# Official Journal C 264/2019

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 264 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 626 August 2019 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 264

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 626 August 2019

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2019/C 264/01 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| | European Systemic Risk Board |
| 2019/C 264/02 ESRB/2019/15 | Decision of the European Systemic Risk Board of 28 June 2019 on the postponement of certain reports on actions and measures taken pursuant to Recommendation ESRB/2014/1 and Recommendation ESRB/2015/2 of the European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB/2019/15) | 2 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2019/C 264/01

Euro exchange rates

1

European Systemic Risk Board

2019/C 264/02 ESRB/2019/15

Decision of the European Systemic Risk Board of 28 June 2019 on the postponement of certain reports on actions and measures taken pursuant to Recommendation ESRB/2014/1 and Recommendation ESRB/2015/2 of the European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB/2019/15)

2

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2019/C 264/03 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9485 — NAEV/Siemens/KoMiPo/Stavro Vind) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 4 |
| 2019/C 264/04 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9468 — Centerbridge/Solidus) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 6 |
| 2019/C 264/05 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9437 — Würth Group/GES) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 7 |
| 2019/C 264/06 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9436 — ICG/Predica/OCEA Group) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 8 |
| | OTHER ACTS |
| | European Commission |
| 2019/C 264/07 | Publication of a communication of approval of a standard amendment to a product specification for a name in the wine sector referred to in Article 17(2) and (3) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33 | 9 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2019/C 264/03

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9485 — NAEV/Siemens/KoMiPo/Stavro Vind) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

4

2019/C 264/04

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9468 — Centerbridge/Solidus) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

6

2019/C 264/05

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9437 — Würth Group/GES) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

7

2019/C 264/06

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9436 — ICG/Predica/OCEA Group) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

8

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

2019/C 264/07

Publication of a communication of approval of a standard amendment to a product specification for a name in the wine sector referred to in Article 17(2) and (3) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33

9

---

| | Corrigenda |
| --- | --- |
| 2019/C 264/08 | Corrigendum to Passenger Name Records (PNR) — List of Member States who have decided the application of the PNR Directive to intra-EU flights as referred to in Article 2 of Directive (EU) 2016/681 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the use of passenger name record (PNR) data for the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious crime (If a Member State decides to apply this Directive to intra-EU flights, it shall notify the Commission in writing. A Member State may give or revoke such a notification at any time. The Commission shall publish that notification and any revocation of it in the Official Journal of the European Union) ( OJ C 196, 8.6.2018 ) | 21 |

Corrigenda

2019/C 264/08

Corrigendum to Passenger Name Records (PNR) — List of Member States who have decided the application of the PNR Directive to intra-EU flights as referred to in Article 2 of Directive (EU) 2016/681 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the use of passenger name record (PNR) data for the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious crime (If a Member State decides to apply this Directive to intra-EU flights, it shall notify the Commission in writing. A Member State may give or revoke such a notification at any time. The Commission shall publish that notification and any revocation of it in the Official Journal of the European Union) ( OJ C 196, 8.6.2018 )

If a Member State decides to apply this Directive to intra-EU flights, it shall notify the Commission in writing. A Member State may give or revoke such a notification at any time. The Commission shall publish that notification and any revocation of it in the

21

---

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

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

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

EN

---

IV Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

| 6.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 264/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 264/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

5 August 2019

(2019/C 264/01)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1182 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 118,61 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4658 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,91880 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,7603 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0893 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 136,30 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,9720 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,776 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 326,99 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3142 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,7325 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 6,1990 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6520 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4775 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,7638 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7138 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5453 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 359,84 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 16,6794 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,8705 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3805 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 006,70 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6724 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 58,191 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 72,6588 |
| THB | Thai baht | 34,435 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,3805 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 21,8221 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 79,1529 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1182

JPY

Japanese yen

118,61

DKK

Danish krone

7,4658

GBP

Pound sterling

0,91880

SEK

Swedish krona

10,7603

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0893

ISK

Iceland króna

136,30

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,9720

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,776

HUF

Hungarian forint

326,99

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3142

RON

Romanian leu

4,7325

TRY

Turkish lira

6,1990

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6520

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4775

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,7638

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7138

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5453

KRW

South Korean won

1 359,84

ZAR

South African rand

16,6794

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,8705

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3805

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 006,70

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6724

PHP

Philippine peso

58,191

RUB

Russian rouble

72,6588

THB

Thai baht

34,435

BRL

Brazilian real

4,3805

MXN

Mexican peso

21,8221

INR

Indian rupee

79,1529

---

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

---

European Systemic Risk Board

| 6.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 264/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 264/2

---

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN SYSTEMIC RISK BOARD

of 28 June 2019

on the postponement of certain reports on actions and measures taken pursuant to Recommendation ESRB/2014/1 and Recommendation ESRB/2015/2 of the European Systemic Risk Board

(ESRB/2019/15)

(2019/C 264/02)

THE GENERAL BOARD OF THE EUROPEAN SYSTEMIC RISK BOARD,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on European Union macro-prudential oversight of the financial system and establishing a European Systemic Risk Board (1), and in particular Article 3(2)(f) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | In Sections 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 of Recommendation ESRB/2014/1 of the European Systemic Risk Board (2), the addressees of that Recommendation are requested to report to the European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB), the Council and the Commission on the measures the addressees have taken to comply with the Recommendation, or to adequately justify any inaction. The first report by each addressee was to have been sent by 30 June 2016. The set of first reports received formed the basis of the first compliance assessment by the ESRB on the implementation of Recommendation ESRB/2014/1. The conclusions of the assessment were approved by the General Board of the ESRB on 1 February 2019 and the Summary Compliance Report, which provides an assessment of the level of implementation of Recommendation ESRB/2014/1 by its addressees, was published on the ESRB’s website in May 2019. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

