denominazzjoni jkun jidher xi mkien ieħor fuq it-tikkettar;

| — | inbidel il-kliem li jrid jidher fuq l-istiker li titwaħħal fuq il-pakketti, hekk li trid tintuża l-kelma “protégée” (protetta) minflok il-kelma “contrôlée” (ikkontrollata). Din l-istiker trid titwaħħal taħt ir-responsabbiltà tal-operatur li jkun inkarigat minn din l-operazzjoni; |
| --- | --- |

—

inbidel il-kliem li jrid jidher fuq l-istiker li titwaħħal fuq il-pakketti, hekk li trid tintuża l-kelma “protégée” (protetta) minflok il-kelma “contrôlée” (ikkontrollata). Din l-istiker trid titwaħħal taħt ir-responsabbiltà tal-operatur li jkun inkarigat minn din l-operazzjoni;

| — | ġie indikat li s-simbolu tal-Unjoni Ewropea għad-DOP jrid jitwaħħal eżatti ħdejn l-istiker (jiġifieri ħdejha jew taħtha jew ’il fuq minnha, u ma jridx ikun mifrud minnha b’xi kliem ieħor). |
| --- | --- |

—

ġie indikat li s-simbolu tal-Unjoni Ewropea għad-DOP jrid jitwaħħal eżatti ħdejn l-istiker (jiġifieri ħdejha jew taħtha jew ’il fuq minnha, u ma jridx ikun mifrud minnha b’xi kliem ieħor).

Tneħħiet id-dispożizzjoni dwar il-projbizzjoni tal-użu tal-kliem “Isigny” jew “Isigny-sur-mer” jew ta’ kull kelma, grafika jew illustrazzjoni oħra li tirreferi għal din iż-żona fil-każ ta’ prodotti li ma jissodisfawx il-kundizzjonijiet stabbiliti fl-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott, minħabba li din ma tidħolx fil-kamp ta’ applikazzjoni tal-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott.

Il-paragrafi li ġejjin:

“Stiker li jkollha l-kliem “Beurre d’Isigny — Appellation d’Origine Contrôlée” jew “Crème d’Isigny — Appellation d’Origine Contrôlée” trid titwaħħal jew tiġi stampata fuq il-pakketti jew fuq ir-reċipjenti, taħt ir-responsabbiltà tal-professjonist ikkonċernat.

L-użu tal-kliem ġeografiku “Isigny” jew “Isigny-sur-mer” jew ta’ kull kelma, grafika jew illustrazzjoni oħra li tirreferi għal din iż-żona huwa pprojbit fil-każ tal-bejgħ ta’ butir li ma jkunx ġie prodott, ippakkjat u kkummerċjalizzat skont id-digriet tad-Denominazzjoni.”

ġew sostitwiti b’dan li ġej:

“Kull pakkett tad-DOP “Beurre d’Isigny” li jiġi kkummerċjalizzat irid ikollu tikketta li jkun fiha l-isem tad-denominazzjoni ta’ oriġini miktub b’ittri li jkunu tal-inqas daqs żewġ terzi tad-daqs tal-ikbar ittri li jidhru fuq it-tikketta.

Stiker li jkollha l-kliem ““Beurre d’Isigny” — Appellation d’Origine Protégée” trid titwaħħal jew tiġi stampata fuq il-pakketti jew fuq ir-reċipjenti, taħt ir-responsabbiltà tal-operatur.

Is-simbolu tal-Unjoni Ewropea għad-DOP irid jitwaħħal ħdejn l-istiker jew taħtha jew ’il fuq minnha, u ma jridx ikun mifrud minnha b’xi kliem ieħor. Id-daqs minimu tad-denominazzjoni ta’ oriġini ma japplikax għall-istiker meta din id-denominazzjoni tkun diġà tidher xi mkien ieħor fuq it-tikkettar.”.

Din l-emenda saret ukoll fil-punt 3.6. tad-Dokument Uniku, imsejjaħ “Regoli speċifiċi dwar it-tikkettar”.

5.7.   
  L-intestatura “Oħrajn”

L-intestatura “Oħrajn”

Fil-kapitolu msejjaħ “Is-servizz kompetenti tal-Istat Membru”, ġie aġġornat l-indirizz tal-INAO.

Fil-kapitolu msejjaħ “Grupp applikant”, ġew aġġornati d-dettalji ta’ kuntatt tal-grupp.

Fil-kapitolu tal-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott imsejjaħ “Referenzi għall-korp ta’ kontroll”, ġew aġġornati l-isem u d-dettalji ta’ kuntatt tal-korpi uffiċjali. F’din l-intestatura jingħataw id-dettalji ta’ kuntatt tal-awtoritajiet Franċiżi responsabbli għall-kontrolli, jiġifieri l-istitut nazzjonali tal-oriġini u tal-kwalità msejjaħ “Institut national de l’origine et de la qualité” (l-INAO) u d-direttorat ġenerali għall-kompetizzjoni, għall-affarijiet tal-konsumaturi u għall-prevenzjoni tal-frodi msejjaħ “Direction générale de la concurrence, de la consommation et de la répression des fraudes” (id-DGCCRF). Żdied ukoll il-fatt li l-isem u d-dettalji ta’ kuntatt tal-korp taċ-ċertifikazzjoni jistgħu jiġu kkonsultati fuq is-sit web tal-INAO u fuq il-bażi tad-data tal-Kummissjoni Ewropea.

Fl-ispeċifikazzjoni tal-prodott żdied kapitolu msejjaħ “Rekwiżiti nazzjonali”. Fih jingħataw, fil-forma ta’ tabella, il-punti ewlenin li jridu jiġu kkontrollati, il-valuri ta’ referenza tagħhom u l-metodu ta’ evalwazzjoni tagħhom.

DOKUMENT UNIKU

“BEURRE D’ISIGNY”

BEURRE D’ISIGNY

Nru tal-UE: PDO-FR-0138-AM01 – 19.10.2017

Nru tal-UE: PDO-FR-0138-AM01 – 19.10.2017

DOP ( X ) IĠP ( )

DOP ( X ) IĠP ( )

1.   Isem

Isem

“Beurre d’Isigny”

2.   Stat Membru jew pajjiż terz

Stat Membru jew pajjiż terz

Franza

3.   Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott agrikolu jew tal-oġġett tal-ikel

Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott agrikolu jew tal-oġġett tal-ikel

3.1.   Tip ta’ prodott

Tip ta’ prodott

Klassi 1.5. Żjut u xaħmijiet (butir, marġerina, żejt, eċċ.)

3.2.   Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott li għalih japplika l-isem f’(1)

Deskrizzjoni tal-prodott li għalih japplika l-isem f’(1)

Il-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny” għandu kulur naturali bejn avorju u isfar “lewn iċ-ċfolloq”. Bis-saħħa tal-konsistenza kremuża tiegħu, jista’ jindilek faċilment. Ta’ spiss ikollu togħma ta’ krema friska u ta’ ġellewż. Huwa jista’ jingħata konsistenza partikulari biex ikun jista’ jintuża għall-isfiljurar u jista’ jkun mielaħ.

Il-butir mhux mielaħ għandu kontenut tax-xaħam ta’ iktar minn 82 %, filwaqt li l-butir mielaħ għandu kontenut tax-xaħam ta’ iktar minn 80 %.

3.3.   Għalf (għall-prodotti li joriġinaw mill-annimali biss) u materja prima (għall-prodotti pproċessati biss)

Għalf (għall-prodotti li joriġinaw mill-annimali biss) u materja prima (għall-prodotti pproċessati biss)

Biex tiġi żgurata rabta stretta bejn it-territorju u l-prodott permezz ta’ għalf b’ħaxix li ġej miż-żona ġeografika, il-baqar tal-ħalib għandhom jirgħu għal mill-inqas seba’ xhur fis-sena, u kull azjenda għandu jkollha mill-inqas 0,35 ettaru ta’ bwar għal kull baqra tal-ħalib li tinħaleb, li mill-inqas 0,20 ettaru minnhom ikunu aċċessibbli mill-post fejn jinħalbu l-baqar, jew mill-inqas 0,10 ettari minnhom ikunu aċċessibbli mill-post fejn jinħalbu l-baqar biż-żieda tal-ħaxix bħala għalf supplimentari. Kull azjenda jrid ikollha żona ewlenija tal-għalf li jkun fiha tal-inqas 50 % ħaxix.

L-għalf tal-baqar tal-ħalib ma jistax jiġi kollu miż-żona ġeografika. Fil-fatt, il-bżonn ta’ proteini li għandhom il-baqar tal-ħalib ma jistgħux ikopruh dejjem l-uċuħ ikkultivati f’din iż-żona. Barra minn hekk, ma tistax tiġi ggarantita l-oriġini tal-materja prima li minnha jkun magħmul l-għalf addizzjonali. 80 % mir-razzjon bażiku tal-merħla magħmul mill-foraġġ huwa prodott fiż-żona ġeografika (ikkalkulat bħala materja niexfa fis-sena). Meta wieħed iqis li r-razzjon bażiku jikkostitwixxi madwar 70 % tal-għalf kollu tal-baqar tal-ħalib, jista’ jiġi stmat li l-proporzjon tal-għalf li ġej miż-żona huwa ta’ mill-inqas 56 %.

Bħala medja, il-ħaxix fil-forom differenti tiegħu jikkostitwixxi mill-inqas 40 % mir-razzjon bażiku matul il-perjodu minimu ta’ seba’ xhur ta’ ragħa u mill-inqas 20 % minnu ta’ kuljum matul il-bqija tas-sena. L-għalf addizzjonali li l-baqar jistgħu jingħataw huwa limitat għal 1 800 kg f’sena kalendarja għal kull baqra tal-merħla.

Il-foraġġ permess huwa l-ħaxix, il-qamħirrum, iċ-ċereali jew l-għelejjel li fihom il-proteini li jkun għadhom ma sarux (il-pjanti sħaħ), it-tiben u l-alfalfa (kollha f’forma friska jew ippreservata), kif ukoll il-pitravi tal-għalf, il-ħaxix tal-għeruq u l-polpa tal-pitravi mnixxfa.

Il-kaboċċi, in-nevew, il-lift u l-kolza mqassma friska u l-urea u d-derivattivi tagħha la jistgħu jintużaw fir-razzjon bażiku u lanqas ma jistgħu jintużaw bħala għalf addizzjonali.

Il-materja prima li ġejja ma tistax tintuża fl-għalf addizzjonali:

| — | iż-żejt tal-palm, iż-żejt tal-karawett, iż-żejt taż-żerriegħa tal-ġirasol u ż-żejt taż-żebbuġa fl-istat naturali tagħhom jew l-isomeri tagħhom; |
| --- | --- |

—

iż-żejt tal-palm, iż-żejt tal-karawett, iż-żejt taż-żerriegħa tal-ġirasol u ż-żejt taż-żebbuġa fl-istat naturali tagħhom jew l-isomeri tagħhom;

| — | il-prodotti tal-ħalib u l-prodotti derivati minnhom; |
| --- | --- |

—

il-prodotti tal-ħalib u l-prodotti derivati minnhom;

| — | il-prodotti tal-annimali tal-art u l-prodotti derivati minnhom; |
| --- | --- |

—

il-prodotti tal-annimali tal-art u l-prodotti derivati minnhom;

| — | il-ħut, annimali akkwatiċi oħrajn u l-prodotti derivati minnhom, ħlief għaż-żejt tal-fwied tal-merluzz; |
| --- | --- |

—

il-ħut, annimali akkwatiċi oħrajn u l-prodotti derivati minnhom, ħlief għaż-żejt tal-fwied tal-merluzz;

| — | komponenti mixxellanji, ħlief għall-melassa tal-glukożju. |
| --- | --- |

—

komponenti mixxellanji, ħlief għall-melassa tal-glukożju.

Għand il-produttur, il-ħalib minn kull ġabra li jintuża biex isir il-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny” għandu jiġi minn merħla li fiha tal-inqas 30 % mill-baqar ikunu baqar tal-ħalib tar-razza tan-Normandija, b’ġabra tal-ħalib tkun tfisser il-ħalib kollu miġbur u użat minn produttur fi żmien 48 siegħa.

Il-ġbir għandu jseħħ mhux aktar tard minn kull 48 siegħa wara l-ewwel ħlib. Il-ħalib miġbur fl-azjendi għandu jiġi ddepożitat direttament fl-impjant tal-ixkumar mingħajr trażbord. Mal-wasla, il-ħalib mhux ipproċessat għandu jkollu aċidità ta’ bejn 14 u 16-il° Dornic, jiġifieri valur tal-pH ta’ bejn 6,6 u 6,85.

Il-kontenut minimu tax-xaħam fil-krema maħsuba għall-produzzjoni tal-butir għandu jkun ta’ mill-inqas 35 gramma għal kull 100 gramma tal-prodott. Il-krema b’inqas xaħam, il-krema mhux ipproċessata, il-krema sterilizzata u l-krema sterilizzata f’temperatura ultra għolja (UHT) ma jistgħux jintużaw għall-produzzjoni tal-butir.

3.4.   Passi speċifiċi tal-produzzjoni li jridu jsiru fiż-żona ġeografika ddefinita

Passi speċifiċi tal-produzzjoni li jridu jsiru fiż-żona ġeografika ddefinita

Il-produzzjoni tal-ħalib u tal-butir għandhom isiru fiż-żona ġeografika ddefinita fil-punt 4.

3.5.   Regoli speċifiċi dwar it-tqattigħ, it-taħkik, l-ippakkjar, eċċ.

Regoli speċifiċi dwar it-tqattigħ, it-taħkik, l-ippakkjar, eċċ.

L-iffriżar eventwali tal-butir u l-ippakkjar tiegħu għandhom isiru fiż-żona ġeografika.

Fil-fatt, l-ippakkjar tal-butir huwa proċedura importanti ħafna għaż-żamma tal-kwalità tal-prodotti minħabba li x-xaħam huwa sensittiv għall-ossidazzjoni. Għaldaqstant, l-ippakkjar irid isir malajr wara li jintemm il-proċess tal-produzzjoni. B’hekk, il-proċedura għandha ssir fiż-żona ġeografika ddefinita mogħtija fil-punt 4 f’pakketti għall-bejgħ ta’ mhux aktar minn 25 kilogramm.

Il-butir jista’ jiġi ffriżat jew iffriżat malajr għal perjodu massimu ta’ 12-il xahar sakemm ikun ippakkjat f’pakketti ta’ mill-inqas kilogramm u ta’ mhux aktar minn 25 kilogramm. L-iffriżar irid isir sa mhux aktar tard minn għaxart ijiem wara l-produzzjoni fil-każ tal-butir li jkun ingħata konsistenza partikulari u sa mhux aktar tard minn 30 jum wara l-produzzjoni fil-każ tal-butir li ma jkunx ingħata konsistenza partikulari.

3.6.   Regoli speċifiċi dwar it-tikkettar

Regoli speċifiċi dwar it-tikkettar

Kull pakkett tad-DOP “Beurre d’Isigny” li jiġi kkummerċjalizzat irid ikollu tikketta li jkun fiha l-isem tad-denominazzjoni ta’ oriġini miktub b’ittri li jkunu tal-inqas daqs żewġ terzi tad-daqs tal-ikbar ittri li jidhru fuq it-tikketta.

Stiker li jkollha l-kliem “Beurre d’Isigny — Appellation d’Origine Protégée” trid titwaħħal jew tiġi stampata fuq il-pakketti jew fuq ir-reċipjenti, taħt ir-responsabbiltà tal-operatur.

Is-simbolu tal-Unjoni Ewropea għad-DOP irid jitwaħħal ħdejn l-istiker jew taħtha jew ’il fuq minnha, u ma jridx ikun mifrud minnha b’xi kliem ieħor. Id-daqs minimu tad-denominazzjoni ta’ oriġini ma japplikax għall-istiker meta din id-denominazzjoni tkun diġà tidher xi mkien ieħor fuq it-tikkettar.

4.   Definizzjoni fil-qosor taż-żona ġeografika

Definizzjoni fil-qosor taż-żona ġeografika

Iż-żona ġeografika ddefinita hija mifruxa fit-territorju tal-muniċipalitajiet tad-dipartimenti li ġejjin:

id-dipartiment tal-Calvados (82 muniċipalità):

id-dipartiment tal-Calvados (82 muniċipalità):

il-muniċipalitajiet kollha tal-Canton de Bayeux, minbarra Chouain, Condé-sur-Seulles, Ellon, Esquay-sur-Seulles, Juaye-Mondaye, Le Manoir, Manvieux, Ryes, Tracy-sur-Mer, Vaux-sur-Seulles u Vienne-en-Bessin;

il-muniċipalitajiet kollha tal-Canton de Trévières, minbarra La Bazoque, Cahagnolles, Cormolain, Foulognes, Litteau, Planquery, Sainte-Honorine-de-Drucy u Sallen;

id-dipartiment tal-Manche (93 muniċipalità):

id-dipartiment tal-Manche (93 muniċipalità):

il-muniċipalitajiet li ġejjin tal-Canton d’Agon-Coutainville: Auxais, Feugères, Gonfreville, Gorges, Marchésieux, Nay, Périers, Raids, Saint-Germain-sur-Sèves, Saint-Martin-d’Aubigny u Saint-Sébastien-de-Raids;

il-muniċipalitajiet li ġejjin tal-Canton de Bricquebec: Etienville, Les Moitiers-en-Bauptois u Orglandes;

il-muniċipalitajiet kollha tal-Canton de Carentan-les-Marais;

il-muniċipalitajiet li ġejjin tal-Canton de Créances: Montsenelle (it-territorji tal-muniċipalitajiet l-antiki ta’ Coigny, Prétot-Sainte-Suzanne u Saint-Jores biss) u Le Plessis-Lastelle;

il-muniċipalitajiet kollha tal-Canton de Pont-Hébert, minbarra Bérigny, Saint-André-de-l’Epine, Saint-Georges-d’Elle, Saint-Germain-d’Elle u Saint-Pierre-de-Semilly;

il-muniċipalitajiet kollha tal-Canton de Saint-Lô-1, minbarra Agneaux, Le Lorey, Marigny-Le-Lozon (it-territorju tal-muniċipalità l-antika ta’ Lozon biss), Le Mesnil-Amey, Saint-Gilles u Saint-Lô;

il-muniċipalitajiet kollha tal-Canton de Valognes, minbarra Brix, Huberville, Lestre, Lieusaint, Montaigu-la-Brisette, Saint-Germain-de-Tournebut, Saint-Joseph, Saint-Martin-d’Audouville, Saussemesnil, Tamerville, Valognes, Vaudreville u Yvetot-Bocage.

5.   Rabta maż-żona ġeografika

Rabta maż-żona ġeografika

Iż-żona ġeografika tal-produzzjoni tal-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny” għandha forma ta’ nofs qamar u hija magħmula minn art sedimentarja b’altitudni baxxa (ta’ inqas minn 50 metru). Din il-medda ta’ art, imsejħa “Col du Cotentin”, tifforma unità ġeoloġika notevoli ffurmata minn diversi saffi ta’ sediment tal-baħar. Fiha nsibu żewġ żoni distinti, waħda msejħa l-“Bas Pays” (ir-reġjun il-baxx), iffurmata mill-bwar kbar kostali u alluvjali nexfin iżda li jistgħu jegħrqu, u l-oħra msejħa l-“Haut Pays” (ir-reġjun l-għoli), li hija art imsaġġra ffurmata minn qortin u minn żoni iżolati tal-franka u għoljiet baxxi tat-tafal u taċ-ċagħaq fil-Lvant. Il-karatteristika prinċipali tal-ħamrija hija l-ammont kbir ta’ sediment tal-baħar u tax-xmajjar fiha, l-iktar fil-Bajja ta’ Veys u fil-widien tax-xmajjar li jispiċċaw fiha.

