# Official Journal C 385/2022

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 385 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 656 October 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 385

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 656 October 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 385/01 | Commission Notice on the interpretation of certain legal provisions of the Disclosures Delegated Act under Article 8 of EU Taxonomy Regulation on the reporting of eligible economic activities and assets | 1 |

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 385/01

Commission Notice on the interpretation of certain legal provisions of the Disclosures Delegated Act under Article 8 of EU Taxonomy Regulation on the reporting of eligible economic activities and assets

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 385/02 | Euro exchange rates — 5 October 2022 | 20 |
| | NOTICES CONCERNING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA |
| | EFTA Surveillance Authority |
| 2022/C 385/03 | State aid – Decision to raise no objections | 21 |
| 2022/C 385/04 | EFTA Surveillance Authority’s notice on state aid recovery interest rates and reference/discount rates for the EFTA States applicable as from 1 July 2022 –
  Published in accordance with the rules on reference and discount rates set out in Part VII of ESA’s State Aid Guidelines and Article 10 of ESA’s Decision No 195/04/COL 14 July 2004 | 22 |
| 2022/C 385/05 | State aid – Decision to raise no objections | 23 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 385/02

Euro exchange rates — 5 October 2022

20

NOTICES CONCERNING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA

EFTA Surveillance Authority

2022/C 385/03

State aid – Decision to raise no objections

21

2022/C 385/04

EFTA Surveillance Authority’s notice on state aid recovery interest rates and reference/discount rates for the EFTA States applicable as from 1 July 2022 –
  Published in accordance with the rules on reference and discount rates set out in Part VII of ESA’s State Aid Guidelines and Article 10 of ESA’s Decision No 195/04/COL 14 July 2004

Published in accordance with the rules on reference and discount rates set out in Part VII of ESA’s State Aid Guidelines and Article 10 of ESA’s Decision No 195/04/COL 14 July 2004

22

2022/C 385/05

State aid – Decision to raise no objections

23

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | COURT PROCEEDINGS |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 385/06 | Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by Landsréttur dated 9 June 2022 in the case of Verkfræðingafélag Íslands, Stéttarfélag tölvunarfræðinga og Lyfjafræðingafélag Íslands v the Icelandic State (Case E-9/22) | 24 |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 385/07 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10904 – CVC / MATICMIND / SIO) – Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 25 |
| 2022/C 385/08 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10697 – ARAMCO OVERSEAS COMPANY / LOTOS SPV 1) (
  1
  ) | 27 |
| 2022/C 385/09 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10857 – CINVEN / ZURICH SANDER VERMÖGENSVERWALTUNG) – Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 28 |
| | OTHER ACTS |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 385/10 | Publication of a communication of approval of a standard amendment to the product specification for a name in the wine sector referred to in Article 17(2) and (3) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33 | 29 |
| 2022/C 385/11 | Publication of a communication of approval of a standard amendment to the product specification for a name in the wine sector referred to in Article 17(2) and (3) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33 | 40 |
| 2022/C 385/12 | Publication of a communication of approval of a standard amendment to the product specification for a name in the wine sector referred to in Article 17(2) and (3) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33 | 52 |
| 2022/C 385/13 | Publication of the amended product specification following the approval of a minor amendment pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 | 64 |

V   Announcements

COURT PROCEEDINGS

European Commission

2022/C 385/06

Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by Landsréttur dated 9 June 2022 in the case of Verkfræðingafélag Íslands, Stéttarfélag tölvunarfræðinga og Lyfjafræðingafélag Íslands v the Icelandic State (Case E-9/22)

24

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2022/C 385/07

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10904 – CVC / MATICMIND / SIO) – Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

25

2022/C 385/08

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10697 – ARAMCO OVERSEAS COMPANY / LOTOS SPV 1) (
  1
  )

1

27

2022/C 385/09

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.10857 – CINVEN / ZURICH SANDER VERMÖGENSVERWALTUNG) – Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