In Sections 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 of Recommendation ESRB/2014/1 of the European Systemic Risk Board (2), the addressees of that Recommendation are requested to report to the European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB), the Council and the Commission on the measures the addressees have taken to comply with the Recommendation, or to adequately justify any inaction. The first report by each addressee was to have been sent by 30 June 2016. The set of first reports received formed the basis of the first compliance assessment by the ESRB on the implementation of Recommendation ESRB/2014/1. The conclusions of the assessment were approved by the General Board of the ESRB on 1 February 2019 and the Summary Compliance Report, which provides an assessment of the level of implementation of Recommendation ESRB/2014/1 by its addressees, was published on the ESRB’s website in May 2019.

| (2) | In Section 2.3.3 of Recommendation ESRB/2014/1, the addressees are requested to send reports explaining the measures that they have taken to comply with the Recommendation every three years and, therefore, the second report by each addressee should be sent to the ESRB, the Council and the Commission by 30 June 2019. However, in order to allow sufficient time for those addressees to address, where applicable, the findings of the first compliance assessment on the implementation of Recommendation ESRB/2014/1, the date for the submission of the second report should be postponed by one year. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In Section 2.3.3 of Recommendation ESRB/2014/1, the addressees are requested to send reports explaining the measures that they have taken to comply with the Recommendation every three years and, therefore, the second report by each addressee should be sent to the ESRB, the Council and the Commission by 30 June 2019. However, in order to allow sufficient time for those addressees to address, where applicable, the findings of the first compliance assessment on the implementation of Recommendation ESRB/2014/1, the date for the submission of the second report should be postponed by one year.

| (3) | In Section 2.3.1 of Recommendation ESRB/2015/2 of the European Systemic Risk Board (3), the relevant authorities are requested to report every two years to the ESRB and the Council on the actions that they take in response to that Recommendation, or to adequately justify any inaction. The first report by each relevant authority was to have been sent by 30 June 2017, and, therefore, the second report by each of them should be sent to the ESRB and the Council by 30 June 2019. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In Section 2.3.1 of Recommendation ESRB/2015/2 of the European Systemic Risk Board (3), the relevant authorities are requested to report every two years to the ESRB and the Council on the actions that they take in response to that Recommendation, or to adequately justify any inaction. The first report by each relevant authority was to have been sent by 30 June 2017, and, therefore, the second report by each of them should be sent to the ESRB and the Council by 30 June 2019.

| (4) | Following the submission by each relevant authority of its first report on the actions taken in response to Recommendation ESRB/2015/2, the compliance assessment on the implementation of the Recommendation is still ongoing. Therefore, the date for the submission of the second report should be postponed by one year. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Following the submission by each relevant authority of its first report on the actions taken in response to Recommendation ESRB/2015/2, the compliance assessment on the implementation of the Recommendation is still ongoing. Therefore, the date for the submission of the second report should be postponed by one year.

| (5) | This Decision is intended only to postpone, by one year, the date of 30 June 2019 for submission by the addressees and the relevant authorities, as applicable, of their second reports on the actions and measures taken in response to Recommendation ESRB/2014/1 and Recommendation ESRB/2015/2, respectively, or adequate justification of any inaction, |
| --- | --- |

(5)

This Decision is intended only to postpone, by one year, the date of 30 June 2019 for submission by the addressees and the relevant authorities, as applicable, of their second reports on the actions and measures taken in response to Recommendation ESRB/2014/1 and Recommendation ESRB/2015/2, respectively, or adequate justification of any inaction,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Postponement of certain deadlines for the submission of reports on actions and measures taken

1.   The date of 30 June 2019 for the submission by each addressee of Recommendation ESRB/2014/1 of their second report explaining the measures they have taken to comply with that Recommendation, or to adequately justify any inaction, shall be postponed by one year, until 30 June 2020.

Nothing in paragraph 1 shall affect the date for submission of the third and subsequent reports due in accordance with the provisions of Recommendation ESRB/2014/1.

2.   The date of 30 June 2019 for the submission by each relevant authority of their second report on the actions taken in response to Recommendation ESRB/2015/2, or to adequately justify any inaction, shall be postponed by one year, until 30 June 2020.

Nothing in paragraph 2 shall affect the date for submission of the third and subsequent reports due in accordance with the provisions of Recommendation ESRB/2015/2.

Article 2

Entry into force

This Decision shall enter into force on 28 June 2019.

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 28 June 2019.

Head of the ESRB Secretariat,

on behalf of the General Board of the ESRB

Francesco MAZZAFERRO

---

(1)  OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 1.

1

(2)  Recommendation of the European Systemic Risk Board of 18 June 2014 on guidance for setting countercyclical buffer rates (OJ C 293, 2.9.2014, p.1).

2

(3)  Recommendation of the European Systemic Risk Board of 15 December 2015 on the assessment of cross-border effects of and voluntary reciprocity for macroprudential policy measures (OJ C 97, 12.3.2016, p. 9).

3

---

V Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

| 6.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 264/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 264/4

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9485 — NAEV/Siemens/KoMiPo/Stavro Vind)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 264/03)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | NAEV SOLVENTUS (‘NAEV’), controlled by NAEV Infrastructure Funds (of Germany), |
| --- | --- |

—

NAEV SOLVENTUS (‘NAEV’), controlled by NAEV Infrastructure Funds (of Germany),

| — | Siemens AG (‘Siemens’), controlled by Siemens Group (of Germany), |
| --- | --- |

—

Siemens AG (‘Siemens’), controlled by Siemens Group (of Germany),

| — | Korea Midland Power Co. (‘KoMiPo’), controlled by Korea Electric Power Corporation (‘KEPCO’) (of Korea), |
| --- | --- |

—

Korea Midland Power Co. (‘KoMiPo’), controlled by Korea Electric Power Corporation (‘KEPCO’) (of Korea),

| — | Stavro Vind Aktiebolag (‘Stavro Vind’, of Sweden), currently solely controlled by NAEV. |
| --- | --- |

—

Stavro Vind Aktiebolag (‘Stavro Vind’, of Sweden), currently solely controlled by NAEV.