Fil-Col du Cotentin tagħmel madwar 800 mm xita u jkun hemm iktar minn 170 jum ta’ xita mqassmin tajjeb tul is-sena u fis-sajf it-temperaturi jkunu friski u x-xtiewi ma jkunux daqstant ħorox, u l-meded tat-temperaturi ma jvarjawx daqskemm ivarjaw f’Saint-Lô u f’Caen, u b’hekk il-klima f’dan ir-reġjun tista’ titqies bħala waħda oċeanika moderata. Din il-klima bl-irtuba, imċajpra u moderata hija omoġenja minħabba n-nuqqas ta’ muntanji. L-influwenza tal-oċean tidher ukoll fl-ammont ta’ rxiex tal-melħ tal-baħar li jxarrab il-bwar.

Il-Col du Cotentin huwa wieħed mir-reġjuni tal-mergħat tan-Normandija li kien jeżisti qabel ma bdiet il-mewġa ta’ konverżjoni tal-art maħduma fi bwar fl-1800 fin-Normandija. Dawk li jrabbu l-bhejjem biddlu r-reġjun ta’ Isigny f’territorju prestiġjuż ta’ mergħat li l-assoċjazzjoni tan-Normandija msejħa “Association Normande” fl-1874 sejħitlu reġjun “ta’ mergħat mogħnija bil-ġid, sorsi awtentiċi ta’ krema u ta’ butir”.

Minn nofs is-seklu 19 ’il quddiem, dawk li jrabbu l-bhejjem f’dan ir-reġjun bdew jaħdmu favur il-purità tar-razza msejħa “Cotentine”, li kellha ssir ir-razza prinċipali tar-razza tan-Normandija, l-aktar minħabba li din ir-razza lokali kienet adattata ferm għall-ħlib. Iżda dan l-istatus ta’ “benniena tar-razza” ħadem kontra dawk li kienu jrabbu l-bhejjem fil-lokal, li damu biex ibbenefikaw mill-avvanzi fl-inseminazzjoni artifiċjali u li daru minflok għar-razza produttiva u omoġenja msejħa “Prim’Holstein”.

Il-popolazzjoni tal-Col du Cotentin malajr assoċjat il-valur tal-ħaxix għall-merħla tal-ħalib mal-valur tal-ħalib permezz tal-produzzjoni u tal-kummerċjalizzazzjoni tal-butir.

Illum il-mergħat għadhom il-bażi tal-għalf tal-baqar tal-ħalib li jirgħu fihom għal mill-inqas seba’ xhur, u li jikkunsmaw il-ħaxix li jingħataw matul il-bqija tas-sena. Ir-rabta tal-produtturi mar-razza tan-Normandija, li hija razza eċċellenti għall-produzzjoni tal-butir bis-saħħa tal-ħalib li tagħmel, li fih ħafna xaħam u ħafna proteini, tippermetti li din tinżamm fi proporzjon sinifikanti fiż-żona ġeografika.

L-għarfien tal-produzzjoni jinvolvi l-preservazzjoni tal-ħalib frisk permezz ta’ kontroll tal-kesħa mill-maqjel tal-baqar sal-fabbrika tal-butir, ir-regolarità tal-ġbir, l-użu tal-maturazzjoni bijoloġika marbut mal-kontroll tal-flora tal-fermentazzjoni permezz tal-pastorizzazzjoni tal-ħalib segwita miż-żieda tal-fermenti, l-ixkumar u fl-aħħar nett it-tħawwid.

Il-“Beurre d’Isigny” huwa butir kremuż li jista’ jindilek faċilment. Wara l-proċess tal-għoti ta’ konsistenza partikulari, huwa jkun solidu u jkun jista’ jinħadem faċilment, u la jkun żejtni u lanqas iwaħħal jew jitfarrak. B’kulur omoġenju tal-avorju fix-xitwa sa isfar lewn iċ-ċfolloq matul l-istaġun tar-ragħa, ir-riħa tiegħu tfakkrek fil-krema tajba biex titħabbat. It-togħma fina tiegħu jista’ jkun fiha ħjiel ta’ ġellewż.

Is-sitwazzjoni ġeografika taż-żona ġeografika (li tinsab qrib il-baħar) u l-morfoloġija tagħha (ma fihiex muntanji) twassal biex ikun hemm ix-xita b’mod regolari matul is-sena kollha u biex fiha jkun hemm temperaturi moderati, anki fix-xitwa. Dawn l-elementi jwasslu biex il-ħaxix jikber matul is-sena kollha u biex l-annimali jkunu jistgħu jirgħu għal perjodu twil. Il-ħamrija taflija u tal-franka, b’sedimenti tal-baħar reċenti u mogħnija b’ħafna minerali, jagħmlu lil dawn il-bwar għanja ferm, filwaqt li t-trab ġulġlieni li jiksi l-Haut-Pays huwa regolatur notevoli tal-ilma li jiffavorixxi t-tkabbir regolari tal-ħaxix.

Il-kwalità tax-xaħam tal-ħalib taż-żona ġeografika ġejja mit-taħlita tal-provvista tal-ħaxix, li tagħti lid-denominazzjoni l-kwalitajiet organolettiċi speċifiċi tagħha u l-kremożità mistennija, u ż-żieda ta’ foraġġ iktar enerġetiku, li jiffavorixxi l-produzzjoni ta’ globuli kbar tax-xaħam li jippermettu li jiġu stabbiliti l-komposti aromatiċi tal-ħalib ipprovduti mill-ħaxix.

Għalhekk, il-prodott “Beurre d’Isigny” huwa kkaratterizzat mill-aħjar użu tal-ħaxix taż-żona b’perjodu twil ta’ ragħa għall-merħla tal-ħalib u b’distribuzzjoni tal-foraġġ ippreservat fix-xitwa flimkien mal-provvista ta’ tipi ta’ foraġġ oħrajn. Fil-fatt, it-trasport tal-foraġġ mill-Bas-Pays għall-Haut-Pays u l-preservazzjoni tiegħu hija prattika tradizzjonali minħabba l-ġeografija tal-irziezet li ġeneralment jinsabu fl-Haut-Pays, imma li għandhom ukoll mergħat fil-Bas-Pays.

Dan l-għalf tal-bhejjem, li parti minnhom huma tar-razza tan-Normandija, iwassal għal ħalib ta’ kwalità għolja, li x-xaħam tiegħu jagħti lill-prodott il-konsistenza kremuża eċċellenti tiegħu.

Barra minn hekk, il-preżenza tal-karotenojdi fil-ħaxix xaħmi tal-mergħat tar-reġjun tiffavorixxi l-kulur naturali lewn iċ-ċfolloq tal-butir waqt l-istaġun tar-ragħa.

Iż-żamma tal-użanzi tradizzjonali fil-produzzjoni tal-butir, li jeskludu b’mod partikulari ż-żieda ta’ aromi u ta’ aċidu lattiku u li jinkludu l-użu ta’ krema mmaturata u tat-tħawwid, tgħin ħafna biex joħorġu l-karatteristiċi tal-materja prima li ġejja mill-merħliet tal-ħalib. Is-suċċess ta’ dawn il-prodotti ġej ukoll miż-żamma ta’ relazzjonijiet kummerċjali man-netwerk ta’ mħaleb tat-territorju nazzjonali, mar-ristoranti reġjonali u mas-swieq tal-esportazzjoni.

Referenza għall-pubblikazzjoni tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott

Referenza għall-pubblikazzjoni tal-Ispeċifikazzjoni tal-Prodott

(it-tieni subparagrafu tal-Artikolu 6(1) ta’ dan ir-Regolament)

https://info.agriculture.gouv.fr/gedei/site/bo-agri/document_administratif-ba1010a1-bc3a-4468-a1d2-7578d8fd5494

---

INFORMAZZJONI DWAR IŻ-ŻONA EKONOMIKA EWROPEA

Awtorità ta' Sorveljanza EFTA

| 23.5.2019 | MT | Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea | C 177/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2019

MT

Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea

C 177/27

---

Stedina biex jitressqu kummenti skont l-Artikolu 1(2) fil-Parti I tal-Protokoll 3 tal-Ftehim bejn l-Istati tal-EFTA dwar it-Twaqqif ta’ Awtorità ta’ Sorveljanza u Qorti tal-Ġustizzja dwar kwistjonijiet ta’ għajnuna mill-Istat

(2019/C 177/04)

Permezz tad-Deċiżjoni msemmija hawn fuq, riprodotta fil-lingwa awtentika fil-paġni ta’ wara dan is-sommarju, l-Awtorità ta’ Sorveljanza tal-EFTA notifikat lin-Norveġja bid-deċiżjoni tagħha biex tibda proċedimenti skont l-Artikolu 1(2) tal-Parti I tal-Protokoll 3 tal-Ftehim bejn l-Istati tal-EFTA dwar it-Twaqqif ta’ Awtorità ta’ Sorveljanza u Qorti tal-Ġustizzja fir-rigward tal-miżura msemmija hawn fuq.

Il-partijiet interessati jistgħu jissottomettu l-kummenti tagħhom dwar il-miżura inkwistjoni fi żmien xahar mid-data tal-pubblikazzjoni lil:

| L-Awtorità ta’ Sorveljanza tal-EFTA |
| --- |
| Ir-Reġistru |
| 35, Rue Belliard |
| 1040 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

L-Awtorità ta’ Sorveljanza tal-EFTA

Ir-Reġistru

35, Rue Belliard

1040 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Il-kummenti se jkunu kkomunikati lill-awtoritajiet Norveġiżi. L-identità tal-parti interessata li tressaq il-kummenti tista’ tinżamm kunfidenzjali jekk issir rikjesta bil-miktub li tiddikjara r-raġunijiet għal tali rikjesta.

SOMMARJU

Proċedura

| 1. | L-Awtorità rċeviet żewġ ilmenti fl-14 ta’ Marzu 2017 u fis-27 ta’ Lulju 2017. L-ilmentaturi talbu trattament kunfidenzjali. |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Wara li għamlet talbiet, l-Awtorità rċeviet informazzjoni mill-awtoritajiet Norveġiżi permezz tal-ittri tat-2 ta’ Ġunju 2017, l-20 ta’ Settembru 2017, l-1 ta’ Diċembru 2017, it-8 ta’ Diċembru 2017, l-1 ta’ Frar 2018, il-5 ta’ Frar 2018, il-21 ta’ Frar 2019, l-14 ta’ Marzu 2019 u t-18 ta’ Marzu 2019. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Deskrizzjoni tal-miżura/i

| 3. | L-allegat benefiċjarju tal-għajnuna hija Trondheim Spektrum AS (“TS”). |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | TS hija s-sid ta’ Trondheim Spektrum u toperaha, u hija faċilità bi skopijiet multipli li tinsab fiċ-ċentru ta’ Trondheim. Il-post jintuża bħala post ta’ taħriġ minn diversi klabbs sportivi lokali, għal avvenimenti sportivi żgħar u kbar u għal avvenimenti oħrajn bħal kunċerti, fieri kummerċjali u kungressi. |
| --- | --- |

4.

| 5. | Il-Muniċipalità ta’ Trondheim (“il-Muniċipalità”) kienet u għadha azzjonist maġġoritarju f’TS. Il-bqija tal-ishma huma f’idejn il-klabbs sportivi volontarji fuq bażi ta’ sħubija (“klabbs sportivi”). |
| --- | --- |

5.

| 6. | L-obbjettiv tal-muniċipalità huwa li jingħataw faċilitajiet għal attivitajiet sportivi u ta’ divertiment lill-abitanti ta’ Trondheim. Fl-2004 l-Muniċipalità fformalizzat il-prinċipju ta’ faċilitajiet mingħajr ħlas għall-benefiċċju tal-klabbs sportivi mingħajr ħlas għall-benefiċċju tal-klabbs sportivi tal-Muniċipalità. Din il-miżura tal-Muniċipalità tiffaċilita l-parteċipazzjoni tat-tfal u ż-żgħażagħ f’attivitajiet sportivi irrispettivament mil-livell ta’ introjtu ta’ familji individwali. |
| --- | --- |

6.

| 7. | Il-Muniċipalità tikri l-kapaċità mingħand diversi faċilitajiet, bħal TS, bil-għan li tipprovdi l-kapaċità lil klabbs sportivi mingħajr ħlas. Il-kompitu tal-għoti ta’ din il-kapaċità huwa- fdat lill-kunsill lokali tal-isports. |
| --- | --- |

7.

| 8. | Mis-sajf 2017 TS bdiet għaddejja b’rinnovazzjoni u estensjoni sinifikanti li għandhom jiġu ffinalizzati fl-2019. Il-pjan huwa li fl-2020 l-kampjonati Ewropej tal-handball tan-nisa u l-irġiel isiru hemmhekk. |
| --- | --- |

8.

| 9. | Id-Deċiżjoni tikkonċerna disa’ miżuri 1) self muniċipali, 2) garanzija muniċipali, 3) ftehimiet ta’ fond lokatizju, 4) il-ftehimiet ta’ lokazzjoni li ġew konklużi bejn l-1999 u l-2017, 5) il-ftehim ta’ lokazzjoni għall-2019, li ntlaħaq fl-2017, 6) iż-żieda kapitali marbuta ma’ kostijiet ġodda u mhux mistennija, 7) il-finanzjament tal-kostijiet tal-infrastruttura, 8) fondi min-Norwegian Gaming Fund u 9) il-garanzija impliċita inerenti fi Ftehim ta’ self bejn Nordea u TS. |
| --- | --- |

9.

| 10. | Skont l-ilmentatur, TS ingħatat vantaġġ permezz ta’ miżuri differenti mingħand il-Muniċipalità. L-ilmentaturi għamlu l-argument li l-miżuri tal-allegata għajnuna ssussidjaw attivitajiet oħrajn ta’ TS. |
| --- | --- |

10.

Valutazzjoni tal-miżuri

| 11. | Fil-fehma tal-Awtorità, kwalunkwe għajnuna potenzjali mill-Istat mogħtija permezz tal-miżuri 1, 2 u 3 tikkostitwixxi għajnuna eżistenti skont it-tifsira tal-Artikolu 1(b) tal-Parti II tal-Protokoll 3 tal-SCA. Għaldaqstant l-Awtorità ma tivvalutax aktar il-karattru tal-għajnuna ta’ dawn il-miżuri fid-deċiżjoni tagħha. |
| --- | --- |

11.

| 12. | F’din id-deċiżjoni, l-Awtorità tasal għall-konklużjoni preliminari li l-miżura 4, il-ftehimiet ta’ lokazzjoni li ġew konklużi bejn l-1999 u l-2017, mhijiex parti minn skema ta’ għajnuna skont it-tifsira tal-Artikolu 1(d) tal-Parti II tal-Protokoll 3 tal-SCA skont l-argument tal-awtoritajiet Norveġiżi. |
| --- | --- |

12.

| 13. | Fid-deċiżjoni tagħha l-Awtorità se tivvaluta biss il-karattru tal-għajnuna potenzjali tal-ftehimiet ta’ lokazzjoni li l-perjodu ta’ preskrizzjoni tiegħu jkun skada. Abbażi tal-informazzjoni fil-pussess tagħha, l-Awtorità tqis li l-perjodu ta’ preskrizzjoni tal-ftehimiet ta’ lokazzjoni, li skont l-awtoritajiet Norveġiżi kien bejn l-2007 u l-2008, għadu ma skadiex. |
| --- | --- |

13.

| 14. | L-Awtorità tqis li l-fondi mogħtija lil TS mingħand Norsk Tipping AS, magħrufa bħala l-miżura 8, huma l-applikazzjoni ta’ sistema eżistenti ta’ għajnuna mill-Istat. Għaldaqstant l-Awtorità ma tivvalutax aktar il-karattru tal-għajnuna tal-miżura fid-deċiżjoni tagħha. |
| --- | --- |

14.

| 15. | L-Awtorità hija tal-fehma preliminari li l-ftehimiet ta’ lokazzjoni bejn l-2007 u l-2017 kif ukoll il-ftehim ta’ lokazzjoni l-ġdid għall-2019 (il-miżuri 4 u 5) seta’ ta vantaġġ lil TS. L-ilmentaturi argumentaw li l-kera hija ogħla mit-termini tas-suq u li l-kera hija bbażata fuq il-ħtiġijiet ta’ TS u mhux fuq il-kapaċità meħtieġa mill-Muniċipalità. |
| --- | --- |

15.

| 16. | L-Awtorità ssib li ż-żieda kapitali, il-miżura 6, tikkostitwixxi vantaġġ lil TS li jikkorrispondi għall-ammont sħiħ taż-żieda kapitali. |
| --- | --- |

16.

| 17. | L-Awtorità tasal għall-konklużjoni preliminari li d-diviżjoni u l-kalkolu tal-kostjiet infrastrutturali fir-rigward tar-rinnovazzjoni u l-estensjoni ta’ TS (il-miżura 7) setgħu taw vantaġġ lil TS. |
| --- | --- |

17.

| 18. | Fir-rigward tal-garanzija impliċita inerenti fil-ftehim ta’ self bejn TS u Nordea (il-miżura 9), l-Awtorità ssib li l-effetti tad-dikjarazzjonijiet fil-ftehim ta’ self mhumiex ċari u, f’dan l-istadju, ma tistax teskludi li dawn jipprovdu vantaġġ lil TS fis-sura ta’ garanzija impliċita mill-Muniċipalità. |
| --- | --- |

18.

| 19. | L-awtoritajiet Norveġiżi argumentaw li l-użu ta’ faċilitajiet ta’ TS mill-klabbs sportivi ma jistax jitqies bħala attività ekonomika, peress li la l-Muniċipalità u lanqas TS ma jirċievu xi forma ta’ remunerazzjoni mingħand l-utenti tagħhom. |
| --- | --- |

19.

| 20. | Anki jekk il-Muniċipalità tista’ titqies li qed twettaq attività mhux ekonomika billi toffri faċilitajiet mingħajr ħlas għall-klabbs sportivi tal-Muniċipalità, fil-prinċipju, l-entità li tforni lill-Muniċipalità tali faċilitajiet, tista’ tkun qed twettaq attivitajiet ekonomiċi meta tagħmel dan. |
| --- | --- |

20.

| 21. | F’dan l-isfond, f’dan l-istadju l-Awtorità ma tistax teskludi li TS hija impriża, mhux biss meta tospita kunċerti, avvenimenti sportivi kbar, fieri, kungressi u avvenimenti oħra, iżda wkoll meta tikri l-faċilitajiet tagħha lill-Muniċipalità li mbagħad tipprovdi l-ispazju għall-klabbs sportivi tal-belt. Fi kwalunkwe każ, l-Awtorità tinnota li TS twettaq attività ekonomika oħra u għandha tintwera biżżejjed separazzjoni tal-kontijiet. |
| --- | --- |

21.

| 22. | L-awtoritajiet Norveġiżi ma nnotifikawx il-miżuri kollha inkwistjoni lill-Awtorità. Għaldaqstant l-Awtorità tasal għall-konklużjoni preliminari li l-awtoritajiet Norveġiżi ma rrispettawx l-obbligi tagħhom skont l-Artikolu 1(3) tal-Parti I tal-Protokoll 3 tal-SCA, u li sa fejn il-miżuri 4, 7 u 9 jinvolvu għajnuna mill-Istat, dik l-għajnuna hija illegali. |
| --- | --- |

22.

| 23. | L-awtoritajiet Norveġiżi nnotifikaw il-ftehim ta’ lokazzjoni l-ġdid tal-2019, il-miżura 5, fl-20 ta’ Novembru 2018. L-awtoritajiet Norveġiżi argumentaw li l-ftehim ta’ lokazzjoni l-ġdid jiddependi fuq il-konformità mat-termini tas-suq. B’mod espliċitu, huwa jippermetti adattamenti sabiex il-kundizzjonijiet tal-ftehim jinġiebu konformi mat-termini tas-suq jekk l-Awtorità tkun tirrikjedi dan. F’dan il-kuntest, il-konklużjoni preliminari tal-Awtorità hija li, jekk il-ftehim ta’ lokazzjoni jinvolvi għajnuna mill-Istat, l-awtoritajiet Norveġiżi rrispettaw ir-rekwiżiti stabbiliti fl-Artikolu 1(3) tal-Parti I tal-Protokoll 3 tal-SCA. |
| --- | --- |

23.

| 24. | Fir-rigward tal-miżura 6, l-Awtorità tinnota li l-awtoritajiet Norveġiżi taw din l-għajnuna lil TS skont l-Artikolu 55 tal-GBER. Madankollu, l-Awtorità mhijiex konvinta bis-sħiħ li r-rekwiżiti stabbiliti fl-Artikolu 6(2) tal-GBER ġew issodisfati fir-rigward tal-miżura. Jidher li hemm bżonn issir valutazzjoni ulterjuri. Jekk l-Awtorità ssib li l-miżura ma tissodisfax ir-rekwiżiti tal-GBER, din l-għajnuna tkun illegali. |
| --- | --- |

24.

| 25. | Il-miżuri ta’ għajnuna possibbli fil-każ inkwistjoni huma ta’ natura varja. L-awtoritajiet Norveġiżi argumentaw il-kompatibbiltà ta’ xi wħud mill-miżuri. F’dan l-istadju, l-Awtorità ma għandhiex l-informazzjoni biex tkun tista’ tistabbilixxi l-ammont possibbli tal-allegata għajnuna mogħtija lil TS li tirriżulta minn dawn il-miżuri. Għaldaqstant l-awtorità għandha dubji dwar jekk il-miżuri humiex se jirrispettaw il-prinċipju ta’ proporzjonalità u jkunux limitati għal dak li huwa meħtieġ biex jinkiseb l-għan tal-istat. |
| --- | --- |

25.

| 26. | Barra minn hekk, l-Awtorità ma tistax teskludi s-sussidju inkroċjat mill-allegati miżuri tal-għajnuna għall-attivitajiet l-oħra li twettqu minn TS. Fid-dawl ta’ dan ta’ hawn fuq, l-Awtorità għandha dubji dwar jekk dawn il-miżuri jistgħux jitqiesu kompatibbli mal-Artikolu 61(3)(c) ta-Ftehim ŻEE. |
| --- | --- |

26.