28

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

2022/C 385/10

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

29

2022/C 385/11

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

40

2022/C 385/12

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

52

2022/C 385/13

Publication of the amended product specification following the approval of a minor amendment pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012

64

---

| | Corrigenda |
| --- | --- |
| | Corrigendum to Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: — 0,50 % on 1 October 2022 — Euro exchange rates (2022/C 381/04) ( OJ C 381, 4.10.2022 ) | 69 |

Corrigenda

Corrigendum to Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: — 0,50 % on 1 October 2022 — Euro exchange rates (2022/C 381/04) ( OJ C 381, 4.10.2022 )

( OJ C 381, 4.10.2022 )

69

---

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

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

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

EN

---

II Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

| 6.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/1

---

Commission Notice on the interpretation of certain legal provisions of the Disclosures Delegated Act under Article 8 of EU Taxonomy Regulation on the reporting of eligible economic activities and assets

(2022/C 385/01)

This frequently asked questions (FAQs) document aims to clarify the content of the Disclosures Delegated Act under Article 8 of the EU Taxonomy Regulation (‘Disclosures Delegated Act’) (1) to aid its implementation.

The FAQs contained in this document clarify the provisions already contained in the applicable legislation. They do not extend in any way the rights and obligations deriving from such legislation nor introduce any additional requirements of the concerned operators and competent authorities. The FAQs are merely intended to assist financial and non-financial undertakings in the implementation of the relevant legal provisions. Only the Court of Justice of the European Union is competent to authoritatively interpret Union law. The views expressed in this Notice cannot prejudge the position that the European Commission might take before the Union and national courts.

On 20 December 2021, the Commission published 22 FAQs on how financial and non-financial undertakings should report taxonomy-eligible economic activities and assets in accordance with the Disclosures Delegated Act. This document complements these FAQs.

CONTENTS

| GENERAL FAQS | 3 |
| --- | --- |

| 1. | To what undertakings does the reporting obligation under the Taxonomy Regulation Article 8 Delegated Act apply? | 3 |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | How is an ‘economic activity’ defined in the Disclosures Delegated Act? | 4 |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | What is a Taxonomy-eligible economic activity? | 4 |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | What are ‘enabling’ and ‘transitional’ economic activities in the context of Taxonomy-eligibility reporting? | 5 |
| --- | --- | --- |

4.

| 5. | How to identify and report eligibility for adaptation-related economic activities? | 5 |
| --- | --- | --- |

5.

| 6. | How should NACE codes be used to identify Taxonomy-eligible activities in the context of eligibility-reporting? | 6 |
| --- | --- | --- |

6.

| 7. | Can undertakings report voluntary information in the context of Taxonomy-eligibility reporting? | 6 |
| --- | --- | --- |

7.

| NON-FINANCIAL UNDERTAKINGS | 7 |
| --- | --- |

| 8. | How far should undertakings assess and report Taxonomy-eligible activities in their value chain, both upstream and downstream? | 7 |
| --- | --- | --- |

8.

| 9. | How to identify Taxonomy-eligible activities of which activity descriptions contain qualifiers, such as ‘low carbon’, and ‘climate-related perils’? | 8 |
| --- | --- | --- |

9.

| 10. | Should undertakings report a breakdown of Taxonomy-eligibility per environmental objective? | 8 |
| --- | --- | --- |

10.

| 11. | How are turnover, CapEx and OpEx defined in the context of Taxonomy-eligibility reporting? | 9 |
| --- | --- | --- |

11.

| 12. | What is the scope of ‘other direct expenditures’ set out in Annex I to the Disclosures Delegated Act? | 11 |
| --- | --- | --- |

12.

| 13. | How should undertakings account for negative revenues in the context of Taxonomy-eligibility reporting? | 11 |
| --- | --- | --- |

13.

| 14. | Should undertakings avoid double reporting of Taxonomy-eligible activities? | 12 |
| --- | --- | --- |

14.

| 15. | Should an entity report Taxonomy-eligible turnover when the economic activity has not been performed by itself, but by a subcontractor? | 12 |
| --- | --- | --- |