NAEV, Siemens and KoMiPo acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the whole of Stavro Vind.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

| — | NAEV provides services regarding old-age provision for the medical profession in Germany, |
| --- | --- |

—

NAEV provides services regarding old-age provision for the medical profession in Germany,

| — | Siemens is active in the business areas of electrification, automation and digitalization. Through the Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy unit, Siemens also offers solutions in the area of renewable energy, in particular wind turbines, |
| --- | --- |

—

Siemens is active in the business areas of electrification, automation and digitalization. Through the Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy unit, Siemens also offers solutions in the area of renewable energy, in particular wind turbines,

| — | KEPCO is the largest electricity supplier in South Korea and is responsible for the generation, transmission and distribution of electricity and the development of power generation projects, including those in the nuclear, wind and coal sectors, |
| --- | --- |

—

KEPCO is the largest electricity supplier in South Korea and is responsible for the generation, transmission and distribution of electricity and the development of power generation projects, including those in the nuclear, wind and coal sectors,

| — | Stavro Vind has been set up for the planning, construction, financing, and operation of the two onshore wind farm sites Blackfjället and Blodrotberget in Sweden. |
| --- | --- |

—

Stavro Vind has been set up for the planning, construction, financing, and operation of the two onshore wind farm sites Blackfjället and Blodrotberget in Sweden.

3.

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

4.

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

M.9485 — NAEV/Siemens/KoMiPo/Stavro Vind

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

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

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

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

1

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

2

---

| 6.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 264/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 264/6

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9468 — Centerbridge/Solidus)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 264/04)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Centerbridge Partners, L.P. (USA, ‘Centerbridge’), |
| --- | --- |

—

Centerbridge Partners, L.P. (USA, ‘Centerbridge’),

| — | Solidus Solutions (The Netherlands, ‘Solidus’). |
| --- | --- |

—

Solidus Solutions (The Netherlands, ‘Solidus’).

Centerbridge acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Solidus.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares and assets.

2.

| — | Centerbridge is a private investment management firm, with offices in New York and London. |
| --- | --- |

—

Centerbridge is a private investment management firm, with offices in New York and London.

| — | Solidus produces packaging solutions from solid board for the fruit and vegetable, fish, and meat industries, and also offers packaging solutions for office supplies and luxury packaging. |
| --- | --- |

—

Solidus produces packaging solutions from solid board for the fruit and vegetable, fish, and meat industries, and also offers packaging solutions for office supplies and luxury packaging.

3.

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

4.

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

M.9468 — Centerbridge/Solidus

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

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

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

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

1

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

2

---

| 6.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 264/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 264/7

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9437 — Würth Group/GES)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 264/05)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Fega & Schmitt Elektrogroßhandel GmbH (Germany), belonging to the group Adolf Würth GmbH & Co. KG (‘Würth Group’, Germany), and |
| --- | --- |

—

Fega & Schmitt Elektrogroßhandel GmbH (Germany), belonging to the group Adolf Würth GmbH & Co. KG (‘Würth Group’, Germany), and

| — | Grupo Electro Stocks, S.L.U. (‘GES’, Spain), controlled by APAX Edison Holdco, S.à.r.l. (Luxembourg). |
| --- | --- |

—

Grupo Electro Stocks, S.L.U. (‘GES’, Spain), controlled by APAX Edison Holdco, S.à.r.l. (Luxembourg).

Würth Group acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control over the whole of GES. The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

—   for Würth Group: wholesale distribution of products and systems manufactured by third parties mainly to professional end users in trade and industry, including electrical installation, industrial automation, cables and wires, tools, data and network technology, lighting and illumination, household appliances and multimedia products, as well as electrical domestic heating technology and regenerative power generation,

—   for GES: distribution of electrical and fluid materials in Spain mainly to other professionals in the construction sector.

3.

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

4.

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

M.9437 — Würth Group/GES

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

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

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

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

1

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

2

---

| 6.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 264/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 264/8

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.9436 — ICG/Predica/OCEA Group)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2019/C 264/06)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Intermediate Capital Group plc (‘ICG’, United Kingdom), |
| --- | --- |

—

Intermediate Capital Group plc (‘ICG’, United Kingdom),

| — | Prévoyance Dialogue du Crédit Agricole S.A. (‘Predica’, France), belonging to the Crédit Agricole Group, |
| --- | --- |

—

Prévoyance Dialogue du Crédit Agricole S.A. (‘Predica’, France), belonging to the Crédit Agricole Group,

| — | Groupe OCEA and its wholly-owned subsidiary OCEA Smart Building (together ‘OCEA Group’) (France), controlled by InfraVia III Invest S.A. |
| --- | --- |

—

Groupe OCEA and its wholly-owned subsidiary OCEA Smart Building (together ‘OCEA Group’) (France), controlled by InfraVia III Invest S.A.

ICG and Predica acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the whole of OCEA Group.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

—   for ICG: a UK-based asset manager, active in the structuring and provision of mezzanine finance, leveraged credit and private equity in Europe, Asia Pacific and the US,

—   for Predica: a French life and health insurance company belonging to the Crédit Agricole Group that offers a wide range of banking-related services mostly in France,

—   for OCEA Group: a French group mainly active in the sector for fluids and energy management solutions for social housing and condominiums. OCEA Group operates exclusively in France.

3.

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

4.

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

M.9436 — ICG/Predica/OCEA Group

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

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

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Fax +32 22964301

Postal address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

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

1

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

2

---

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

| 6.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 264/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 264/9

---

Publication of a communication of approval of a standard amendment to a product specification for a name in the wine sector referred to in Article 17(2) and (3) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33

(2019/C 264/07)

This notice is published in accordance with Article 17(5) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2019/33 of 17 October 2018 (1).