Decision No 032/19/COL

of 16 April 2019

to open a formal investigation into potential state aid granted to Trondheim Spektrum AS

(Case 83227)

| Norwegian Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries |
| --- |
| PO Box 8090 Dep |
| 0032 Oslo |
| NORWAY |

Norwegian Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries

PO Box 8090 Dep

0032 Oslo

NORWAY

Subject: Trondheim Spektrum

1.   Summary

| (1) | The EFTA Surveillance Authority (‘the Authority’) wishes to inform the Norwegian authorities that it has concerns that the notified measure and some of the measures covered by the complaints related to Trondheim Spektrum AS might entail state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. The Authority furthermore has doubts concerning the compatibility of these measures with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. The Authority has therefore decided to open a formal investigation (1) into these measures. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

| (2) | The Authority has based its decision on the following considerations. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

2.   Procedure

2.1.   
  First complaint

| (3) | On 14 March 2017, the Authority received a complaint (2) alleging that Trondheim municipality (‘the Municipality’) has granted unlawful state aid to Trondheim Spektrum AS (‘TS’), a company that owns and operates Trondheim Spektrum, which is a multipurpose sport facility located in Trondheim, Norway. By letter dated 27 March 2017, the Authority invited the Norwegian authorities to comment on the complaint (3). The Norwegian authorities replied by letter dated 2 June 2017 (4). |
| --- | --- |

(3)

2.2.   
  Second complaint

| (4) | On 27 July 2017, the Authority received a second complaint (5), also alleging that the Municipality has granted unlawful state aid to TS. By letter dated 24 August 2017, the Authority invited the Norwegian authorities to comment (6). In the same letter, the Authority requested further information from the Norwegian authorities concerning their comments to the first complaint. By letter dated 1 September 2017, the Authority forwarded to the Norwegian authorities additional information from the second complainant (7). |
| --- | --- |

(4)

| (5) | By letter dated 20 September 2017, the Norwegian authorities submitted their comments to the second complaint and provided the information requested by the Authority relating to the first complaint (8). On 29 September 2017, the case was further discussed during the annual package meeting in Oslo. The discussion was subsequently summarised in a follow-up letter (9). |
| --- | --- |

(5)

2.3.   
  Request for information

| (6) | On 20 October 2017, the Authority sent an information request to the Norwegian authorities (10). On 22 November 2017, the Norwegian authorities and the Authority held a video-conference to discuss the information request. By letter of 8 December 2017, the Norwegian authorities responded (11). |
| --- | --- |

(6)

2.4.   
  Additional information from the second complainant

| (7) | On 19 September 2017, the second complainant submitted additional information (12). On 6 November 2017, the second complainant submitted supplementary information (13). On 9 November 2017, the Authority forwarded the additional information to the Norwegian authorities (14). On 22 November and 13 December 2017, the Norwegian authorities and the Authority discussed the case during a video-conference. On 1 December 2017, the Norwegian authorities submitted information to the Authority in relation to the meetings (15). |
| --- | --- |

(7)

| (8) | On 26 October 2018, the second complainant submitted additional information (16). |
| --- | --- |

(8)

2.5.   
  Further request for information and meeting

| (9) | On 16 January 2018, the Authority sent an information request to the Norwegian authorities (17), to which they replied by letters dated 1 and 5 February 2018 (18). |
| --- | --- |

(9)

| (10) | On 13 March 2019, the Norwegian authorities and the Authority discussed the case during a video-conference. Following the meeting, the Norwegian authorities submitted further information (19). On 18 March 2019, the Norwegian authorities submitted additional information (20). |
| --- | --- |

(10)

2.6.   
  Notification of the 2019 lease agreement

| (11) | On 29 November 2018 (21), the Norwegian authorities notified a lease agreement (‘the 2019 lease agreement’), which is intended to enter into force on 1 December 2019. By letter dated 28 January 2019, the Authority requested additional information from the Norwegian authorities. By letter of 21 February 2019, the Norwegian authorities responded (22). |
| --- | --- |

(11)

2.7.   
  GBER information sheet regarding capital increase

| (12) | On 10 December 2018, the Norwegian authorities submitted a GBER (23) information sheet (24), concerning ad hoc aid to TS in the form of a NOK 55 million capital increase (approximately EUR 5,68 million), claiming that this measure was block exempted. |
| --- | --- |

(12)

3.   Background

| (13) | TS owns and operates Trondheim Spektrum, a multipurpose facility located in central Trondheim. The facility consists of eight multi-purpose halls. The halls are used as training venues for local sports clubs, small and large sports events and other events such as concerts, trade fairs and congresses. |
| --- | --- |

(13)

| (14) | The company Nidarøhallen was established in 1961 for the purpose of carrying out the construction and operation of a sports and exhibition hall in Trondheim. On 5 June 2002, the company name was changed to Trondheim Spektrum AS. |
| --- | --- |

(14)

| (15) | The Municipality has been, and is at present, the majority shareholder in TS. As of October 2018, The Municipality holds 96 % of the shares. The remaining shares are held by membership-based volunteer sport clubs (‘sport clubs’). |
| --- | --- |

(15)

| (16) | The construction of the first part of the hall finished in 1963 (halls A and B). The facility has been expanded four times, in 1971 (hall C), 1980 (hall G), 1988 (halls D and E/H) and 2000 (hall F). The facility now totals 27 000 m2, which, in addition to eight multipurpose halls, consists of 14 seminar rooms and a plot area of over 1 000 m2. |
| --- | --- |

(16)

| (17) | The Municipality’s objective is to provide facilities for sports and leisure activities to the inhabitants of Trondheim. In 2004, the Municipality formalised a principle of cost-free facilities for the benefit of the Municipality’s sport clubs. This facilitates participation of children and youth in sport activities, irrespective of the income level of individual families. The Municipality owns and operates numerous sport facilities, but also rents facilities owned and operated by third parties. The Municipality rents capacity from such facilities under special rental agreements, and the joint capacity is distributed, free of charge, amongst the sport clubs. The task of distributing the capacity is entrusted to the local Sports Council (Idrettsrådet), which forms part of the organisational structure of the Norwegian Confederation of Sports (Norges idrettsforbund). |
| --- | --- |

(17)

| (18) | TS generates income from sport activities, trade fairs and concerts. TS hosts a number of fairs, which includes an annual fisheries industry fair. Furthermore, TS generates income from the operation of a kiosk, café and a restaurant. |
| --- | --- |

(18)

| (19) | Since summer 2017, Trondheim Spektrum has been undergoing a significant renovation and extension, to be finalised in 2019. The plan is to host the European Championship in handball for women and men in 2020. |
| --- | --- |

(19)

4.   The measures

4.1.   
  Introduction

| (20) | Throughout the years, the Municipality has provided TS with loans, guarantees and other measures that may potentially involve state aid. The following measures are at stake in the present decision. |
| --- | --- |

(20)

4.2.   
  Measure 1 – municipal loan

| (21) | In 1992, the total loan portfolio of TS included nine different loans amounting to a total of NOK 87.8 million (approximately EUR 9,1 million). During the period from 1992 to 1994, TS restructured the debt by borrowing NOK 86.67 million (approximately EUR 8,95 million) from the Municipality (25). The nominal interest rate was set at 7,5 %, and the effective interest rate was at 7,7 %. In 2004, the terms of the loan were modified, lowering the effective interest rate to 4,15 %. |
| --- | --- |

(21)

| (22) | The complainants allege that the intention of the Municipality, by granting the loan, was to grant an advantage to TS, which it would not have obtained otherwise, in the form of lower interest rates. The complainants further allege that later modifications of the loan have turned the alleged aid into new aid. |
| --- | --- |

(22)

| (23) | The Norwegian authorities have not contested the fact that the loan may have entailed state aid. The Norwegian authorities have argued that the interest rates, in particular following the modification in 2004, were broadly in line with market price. However, the Norwegian authorities do not consider it meaningful to investigate further the historical market rates for loans as, in their view, any aid would have to be considered as existing aid, and in any event, the loan has in the meantime been paid back in full (26). The Norwegian authorities have not found any documentation indicating that the loan has been renegotiated as alleged by the complainants, save for the modification of the interest rate in 2004 (27). |
| --- | --- |

(23)

4.3.   
  Measure 2 – municipal guarantee

| (24) | On 7 September 1999, the Municipality granted a guarantee in favour of TS, in order for TS to secure a loan from Nordea. The purpose of the loan was to finance the construction of hall F. The guarantee was limited to 50 % of the loan balance with a limit of NOK 28 million (approximately EUR 2,89 million). The guarantee is of a secondary nature. That is, Nordea would have to initiate a procedure for the liquidation of TS’ assets, before it could have recourse to the guarantee. |
| --- | --- |

(24)

| (25) | According to the Norwegian authorities’ best estimate, the interest rate obtainable without the guarantee corresponds to an addition of 0.10 – 0.15 percentage points. The Norwegian authorities have explained that this is because TS is viewed by Nordea as a low-risk debtor. On Nordea’s six-point scale, with six representing no risk, TS is and has been rated at five. The reason behind this rating is first, the fact that the majority of the shares in TS is held by a public authority and secondly, TS’ low-risk lease agreement with the Municipality represents a substantial part of its revenues. Further, a guarantee of this nature is of marginal value to the bank, as the mandatory capital requirements are similar for loans without such partial and limited guarantee (28). The guarantee is still in effect. It expires in 2031 (29). At the end of 2016, it covered the outstanding balance of NOK 9 260 000 (approximately EUR 956 500). |
| --- | --- |

(25)

| (26) | The complainants have alleged that the guarantee was not granted on market terms and therefore provided an advantage to TS. |
| --- | --- |

(26)

| (27) | The Norwegian authorities state that any advantage resulting from the guarantee is at most marginal and further refer to marginal effects of the measure on the conditions of cross-border investment or establishment (30). The Norwegian authorities maintain that the guarantee should be qualified as existing aid as it was granted more than 10 years ago (31). |
| --- | --- |

(27)

4.4.   
  Measure 3 – leasehold agreements

| (28) | In 1980, the Municipality entered into a 40-year leasehold agreement with Trondheim Tennisklubb. The leasehold was transferred to Nidarøhallen A/S (now TS) in 1991. A second leasehold agreement was concluded in 1989. TS has relied on these leasehold agreements as collateral when entering into a loan agreement with Nordea (32). |
| --- | --- |

(28)

| (29) | According to the Norwegian authorities, the leasehold agreements are governed by the Norwegian Ground Lease Act (33) and established case-law. |
| --- | --- |

(29)

| (30) | To offer collateral on a leasehold agreement does not require the permission from the lessor (the owner) under the Ground Lease Act, the Land Registration Act (34) or the leasehold agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(30)

| (31) | The Norwegian authorities have stated that the leasehold agreements were concluded before the entry into force of the EEA Agreement (35). |
| --- | --- |

(31)

4.5.   
  Measure 4 – lease agreements concluded from 1999 to 2017

| (32) | Most of the capacity of Trondheim Spektrum has traditionally been used for the purpose of sport clubs on the basis of lease agreements concluded between TS and the Municipality. The Municipality has leased the facility since it opened in 1963. |
| --- | --- |

(32)

| (33) | The Municipality formalised a principle of cost-free facilities for the benefit of the Municipality’s sport clubs in 2004. This was done to facilitate the participation of sport activities irrespective of the income level of individual families. From then on, the sport clubs did not pay for its use, neither to the Municipality nor to TS. |
| --- | --- |

(33)

| (34) | The Municipality rented the facilities from Trondheim Spektrum for approximately NOK 12 million per year from 1990 until 2002. In 2002, the lease agreement was amended as the Municipality required more capacity. The variations of rent paid is a result of the capacity increase with the construction of hall F, and the implementation of a new model for calculating the agreed utilisation of the facility (36). |
| --- | --- |

(34)

| (35) | The Norwegian authorities have explained that the level of rent takes into account the cost structure of TS. The historical rent was set on the basis of the level established in 1989 and 1990, which historically reflected the required cash flow for TS to pay off debt and continue operations on the proportion of the facility occupied by the sport clubs (37). |
| --- | --- |

(35)

| (36) | The lease agreement was not formalized until February 1995. The lease agreement entered into in 1995 does not specify the number of hours and/or percentage of occupation of the sport clubs’ use of the facility. These specificities were introduced and further developed in the agreements entered into for 1999 onwards (38). |
| --- | --- |

(36)

| (37) | The following lease agreements have been concluded since 1999:






  a. | Lease agreement 2000 – 2002. |
| --- | --- | --- |

(37)

a.

Lease agreement 2000 – 2002.

| b. | Lease agreement 2002 – 2006. |
| --- | --- |

b.

Lease agreement 2002 – 2006.

| c. | Lease agreement 2007 – 2008. |
| --- | --- |

c.

Lease agreement 2007 – 2008.

| d. | Lease agreement 2009 – 2010. |
| --- | --- |

d.

Lease agreement 2009 – 2010.

| e. | Lease agreement 2011 (renewed annually) (39). |
| --- | --- |

e.

Lease agreement 2011 (renewed annually) (39).

| (38) | The Norwegian authorities have provided the following information regarding the leased capacity (40):







  Year | Rent paid (NOK) | Hours rented |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1999 | 11 200 000 | Not given |
| 2000 | 11 200 000 | 13 650 |
| 2001 | 11 200 000 | 13 650 |
| 2002 | 11 200 000 | 17 300 |
| 2003 | 14 000 000 | 17 300 |
| 2004 | 14 000 000 | 17 300 |
| 2005 | 14 300 000 | 17 300 |
| 2006 | 14 500 000 | 17 300 |
| 2007 | 14 700 000 | 12 500 |
| 2008 | 14 000 000 | 12 500 |
| 2009 | 14 300 000 | 12 500 |
| 2010 | 14 443 000 | 12 500 |
| 2011 | 14 088 000 | 12 500 |
| 2012 | 14 234 000 | 12 500 |
| 2013 | 14 234 000 | 12 500 |
| 2014 | 14 234 000 | 12 500 |
| 2015 | 14 679 522 | 12 500 |
| 2016 | 14 105 196 | 11 650 |

(38)

Year

Rent paid (NOK)

Hours rented

1999

11 200 000

Not given

2000

11 200 000

13 650

2001

11 200 000

13 650

2002

11 200 000

17 300

2003

14 000 000

17 300

2004

14 000 000

17 300

2005

14 300 000

17 300

2006

14 500 000

17 300

2007

14 700 000

12 500

2008

14 000 000

12 500

2009

14 300 000

12 500

2010

14 443 000

12 500

2011

14 088 000

12 500

2012

14 234 000

12 500

2013

14 234 000

12 500

2014

14 234 000

12 500

2015

14 679 522

12 500

2016

14 105 196

11 650

| (39) | According to the terms of the lease agreements, the capacity of Trondheim Spektrum should be reserved for the sport clubs, from 1 September to 1 May each year, during the afternoon on weekdays from 16:00 to 23:00 and on weekends from 09:00 to 22:00. TS can therefore offer Trondheim Spektrum’s capacity outside of these hours and outside the said time of year. |
| --- | --- |

(39)

| (40) | Furthermore, the lease agreements provide that TS can reclaim, subject to the terms laid down in the lease agreement, up to 2 000 hours annually during the period from 1 September to 1 May. TS can therefore use the facilities, which are otherwise reserved under the lease agreements for other purposes, for those specific hours. The Norwegian authorities have explained that TS has reclaimed 945 – 2 173 hours annually from 2010 to 2017 (41). The Norwegian authorities explained that there is no mechanism for the reduction of the overall rent when TS reclaims rented hours (42). |
| --- | --- |

(40)

| (41) | The complainants have argued that the rent is above market terms. That is, the rent is based on the needs of TS, and not the capacity needed by the Municipality. The complainants allege that the rental fee has never been based on arm’s length negotiations, but decided unilaterally by the municipal board of the Municipality. |
| --- | --- |

(41)

| (42) | According to the Norwegian authorities, the rent paid to TS by the Municipality has been market conform and thus does not entail state aid. Were the Authority to conclude differently, the Norwegian authorities argue that the lease agreement forms part of an existing aid scheme. Furthermore, any new aid would, in any event, be compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(42)

4.6.   
  Measure 5 – lease agreement of 2019 – notification

| (43) | As set out in paragraph (11) above, the Norwegian authorities have notified the lease agreement of 2019. |
| --- | --- |

(43)

| (44) | TS and the Municipality have concluded a new lease agreement, which is set to enter into force on 1 December 2019. The agreement is conditional upon being in line with market terms. The agreement allows for adaptations by the Municipality, in order to conform to the market economy investor principle, should the Authority so require (43). The agreement will expire on 30 April 2035. |
| --- | --- |

(44)

| (45) | The Norwegian authorities have explained that this lease agreement is based on the same principles underlying previous lease agreements. The Norwegian authorities have further explained that the new lease agreement represents a substantial increase in the capacity made available for the sport clubs. |
| --- | --- |

(45)

| (46) | A total of 16 848 hours yearly is rented under the new lease agreement, compared to 12 500 hours in the past. The new lease agreement represents an increase in the rent per hours from approximately NOK 1 200 to 1 700 (approximately EUR 124 to 176). The reason for this increase is twofold: First, the historical rent paid by the Municipality was set on the basis of the level established in 1989 and 1990, and has not been subject to adjustments. Second, the construction costs associated with providing flexibility and allowing for multisport-use results in the operating costs per square metre exceeding by far the square metre cost of the existing venue. |
| --- | --- |