COMMUNICATION OF APPROVAL OF A STANDARD AMENDMENT

‘Fiefs Vendéens’

Reference number: PDO-FR-A0733-AM01

Date of communication: 12.6.2019

DESCRIPTION OF AND REASONS FOR THE APPROVED AMENDMENT

1.   Geographical area

Description and reasons

Point IV(1) of Chapter I of the specification regarding the geographical area has been amended as follows: ‘The grapes are harvested and the wines made and developed within the municipalities of the department of the Vendée listed below, as approved by the National Institute of Origin and Quality at the meeting of the competent national committee on 10 February 2011: Auchay-sur-Vendée for the territory of the delegated municipality of Auzay, Brem-sur-Mer, Bretignolles-sur-Mer, Le Champ-Saint-Père, Chantonnay, Château-Guibert, La Couture, L'Île-d'Olonne, Longèves, Mareuil-sur-Lay-Dissais, Olonne-sur-Mer, Pissotte, Le Poiré-sur-Velluire, Rives de l'Yon, Rosnay, Le Tablier, Vairé, Vix.’

This amendment is a result of the merger of certain municipalities.

This amendment amends the Single Document.

2.   Geographical area: supplementary geographical designation Mareuil

Description and reasons

In point IV(2) of Chapter I of the specification, the municipalities for the supplementary geographical designation Mareuil have been replaced by: ‘“Mareuil”: Le Champ-Saint-Père, Château-Guibert, La Couture, Mareuil-sur-Lay-Dissais, Rives de l'Yon, Rosnay, Le Tablier.’

This amendment is a result of the merger of certain municipalities.

The Single Document is not affected by this amendment.

3.   Geographical area: supplementary geographical designation Vix

Description and reasons

In point IV(2) of Chapter I of the specification, the municipalities for the supplementary geographical designation Vix have been replaced by: ‘“Vix”: Auchay-sur-Vendée for the territory of the delegated municipality of Auzay, Longèves, Le Poiré-sur-Velluire, Vix.’

This amendment is a result of the merger of certain municipalities.

The Single Document is not affected by this amendment.

4.   Vine varieties

Description and reasons

Point V(1) of Chapter I of the specification has been replaced by

‘The wines are produced from the following varieties:

White wines

“Brem”

main variety: Chenin B,

supplementary variety: Chardonnay B,

other variety: Grolleau Gris G.

“Chantonnay”, “Mareuil”, “Pissotte”

main variety: Chenin B,

supplementary variety: Chardonnay B.

“Vix”

main variety: Chenin B,

supplementary variety: Chardonnay B,

other variety: Sauvignon B.

Red wines

“Brem”, “Pissotte”,

main variety: Pinot Noir N,

supplementary variety: Négrette N,

other varieties: Cabernet Sauvignon N, Gamay N, Cabernet Franc N,

“Chantonnay”, “Mareuil”, “Vix”

main variety Cabernet Franc N,

supplementary variety: Négrette N,

other varieties: Pinot Noir N, Cabernet Sauvignon N, Gamay N

Rosé wines

“Brem”

main variety: Pinot Noir N,

supplementary variety: Gamay N,

other varieties: Cabernet Franc N, Cabernet Sauvignon N, Grolleau Gris G, Négrette N.

“Chantonnay”,

main variety: Pinot Noir N,

supplementary variety: Gamay N,

other varieties: Cabernet Franc N, Cabernet Sauvignon N, Négrette N.

“Mareuil”, “Vix”, “Pissotte”

main variety: Gamay N,

supplementary variety: Pinot Noir N.

other varieties: Cabernet Franc N, Cabernet Sauvignon N, Négrette N,’

This amendment was made in order to simplify the rules for blending for the different supplementary geographical designations while maintaining consistency within the designation.

The Single Document is not affected by this amendment.

5.   Proportions to be planted

Proportions to be planted

Description and reasons

Description and reasons

Point V(2) of Chapter I of the specification has been replaced by:

‘The compliance of the vine varieties as regards the colour is assessed throughout the parcels of the holding producing the wine of the controlled designation of origin.

White wines

“Brem”, “Vix”, “Chantonnay”, “Mareuil”, “Pissotte”

The proportion of the main variety must be greater than or equal to 60 %.

The proportion of the supplementary variety must be greater than or equal to 10 %.

Red and rosé wines

“Brem”, “Pissotte”, “Chantonnay”, “Mareuil”, “Vix”

The proportion of the main variety must be greater than or equal to 50 %.

The proportion of the supplementary variety must be greater than or equal to 10 %.’

This amendment was made in order to simplify the rules for blending for the different supplementary geographical designations while maintaining consistency within the designation.

The Single Document is not affected by this amendment.

6.   Harvest proclamation

Harvest proclamation

Description and reasons

Description and reasons

At point VII(1) of Chapter 1 of the specification, the following sentence has been deleted: ‘The start date of the harvests is set in accordance with Article D. 645-6 of the Rural and Maritime Fishing Code’.

The harvest proclamation has been removed because the practice of detailed ripeness monitoring is now understood and sufficient. It is therefore no longer necessary to have a start date for harvests.

The Single Document is not affected by this amendment.

7.   Minimum sugar content

Minimum sugar content

Description and reasons

Description and reasons

At point VII(2) of Chapter 1 of the specification, the figure for the minimum sugar content of the white wines has been replaced by 170. The figure for the minimum sugar content of the red wines has been replaced by 190.

The minimum sugar content has been increased to improve the ripeness of the grapes.

The Single Document is not affected by this amendment.

8.   Minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume

Minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume

Description and reasons

Description and reasons

At point VII(2) of Chapter 1 of the specification, the figure for the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume of the white wines has been replaced by 10,5. The figure for the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume of the red wines has been replaced by 11.

The minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume has been raised owing to the increased minimum sugar content of the grapes.

This amendment amends the Single Document.

9.   First production of young vines

First production of young vines

Description and reasons

Description and reasons

At the first indent of Point VIII(2) of Chapter 1, the words ‘in place’ have been removed.

This amendment was made for a more consistent text.