(46)

| (47) | Both complainants have argued that the rent in the new lease agreement is above market terms, because it is based on TS’ needs and not the capacity needed by the Municipality. The complainants allege that the rental fee is not based on arm’s length negotiations, but set in order to cover the construction cost of the expansion of Trondheim Spektrum. |
| --- | --- |

(47)

| (48) | One of the complainants has further alleged that the main cost elements of the extension and renovation project is tied to requirements related to activities other than the activities covered by the lease agreements, such as concerts, professional sports events and fairs. One of the complainants claims that the division of costs between the different activities is therefore not correct, as the needs of the sport clubs could have been met with much less costs. |
| --- | --- |

(48)

| (49) | According to the Norwegian authorities, the rent paid to TS by the Municipality under the new lease agreement is market conform, and thus does not entail state aid. Should the Authority be unable to exclude the presence of state aid in the new lease agreement, the Norwegian authorities have notified the lease agreement as compatible aid under Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(49)

4.7.   
  Measure 6 – capital increase linked to new and unexpected costs – block exemption

| (50) | As set out in paragraph (12) above, on 10 December 2018, the Norwegian authorities submitted a GBER information sheet (44), concerning an ad hoc aid to TS for an aid amount of NOK 55 million (approximately EUR 5,68 million) in form of a capital increase. The Norwegian authorities have provided the capital increase to TS under Article 55 of the General Block Exemption Regulation (‘GBER’). |
| --- | --- |

(50)

| (51) | Due, in particular, to an increase in the project scope in 2018, the budget increased to NOK 591 million (approximately EUR 61,05 million). The Norwegian authorities have explained that TS cannot cover the additional costs through its existing means or through additional market financing. It therefore applied for the capital increase on 6 July 2018. |
| --- | --- |

(51)

| (52) | One of the complainants alleges that the capital increase is not compliant with all of the conditions set out in Chapter I of the GBER. |
| --- | --- |

(52)

4.8.   
  Measure 7 – financing of infrastructure costs

| (53) | On 14 March 2017, the City Council adopted a zoning plan for the area where TS is located and the surrounding park area. The process was initiated by TS with the aim of expanding the facility into a multi-function facility, feasible for concerts and large sport events, and with increased capacity for sport clubs, trade fairs and congresses. |
| --- | --- |

(53)

| (54) | The City Council adopted the principle of full transfer of expenses in 1993, which sets out that building projects must carry all infrastructure costs that are a consequence of the project. Which costs this principle comprises must be in line with Section 17-3, third paragraph of the Planning and Building Act, which regulates what a development agreement must include (45). |
| --- | --- |

(54)

| (55) | The Norwegian authorities have explained that a zoning plan forms the basis for a project such as the expansion of Trondheim Spektrum (46). The zoning plan – including use of procedural orders (47) (rekkefølgekrav) – does not impose any economic obligations on the developer, but provides for the use of the area relating to the project and indicates what (public) infrastructure needs to be in place prior to the implementation of the project (48). |
| --- | --- |

(55)

| (56) | The Planning and Building Act sets limits on the developer’s maximum financial contribution to the public infrastructure measures that are required under the zoning regulations. The main criterion for cost allocation under a development agreement is that the measure must have a direct factual relationship with the development; it must be necessary for the implementation of the project. Consequently, only public infrastructure measures that result from the project may potentially be imposed as obligations on the developer. On the other hand, infrastructure works that the Municipality would need to implement also in the absence of the project, cannot be imposed on the developer (49). |
| --- | --- |

(56)

| (57) | In addition to the first criterion for cost allocation, the contribution from the developer to the measure must be proportionate to the size and the type of the development or project. |
| --- | --- |

(57)

| (58) | The Norwegian authorities have explained that the Municipality will, for each project, cover the costs of measures that would have to be implemented regardless of the project, but for which the project affects the timing of when the measures are implemented. Such costs relate to infrastructure that is of a general character, benefitting the population as a whole. |
| --- | --- |

(58)

| (59) | The Norwegian authorities have explained that a proportionality assessment must be carried out in each case. The eventual conclusion of a development agreement and the allocation of costs entails a degree of discretion on behalf of the Municipality, which must take into consideration the legal framework, as well as the nature of the project (50). |
| --- | --- |

(59)

| (60) | One of the complainants argues that the Municipality has relieved TS from infrastructure costs that a developer would normally have to bear in relation to this type of constructions and has therefore granted an advantage to TS. |
| --- | --- |

(60)

| (61) | The Norwegian authorities have provided information regarding the distribution of the costs between the TS and the Municipality (51). |
| --- | --- |

(61)

| (62) | According to the Norwegian authorities, the connection from Nidarø to Ilen Church will be developed. The Norwegian authorities have stated that the measure forms part of what may be described as a recreational area network for the use of the general public and that therefore it cannot legally order the developer to assume the costs in that respect. |
| --- | --- |

(62)

| (63) | The Norwegian authorities have further explained that the upgrade of Klostergata is a direct consequence of the development. However, the Municipality assumes the implementation responsibility and will cover the costs connected to roads and archaeological excavations; TS will pay a contribution of NOK 20 million. This is because the Municipality would in any case need to renew the water and sewage pipes in parts of the street. |
| --- | --- |

(63)

| (64) | The Norwegian authorities have further explained that green areas and a public park will be developed, i.e. a vegetation belt, a park, a walking path and public squares. The Norwegian authorities have stated that this is TS’ responsibility. The total amount was estimated at NOK 74 million (approximately EUR 7,64 million), but has been lowered to NOK 39 million (approximately EUR 4,03 million). TS’ share of this costs is set at NOK 26 million (approximately EUR 2,66 million), excluding VAT. According to the Norwegian authorities, the calculation of TS’ contribution is limited as allowed by Section 17-3, third paragraph of the Planning and Building Act. |
| --- | --- |

(64)

| (65) | In the view of the Norwegian authorities, infrastructure projects financed by the Municipality do not represent financing in violation of the principle of full transfer of costs in light of the modification mandated by Section 17-3, third paragraph of the Planning and Building Act. Furthermore, the Norwegian authorities do not see that the financial contribution by the local authority may be classified as illegal state aid, because the costs could not have been transferred to the developer in any event. |
| --- | --- |

(65)

| (66) | The Norwegian authorities argue that the infrastructure works, to be partly financed by the Municipality, relate to activities that public authorities normally perform in the exercise of their public powers and do not consist in offering goods and services on a market (52). According to the Norwegian authorities, the costs assumed by the Municipality do not entail that TS pays less than legally required. Furthermore, the infrastructure is of a general character and will benefit the population as a whole. |
| --- | --- |

(66)

4.9.   
  Measure 8 – funds from the Gaming Fund

| (67) | The Gaming Fund scheme is administered by Norsk Tipping AS. The funds stemming from Norsk Tipping AS are gaming funds collected, administered and distributed on the basis of the Gaming Act (53) that entered into force on 1 January 1993. |
| --- | --- |

(67)

| (68) | Applications for grants from the Gaming Fund scheme are processed and assessed in accordance with the provisions laid down by the Ministry of Culture relating to grants and allocations for sports and physical activities. The goal of the scheme is to facilitate sports and physical activities for everyone. |
| --- | --- |

(68)

| (69) | Funds granted for the construction and renovation of sports facilities will contribute to an infrastructure that provides the population with the opportunity to take part in individually organised activities and activities under the supervision of sport clubs. |
| --- | --- |

(69)

| (70) | As from 1994, TS has received grants from the Gaming Fund Scheme (54). |
| --- | --- |

(70)

| (71) | The Norwegian authorities emphasise that the existing Gaming Fund scheme has not been materially altered since it was last assessed by the Authority in the Vålerenga case (55) and that the grants in favour of TS have been awarded in accordance with the provisions of the scheme (56). |
| --- | --- |

(71)

4.10.   
  Measure 9 – implicit guarantee inherent in a loan agreement between Nordea and TS

| (72) | On 11 December 2017, TS signed a loan agreement for NOK 490 million with Nordea (57). Nordea will provide the working capital during the construction period. The Norwegian authorities have explained that the Municipality is not a party to the loan agreement nor are there any contractual obligations that require the Municipality to provide financing or capital to TS (58). |
| --- | --- |

(72)

| (73) | However, the loan agreement includes the following statements (59):
  ‘Nordea has placed considerable weight on the fact that Trondheim Spektrum AS intends to make structural changes in the company or other measures that increase the possibility that the municipality of Trondheim, without acting contrary to the law, if necessary, can provide a guarantee to Nordea that reduces the risk of cost overruns.’
  ‘Nordea has also placed great weight on the ownership of Trondheim municipality and the Executive Board’s decision on 25 June 2015 in case 144/14, which states in paragraph two that the municipality of Trondheim, as the majority owner of Trondheim Spektrum, is ready to assume the necessary financial responsibility resulting from the renovation and development of Trondheim Spektrum.’ (Unofficial translation) |
| --- | --- |

(73)

‘Nordea has placed considerable weight on the fact that Trondheim Spektrum AS intends to make structural changes in the company or other measures that increase the possibility that the municipality of Trondheim, without acting contrary to the law, if necessary, can provide a guarantee to Nordea that reduces the risk of cost overruns.’

‘Nordea has also placed great weight on the ownership of Trondheim municipality and the Executive Board’s decision on 25 June 2015 in case 144/14, which states in paragraph two that the municipality of Trondheim, as the majority owner of Trondheim Spektrum, is ready to assume the necessary financial responsibility resulting from the renovation and development of Trondheim Spektrum.’ (Unofficial translation)

| (74) | These statements relate to a clause in the loan agreement which states under ‘other terms’ (60):
  ‘The risk resulting from any cost overruns occurring during the construction period and, which the credit customer himself cannot pay: Trondheim Spektrum AS will make structural changes in the company or take other measures, which will make it possible for Trondheim Municipality, without coming into conflict with the legislation, if necessary, to provide a guarantee to Nordea.’ |
| --- | --- |

(74)

‘The risk resulting from any cost overruns occurring during the construction period and, which the credit customer himself cannot pay: Trondheim Spektrum AS will make structural changes in the company or take other measures, which will make it possible for Trondheim Municipality, without coming into conflict with the legislation, if necessary, to provide a guarantee to Nordea.’

| (75) | Under the same heading, the following clause states (61):
  ‘The lease agreement with Trondheim Municipality of 26.10.2017 cannot be changed/reduced without Nordea’s prior written consent.’ |
| --- | --- |

(75)

‘The lease agreement with Trondheim Municipality of 26.10.2017 cannot be changed/reduced without Nordea’s prior written consent.’

| (76) | Finally, under the heading ‘Change of ownership – mandatory early repayment’ (62) the loan agreement states (63):
  ‘It is a condition for entering into and maintaining the Construction Loan Agreement that Trondheim Municipality owns at least 77,93 % of the credit customer and maintains its ownership unchanged.
  In the event that the ownership composition changes, without Nordea’s prior written consent, the Construction Loan and any outstanding amount shall be repaid as specified in clause 11 (early maturity of the construction loan).’ |
| --- | --- |

(76)

‘It is a condition for entering into and maintaining the Construction Loan Agreement that Trondheim Municipality owns at least 77,93 % of the credit customer and maintains its ownership unchanged.

In the event that the ownership composition changes, without Nordea’s prior written consent, the Construction Loan and any outstanding amount shall be repaid as specified in clause 11 (early maturity of the construction loan).’

| (77) | TS and Nordea had previously signed a loan agreement dated 27 July 2017. The agreement contained a condition that any construction cost excess during the construction period should be covered either by TS or the Municipality. The loan agreement was co-signed by the City Executive of Finance. That agreement therefore contained clauses regarding the Municipality’s responsibility in respect of any project overruns as well as obligations in respect of the lease agreement which at that time had not been finalised (64). |
| --- | --- |

(77)

| (78) | The co-signing of the loan agreement was later deemed a municipal guarantee pursuant to section 51 of the Municipality Act. The City concluded that the guarantee, in order to be effective, required state approval. The guarantee would, for various reasons, probably not obtain such approval and therefore the Chief City Executive was advised to promptly inform Nordea that the Municipality could not be party to the loan agreement. This agreement is void and does not apply between the parties. TS and Nordea therefore signed the current loan agreement without the official involvement of the Municipality. |
| --- | --- |

(78)

5.   The presence of state aid

5.1.   
  Introduction – existing vs. new aid

| (79) | As set out above, several alleged aid measures granted to TS are at stake. However, in the present decision the Authority will not assess further the nature of potential aid measures, which would constitute existing aid – either individual aid or aid schemes – within the meaning of Article 1(b) of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice (‘Protocol 3 SCA’). |
| --- | --- |

(79)

| (80) | Existing aid is subject to a different procedural framework compare to new aid (65). Furthermore, existing aid measures are not subject to a repayment obligation. |
| --- | --- |

(80)

5.1.1.   Measure 1 – the municipal loan

| (81) | The municipal loan was granted to TS in 1992. In case 113/92 (66), the City Council adopted a decision to issue bonds to enable TS, through a new loan, to pay off its existing loans. The Authority therefore considers that any aid entailed in the municipal loan would be individual aid awarded to TS (67). The terms of the loans were modified in 2004. |
| --- | --- |

(81)

| (82) | According to Article 15(1) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA, the powers of the Authority to recover aid shall be subject to a limitation period of 10 years. According to Article 15(3) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA, any aid with regard to which the limitation period has expired, shall be deemed to be existing aid (68). |
| --- | --- |

(82)

| (83) | The limitation period begins on the day on which the unlawful aid is awarded to the beneficiary either as individual aid or as aid under an aid scheme (69). |
| --- | --- |

(83)

| (84) | As the municipal loan was granted to TS in 1992, the limitation period has expired. This would be the case even if the limitation period were to be calculated from the date of the last modification of the loan in 2004. Further, the loan was fully repaid in 2014. Any potential aid granted through the measure shall therefore be deemed to be existing aid. Moreover, as the loan was granted to TS in 1992, it would also be aid, which existed before the entry into force of the EEA Agreement and is still applicable after the entry into force of the EEA Agreement. Any potential aid granted through the measure would therefore also be existing aid within the meaning of Article 1(b)(i) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA. |
| --- | --- |

(84)

5.1.2.   Measure 2 – the municipal guarantee

| (85) | The Authority considers that any aid inherent in the guarantee would be individual aid awarded to TS. The Municipality granted the guarantee to TS in 1999 for TS to secure a loan(s) from Nordea. The guarantee was, according to the information provided by the Norwegian authorities, used in 2000 and 2001. The purpose of the loan was to finance the construction of hall F. The guarantee is still in effect and expires in 2031. |
| --- | --- |

(85)

| (86) | As the municipal guarantee was awarded to TS in 1999, the limitation period of 10 years under Article 15(1) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA has expired (70). According to Article 15(3) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA any potential aid granted through the measure shall therefore be deemed to be existing aid. |
| --- | --- |

(86)

5.1.3.   Measure 3 – the leasehold agreements

| (87) | The leasehold agreements were concluded in 1980 and 1989 respectively. The leasehold agreement between Trondheim commune and Nidarøhallen A/S (now TS) was concluded in 1989 for a duration of 50 years. In 1980, the Municipality entered into a 40-year leasehold agreement with Trondheim Tennisklubb. Trondheim Tennisklubb financed and constructed Hall G of Trondheim Spektrum. The ownership of Hall G, including the leasehold, was transferred to Nidarøhallen A/S (now TS) in 1991 (71). |
| --- | --- |

(87)

| (88) | The Authority considers that any aid granted through these leasehold agreements, including their later use as a collateral, would constitute individual aid, which existed prior to the entry into force of the EEA Agreement. According to Article 1(b)(i) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA, the measures would therefore constitute existing aid. |
| --- | --- |

(88)

5.1.4.   Conclusion – measures 1, 2 and 3

| (89) | As any potential state aid granted through measures 1, 2 and 3 would seem to constitute existing aid, within the meaning of Article 1(b) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA, the Authority will not further assess the state aid character of these measures in the present decision. |
| --- | --- |

(89)

5.1.5.   Measure 8 – aid granted under the Gaming Fund scheme

| (90) | The funds stemming from Norsk Tipping AS are gaming funds collected, administered and distributed on the basis of the Gaming Act 1992 that entered into force on 1 January 1993, before the entry into force of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(90)

| (91) | The Authority considered in its Decision No 537/09/COL of 16 December 2009 (72) that the activities of Norsk Tipping AS constituted an existing aid scheme. The Norwegian authorities have confirmed that no amendments have been made to the scheme since that time. The Authority considers that the funds granted to TS from Norsk Tipping AS are an application of an existing aid system. Existing aid also covers individual aid awards, which have been granted on the basis of an existing aid scheme (73). Therefore, the Authority will not further assess the aid character of the measure in this decision. However, the Authority will take into account the contribution from the gaming funds in any compatibility assessment it may carry out in relation to the measures included in the scope of this decision. |
| --- | --- |

(91)

5.1.6.   Measure 4 – lease agreements concluded from 1999 to 2017

5.1.6.1.   Introduction

| (92) | The Norwegian authorities have argued that, should the Authority entertain any doubts concerning potential advantages in the lease agreements, the lease agreements concluded from 1999 to 2017 should be considered to form part of an existing aid scheme that predates the EEA Agreement. The Norwegian authorities have stated that the Municipality leased the facilities since its opening in 1963. However, the lease agreements were never formalised before 1995 (74). |
| --- | --- |

(92)

| (93) | One of the complainants has argued that the lease agreements cannot be considered to form part of an existing aid scheme. The complainant refers to the fact that there is no law or regulation that obliges the Municipality to lease facilities for sports. According to the complainant, the recent municipal decision regarding the new and twice as high lease, illustrates the margin of discretion inherent in the conclusion of a new lease agreement. In any case, the new lease would have represented a significant amendment to the aid scheme as it entails twice as much aid as before. The complainant did not elaborate further on this issue since, in its view, the financing of the operation of the premises cannot constitute an existing aid scheme in the first place (75). |
| --- | --- |

(93)

| (94) | The Authority takes the preliminary view that the lease agreements concluded from 1999 to 2017 do not constitute an aid scheme, for the following reasons. |
| --- | --- |

(94)

| (95) | Article 1(d) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA sets out two definitions of an aid scheme:
  ‘“aid scheme” shall mean any act on the basis of which, without further implementing measures being required, individual aid awards may be made to undertakings defined within the act in a general and abstract manner and any act on the basis of which aid which is not linked to a specific project may be awarded to one or several undertakings for an indefinite period of time and/or for an indefinite amount’. (emphasis added) |
| --- | --- |

(95)

‘“aid scheme” shall mean any act on the basis of which, without further implementing measures being required, individual aid awards may be made to undertakings defined within the act in a general and abstract manner and any act on the basis of which aid which is not linked to a specific project may be awarded to one or several undertakings for an indefinite period of time and/or for an indefinite amount’. (emphasis added)

| (96) | The presence of an aid scheme can be based on either of those two definitions. |
| --- | --- |

(96)

5.1.6.2.   The first definition under Article 1(d) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA

| (97) | The first definition has three cumulative criteria, defining an aid scheme as (i) any act on the basis of which aid can be awarded, (ii) which does not require any further implementing measures, and (iii) which defines the potential aid beneficiaries in a general and abstract manner. |
| --- | --- |

(97)

| (98) | The Norwegian authorities first note that the main purpose underlying the construction and ongoing extension of Trondheim Spektrum was to create facilities that the municipality, or more precisely, the local Sports Council, would then distribute among the sport clubs. If not used by the sport clubs, Trondheim Spektrum’s facilities would remain unused throughout most of the year. At the same time, it would be inconceivable for TS to run a balanced budget without receiving the lease income from the Municipality, which acquires this capacity for the sole purpose of providing its citizens with free access to sports and leisure activities. |
| --- | --- |

(98)

| (99) | The Norwegian authorities have referred to an administrative practice and the principles underlying the lease agreements, which have remained unaltered since the entry into force of the EEA Agreement. Those are the leasing of, in principle, all of Trondheim Spektrum’s suitable capacity during 8 months of the year, the possibility for TS to offer some of this capacity on the market for third parties and at a price that is periodically adjusted to reflect, in particular, extensions of Trondheim Spektrum’s capacity. |
| --- | --- |

(99)

| (100) | In the view of the Norwegian authorities, this mechanism, even if not strictly legally binding, could be regarded as an ‘act’ which also defines the potential aid beneficiary, as required by Article 1(d) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA (76). |
| --- | --- |

(100)

| (101) | The Norwegian authorities have argued that while the Municipality negotiates the new lease contracts with TS upon expiry of the previous one, it could not deviate from the mechanism without endangering its capacity to deliver sports and leisure possibilities to its citizens. As a result, there have only been minor adaptations to the lease agreements over the years. Notwithstanding the fact that the lease agreement falls – through its responsibility for the annual budget – under the oversight of the City Council, the possible modifications are rather of a ‘technical application’ based on the principles of the act, and do not, in the view of the Norwegian authorities, convey sufficient discretion upon the Municipality to be considered as implementing measures (77). |
| --- | --- |

(101)

| (102) | As the Norwegian authorities have stated, existing ‘aid schemes’ have been held to encompass non-statutory customary law (78) and administrative practice related to the application of statutory (79) and non-statutory law (80). In one case, the Commission found that an aid scheme relating to Anstaltslast and Gewährträgerhaftung was based on the combination of an unwritten old legal principle combined with widespread practice across Germany (81). |
| --- | --- |

(102)

| (103) | In a recent judgment, the General Court made the following observations on the basis of the definition of an aid scheme in Article 1(d) of Regulation (EC) No 2015/1589 (82), as interpreted by case-law (83):
  ‘First, if individual aid awards are made without further implementing measures being adopted, the essential elements of the aid scheme in question must necessarily emerge from the provisions identified as the basis for the scheme.
  Secondly, where the national authorities apply that scheme, those authorities cannot have any margin of discretion as regards the determination of the essential elements of the aid in question and whether it should be awarded. For the existence of such implementing measures to be precluded, the national authorities’ power should be limited to the technical application of the provisions that allegedly constitute the scheme in question, if necessary after verifying that the applications meet the pre-conditions for benefiting from that scheme.
  Thirdly, it follows from Article 1(d) of Regulation (EC) No 2015/1589 that the acts on which the aid scheme is based must define the beneficiaries in a general and abstract manner, even if the aid granted to them remains indefinite.’ |
| --- | --- |

(103)

‘First, if individual aid awards are made without further implementing measures being adopted, the essential elements of the aid scheme in question must necessarily emerge from the provisions identified as the basis for the scheme.

Secondly, where the national authorities apply that scheme, those authorities cannot have any margin of discretion as regards the determination of the essential elements of the aid in question and whether it should be awarded. For the existence of such implementing measures to be precluded, the national authorities’ power should be limited to the technical application of the provisions that allegedly constitute the scheme in question, if necessary after verifying that the applications meet the pre-conditions for benefiting from that scheme.

Thirdly, it follows from Article 1(d) of Regulation (EC) No 2015/1589 that the acts on which the aid scheme is based must define the beneficiaries in a general and abstract manner, even if the aid granted to them remains indefinite.’

| (104) | In the case at hand, there is no legal obligation on the Municipality to enter into a lease agreement with TS. Nor is there any legislation which provides the framework under which the lease agreements are made. Furthermore, it appears that the Municipality has, at least on some occasions, decided unilaterally how much rent it pays to TS under the lease agreements (84). The complainants allege that the rent has never been based on arm’s length negotiations but decided unilaterally by the Municipal Board of the Municipality. |
| --- | --- |

(104)

| (105) | The alleged aid measure in question is the rent paid above market terms to TS under the lease agreement. If the Municipality can decide unilaterally the level of the rent, then that affords it the discretion to decide whether to grant TS the alleged aid or not, as well as the amount of the alleged aid. |
| --- | --- |

(105)

| (106) | It thus appears to the Authority, based on the information provided by the Norwegian authorities so far, that the administrative practice and the principles referred to by the Norwegian authorities do not constitute an ‘act on the basis of which aid can be awarded’. Moreover, it appears to the Authority that the Municipality enjoys discretion when entering into the lease agreements with TS, so that it can determine the essential elements of the potential aid in question. Should that be the case, the second criterion and the first criterion of the first definition under Article 1(d) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA would not be fulfilled. |
| --- | --- |

(106)

| (107) | Finally, the Norwegian authorities have not explained how the third criterion could be fulfilled by the principles and administrative practice in question. |
| --- | --- |

(107)

| (108) | As all conditions of the first definition must be cumulatively fulfilled, the Authority takes the preliminary view that the lease agreements concluded from 1999 to 2017 do not constitute an aid scheme. |
| --- | --- |

(108)

5.1.6.3.   The second definition under Article 1(d) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA

| (109) | The second definition has three cumulative criteria, defining an aid scheme as (i) any act on the basis of which aid which is not linked to a specific project (ii) may be awarded to one or several undertakings (iii) for an indefinite period of time and/or for an indefinite amount. |
| --- | --- |

(109)

| (110) | The Norwegian authorities have not argued that the alleged aid scheme falls within the second definition of Article 1(d) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA. The Authority therefore lacks information to assess this. |
| --- | --- |

(110)

| (111) | However, the Authority notes that in line with the administrative practice and principles referred to by the Norwegian authorities, the lease agreements have been concluded for a specific time period and expire at a certain date. Moreover, the lease agreements set out the rental price for the facilities rented to the Municipality. It therefore appears to the Authority that the third condition would not be fulfilled. |
| --- | --- |

(111)

| (112) | As all conditions of the second definition must be fulfilled cumulatively, the Authority takes the preliminary view that the lease agreements concluded from 1999 to 2017 do not constitute an aid scheme. |
| --- | --- |

(112)

5.1.6.4.   Limitation period

| (113) | Pursuant to Article 15(1) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA, the powers of the Authority to recover aid are subject to a limitation period of 10 years. The limitation period shall begin on the day on which the unlawful aid is awarded to the beneficiary either as individual aid or as aid under an aid scheme. Any action taken by the Authority, with regard to the unlawful aid shall interrupt the limitation period (85). |
| --- | --- |

(113)

| (114) | In this decision, the Authority will only further assess the potential aid character of the lease agreements for which the limitation period has not expired. |
| --- | --- |

(114)

| (115) | The General Court has confirmed that a request for information constitutes a measure interrupting the 10-year limitation period (86). Furthermore, the General Court stated, in relation to an information request from the Commission that: ‘When it addresses a request for information to a Member State, the Commission is informing that State that it has in its possession information concerning aid alleged to be unlawful and, if necessary, that that aid will have to be repaid. Accordingly, the simplicity of the request for information does not have the consequence of depriving it of legal effect as a measure capable of interrupting the limitation period’ (87). |
| --- | --- |

(115)

| (116) | By letter dated 27 March 2017, the Authority sent the first complaint in the case to the Norwegian authorities and invited them to comment on the complaint (88). By that letter, the Authority informed the Norwegian authorities that it had in its possession information concerning alleged unlawful state aid and invited them to provide their comments. The Authority therefore considers that by sending the first complaint to the Norwegian authorities, it took action within the meaning of Article 15(2) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA, and therefore interrupted the limitation period on 27 March 2017. |
| --- | --- |

(116)

| (117) | Accordingly, the lease agreements for which the limitation period has not expired, would appear to be following:






  (a) | Lease agreement 2007 – 2008; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(117)

(a)

Lease agreement 2007 – 2008;

| (b) | Lease agreement 2009 – 2010; and |
| --- | --- |

(b)

Lease agreement 2009 – 2010; and

| (c) | Lease agreement 2011 (which has been renewed annually). |
| --- | --- |

(c)

Lease agreement 2011 (which has been renewed annually).

| (118) | This is because it would seem from the information provided by the Norwegian authorities that the lease agreement entered into force on 1 January 2008 (89), which in the absence of any indication to the contrary should be taken as the day any aid was granted under the agreement. However, it appears that the lease agreement listed by the Norwegian authorities, as preceding the 2007 – 2008 lease agreement expired on 31 December 2006. The Authority thus lacks information regarding the lease agreement in force during the year 2007. Moreover, the Authority does not have information on when the lease agreement of 2007 – 2008 was signed, and on whether the date of signing could be the date that any aid was granted under the agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(118)

| (119) | The Authority invites the Norwegian authorities to submit further information in this regard. |
| --- | --- |

(119)

5.1.7.   Conclusion – new vs. existing aid

| (120) | In light of the above findings, the Authority’s further assessment in this decision is limited to potential new aid entailed in measures 4 to 7 and 9, which all post-date the entering into force of the EEA Agreement and where the limitation period has not expired: That is, the lease agreements concluded from 2007 to 2017 (measure 4), the new lease agreement of 2019 (measure 5), the capital increase related to new and unexpected costs (measure 6), the financing of infrastructure costs (measure 7) and the implicit guarantee inherent in the loan agreement between TS and Nordea (measure 9). |
| --- | --- |

(120)

5.2.   
  The concept of state aid

| (121) | Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement reads as follows:
  ‘Save as otherwise provided in this Agreement, any aid granted by EC Member States, EFTA States or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Contracting Parties, be incompatible with the functioning of this Agreement.’ |
| --- | --- |

(121)

‘Save as otherwise provided in this Agreement, any aid granted by EC Member States, EFTA States or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Contracting Parties, be incompatible with the functioning of this Agreement.’

| (122) | The qualification of a measure as aid within the meaning of this provision therefore requires the following cumulative conditions to be met: the measure must (i) be granted by the State or through state resources; (ii) confer an advantage on an undertaking; (iii) favour certain undertakings (selectivity); and (iv) be liable to distort competition and affect trade. |
| --- | --- |

(122)

5.3.   
  State resources

| (123) | Only advantages granted directly or indirectly through state resources can constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. State resources include all resources of the public sector, including municipalities (90). |
| --- | --- |

(123)

| (124) | The transfer of state resources may take many forms, such as direct grants, loans, guarantees, direct investment in the capital of companies, and benefits in kind. A firm and concrete commitment to make state resources available at a later point in time is also considered a transfer of state resources. A positive transfer of funds does not have to occur; foregoing state revenue is sufficient. Waiving revenue which would otherwise have been paid to the State constitutes a transfer of state resources (91). |
| --- | --- |

(124)

| (125) | Measures 4 to 7 and 9 were granted by the Municipality in the form of payments under lease agreements, a capital increase, the reduction of infrastructure costs allegedly borne by a developer and as a potential implicit guarantee inherent in a loan agreement between TS and Nordea. Consequently, the measures entail the transfer of state resources. |
| --- | --- |

(125)

5.4.   
  Advantage

5.4.1.   Introduction

| (126) | The qualification of a measure as state aid requires that it confers an advantage on the recipient. An advantage, within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, is any economic benefit, which an undertaking could not have obtained under normal market conditions. |
| --- | --- |

(126)

5.4.2.   Measure 4 – the lease agreements concluded from 2007 to 2017

| (127) | The Norwegian authorities have argued that the lease agreements concluded from 2007 to 2017 are market conform and therefore do not entail an advantage within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. The Norwegian authorities have not, however, put forward further arguments to the effect that the Municipality acted as a market investor, when entering into the lease agreement with TS. |
| --- | --- |

(127)

| (128) | The EEA legal order is neutral with regard to the system of property ownership and does not in any way prejudice the right of EEA States to act as economic operators. However, when public authorities directly or indirectly carry out economic transactions in any form, they are subject to EEA State aid rules. Economic transactions carried out by public bodies (including public undertakings) do not confer an advantage on its counterpart, and therefore do not constitute aid, if they are carried out in line with normal market conditions (92). |
| --- | --- |

(128)

| (129) | The Norwegian authorities have noted that given the different sizes, equipment, design and location of other venues in Norway, it is not possible to identify a fully equivalent venue to Trondheim Spektrum (93). However, the Norwegian authorities have provided information to support its argument that the lease agreements have been market confirm. |
| --- | --- |

(129)

| (130) | The Municipality has provided information on how TS’ pricing to third parties compares to other venues and information on prices for leasing hall capacity for sports and leisure purposes in other venues. |
| --- | --- |

(130)

| (131) | The Norwegian authorities have explained that Trondheim Spektrum disposes of two halls larger than 2 000 m2 (Hall D and Hall F), which are particularly suited for larger fairs, concerts, conferences and similar events. Depending on the type of event, TS charges approximately NOK 70 000 to NOK 85 000 per day for the larger hall D (approximately EUR 7 230 – 8 780), and NOK 59 000 to NOK 70 000 for the somewhat smaller hall F (approximately EUR 6 100 – 7 230). |
| --- | --- |

(131)

| (132) | The Norwegian authorities made a comparison with leasing such facilities in other venues in Trondheim. The freemasons lodge in Trondheim, for example, charges a daily rate of only NOK 15 000 to NOK 18 000 (approximately EUR 1 550 – 1 860). This is a somewhat smaller venue, it can accommodate up to 600 persons, whereas Hall F in Trondheim Spektrum has a capacity of more than 1 000 persons. |
| --- | --- |

(132)

| (133) | According to the Norwegian authorities, venues located in Norwegian cities of comparable sizes charge similar rates. In Stavanger, renting of capacity similar to that of Hall F costs just above NOK 200 000 for four days, whereas Grieghallen in Bergen charges approximately NOK 300 000 for four days (approximately EUR 20 100 and 31 000). TS’ prices lie just below Bergen (94). |
| --- | --- |

(133)

| (134) | The Norwegian authorities have further referred to Sotra Arena located in the municipality of Fjell, a 25 minutes drive from the city of Bergen, a venue with 12 000 m2 indoor capacity. In 2016, this venue was used for trade fairs charging approximately NOK 100 000 to 125 000 for three days (approximately EUR 10 300 – 12 900) for approximately 5 000 to 7 000 m2. |
| --- | --- |

(134)

| (135) | In view of this comparison, the Norwegian authorities state that it would appear that TS’ prices for hall capacity, when rented out to third parties, are in line with market prices. |
| --- | --- |

(135)

| (136) | The Municipality purchases capacity from TS, sports clubs with own facilities, other state authorities (in buildings such as high-schools) and to a very limited degree, from private facilities. |
| --- | --- |

(136)

| (137) | The hourly rate paid by the Municipality ranges between NOK 350 and 2 046 per hour (approximately EUR 36 and 211). The hourly rate paid to TS is NOK 1 174 (approximately EUR 121) (95). The Norwegian authorities note that the difference in the prices can be explained by a variety of factors. Also, a number of these venues have been financed (partly) by the State and are contractually bound to provide (some) capacity at fixed rates. |
| --- | --- |

(137)

| (138) | Other factors, which may explain the relatively large differences in prices, are that not all daytimes are similarly valuable and not all venues are as modern, well equipped and centrally located as Trondheim Spektrum. The Norwegian authorities have explained that all of the foregoing considerations are reasons why some of the capacity that the Municipality purchases from other venues is comparatively cheap (96). |
| --- | --- |

(138)

| (139) | The Norwegian authorities provided examples of the rates charged by Vestlandshallen, a sports centre in Bergen. According to the Norwegian authorities, this venue charges approximately the same price to (non-sport club) users as the Municipality pays to TS. This is based on a calculation whereby one of TS’ ‘hall hours’ is for a surface area of 800 m2 and comprises 60 minutes. A ‘quarter hall’ in Vestlandshallen would be approximately 440 m2 and cost NOK 940 for 90 minutes (approximately EUR 97). This would result in a theoretical price of approximately NOK 626 for 60 minutes and hence NOK 1 252 for a slightly larger surface area than the equivalent in TS (approximately EUR 65 and 129). |
| --- | --- |

(139)

| (140) | Moreover, the Norwegian authorities argue that the City of Bergen charges non-preferential users NOK 1 150 for one hour in Haukelandshallen, a venue comparable to Trondheim Spektrum (approximately EUR 119). Furthermore, the City of Tromsø charges up to NOK 1 940 for one hour of similar surface area in Tromsøhallen (approximately EUR 200). |
| --- | --- |

(140)

| (141) | The Authority notes that these prices appear to be charged for specific events whereas the assessment in the case at hand concerns an agreed price for a large amount of capacity over a long period of time. |
| --- | --- |

(141)

| (142) | Furthermore, as noted by the Norwegian authorities, there are important differences when it comes to comparing these venues, for example in the rental time (97), the quality of the facilities and the location of the venues within (or outside) the cities. In light of this, the Authority is not convinced that these examples submitted by the Norwegian authorities provide a sufficient degree of comparability to be able to establish that the lease agreements have conformed to market terms. |
| --- | --- |

(142)

| (143) | In order to establish whether a transaction conforms to market conditions, the transaction can be assessed in the light of the terms under which comparable transactions carried out by comparable private operators have taken place in comparable situations (98). |
| --- | --- |

(143)

| (144) | Benchmarking may not be an appropriate method to establish market prices if the available benchmarks have not been defined with regard to market considerations or if the existing prices are significantly distorted by public interventions (99). |
| --- | --- |

(144)

| (145) | Finally, there are other indications that the lease agreements have not been entered into on market terms, indicating a need for further assessment. |
| --- | --- |

(145)

| (146) | First, the Norwegian authorities have explained that, in the past, the rent in the lease agreements has been set, inter alia, on the basis of TS’ cost structure, with a focus on putting TS in a position to pay off its loans and continue operations. |
| --- | --- |

(146)

| (147) | Second, in the past, there are examples where the rent has been reduced unilaterally by the Municipality, due to reasons unrelated to the use of the facilities (100). |
| --- | --- |

(147)

| (148) | Third, the Norwegian authorities have explained that the lease agreements have provided that TS can reclaim up to 2 000 hours annually under the lease agreements. TS can therefore use the facilities, which are otherwise reserved under the lease agreements for other purposes, for those specific hours. The Norwegian authorities have explained that TS has reclaimed 945 – 2 173 hours annually from 2010 to 2017 and that there is no mechanism for the reduction of the overall rent when TS reclaims rented hours. However, the Norwegian authorities have explained that these are hours which the Municipality for distribution purposes gains access to, but never pays for (101). |
| --- | --- |

(148)

| (149) | In the light of the aforementioned considerations, the Authority takes the preliminary view that the lease agreements from 2007 to 2017 may have granted TS an advantage. |
| --- | --- |

(149)

5.4.3.   Measure 5 – the lease agreement of 2019

| (150) | The Norwegian authorities have argued that the lease agreement of 2019 is market conform and therefore does not constitute an advantage in favour of TS. The Norwegian authorities have not presented arguments stating that the Municipality acted as a market investor when entering into the new lease agreement with TS. |
| --- | --- |

(150)

| (151) | The new lease agreement represents an increase in the rent per hour from approximately NOK 1 200 to NOK 1 700 (approximately EUR 124 to 176) (102). The Norwegian authorities have acknowledged that this is at the upper end of the hourly rates they have provided (hourly rates from a sample of sports facilities range from approximately NOK 350 to NOK 2 046 (approximately EUR 36 to 211)) (103). |
| --- | --- |