The Single Document is not affected by this amendment.

10.   Blending

Blending

Description and reasons

Description and reasons

Point IX(1)(b) of Chapter 1 of the specification for the controlled designation of origin ‘Fiefs vendéens’, approved by the aforementioned Decree of 9 September 2011, has been replaced by:

‘White wines

The wines are made by blending grapes or wines in the same proportions as those laid down for the vine varieties.

Rosé and red wines

The wines are made by blending grapes or wines in which the main variety accounts for at least 40 % and the supplementary variety for at least 10 %.’

This amendment was made for the sake of consistency following simplification of the rules on vine varieties.

The Single Document is not affected by this amendment.

11.   Volatile acidity

Volatile acidity

Description and reasons

Description and reasons

At point IX(1)(d) of Chapter 1 of the specification for the controlled designation of origin ‘Fiefs vendéens’, approved by the aforementioned Decree of 9 September 2011, the phrase ‘After fermentation, the wines have the following properties:’ is replaced by ‘At the time of packaging, the wines have the following properties:’. The figure for the maximum volatile acid content of the white and rosé wines has been replaced by 14,3. The figure for the maximum volatile acid content of the red wines has been replaced by 16,3.

The maximum amounts for volatile acidity have been amended as they were considered too low.

This amendment amends the Single Document.

12.   Oenological charcoal

Oenological charcoal

Description and reasons

Description and reasons

At point IX(1)(e) of Chapter 1 of the specification, the sentence ‘For making rosé wines, use of oenological charcoal, on its own or mixed with other preparations, is prohibited’ has been replaced by ‘For making rosé wines, use of oenological charcoal is permitted for the musts and new wines still in fermentation within a limit of 15 % of the volume of rosé wines made by a given wine-grower for a specific harvest, at a maximum amount of 60 grams per hectolitre.’

Oenological charcoal can be used to correct certain defects in the wine.

This amendment amends the Single Document.

13.   Circulation between authorised warehouses

Circulation between authorised warehouses

Description and reasons

Description and reasons

Point IX(4)(b) of Chapter I of the specification has been removed.

It was a provision prohibiting the circulation of wine among authorised warehouses before a certain date.

When the specification was being amended, it became clear that there was no technical justification for this provision. It has therefore been removed.

The Single Document is not affected by this amendment.

14.   Link to the origin

Link to the origin

Description and reasons

Description and reasons

At Point X(1)(a) of Chapter I of the specification, the figure 19 has been replaced by 18.

This amendment updates the number of municipalities following the merger of certain municipalities.

This amendment amends the Single Document.

15.   Transitional measures

Transitional measures

Description and reasons

Description and reasons

At Point XI(2)(a) of Chapter I of the specification, the following paragraphs have been removed:

‘From the 2011 harvest to the 2015 harvest, inclusive:

White wines

“Brem”, “Pissotte”, “Mareuil”, “Vix”

The proportion of the main grape variety must be greater than or equal to 50 %.

Red and rosé wines

“Brem”, “Pissotte”, “Mareuil”, “Vix”

The proportion of the main grape varieties must be greater than or equal to 50 %.

Rosé wines

“Brem”

The proportion of the main grape varieties must be greater than or equal to 80 %.

The proportion of the variety Pinot Noir N must be greater than or equal to 30 %.

The proportion of the variety Gamay N must be greater than or equal to 10 %.

“Mareuil”, “Pissotte”, “Vix”

The proportion of the main grape varieties must be greater than or equal to 80 %.

The proportion of the variety Gamay N must be greater than or equal to 30 %.

The proportion of the variety Pinot Noir N must be greater than or equal to 15 %.’

are deleted.

At the second indent, for the supplementary geographical designations ‘Brem’ and ‘Pissote’, the following sentences have been removed: ‘The proportion of the main grape varieties must be greater than or equal to 80 %’ and ‘The proportion of the variety Cabernet Franc N must be greater than or equal to 10 %; The proportion of the variety Négrette N must be greater than or equal to 5 %’.

At the second indent, for the complementary geographical designations ‘Mareuil’ and ‘Vix’, the following sentences have been removed: ‘The proportion of the main grape varieties must be greater than or equal to 80 %’ and ‘The proportion of the variety Pinot Noir N must be greater than or equal to 10 %; The proportion of the variety Négrette N must be greater than or equal to 5 %.’

The phrases removed represent transitional measures no longer in force.

The Single Document is not affected by this amendment.

16.   Transitional measure

Transitional measure

Description and reasons

Description and reasons

After point XI(3) of Chapter I of the specification, the following has been added: ‘b — The right to the controlled designation of origin applies to the harvests of the vineyard parcels in existence at the time of approval of this specification, and which are arranged in rows with spacing of more than 1,8 metres and less than, or equal to, 2,2 metres. The aforementioned right applies until the vineyards are grubbed up or, at the latest, until the 2021 harvest, on condition that they comply with the other provisions of this specification.’

This amendment allows the vineyard to be adapted with a measure of less than three years.

The Single Document is not affected by this amendment.

17.   Labelling

Labelling

Description and reasons

Description and reasons

After point XII(2) of Chapter I of the specification, the following has been added: ‘Wines with the controlled designation of origin “Fiefs Vendéens” may mention the name of a smaller geographical entity on their labels, provided that: it is a registered location; it appears on the harvest declaration; the name of the registered location appears immediately under the designation, and is printed in letters no greater than half the size, in both height and width, of the letters forming the name of the controlled designation of origin.’

This amendment amends the Single Document.

18.   Labelling

Labelling

Description and reasons

Description and reasons

Point XII(2)(e) of Chapter I of the specification has been removed.

The Single Document is not affected by this amendment.

19.   Reporting requirements

Reporting requirements

Description and reasons

Description and reasons

Point I(1) of Chapter II of the specification has been replaced by ‘All operators must declare to the protection and management body and the control body, before the 31 May preceding the harvest, the parcels for which they do not intend to produce the controlled designation of origin.’