(151)

| (152) | Trondheim Spektrum will be, following the upgrade, a modern and very centrally located facility in one of Norway’s largest and fastest growing cities. In the Norwegian authorities’ view, for the Authority to conclude that the lease agreement does entail an advantage, the hourly rate would have to be well above the price ranges observed in the market (104). |
| --- | --- |

(152)

| (153) | The Norwegian authorities have further stated that the hourly rate for commercial users of Trondheim Spektrum was higher in the past (from NOK 1 000 to 1 800; approximately EUR 103 to 186) than under the municipal lease contract (NOK 1 200; approximately EUR 124). This is also expected to remain the case going forward, with an hourly rate of approximately NOK 1 700 under the new lease agreement (approximately EUR 176). |
| --- | --- |

(153)

| (154) | Consequently, if it were concluded that the Municipality paid a price above market levels, this would necessarily entail that the commercial users of TS would also do that. In the Norwegian authorities’ view, there is no reason to assume that commercial users would pay a price above market level for the renting of hall space in Trondheim Spektrum (105). |
| --- | --- |

(154)

| (155) | The Authority acknowledges that the benchmarks provided by the Norwegian authorities do enable some degree of comparison. However, as the Authority noted with regard to the lease agreements concluded from 1999 to 2017, the lease agreement concerns an annually agreed price for a large amount of capacity, whereas the hourly rates provided for other venues appear to concern situations where the venue is rented for a limited period. |
| --- | --- |

(155)

| (156) | Furthermore, as noted by the Norwegian authorities, the comparison entails important differences, for example in the rental time, the quality of the facilities, and the location of the venues within the cities. The Authority therefore has doubts as to whether the benchmarks provided by the Norwegian authorities can establish that the lease agreement of 2019 conforms to market terms. |
| --- | --- |

(156)

| (157) | The Authority therefore does not share the Norwegian authorities’ view that the hourly rates observed in the market, as described by the Norwegian authorities, are sufficient at this stage, in order to exclude that the lease agreement entails an advantage to TS. |
| --- | --- |

(157)

| (158) | The Authority accordingly draws the preliminary conclusion that the lease agreement of 2019 concluded in 2017 may have granted an advantage to TS. |
| --- | --- |

(158)

5.4.4.   Measure 6 – capital increase linked to new and unexpected costs – GBER

| (159) | The Norwegian authorities have granted ad hoc aid to TS in the form of a capital increase for an amount of NOK 55 million (approximately EUR 5,68 million) under Article 55 GBER. The Norwegian authorities have not argued that TS could have obtained the capital increase under normal market conditions. The Norwegian authorities have explained that TS cannot cover these additional costs through its existing means or through additional market financing. |
| --- | --- |

(159)

| (160) | Accordingly, the Authority finds that the capital increase constitutes an advantage to TS, corresponding to the full amount of the capital increase. |
| --- | --- |

(160)

5.4.5.   Measure 7 – financing of infrastructure costs

| (161) | The precise form of the measure is irrelevant in establishing whether it confers an economic advantage on the undertaking. Not only the granting of positive economic advantages is relevant for the notion of state aid, also relief from economic burdens can constitute an advantage. The latter is a broad category, which comprises any mitigation of charges normally included in the budget of an undertaking. This covers all situations in which economic operators are relieved of the inherent costs of their economic activities (106). |
| --- | --- |

(161)

| (162) | The notion of an advantage also covers situations where operators do not have to bear costs that other comparable operators normally do under a given legal order, regardless of the non-economic nature of the activity to which the costs relate (107). |
| --- | --- |

(162)

| (163) | The Norwegian authorities have provided information relating to the infrastructure costs of the expansion and development of TS as described in section 4.8. |
| --- | --- |

(163)

| (164) | The Norwegian authorities have explained that the infrastructure improvements that are (partly) financed by the Municipality relate to measures that the Municipality would have to implement, but the project affects the timing for when the measures are implemented. Further, the Norwegian authorities have stated that it would be disproportionate to require the developer to bear these costs and would thus be contrary to Section 17-3(3) of the Planning and Building Act (108). Moreover, they have stated that this approach is consistent with the Municipality’s practice in other comparable projects (109). |
| --- | --- |

(164)

| (165) | The Norwegian authorities have explained that in order to ensure proportionality of the cost allocation, the total costs that the developer must bear are benchmarked against other projects and practice (cost of contribution to public infrastructure per m2 BRA (110)). For a typical housing development, which tends to be a highly profitable development, experience shows that an acceptable expense per m2 BRA is around NOK 2 000 (approximately EUR 207). In TS’ case, there is a cost of NOK 2 081 per m2 BRA (approximately EUR 215). |
| --- | --- |

(165)

| (166) | However, the Norwegian authorities have not provided information underlying the calculations of the division of costs and have not specified whether these calculations are based on objective criteria. The benchmark used by the Norwegian authorities does not provide full comparability as it refers to a different type of project, that is, a housing development, whereas the case at hand concerns a multifunctional infrastructure. Furthermore, it is not clear how this benchmark has been applied to other projects. The Authority therefore sees a need for a further assessment of the practice of calculating costs for these types of projects. Consequently, the Authority cannot, at this point, exclude the existence of an advantage, within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(166)

| (167) | The Authority thus draws the preliminary conclusion that the division and calculation of infrastructure costs, with regard to the renovation and extension of TS, may have granted TS an advantage. |
| --- | --- |

(167)

5.4.6.   Measure 9 – implicit guarantee inherent in a loan agreement between Nordea and TS

| (168) | On 11 December 2017, TS signed a loan agreement for NOK 490 million (approximately EUR 50,67 million) with Nordea (111). Nordea will provide the working capital during the construction period. The Norwegian authorities have explained that the Municipality is not a party to the loan agreement, nor are there any contractual obligations that require the municipality to provide financing or capital to TS (112). |
| --- | --- |

(168)

| (169) | One of the complainants has alleged that the Municipality has granted state aid to TS through the loan with Nordea, in the form of a guarantee. |
| --- | --- |

(169)

| (170) | As described in section 4.10, the loan agreement contains clauses, which mention the possibility for the Municipality, without acting contrary to the legislation, if necessary, to issue a guarantee for Nordea, in relation to the risk which follows any cost overruns in the construction period (113). |
| --- | --- |

(170)

| (171) | The loan agreement further contains clauses, which state that the lease agreement between TS and the Municipality cannot be changed, without Nordea’s prior written approval (114). Furthermore, the loan agreement contains a condition that the Municipality owns at least 77,93 % of TS (115). |
| --- | --- |

(171)

| (172) | The Norwegian authorities have emphasised that the Municipality is not a party to the loan agreement and that it is Nordea that takes into account certain factual circumstances in its risk assessment and that these clauses and statements do not bind the Municipality. More specifically, the Norwegian authorities have stated that the potential structural changes in the company and potential political guidelines do not constitute a firm and concrete legal obligation that could bind the Municipality. |
| --- | --- |

(172)

| (173) | Similarly, the Norwegian authorities have argued that the section in the loan agreement that states that the lease agreement with the Municipality cannot be changed without Nordea’s prior written consent, does not bind the Municipality. Were the lease agreement to be changed, it would be for TS to ensure that it obtains the consent of its creditor, i.e. Nordea. |
| --- | --- |

(173)

| (174) | As to the condition for granting and maintaining the construction loan that the Municipality owns at least 77,93 % of TS, the Norwegian authorities recall that the board of TS, which entered into the loan agreement, does not have the authority to bind its shareholders and thereby the Municipality, including a potential future sale of shares. The loan agreements reflect that Nordea is well aware of the fact that the agreement cannot bind the Municipality, given that the second section provides that change in the ownership structure without consent implies a breach of contract by TS (116). |
| --- | --- |

(174)

| (175) | However, the Authority finds the effects of the statements in the loan agreements unclear and can, at this point, not exclude that they provide an advantage to TS in the form of an implicit guarantee from the Municipality. |
| --- | --- |

(175)

| (176) | The Authority invites the Norwegian authorities to submit further information in this regard. |
| --- | --- |

(176)

5.5.   
  The notion of undertaking

| (177) | In order to constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 61 of the EEA Agreement, the measure must confer an advantage on an undertaking. Undertakings are entities engaged in an economic activity, regardless of their legal status and the way in which they are financed (117). Consequently, the public or private status of an entity or the fact that an entity is partly or wholly publicly owned has no bearing as to whether or not that entity is an ‘undertaking’ within the meaning of state aid law (118). |
| --- | --- |

(177)

| (178) | Economic activities are activities consisting of offering goods or services on a market (119). Conversely, entities that are not commercially active in the sense that they are not offering goods or services on a given market do not constitute undertakings. In general, both the construction and operation of an infrastructure constitute an economic activity in itself (and are thus subject to state aid rules) if that infrastructure is, or will be used, to provide goods or services on the market (120). State aid may be granted at several levels: construction, operation and use of the infrastructure (121). |
| --- | --- |

(178)

| (179) | A single entity may carry out a number of activities, both economic and non-economic activities, provided that it keeps separate accounts for the different funds that it receives, so as to exclude any risk of cross-subsidisation of its economic activities by means of public funds received for its non-economic activities (122). |
| --- | --- |

(179)

| (180) | Trondheim Spektrum is a multifunctional facility, which hosts, inter alia, concerts, large sport events, fairs, and congresses. Further, Trondheim Spektrum is scheduled to host in 2020 the European Championship in handball for men and women. TS also rents out facilities to the Municipality, which in turn makes them available to the sport clubs. |
| --- | --- |

(180)

| (181) | It is undisputed that TS carries out economic activities, when hosting concerts, large sport events, fairs, congresses and other such events. Consequently, TS constitutes an undertaking within the meaning of Article 61 of the EEA Agreement, with regard to those activities. |
| --- | --- |

(181)

| (182) | However, the Norwegian authorities have argued that the use of TS’ facilities by sport clubs cannot be considered as an economic activity, given that neither the Municipality nor TS receives any remuneration from its users. On this basis, the Norwegian authorities have argued that TS provides its services on a market on a commercial basis only in so far as it is offering its spare capacity on the markets for trade fairs, concerts and other such activities. All other activities should be classified as non-economic (123). |
| --- | --- |

(182)

| (183) | Even if the Municipality can be considered to be carrying out a non-economic activity by offering cost-free facilities for the Municipality’s sport clubs, in principle, the entity supplying the Municipality with such facilities, might very well be carrying out economic activities when doing so. The non-economic activities relate to the services provided to the sport clubs, that is, the relationship between the Municipality and the sport clubs. |
| --- | --- |

(183)

| (184) | Against that background, the Authority cannot exclude, at this point, that TS is an undertaking, not only when hosting concerts, large sport events, fairs, congresses and other events, but also when renting out its facilities to the Municipality, which then provides the hall space for the Municipality’s sport clubs. |
| --- | --- |

(184)

| (185) | In any event, TS carries out other economic activities and the Norwegian authorities have admitted that, at least in the past, no strict separation of accounts has been maintained as regards what had been considered economic and non-economic activities (124). |
| --- | --- |

(185)

| (186) | Still, the Norwegian authorities have submitted to the Authority a model developed by BDO for the separation of accounts in TS, both for the future and regarding the past. This model has now been implemented by TS. |
| --- | --- |

(186)

| (187) | However, the Authority does not have sufficient information at this point, based on the BDO cost allocation model and the cost projection for the future, to be convinced that the revenue from each activity covers their own set of costs. |
| --- | --- |

(187)

| (188) | Consequently, even if the renting out of TS’ facilities to the Municipality for the purposes of providing cost-free facilities to the Municipality’s sport clubs were to be considered non-economic, the Authority is not convinced that TS has excluded the risk that the public funds received could cross-subsidise economic activities. |
| --- | --- |

(188)

| (189) | In light of the above, the Authority cannot exclude that the measures assessed in this decision have provided an advantage to TS’ economic activities. |
| --- | --- |

(189)

5.6.   
  Selectivity

| (190) | To be characterised as state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, the measure must also be selective in that it favours ‘certain undertakings or the production of certain goods’. Not all measures which favour economic operators fall under the notion of aid, but only those which grant an advantage in a selective way to certain undertakings, categories of undertakings or to certain economic sectors. |
| --- | --- |

(190)

| (191) | The potential aid measures at issue here are individual measures addressed only to TS. The measures are therefore selective within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(191)

5.7.   
  Impact on trade and distortion of competition

| (192) | Public support to undertakings only constitutes state aid under Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, if it ‘distorts or threatens to distort competition’ and only insofar, as it is liable to ‘affect trade’ between EEA States. |
| --- | --- |

(192)

| (193) | According to settled case-law, the mere fact that a measure strengthens the position of an undertaking compared with other undertakings competing in intra-EEA trade, is considered sufficient to conclude that the measure is likely to affect trade between EEA States and distort competition between undertakings established in other EEA States (125). |
| --- | --- |

(193)

| (194) | To the extent that the measures assessed in this decision have not been carried out in line with normal market conditions, they have conferred an advantage on TS, which strengthens its position compared to other undertakings that it competes with. |
| --- | --- |

(194)

| (195) | The Authority must further consider whether the measures are liable to affect trade between EEA States. In this regards, the Union Courts have ruled that ‘where State financial aid strengthens the position of an undertaking as compared with other undertakings competing in intra-[Union] trade, the latter must be regarded as affected by the aid’ (126). |
| --- | --- |

(195)

| (196) | The City of Trondheim is the third largest city in Norway located about an hour’s drive from the scarcely populated areas of mid-Sweden. Trondheim Spektrum has the capacity to host large and mid-size international events, which may also be held outside the region (127). |
| --- | --- |

(196)

| (197) | On the other hand, the Norwegian authorities have submitted that taking into consideration that the majority of the activities carried out in Trondheim Spektrum are of local character and in light of the limited extent of the activities of TS in a market, as well as the marginal aid intensity, if any, it can consequently not be foreseen that the measures would have more than, at most, a marginal effect on the conditions of cross-border investment or establishment (128). |
| --- | --- |

(197)

| (198) | The Authority notes that an effect on trade cannot be merely hypothetical or presumed. It must be established why the measure distorts or threatens to distort competition and is liable to have an effect on trade between EEA States, based on the foreseeable effects of the measure (129). |
| --- | --- |

(198)

| (199) | The Authority and the Commission have in a number of decisions considered that certain activities and measures, in view of their specific circumstances, have a purely local impact and consequently no effect on trade between EEA States. In those cases, the Authority and the Commission ascertained, in particular, that the beneficiary provided services to a limited area within an EEA Sate and was unlikely to attract customers from other EEA States and that it could not be foreseen that the measure would have more than marginal effect on the conditions of cross-border investments or establishments. Some of these decisions concerned sports and leisure facilities serving predominantly a local audience and unlikely to attract customers or investment from other EEA States (130). |
| --- | --- |

(199)

| (200) | In the case at hand, the Authority notes that even though some of the activities carried out by TS are of local character, TS also hosts events such as trade fairs, which attract foreign customers. Moreover, TS will host the European handball Championship in 2020, which can be assumed to attract foreign customers. |
| --- | --- |

(200)

| (201) | Finally, the market for organising international events is open to competition between venue providers and event organisers, which generally engage in activities that are subject to trade between EEA States (131). |
| --- | --- |

(201)

| (202) | In light of the above, at this stage, the Authority considers that the measures at issue threaten to distort competition and are liable to effect trade between EEA States. |
| --- | --- |

(202)

6.   Conclusion on the presence of aid

| (203) | The Authority takes the preliminary view that measures 4 to 7 and 9, as specified above, may entail state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(203)

7.   Procedural requirements

| (204) | Pursuant to Article 1(3) of Part I of Protocol 3 SCA: ‘the EFTA Surveillance Authority shall be informed, in sufficient time to enable it to submit its comments, of any plans to grant or alter aid. [...] The State concerned shall not put its proposed measures into effect until the procedure has resulted in a final decision’. |
| --- | --- |

(204)

| (205) | The Norwegian authorities have not notified all of the measures in question to the Authority. The Authority therefore reaches the preliminary conclusion that the Norwegian authorities have not respected their obligations pursuant to Article 1(3) of Part I of Protocol 3 SCA, and that to the extent measures 4, 7 and 9 entail state aid, that aid is unlawful. |
| --- | --- |

(205)

| (206) | The Norwegian authorities notified the new lease agreement of 2019, measure 5, on 29 November 2018 (132). The new lease agreement was signed by TS and the Municipality on 25 September and 26 October 2017 respectively and will enter into force on 1 December 2019. The Norwegian authorities have argued that the new lease agreement is conditional upon being in line with market terms (133). It explicitly enables adaptations to bring the conditions of the agreement in line with market terms should the Authority so require. In light of this, the Authority’s preliminary conclusion is that, should the lease agreement entail state aid, the Norwegian authorities have respected the requirement set out in Article 1(3) of Part I of Protocol 3 SCA. However, finding this conclusion less than certain, the Authority specifically invites the Norwegian authorities to submit further information in this regard. |
| --- | --- |

(206)

| (207) | Furthermore, as regards measure 6, the capital increase, the Authority notes that the Norwegian authorities have granted this aid to TS under Article 55 of the GBER (134). State aid measures fulfilling all the requirements of Chapter I of the GBER, as well as the specific conditions for the relevant category of aid laid down in Chapter III of the GBER, shall be exempted from the notification requirement. However, as further explained below in section 8 of this decision, the Authority is not fully convinced that the requirements set out in Article 6(2) GBER are fulfilled in relation to this measure. Further assessment of the measure seems required. If the Authority would find that measure 6 does not fulfil the requirements of the GBER it would qualify as unlawful aid. |
| --- | --- |

(207)

8.   Compatibility of any aid

| (208) | Should the measures 4 to 7 and 9 entail state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, the Authority must assess whether the aid can be declared compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. It is up to the Norwegian authorities to invoke possible grounds of compatibility and to demonstrate that the conditions for such compatibility are met (135). |
| --- | --- |

(208)

| (209) | Should the Authority consider that the measures at issue entail elements of (new) aid, the Norwegian authorities are of the view that they would in any event be compatible with the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(209)

| (210) | The Norwegian authorities have noted that the Authority has recognised the promotion of sport as a common objective in a number of decisions (136). Similarly, the European Commission has authorised a large number of aid measures in support of sports and multipurpose facilities (137). |
| --- | --- |

(210)

| (211) | Further, the Norwegian authorities refer to Article 55 of the GBER which allows for aid for the construction of sports – or multipurpose infrastructure. In the Norwegian authorities’ view, to some extent, TS arguably also fulfils objectives relating to culture, another well-established objective of common interest (138). |
| --- | --- |

(211)

| (212) | The Norwegian authorities have submitted that TS will not break even without revenue from the lease agreement. The Norwegian authorities consider that there is a demonstrated need for state intervention both as regards the provision of hall capacity to sport clubs and as regards the financing of sports facilities themselves. |
| --- | --- |

(212)

| (213) | The Norwegian authorities submit that in their view, there is no other policy instrument that would have been equally suited to attain the objective and which would be less distortive. The only other option would be for the Municipality to construct, own and operate a similar infrastructure itself, which, in the Norwegian authorities’ view, would hardly be less distortive. |
| --- | --- |

(213)

| (214) | The Norwegian authorities refer to previous decisions of the Authority and state that in the absence of the lease agreement, the sport clubs would evidently not gain access to free hall time in TS. Even a lower level of the lease would put the entire operation of TS at risk and thereby jeopardise both the provision of hall capacity to sport clubs and the existence of TS as such (139). |
| --- | --- |

(214)

| (215) | As regards the incentive effect of the lease agreements, TS could not finance the projects absent the revenue stream from the municipal lease agreement. In that regard, the Norwegian authorities recall that the lease agreements, while intended to be entered into on market terms – also took account of TS’ cost structure. Lower income from the Municipality would have left a hole in TS’ balance sheet that other – commercial – activities may not have been able to fill. The infrastructure would also have been designed in a different manner and not have taken account of the needs of various kinds of amateur sport. In view of the forgoing, the Norwegian authorities consider that any potential aid clearly has an incentive effect (140). |
| --- | --- |