The following words have been added at the end of Point I(3) of Chapter II of the specification: ‘and the protection and management body’.

The following words have been added at the end of Point I(4) of Chapter II of the specification: ‘and the protection and management body’.

The following words have been added at the end of Point I(5) of Chapter II of the specification: ‘and the protection and management body’.

These amendments add the management body as recipient of producers' information.

The Single Document is not affected by this amendment.

20.   Main points for checking

Main points for checking

Description and reasons

Description and reasons

At A1 in Chapter III of the specification, the following words have been removed: ‘(CVI entry up-to-date)’.

At A2 in Chapter III of the specification, the following words have been removed: ‘(CVI entry up-to-date)’.

At A3 in Chapter III of the specification, the following words have been removed: ‘(identification declaration)’.

At B1 in Chapter III of the specification, the following words have been removed: ‘(visual examination, count of the number of bunches and estimate of the density based on a table drawn up for that purpose)’.

At B2 in Chapter III of the specification, the following words have been removed: ‘date of harvest, on site (wine cellar records) and (sampling of 200 grapes and measurements by refractometry)’.

At B3 in Chapter III of the specification, the following words have been removed: ‘Document check (wine cellar records) and (visual examination)’.

At B4 in Chapter III of the specification, the following words have been removed: ‘(declarations, records, any derogations that exist) and on-site check’.

The Single Document is not affected by this amendment.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

1.   Name of product

Name of product

‘Fiefs Vendéens’

2.   Name of the Member State

Name of the Member State

France

3.   Geographical indication type

Geographical indication type

PDO - Protected Designation of Origin

4.   Categories of grapevine products

Categories of grapevine products

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

1.

Wine

5.   Description of the wine(s)

Description of the wine(s)

White and rosé wines

White and rosé wines

The wines are still white, rosé and red wines.

The wines have the following analytical characteristics:

| — | Minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume: white wines 10 %, rosé wines 10,5 %, red wines 10,5 % |
| --- | --- |

—

Minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume: white wines 10 %, rosé wines 10,5 %, red wines 10,5 %

| — | Total maximum alcoholic strength by volume after enrichment: white wines 12 %, rosé wines 12 %, red wines 12,5 %. |
| --- | --- |

—

Total maximum alcoholic strength by volume after enrichment: white wines 12 %, rosé wines 12 %, red wines 12,5 %.

| — | Maximum volatile acid content: white wines 11 milliequivalents per litre, rosé wines 11 milliequivalents per litre, red wines 13 milliequivalents per litre |
| --- | --- |

—

Maximum volatile acid content: white wines 11 milliequivalents per litre, rosé wines 11 milliequivalents per litre, red wines 13 milliequivalents per litre

| — | Maximum fermentable sugar content (glucose and fructose): white wines 3 grams per litre, rosé wines 3 grams per litre, red wines 2,5 grams per litre |
| --- | --- |

—

Maximum fermentable sugar content (glucose and fructose): white wines 3 grams per litre, rosé wines 3 grams per litre, red wines 2,5 grams per litre

| — | Maximum malic acid content: not exceeding 0,4 grams per litre for red wines. |
| --- | --- |

—

Maximum malic acid content: not exceeding 0,4 grams per litre for red wines.

The total acidity content, the total sulphur dioxide content and the total actual alcoholic strength follow the rules laid down in EU legislation. The white wines offer a balance dominated by freshness. Elegant and subtle, in general they offer good mineral quality with a broad range of floral and fruity notes.

The colour of the rosé wines includes tints ranging from pale pink to salmon pink. Lightly acidic with prominent freshness and unctuousness, they usually have fruity aromas.

The red wines are distinguished by their powerful fruity aromas, sometimes accompanied by notes of mild spices, leather and liquorice.

| General analytical characteristics |
| --- |
| Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume) | |
| Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume) | |
| Minimum total acidity | |
| Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre) | 14,3 |
| Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre) | |

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum total acidity

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

14,3

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

Red wines

Red wines

The wines have the following analytical characteristics:

| — | Minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume: 11 % |
| --- | --- |

—

Minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume: 11 %

| — | Maximum fermentable sugar content (glucose and fructose): grams per litre |
| --- | --- |

—

Maximum fermentable sugar content (glucose and fructose): grams per litre

| — | Maximum malic acid content: not exceeding 0,4 grams per litre for red wines. |
| --- | --- |

—

Maximum malic acid content: not exceeding 0,4 grams per litre for red wines.

The total acidity content, the total sulphur dioxide content and the total actual alcoholic strength follow the rules laid down in EU legislation.

The red wines are distinguished by their powerful fruity aromas, sometimes accompanied by notes of mild spices, leather and liquorice.

| General analytical characteristics |
| --- |
| Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume) | |
| Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume) | |
| Minimum total acidity | |
| Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre) | 16,3 |
| Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre) | |

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum total acidity

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

16,3

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

6.   Wine-making practices

Wine-making practices

a.   Essential oenological practices

Essential oenological practices

Specific oenological practice

Specific oenological practice

The use of oenological charcoal to make the rosé wines is prohibited, whether alone or mixed in preparations.

Reductive methods of enrichment are permitted for the red wines with the maximum partial concentration rate set at 10 % in relation to the volumes used.

After enrichment, the wines' total alcoholic strength by volume must not exceed the following: white wines 12 %, rosé wines 12 %, red wines 12,5 %.

In addition to the above provisions, the oenological practices concerning these wines meet the requirements laid down at Community level and in the Rural and Maritime Fishing Code.

Cultivation method

Cultivation method

The minimum planting density of the vines is 5 000 plants per hectare.

The distance between the rows is 1,8 metres or less, and the spacing between plants in the same row is between 0,9 and 1,3 metres.

The vines are pruned with a maximum of ten buds per plant:

| — | either simple or double Guyot, |
| --- | --- |

—

either simple or double Guyot,

| — | or short pruning with a maximum of 5 spurs per plant. |
| --- | --- |

—

or short pruning with a maximum of 5 spurs per plant.

Pruning is done before 31 May of the year of harvest.

Charcoal

Wine-making restriction

For making rosé wines, use of oenological charcoal is permitted for the musts and new wines still in fermentation within a limit of 15 % of the volume of rosé wines made by a given wine-grower for a specific harvest, at a maximum amount of 60 grams per hectolitre.

b.   Maximum yields

Maximum yields

White and rosé wines

66 hectolitres per hectare

Red wines

62 hectolitres per hectare

7.   Demarcated geographical area

Demarcated geographical area

The grapes are harvested and the wines made and developed within the municipalities of the department of the Vendée listed below, as approved by the National Institute of Origin and Quality at the meeting of the competent national committee on 10 February 2011: Auchay-sur-Vendée for the territory of the delegated municipality of Auzay, Brem-sur-Mer, Bretignolles-sur-Mer, Le Champ-Saint-Père, Chantonnay, Château-Guibert, La Couture, L'Île-d'Olonne, Longèves, Mareuil-sur-Lay-Dissais, Olonne-sur-Mer, Pissotte, Le Poiré-sur-Velluire, Rives de l'Yon, Rosnay, Le Tablier, Vairé, Vix.

8.   Main wine grapes

Main wine grapes

| | Chenin B |
| --- | --- |

Chenin B

| | Négrette N |
| --- | --- |

Négrette N

| | Cabernet Franc N |
| --- | --- |

Cabernet Franc N

| | Chardonnay B |
| --- | --- |

Chardonnay B

| | Pinot Noir N |
| --- | --- |

Pinot Noir N

9.   Description of the link(s)

Description of the link(s)

The geographical area is situated between the bocage of the Vendée, to the north, and the cereal-growing plain of Luçon to the south. The border of the Massif Armoricain extends from west to east, from Sables-d'Olonne on the Atlantic coast as far as Fontenay-le-Comte. Vineyards are planted in the areas where this border is intersected by the hydrographic network, often on slopes between 3 % and 5 % and mainly facing south/south-west. The various geographical entities are distributed as follows: ‘Brem’ around the Olonne marsh; ‘Mareuil’ and ‘Chantonnay’ along the valleys of the Lay and the Yon; and ‘Vix’ and ‘Pissotte’ on the hillsides of the Vendée river. This geographical area is formed of lands from 18 municipalities in the south of the Vendée department.

In geological terms, the geographical area is relatively homogeneous, set on the edge of the crystalline basement of the Massif Armoricain, adjoining Jurassic limestone formations. The geological substratum is mainly formed of shale and rhyolite, occasionally gneiss and amphibolite, and even limestone in the case of the geographical designation ‘Vix’. However, such limestone is usually covered by fluvial deposits of sand and gravel from the tertiary era. Consequently, parcels specifically demarcated for harvesting grapes generally have brown acidic soils containing a high proportion of coarse fragments. They are fundamentally different from the deep loamy soils of the bocage, to the north, and the fertile clay soils of the plain further south. The climate in the south of the Vendée is oceanic and temperate, and significantly hotter than that of the bocage located further north. Above all, the climate in the south has less rainfall and more sunshine, with a shortage of rainfall in the summer. The regions of Olonne and La Rochelle have the most sunshine of the Atlantic coast, with an average of 1 430 hours of sun per six months from June to September. Annual average temperatures range between 12 °C and 12,5 °C, with temperature ranges increasing from west to east as altitude increases and the maritime influence declines.

Description of the human factors relevant to the geographical link

Numerous documents refer to tithes on the products of the vines paid to abbeys and priories in the region and thus attest to the development of viticulture in Vendée in the Middle Ages. In the eleventh century, a lively trade started with Holland in wines of the geographical designation ‘Brem’. Between the twelfth and fifteenth centuries, wines of the geographical designation ‘Mareuil’ were taken by barge to the ports of Saint-Benoist and Moricq-sur-le-Lay. They were then transferred to La Rochelle, where they were loaded and shipped to England.

It was not until the writings of Rabelais, who lived in Fontenay-le-Comte and Maillezais between 1520 and 1528, that the varieties used became known again. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the most widely grown white variety was already Chenin B (‘Franc Blanc’ in ‘Brem’, ‘Blance d'Aunis’ in ‘Vix’). The varieties for rosé and red wines were dominated by Pinot Noir N and especially Négrette N. The latter was known as ‘Pinot Rosé’ or ‘Bourgogne’ in ‘Brem’; as ‘Ragoûtant’ in ‘Mareuil’ and ‘Chantonnay’; and as ‘Folle Noire’ in ‘Vix’. The introduction of the variety Cabernet Franc N dates from the eighteenth century.

Viticulture in the Vendée underwent significant expansion in the nineteenth century, covering 18 000 hectares by 1880. Following the phylloxera attack, producers in the south of the Vendée specialised and rehabilitated the vineyards on slopes with the best exposure using grafts of traditional varieties. These were supplemented mainly by the varieties Gamay N, Chardonnay B and Cabernet Sauvignon N. Depending on the sector, the varieties Sauvignon B and Grolleau Gris G were added in ‘Vix’ and ‘Brem’ respectively.

After the Second World War, the producers wanted to unite the five historic centres of production. The label ‘Anciens Fiefs du Cardinal’ was created in 1953. The reference is to Richelieu, appointed Bishop of Luçon in 1608 and a great promoter of the wines of the geographical designation ‘Mareuil’. The rules for production were organised and defined, enabling an improvement in quality while respecting local distinctions regarding varieties. The ‘Vins des Fiefs Vendéens’ were recognised as a simple designation of origin in 1965; as ‘vins de pays’ in 1974; and as ‘vin délimité de qualité supérieure’ in 1984. The procedure for recognition as a controlled designation of origin was initiated in 1991.