(215)

| (216) | The Norwegian authorities further refer to the compatibility criteria under Article 55 of the GBER and state that the actual aid element must necessarily be lower than the thresholds in the GBER and that higher amounts could, in any event, be approved under Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement, in particular, if that aid does not lead to more than a reasonable profit, which according to current projections, is not the case. In view of this, the Norwegian authorities consider that any potential aid, inherent in the lease agreement, is proportionate and limited to the minimum necessary. |
| --- | --- |

(216)

| (217) | The Norwegian authorities have further stated that if any of the measures addressed would be found to constitute state aid it would be equally clear that those measures would be proportionate. The aid element would be minor in comparison to the costs of constructing and operating Trondheim Spektrum. The Norwegian authorities do not consider it meaningful to calculate a precise potential aid intensity, as undoubtedly, the vast part if not all of the public financing has benefitted TS’ non-economic activities. |
| --- | --- |

(217)

| (218) | In any event, it is apparent from TS’ income statement that it generates a large percentage of its income from sales to third parties and the Municipality takes full account of TS’ other revenues when negotiating the lease agreements. As a result, the aid is limited to the minimum necessary. |
| --- | --- |

(218)

| (219) | The Norwegian authorities further refer to the BDO report and state that no cross-subsidisation of the commercial activities occurs. Even if the Authority refuses to exclude the presence of aid in the lease agreement, based on the benchmarks submitted by the Norwegian authorities, these benchmarks prove that the lease agreement’s pricing falls within the range of what is customary in this market in Norway. In that regard, the Municipality notes that the Authority has previously accepted such benchmarks in an infrastructure case as a means to ensure the proportionality of the aid (141). |
| --- | --- |

(219)

| (220) | The Norwegian authorities consider that, as any aid amount would be insignificant and as TS does not undercharge its commercial users, any effect on trade between EEA States or distortion of competition would be insignificant at most. The Norwegian authorities therefore submit that a balancing test would need to result in finding any potential aid to TS compatible with the EEA Agreement (142). |
| --- | --- |

(220)

| (221) | The Norwegian authorities state that TS in its present form is a cornerstone of the sports and cultural offer available in Trondheim, in particular, as regards free amateur sports. As for the negative effects, the BDO report supports the claim that any aid is used to finance activities of local (and most likely non-economic) character, with no spill-over to the commercial, market oriented activities that TS also performs. |
| --- | --- |

(221)

| (222) | According to the Norwegian authorities, it would appear common ground that private investment into facilities such as TS is rare and, in any event, insufficient. In the Norwegian authorities’ view, the aid would therefore not be capable of crowding out private investment. |
| --- | --- |

(222)

| (223) | Further, Trondheim is geographically very isolated by European standards and thus unlikely to compete (directly) with other similar venues in Norway, or even less likely, in other EEA States. Even if that would be the case, that does not seem to have led the Authority or the Commission to question the compatibility of aid to such infrastructures. In addition, the Norwegian authorities have shown that TS does not undercharge its commercial users. |
| --- | --- |

(223)

| (224) | The Authority notes that aid to promote sport and culture, including aid to sport and multi-purpose infrastructure, can be declared compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement under certain conditions, as illustrated by Article 55 of the GBER and the decisional practice of the European Commission (143) and the Authority (144). |
| --- | --- |

(224)

| (225) | The possible aid measures at hand vary in nature. At this stage, the Authority does not have the information to enable it to set out the total possible amount of alleged aid granted to TS that would result from these measures. The Authority must thus conclude that it has doubts as to whether the measures would respect the principle of proportionality and be limited to what is necessary to achieve the stated objective. |
| --- | --- |

(225)

| (226) | Furthermore, the Authority does not have sufficient information at this point, based on the BDO cost allocation model and the cost projections for the future, to be convinced that the revenue from each activity covers their own set of costs. Consequently, the Authority cannot exclude cross-subsidization from the alleged aid measures to the other activities carried out by TS. |
| --- | --- |

(226)

| (227) | As to the claims of unlawful state aid granted to TS in the form of the implicit guarantee alleged to be granted in relation to the loan agreement and the alleged relief of infrastructure costs, the Norwegian authorities have not put forward any arguments, regarding possible compatibility with the functioning of the EEA Agreement, in case these measures are found to constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. The Authority invites the Norwegian authorities to submit information in this regard. |
| --- | --- |

(227)

| (228) | As regards the capital increase, referred to as measure 6 in this decision, the Authority notes that the Norwegian authorities have granted this aid to TS under Article 55 of the GBER (145). The Norwegian authorities have provided information relating to the increased and extra costs pertaining to the extension and renovation of Trondheim Spektrum, which led to the capital increase being granted to TS (146). In previous correspondence between the Authority and the Norwegian authorities, the Authority had raised the issue of whether the measure fulfilled the criteria set out in Article 6(2) of the GBER. The Norwegian authorities have stated that TS cannot complete the expansion without the requested capital. The Norwegian authorities therefore consider that the aid complies with Article 6 GBER. |
| --- | --- |

(228)

| (229) | Article 6(1) GBER states that the Regulation shall only apply to aid, which has an incentive effect. According to Article 6(2) GBER: ‘Aid shall be considered to have an incentive effect if the beneficiary has submitted written application for the aid to the Member State concerned before work on the project or activity starts. The application for the aid shall contain at least the following information: a) undertaking’s name and size; b) description of the project, including its start and end dates; c) location of the project; d) list of project costs; type of aid (grant, loan, guarantee, repayable advance, equity injection or other) and amount of public funding needed for the project’. |
| --- | --- |

(229)

| (230) | The Norwegian authorities have explained that originally the project costs were estimated to be approximately NOK 536 million (approximately EUR 55,37 million). However, the expectation now is that they will be approximately NOK 591 million (approximately EUR 61,05 million), due, in particular, to the fact that the scope of the project increased. The increased costs of NOK 55 million (approximately EUR 5,68 million) can be attributed two both, as described by the Norwegian authorities, new costs (increased scope of the project) and unexpected costs (budget overruns). |
| --- | --- |

(230)

| (231) | As explained by the Norwegian authorities in relation to the measure, Trondheim Spektrum has been undergoing a significant renovation and extension project since summer 2017. TS applied for a capital increase of NOK 55 million (approximately EUR 5,68 million) on 6 July 2018, and was granted the aid on 5 December 2018. It therefore seems that the aid was granted after the work on the renovation and extension project started. |
| --- | --- |

(231)

| (232) | In light of the above, the Authority has doubts, at this point, as to whether the measure fulfils the criteria set out in Article 6(2) GBER. The Authority invites the Norwegian authorities to provide further information in this regard. |
| --- | --- |

(232)

| (233) | The Norwegian authorities have not presented arguments concerning compatibility of the measure directly under Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement, in the event that it would be considered that the GBER would not be applicable to the measure. The Authority invites the Norwegian authorities to provide information in this regard. |
| --- | --- |

(233)

| (234) | Consequently, following its preliminary assessment, the Authority has doubts as to whether the measures could be deemed compatible under Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(234)

9.   Conclusion

| (235) | As set out above, the Authority considers that measures 4 to 7 and 9, as described above, may constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(235)

| (236) | The Authority has doubts as to whether these measures are compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(236)

| (237) | Consequently, and in accordance Article 4(4) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA, the Authority is obliged to open the formal investigation procedure provided for in Article 1(2) of Part I of Protocol 3 SCA. The decision to open a formal investigation procedure is without prejudice to the final decision of the Authority, which may conclude that the measures do not constitute state aid, or that any aid is compatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(237)

| (238) | The Authority, acting under the procedure laid down in Article 1(2) of Part I of Protocol 3 SCA, invites the Norwegian authorities to submit, by Monday, 20 May 2019, their comments and to provide all documents, information and data needed for the assessment of these measures in light of the state aid rules. |
| --- | --- |

(238)

| (239) | The Authority requests the Norwegian authorities to forward a copy of this decision to Trondheim Spektrum AS. |
| --- | --- |

(239)

| (240) | The Authority must remind the Norwegian authorities that, according to Article 14 of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA, any incompatible aid unlawfully granted to the beneficiary will have to be recovered, unless (exceptionally) this recovery would be contrary to a general principle of EEA law. |
| --- | --- |

(240)

| (241) | If this letter contains confidential information which should not be disclosed to third parties, please inform the Authority by 13 May 2019, identifying the confidential elements and the reasons why the information is considered to be confidential. In doing so, please consult the Authority’s Guidelines on Professional Secrecy in State Aid Decisions (147). If the Authority does not receive a reasoned request by that deadline, you will be deemed to agree to the disclosure to third parties and to the publication of the full text of the letter on the Authority’s website: http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/. |
| --- | --- |

(241)

Done in Brussels, 16 April 2019.

For the EFTA Surveillance Authority

Bente ANGELL-HANSEN

President

Responsible College Member

Frank J. BÜCHEL

College Member

Högni KRISTJÁNSSON

College Member

Carsten ZATSCHLER

Countersigning as Director

Legal and Executive Affairs

---

(1)  Reference is made to Articles 4(4) and 13(1) of Part II of Protocol 3 to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice.

1

(2)  Documents No 847105 and 848590 to 848601.

2

(3)  Document No 849708.

3

(4)  Documents No 859505, 859499, 859501 and 859503.

4

(5)  Documents No 867151, 868181 and 868182.

5

(6)  Document No 870428.

6

(7)  Document No 870360.

7

(8)  Documents No 874440 and 874442.

8

(9)  Document No 876728.

9

(10)  Document No 877379.

10

(11)  Documents No 887522, 887524 and 887526.

11

(12)  Document No 874067.

12

(13)  Document No 881377.

13

(14)  Document No 888352.

14

(15)  Documents No 885827, 885829, 888351 and 888354.

15

(16)  Document No 936140.

16

(17)  Document No 888021.

17

(18)  Documents No 896729, 896727, 896725 and 896723.

18

(19)  Documents No 1059166, 1059170 and 1059171.

19

(20)  Documents No 1059842 to 1059848.

20

(21)  Documents No 1040641, 1040643, 1040645, 1040647 and 1040649.

21

(22)  Documents No 1054292, 1054294, 1054296 and 1054298.

22

(23)  Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 of 17 June 2014 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty (OJ L 187, 26.6.2014, p. 1), referred to at point 1j of Annex XV to the EEA Agreement, see Joint Committee Decision No 152/2014, published in OJ L 342, 27.11.2014, p. 63 and EEA Supplement No 71, 27.11.2014, p. 61.

23

(24)  Case No 82883, GBER 30/2018/Sports.

24

(25)  Document No 874440, p. 6 and Document No 859501, p. 13 and 20.

25

(26)  Document No 859501, p. 20.

26

(27)  Document No 874440, p. 6.

27

(28)  Document No 859501, p. 14.

28

(29)  Document No 859501, p. 14.

29

(30)  Document No 859501, p. 22.

30

(31)  Document No 859501, p. 23.

31

(32)  Document 1054294. See section 4.10.

32

(33)  Lov om tomtefeste (tomtefesteloven) LOV-1996-12-20-106. The Norwegian authorities have explained that the conclusion of leasehold agreements and the contractual relationship between the landowner/lessor and the lessee was regulated for the first time in a statute from 1975, which entered into force on 1 January 1976. A new Ground Lease Act was enacted in 1996 and entered into force on 1 January 2002.

33

Lov om tomtefeste (tomtefesteloven)

(34)  Lov om tinglysing (tinglysingsloven) LOV-1935-06-07-2.

34

Lov om tinglysing (tinglysingsloven)

(35)  Document No 887522, p. 4.

35

(36)  Document 874440, p. 5.

36

(37)  Document 874440, p. 10.

37

(38)  Document 859501, p. 14.

38

(39)  Document No 859501, p. 14–15. However, it can be observed that there was a reduction in the capacity in 2016. This indicates that amendments were made at least that year. The Norwegian authorities have explained that this is due to the renovation of TS (Document 874440, p. 9).

39

(40)  Document 859501, p. 15.

40

(41)  The Norwegian authorities were not able to provide data from before 2010.

41

(42)  Document 896727, p. 6.

42

(43)  Article 12 of the 2019 lease agreement. Norwegian: ‘Denne avtalen forutsettes å være inngått på markedsmessige vilkår. Det tas forbehold om at avtalen vil – forut for og i avtaleperioden – justeres for å tilfredsstille eventuelle føringer/krav fra EFTAs overvåkningsorgan (ESA), og/eller andre offentlige myndigheter. Dette for at avtalen til enhver tid skal tilfredsstille markedsinvestorprinsippet.’ Document No 887522, p. 7.

43

Denne avtalen forutsettes å være inngått på markedsmessige vilkår. Det tas forbehold om at avtalen vil – forut for og i avtaleperioden – justeres for å tilfredsstille eventuelle føringer/krav fra EFTAs overvåkningsorgan (ESA), og/eller andre offentlige myndigheter. Dette for at avtalen til enhver tid skal tilfredsstille markedsinvestorprinsippet.

(44)  Case No 82883, GBER 30/2018/Sports.

44

(45)  Document No 874440, p. 20-25. The detailed zoning plan for part of Nidarø was adopted by the City Council on 14 March 2017 in case 25/17.

45

(46)  The Norwegian authorities refer to Section 11 of lov om planlegging og byggesaksbehandling (plan- og bygningsloven) LOV-2008-06-27-71.

46

lov om planlegging og byggesaksbehandling (plan- og bygningsloven)

(47)  ‘Procedural orders’ are requirements relating to the order in which work shall be carried out to ensure the establishment of public services, technical infrastructure and green structures before use is made of areas and the point in time when areas may be used for building and construction purposes, including requirements relating to the order in which development works shall be carried out. See Section 11-9 of the Planning and Building Act, referred to in footnote 46.

47

(48)  The Norwegian authorities refer to section 18 of the Planning and Building Act.

48

(49)  Document No 1059846, p. 2.

49

(50)  Document No 1059846, p. 2.

50

(51)  Document No 874440, p. 20 – 25 and Documents No 1059842 to 1059848. The detailed zoning plan for part of Nidarø was adopted by the City Council on 14 March 2017 in case 25/17.

51

(52)  The Norwegian authorities refer to paragraph 203 of the Authority’s Guidelines on the notion of State aid as referred to in Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement (‘NoA’), in this regard and Commission Decision of 8.1.2016. State aid No SA.36019 – Belgium – Financing of road infrastructure in the vicinity of a real estate project – Uplace, paragraph 38.

52

(53)  Lov om pengespill (pengespilloven) LOV-1992-08-28-103.

53

Lov om pengespill (pengespilloven)

(54)  Document No 859501, p. 16.

54

(55)  The Authority’s Decision No 225/15/COL of 10 June 2015 raising no objections to aid in the form of a transfer of land to Vålerenga Fotball.

55

(56)  Document No 887522, p. 6.

56

(57)  Document No 1054294.

57

(58)  Document No 1054298, p. 6.

58

(59)  Document No 1054294, Loan Agreement between Nordea and TS, dated 11 December 2017, page 1, paragraphs 5 and 6. Unofficial translation. Norwegian: ‘Nordea har lagt betydelig vekt på at Trondheim Spektrum AS har til hensikt å gjøre selskapsendringer eller andre tiltak som åpner muligheten for at Trondheim kommune, uten å komme i strid med lovverket, om nødvendig kan stille en garanti overfor Nordea som reduserer risikoen ifm kostnadsoverskridelser.’/‘Nordea har for øvrig lagt sterk vekt på eierskapet fra Trondheim kommune og vedtaket i formannskapet datert 25. juni 2014 i sak 144/14, hvor det blant annet fremgår av punkt 2 at Trondheim kommune, som største eier av Trondheim Spektrum AS, er innstilt på å ta det nødvendige økonomiske ansvaret som følger av rehabilitering og utvikling av Trondheim Spektrum.’

59

Nordea har lagt betydelig vekt på at Trondheim Spektrum AS har til hensikt å gjøre selskapsendringer eller andre tiltak som åpner muligheten for at Trondheim kommune, uten å komme i strid med lovverket, om nødvendig kan stille en garanti overfor Nordea som reduserer risikoen ifm kostnadsoverskridelser.

Nordea har for øvrig lagt sterk vekt på eierskapet fra Trondheim kommune og vedtaket i formannskapet datert 25. juni 2014 i sak 144/14, hvor det blant annet fremgår av punkt 2 at Trondheim kommune, som største eier av Trondheim Spektrum AS, er innstilt på å ta det nødvendige økonomiske ansvaret som følger av rehabilitering og utvikling av Trondheim Spektrum.

(60)  Document No 1054294, Loan Agreement between Nordea and TS, dated 11 December 2017, p. 5, ‘Other terms’ – bullet point 3. Unofficial translation. Norwegian: ‘Risikoen som følge av at det oppstår kostnadsoverskridelser i byggeperioden og kredittkunden selv ikke kan betale disse: Trondheim Spektrum AS vil gjøre selskapsendringer eller andre tiltak som åpner muligheten for at Trondheim kommune, uten å komme i strid med lovverket, om nødvending kan stille garanti overfor Nordea.’

60

Risikoen som følge av at det oppstår kostnadsoverskridelser i byggeperioden og kredittkunden selv ikke kan betale disse: Trondheim Spektrum AS vil gjøre selskapsendringer eller andre tiltak som åpner muligheten for at Trondheim kommune, uten å komme i strid med lovverket, om nødvending kan stille garanti overfor Nordea.

(61)  Document No 1054294, Loan Agreement between Nordea and TS, dated 11 December 2017, p. 5, ‘Other terms’ – bullet point 4. Unofficial translation. Norwegian: ‘Leieavtalen med Trondheim kommunea av 26.10.2017 kan ikke endres/reduseres uten Nordea forutgående skriftlige samtykke.’

61

Leieavtalen med Trondheim kommunea av 26.10.2017 kan ikke endres/reduseres uten Nordea forutgående skriftlige samtykke

(62)  Norwegian: ‘eierskifte – obligatorisk førtidig tilbakebetaling’.

62

eierskifte – obligatorisk førtidig tilbakebetaling

(63)  Document No 1054294, Loan Agreement between Nordea and TS, dated 11 December 2017, p. 4. Unofficial translation. Norwegian: ‘Det er et vilkår for inngåelse og opprettholdelse av Byggekredittavtalen, at Trondheim Kommune eier minst 77,93 % av Kredittkunden, og opprettholder sin eierandel uendret. For det tilfellet at eiersammensetningen endres, uten Nordeas forutgående skriftlige samtykke, skal Byggekreditten og ethvert utestående tilbakebetales som angitt i klausul 11 (Førtidig forfall av byggekreditten).’

63

Det er et vilkår for inngåelse og opprettholdelse av Byggekredittavtalen, at Trondheim Kommune eier minst 77,93 % av Kredittkunden, og opprettholder sin eierandel uendret. For det tilfellet at eiersammensetningen endres, uten Nordeas forutgående skriftlige samtykke, skal Byggekreditten og ethvert utestående tilbakebetales som angitt i klausul 11 (Førtidig forfall av byggekreditten).

(64)  Document No 1054298, p. 5.

64

(65)  Within the meaning of Article 1(c) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA.

65

(66)  Documents No 859501, p. 13, and 859503, p. 76.

66

(67)  According to Article 1(e) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA, ‘“individual aid” shall mean aid that is not awarded on the basis of an aid scheme and notifiable awards of aid on the basis of an aid scheme’.

67

(68)  See also Article 1(b)(iv) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA, according to which ‘existing aid’ is ‘aid which is deemed to be existing aid pursuant to Article 15 of this Chapter’.

68

(69)  Article 15(2) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA.

69

(70)  This would be the case even if the limitation period would be calculated form the date of when the guarantee was last used in 2001.

70

(71)  Document No 887522, p. 5.

71

(72)  Available at http://www.eftasurv.int/media/decisions/537-09-COL.pdf. Further, see the Authority’s Decision No 225/15/COL of 10 June 2015 raising no objections to aid in the form of a transfer of land to Vålerenga Fotball, paragraph 57.

72

(73)  Case E-14/10 Konkurrenten.no AS v ESA [2011] EFTA Ct. Rep. 266, paragraph 53.

73

Konkurrenten.no AS

ESA

(74)  Document No 859501, p. 23.

74

(75)  Document No 868182, p. 4.

75

(76)  Document No 859501, p. 24.

76

(77)  The Norwegian authorities refer to the Authority’s Decision No 519/12/COL of 19 December 2012 closing the formal investigation procedure into potential aid to AS Oslo Sporveier and AS Sporveisbussene, paragraph 180.

77

(78)  See the Authority’s Decision No 405/08/COL of 27 June 2008 closing the formal investigation procedure with regard to the Icelandic Housing Financing Fund, section II.2.3.1.

78

(79)  See Commission Decision No E-45/2000 Fiscal exemption in favour of Schiphol Group (OJ C 37, 11.2.2004, p. 13).

79

(80)  The Authority’s Decision No 491/09/COL of 2 December 2009 Norsk Film group, Chapter II.2 p. 8. See also the Authority’s Decision No 075/16/COL of 20 April 2016 to propose appropriate measures regarding the use of publicly owned land and natural resources by electricity producers in Iceland, paragraph 114, and Decision No 519/12/COL of 19 December 2012 closing the formal investigation into potential aid to AS Oslo Sporveier and AS Sporveisbussene.

80

(81)  See Commission Decision No E-10/2000 State guarantees for public banks in Germany (OJ C 150 22.6.2002, p. 7).

81

(82)  Article 1(d) of Regulation (EC) No 2015/1589 corresponds to Article 1(d) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA.

82

(83)  Judgment in Belgium v Commission, T-131/16 and T-263/16, EU:T:2019:91, paragraphs 85–88.

83

Belgium

Commission

(84)  Document No 874440, p. 8.

84

(85)  Article 15(2) of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA.

85

(86)  See judgment in Scott v Commission, T-366/00, EU:T:2003:113, paragraph 60: ‘It follows that the mere fact that the applicant was not aware of the existence of the Commission’s request for information from the French authorities beginning on 17 January 1997 [...] does not have the effect of depriving them of legal effect vis-á-vis the applicant. Consequently, the letter of 17 January 1997, sent by the Commission before the initiation of the administrative procedure and requesting further information from the French authorities, constitutes, under Article 15 of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, a measure interrupting the 10-year limitation period’. Article 15 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (no longer in force) corresponds to Article 15 of Part II of Protocol 3 SCA.

86

Scott

Commission

vis-á-vis

(87)  Judgment in Département du Loiret v Commission, T-369/00, EU:T:2003:114, paragraphs 81 and 82.

87

Département du Loiret

Commission

(88)  Document No 849708.

88

(89)  Exhibit Q to Document No 859501.

89

(90)  Judgment in Germany v Commission, C-248/84, EU:C:1987:437, and NoA, paragraph 48.

90

Germany

Commission

(91)  Judgment in France v Ladbroke Racing Ltd and Commission, C-83/98 P, EU:C:2000:248, paragraphs 48 – 51.

91

France

Ladbroke Racing Ltd and Commission

(92)  NoA, p. 73 and 74.

92

(93)  Document 859501, p. 17.

93

(94)  Document No 859501, p. 17–18. The Norwegian authorities have further referred to a management interview with Trondheim Messeselskap AS, a company that organizes fairs all over Norway in which the Municipality was informed that Trondheim Spektrum is not perceived as a particularly cheap location. The Norwegian authorities have referred to this interview for further details on price comparison.

94

(95)  Presumably by dividing the total price paid by number of hours, 14 679 522/12 500 = 1174.36.

95

(96)  Document No 859501, p. 18.

96

(97)  As explained by the Norwegian authorities, not all daytimes are equally valuable.

97

(98)  NoA, paragraph 98.

98

(99)  NoA, paragraph 99.

99

(100)  Document No 874440, p. 8. In 1994, the rent was reduced by NOK 2 million unilaterally by the City Council. The reason behind this was threefold; (i) overall economic downturn demanding overall cuts in the city budget, (ii) the City Council was focusing on elderly care, and (iii) after refinancing in 1992, TS had reduced their cost of loan-capital and was deemed able to withstand such a cut.

100

(101)  Document No 896727, p. 6.

101

(102)  Numbers from 2017.

102

(103)  See section 5.4.2 of this decision.

103

(104)  Document No 1040641, p. 9.

104

(105)  Document Nos 1040641, p. 10, and 1054298, p. 5.

105

(106)  NoA, paragraph 68.

106

(107)  NoA, paragraph 68.

107

(108)  Lov om planlegging og byggesaksbehandling (plan- og bygningsloven) LOV-2008-06-27-71, available at https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/2008-06-27-71.

108

Lov om planlegging og byggesaksbehandling (plan- og bygningsloven)

(109)  Document No 1059170.

109

(110)  The Authority understands that ‘BRA’ stands for ‘area of use’.

110

(111)  Document No 1054294.

111

(112)  Document No 1054298, p. 6.

112

(113)  Document No 1054294, Loan Agreement between Nordea and TS, dated 11 December 2017, page 5, ‘Other terms’ – bullet point 3.

113

(114)  Document No 1054294, Loan Agreement between Nordea and TS, dated 11 December 2017, page 5, ‘Other terms’ – bullet point 4.

114

(115)  Document No 1054294, Loan Agreement between Nordea and TS, dated 11 December 2017, page 4, ‘Change of ownership – mandatory mandatory early repayment’ – first paragraph.

115

(116)  Document No 1054298, p. 7.

116

(117)  Judgment in Höfner and Elser v Macrotron, Case C-41/90, EU:C:1991:161, paragraphs 21 – 23 and

117

Höfner and Elser

Macrotron

(118)  Judgment in Congregación de Escuelas Pías Provincia Betania v Ayuntamiento de Getafe, Case C-74/16, EU:C:2017:496, paragraph 42.

118

Congregación de Escuelas Pías Provincia Betania

Ayuntamiento de Getafe,

(119)  Judgment in Cassa di Risparmio di Firenze and Others, Case C-222/04, EU:C:2006:8, paragraph 108.

119

Cassa di Risparmio di Firenze and Others

(120)  Judgment in Mitteldeutsche Flughafen and Flughafen Leipzig-Halle v Commission, Case C-288/11 P, EU:C:2012:821, paragraphs 40 – 43.

120

Mitteldeutsche Flughafen and Flughafen Leipzig-Halle

Commission

(121)  The Authority’s Decision No 496/13/COL of 11 December 2013 concerning the financing of Harpa Concert Hall and Conference Centre, paragraph 50.

121

(122)  Judgment in Congregación de Escuelas Pías Provincia Betania v Ayuntamiento de Getafe, Case C-74/16, EU:C:2017:496, paragraph 51.

122

Congregación de Escuelas Pías Provincia Betania

Ayuntamiento de Getafe,

(123)  Document No 859501, p. 20.

123

(124)  Document No 859501, p. 19.

124

(125)  Case E-6/98 The Government of Norway v EFTA Surveillance Authority [1999] EFTA Ct. Rep. 76, paragraph 59; and judgment in Philip Morris v Commission, C-730/79, EU:C:1980:209, paragraph 11.

125

The Government of Norway

EFTA Surveillance Authority

Philip Morris

Commission

(126)  Judgment in Eventech v The Parking Adjudicator, C-518/13, EU:C:2015:9, paragraph 66.

126

Eventech

The Parking Adjudicator

(127)  Document No 859501, p. 22.

127

(128)  Document No 859501, p. 22.

128

(129)  See, for instance, judgment in AITEC and others v Commission, T-447/93, T-448/93 and T-449/93, EU:T:1995:130, paragraph 141.

129

AITEC and others

Commission

(130)  See, for instance, Commission Decisions in cases N 258/2000 Leisure Pool Dorsten (OJ C 172, 16.6.2001, p. 16); Commission Decision 2004/114/EC of 29 October 2003 on measures in favour of non-profit harbours for recreational crafts, the Netherlands (OJ L 34, 6.2.2004, p. 63); SA.37963 – United Kingdom – Alleged State aid to Glenmore Lodge (OJ C 277, 21.8.2015, p. 3); SA.38208 – United Kingdom – Alleged State aid to UK member-owned golf clubs (OJ C 277, 21.8.2015, p. 4); the Authority’s Decision No 459/12/COL of 5 December 2012 on aid to Bømlabadet Bygg AS for the construction of the Bømlabadet aqua park in the Municipality of Bømlo; and Decision No 20/19/COL of 2 April 2019 Leangbukten Båtforenings Andelslag.

130

(131)  See to that effect the Authority’s Decision No 496/13/COL of 11 December 2013 concerning the financing of Harpa Concert Hall and Conference Centre, paragraph 75.

131

(132)  See further section 2.6. The Authority requested additional information from the Norwegian authorities on 28 January 2019, which the Norwegian authorities provided on 21 February 2019.

132

(133)  Article 12 of the new lease agreement of 2019 states (in Norwegian): ‘Denne avtalen forutsettes å være inngått på markedsmessige vilkår. Det tas forbehold om at avtalen vil – forut for og i avtaleperioden – justeres for å tilfredsstille eventuelle føringer/krav fra EFTAs overvåkningsorgan (ESA), og/eller andre offentlige myndigheter. Dette for at avtalen til enhver tid skal tilfredsstille markedsinvestorprinsippet.’

133

Denne avtalen forutsettes å være inngått på markedsmessige vilkår. Det tas forbehold om at avtalen vil – forut for og i avtaleperioden – justeres for å tilfredsstille eventuelle føringer/krav fra EFTAs overvåkningsorgan (ESA), og/eller andre offentlige myndigheter. Dette for at avtalen til enhver tid skal tilfredsstille markedsinvestorprinsippet

(134)  See section 4.7 above.

134

(135)  Judgment in Italy v Commission, C-364/90 EU:C:1993:157, paragraph 20.

135

Italy

Commission

(136)  The Norwegian authorities refer to the Authority’s Decision No 357/15/COL of 23 September 2015 to close the formal investigation into State aid in favour of Sandefjord Fotball AS, Decision No 225/15/COL of 10 June 2015 raising no objections to aid in the form of a transfer of land to Vålerenga Fotball, and Decision No 13/18/COL of 29 January 2018 – Templarheimen II – Aid for the construction and operation of the sports facility Templarheimen.

136

(137)  The Norwegian authorities refer to Commission Decision in case SA.33728 on the financing of a new multiarena in Copenhagen.

137

(138)  The Norwegian authorities refer to Article 53 of the GBER, in particular paragraph 2 thereof, and the Authority’s Decision No 496/13/COL of 11 December 2013 concerning the financing of Harpa Concert Hall and Conference Centre.

138

(139)  Document No 1046041, p. 13.

139

(140)  Document No 1040641, p. 14.

140

(141)  Document No 1040641, p. 15.

141

(142)  Document No 859501, p. 25.

142

(143)  See e.g. Commission Decision in case SA.33728 Financing of a new multiarena in Copenhagen, Commission Decision in case SA.33618 Sweden – Uppsala arena, Commission Decision in case SA.47683 Finland – Tampere Arena.

143

(144)  The Authority’s Decision No 357/15/COL of 23 September 2015 to close the formal investigation into State aid in favour of Sandefjord Fotball AS, Decision No 225/15/COL of 10 June 2015 raising no objections to aid in the form of a transfer of land to Vålerenga Fotball, and Decision No 13/18/COL of 29 January 2018 – Templarheimen II – Aid for the construction and operation of the sports facility Templarheimen.

144

(145)  See section 4.7 above.

145

(146)  Document No 930813. Letter from the Norwegian authorities dated 21 September 2018.

146

(147)  OJ L 154, 8.6.2006, p. 27 and EEA Supplement No 29, 8.6.2006, p. 1.

147

---

V Avviżi

PROĊEDURI AMMINISTRATTIVI

L-Uffiċċju Ewropew għas-Selezzjoni tal-Persunal (EPSO)

| 23.5.2019 | MT | Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea | C 177/55 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2019

MT

Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea

C 177/55

---

Avviż ta’ kompetizzjoni ġenerali

(2019/C 177/05)

L-Uffiċċju Ewropew għas-Selezzjoni tal-Persunal (EPSO) qed jorganizza l-kompetizzjoni ġenerali li ġejja:

| | EPSO/AD/373/19 — AMMINISTRATURI (AD 5) |
| --- | --- |

EPSO/AD/373/19 — AMMINISTRATURI (AD 5)

L-avviż tal-kompetizzjoni huwa ppubblikat f’24 lingwa f’
  Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea C 177 A tat-23 ta' Mejju 2019.

Tista' ssib aktar informazzjoni fuq is-sit web tal-EPSO: https://epso.europa.eu/

---

PROĊEDURI DWAR L-IMPLIMENTAZZJONI TAL-POLITIKA TAL-KOMPETIZZJONI

Il-Kummissjoni Ewropea

| 23.5.2019 | MT | Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea | C 177/56 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2019

MT

Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea

C 177/56

---

Notifika minn qabel ta' konċentrazzjoni

(Il-Każ M.9323 — RheinEnergie/SPIE/TankE)

Każ li jista' jiġi kkunsidrat għal proċedura ssimplifikata

(Test b'rilevanza għaż-ŻEE)

(2019/C 177/06)

1.

Din in-notifika tikkonċerna l-impriżi li ġejjin:

| — | RheinEnergie AG (“RheinEnergie”, il-Ġermanja), |
| --- | --- |

—

RheinEnergie AG (“RheinEnergie”, il-Ġermanja),

| — | SPIE Deutschland & Zentraleuropa GmbH (“SPIE”, il-Ġermanja), li tappartjeni għall-Grupp SPIE (Franza). |
| --- | --- |

—

SPIE Deutschland & Zentraleuropa GmbH (“SPIE”, il-Ġermanja), li tappartjeni għall-Grupp SPIE (Franza).

RheinEnergie u SPIE jakkwistaw, fis-sens tal-Artikolu 3(1)(b) u 3(4) tar-Regolament dwar l-Għaqdiet, il-kontroll konġunt tal-impriża konġunta (joint venture, JV) li għadha kif inħolqot, TankE, li se tipprovdi servizzi fis-settur tal-elettromobilità, b’mod partikolari l-akkwist u l-installazzjoni ta’ infrastruttura tal-iċċarġjar għat-tipi kollha ta’ vetturi elettriċi kif ukoll servizzi ta’ konsulenza, ta’ operazzjonijiet u ta’ ġestjoni relatati.

Il-konċentrazzjoni hija mwettqa permezz ta' xiri ta' ishma f'kumpanija maħluqa ġdida li tikkostitwixxi f’JV.

2.

—   RheinEnergie: kumpanija reġjonali ta’ provvista tal-enerġija u l-ilma integrata vertikalment, ikkontrollata indirettament mill-belt ta’ Cologne,

—   SPIE: servizzi multitekniċi għall-bini, l-installazzjonijiet u l-infrastrutturi. Il-Grupp SPIE joffri servizzi ta’ inġinerija mekkanika u elettroteknika u servizzi tekniċi ta’ ġestjoni ta’ faċilità teknika kif ukoll servizzi ta’ informazzjoni u komunikazzjoni.

3.

Skont l-Avviż tal-Kummissjoni dwar proċedura ssimplifikata għat-trattament ta’ ċerti konċentrazzjonijiet skont ir-Regolament tal-Kunsill (KE) Nru 139/2004 (2) jinħtieġ li jiġi nnutat li dan il-każ jista’ jiġi kkunsidrat għal trattament skont il-proċedura stabbilita fl-Avviż.

4.

Il-kummenti jridu jaslu għand il-Kummissjoni mhux aktar tard minn għaxart ijiem wara d-data ta' din il-pubblikazzjoni. Jinħtieġ li r-referenza li ġejja dejjem tiġi speċifikata:

M.9323 — RheinEnergie/SPIE/TankE

Il-kummenti jistgħu jintbagħtu lill-Kummissjoni permezz tal-email, permezz tal-faks jew permezz tal-posta. Uża d-dettalji ta’ kuntatt ta’ hawn taħt:

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

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Faks +32 22964301

Indirizz postali:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  ĠU L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (ir-“Regolament dwar l-Għaqdiet”).

1

(2)  ĠU C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

2

---

| 23.5.2019 | MT | Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea | C 177/58 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2019

MT

Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea

C 177/58

---

Notifika minn qabel ta’ konċentrazzjoni

(Il-Każ M.9328 — Platinum Equity Group/Multi-Color Corporation)

Każ li jista’ jiġi kkunsidrat għal proċedura ssimplifikata

(Test b'rilevanza għaż-ŻEE)

(2019/C 177/07)

1.

Din in-notifika tikkonċerna l-impriżi li ġejjin:

| — | Platinum Equity Group (l-Istati Uniti tal-Amerka), |
| --- | --- |

—

Platinum Equity Group (l-Istati Uniti tal-Amerka),

| — | Multi-Color Corporation (l-Istati Uniti tal-Amerka). |
| --- | --- |

—

Multi-Color Corporation (l-Istati Uniti tal-Amerka).

Platinum Equity Group (“Platinum Equity”), jakkwista, fis-sens tal-Artikolu 3(1)(b) tar-Regolament dwar l-Għaqdiet, il-kontroll ta’ Multi-Color Corporation (“MCC”) kollha kemm hi l-impriża.

Il-konċentrazzjoni hija mwettqa permezz ta’ xiri ta’ ishma.

2.

—   Platinum Equity: il-fużjoni, l-akkwist u t-tħaddim ta’ kumpaniji li jipprovdu servizzi u soluzzjonijiet lill-klijenti f’firxa wiesgħa ta’ negozju, inklużi t-teknoloġija tal-informazzjoni u t-telekomunikazzjonijiet, il-loġistika, is-servizzi, il-manifattura u d-distribuzzjoni tal-metall;

—   MCC: il-manifattura u l-forniment ta’ tikketti lill-klijenti kummerċjali f’firxa ta’ setturi, inklużi: il-kura fid-dar u l-kura personali, l-ikel u x-xorb, il-kura tas-saħħa, l-ispeċjalità, l-oġġetti għall-konsum li jservu fit-tul, u l-inbid u l-ispirti.

3.

Skont l-Avviż tal-Kummissjoni dwar proċedura ssimplifikata għat-trattament ta’ ċerti konċentrazzjonijiet skont ir-Regolament tal-Kunsill (KE) Nru 139/2004 (2) jenħtieġ li jiġi nnutat li dan il-każ jista’ jiġi kkunsidrat għal trattament skont il-proċedura stabbilita fl-Avviż.

4.

Il-kummenti jridu jaslu għand il-Kummissjoni mhux aktar tard minn għaxart ijiem wara d-data ta’ din il-pubblikazzjoni. Jinħtieġ li r-referenza li ġejja dejjem tiġi speċifikata:

M.9328 — Platinum Equity Group/Multi-Color Corporation

Il-kummenti jistgħu jintbagħtu lill-Kummissjoni permezz tal-email, permezz tal-faks jew permezz tal-posta. Uża d-dettalji ta’ kuntatt ta’ hawn taħt:

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

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Faks +32 22964301

Indirizz postali:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  ĠU L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (ir-“Regolament dwar l-Għaqdiet”).

1

(2)  ĠU C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

2

---