In 2009, the vineyards covered 480 hectares worked by around 40 cultivators, giving an average annual production of 27 000 hectolitres. This breaks down as 45 % rosé wines, 40 % red wines and 15 % white wines. The white wines offer a balance dominated by freshness. Elegant and subtle, in general they offer good mineral quality with a broad range of floral and fruity notes.

The colour of the rosé wines includes tints ranging from pale pink to salmon pink. Lightly acidic with prominent freshness and unctuousness, they usually have fruity aromas.

The red wines are distinguished by their powerful fruity aromas, sometimes accompanied by notes of mild spices, leather and liquorice. In the case of the geographical designations ‘Brem’ and ‘Pissotte’, the wines are often ruby to garnet in colour, and round and elegant. By contrast, the wines of ‘Mareuil’, ‘Chantonnay’ and ‘Vix’ can be more deeply coloured and have more structure in the mouth. The climate in the south of the Vendée, with its abundant sunshine, is characteristically southern. This factor, together with the presence of slopes of stony soil and surfaces that are largely schist and rhyolite in origin, steered viticulture in the geographical area towards a long tradition of producing mainly rosé and red wines. Together these represent on average 85 % of the production of the controlled designation of origin.

The geographical location of the vineyards, between Val de Loire and the south-west, has also influenced the varieties preserved down the generations. The vineyards therefore contain an original set of varieties that blend influences from the Loire (Chenin, Cabernet Franc, Grolleau Gris), with continental influences (Pinot Noir, Gamay) and influences from the south-west (Négrette, Cabernet-Sauvignon). Chenin B is the predominant variety among the white wines. For the rosé wines, the main varieties are Pinot Noir N and Gamay N, while Pinot Noir N, Cabernet Franc N et Négrette N are the varieties forming the basis of the red wines. In all cases, the typical character of the product is guaranteed.

However, the unique history of each geographical designation recalls that different trade routes have been in place for a long time. Wines of the geographical designation ‘Brem’ were transported through the port of Saint-Martin-de-Brem; wines of ‘Mareuil’ and ‘Chantonnay’ through the valley of the Lay river; and those of ‘Vix’ and ‘Pissotte’ through the mouth of the Vendée. Taking into account the variations in natural factors, i.e. soil and climate, over time local producers tended towards different strategies for grape varieties and blending practices. These have resulted in subtle differences in the taste of the wines and contribute to the richness of the wines of this controlled designation of origin. Blending wines from the five geographical entities has therefore never been a practice and there is still no desire for it.

Since 1985, the reputation of the controlled designation of origin ‘Fiefs vendéens’ has developed significantly and the amounts placed on the market have almost doubled. The originality, freshness and fruity aromas of the wines are appreciated by holiday-makers on the coast of the Vendée. The diversity of the wines means that they can always be matched with the regional gastronomy.

10.   Essential further conditions (packaging, labelling, other requirements)

Essential further conditions (packaging, labelling, other requirements)

Labelling

Labelling

Legal framework:

National legislation

Type of further condition:

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition:

The name of the controlled designation of origin is followed by one of the following supplementary geographical designations:

| — | ‘Brem’; |
| --- | --- |

—

‘Brem’;

| — | ‘Chantonnay’; |
| --- | --- |

—

‘Chantonnay’;

| — | ‘Mareuil’; |
| --- | --- |

—

‘Mareuil’;

| — | ‘Pissotte’; |
| --- | --- |

—

‘Pissotte’;

| — | ‘Vix’ |
| --- | --- |

—

‘Vix’

for the wines that comply with the production conditions laid down in the specification for each of these designations.

The name of the controlled designation of origin may be followed by the supplementary geographical designation ‘Val de Loire’, in accordance with the rules laid down in the specification.

All optional information is printed on the labels in letters that may not be larger, in height, width or thickness, than double the size of the letters forming the name of the controlled designation of origin.

Labelling

Labelling

Legal framework:

National legislation

Type of further condition:

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition:

The size of the letters of the supplementary geographical names ‘Brem’, ‘Chantonnay’, ‘Mareuil’, ‘Pissotte’ and ‘Vix’ may not be larger, either in height, width or thickness, than the letters forming the name of the controlled designation of origin.

The size of the letters of the supplementary geographical name ‘Val de Loire’ may not be larger, either in height, width or thickness, than two-thirds of the size of the letters forming the name of the controlled designation of origin.

Any mention of the name of the grape variety is prohibited on the label bearing all of the obligatory information.

The wines can state the vintage if the grapes used to make them were exclusively from that year.

Wines with the controlled designation of origin ‘Fiefs Vendéens’ may specify a smaller geographical entity on their labels, provided that: it is a registered location; it appears on the harvest declaration; the name of the registered location appears immediately under the designation, and is printed in letters no greater than half the size, in both height and width, of the letters forming the name of the controlled designation of origin.

Link to the product specification

Link to the product specification

https://info.agriculture.gouv.fr/gedei/site/bo-agri/document_administratif-b8ebb03b-ef0d-44f7-9695-fac9f1495b9e

---

(1)  OJ L 9, 11.1.2019, p. 2.

1

---

Corrigenda

| 6.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 264/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 264/21

---

Corrigendum to Passenger Name Records (PNR) — List of Member States who have decided the application of the PNR Directive to intra-EU flights as referred to in Article 2 of Directive (EU) 2016/681 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the use of passenger name record (PNR) data for the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious crime

(If a Member State decides to apply this Directive to intra-EU flights, it shall notify the Commission in writing. A Member State may give or revoke such a notification at any time. The Commission shall publish that notification and any revocation of it in the Official Journal of the European Union)

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 196 of 8 June 2018
  )

(2019/C 264/08)

On page 29:

The following Member States that have notified the Commission of the application of the PNR Directive in intra-EU flights are added:

| — | Czechia |
| --- | --- |

—

Czechia

| — | Netherlands |
| --- | --- |

—

Netherlands

| — | Finland |
| --- | --- |

—

Finland

---