15.

| 16. | How should a non-financial undertaking report on products and services that are both consumed internally and sold externally? | 12 |
| --- | --- | --- |

16.

| 17. | How should non-financial undertakings treat intangibles under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting? | 13 |
| --- | --- | --- |

17.

| 18. | Should non-financial undertakings report the Taxonomy-eligibility of their non-EU activities? | 13 |
| --- | --- | --- |

18.

| 19. | How should non-financial undertakings treat the turnover of eligible activities that are deconsolidated during the financial year? | 13 |
| --- | --- | --- |

19.

| FINANCIAL UNDERTAKINGS | 14 |
| --- | --- |

| 20. | What should financial undertakings report if underlying entities’ information is not publicly available? | 14 |
| --- | --- | --- |

20.

| 21. | What is the difference between covered assets and total assets in the context of Taxonomy-eligibility reporting? | 14 |
| --- | --- | --- |

21.

| 22. | Should cash and cash equivalent assets be considered in the context of Taxonomy-eligibility reporting? | 15 |
| --- | --- | --- |

22.

| ASSET MANAGERS | 15 |
| --- | --- |

| 23. | How may asset managers weight their holdings in a portfolio to report Taxonomy-eligible assets? | 15 |
| --- | --- | --- |

23.

| 24. | Do mortgages qualify as eligible for an asset manager (as an investment) or only for the bank that provided the loan originally? | 15 |
| --- | --- | --- |

24.

| INSURERS | 16 |
| --- | --- |

| 25. | What activities should an insurer and a reinsurer consider when reporting their underwriting activities in the context of Taxonomy-eligibility reporting? | 16 |
| --- | --- | --- |

25.

| CREDIT INSTITUTIONS | 16 |
| --- | --- |

| 26. | Do the reporting obligations under the Disclosures Delegated Act apply to a large entity that is not a credit institution under Article 4 of the Capital Requirements Regulation but is treated as a financial undertaking under Articles 19a and 29a of the NFRD? | 16 |
| --- | --- | --- |

26.

| 27. | How can CapEx be associated with general purpose lending in the context of Taxonomy-eligibility reporting? | 16 |
| --- | --- | --- |

27.

| 28. | How should a credit institution with a Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MifiD) investment firm license report its Taxonomy-eligible economic activities? | 17 |
| --- | --- | --- |

28.

| DEBT MARKET | 17 |
| --- | --- |

| 29. | How to assess and report the Taxonomy-eligibility of a debt asset such as a bond or a loan? | 17 |
| --- | --- | --- |

29.

| 30. | Does the use of all proceeds from debt products need to be independently verified if reported as Taxonomy-eligible? | 18 |
| --- | --- | --- |

30.

| 31. | Can green debt instruments from non-EU entities be reported as Taxonomy-eligible? | 18 |
| --- | --- | --- |

31.

| 32. | Can green sovereign debt be reported as Taxonomy-eligible? | 18 |
| --- | --- | --- |

32.

| INTERACTION WITH OTHER REGULATIONS | 19 |
| --- | --- |

| 33. | How does the Disclosures Delegated Act interact with the proposed requirements on corporate sustainability reporting? | 19 |
| --- | --- | --- |

33.

GENERAL FAQS

1.   To what undertakings does the reporting obligation under the Taxonomy Regulation Article 8 Delegated Act apply?

The Delegated Act supplementing Article 8 of the Taxonomy Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2021/2178) (‘the Disclosures Delegated Act’) sets out specific requirements for Taxonomy-related reporting by undertakings covered by Directive EU 2014/95 (the Non-Financial Reporting Directive) (2).

Specifically, Article 8(1) of Regulation EU 2020/852 (3) (the Taxonomy Regulation) contains a cross reference to Articles 19a and 29a of Directive EU 2013/34 (4) (the Accounting Directive) which were introduced by Directive EU 2014/95 (the Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD)). More precisely, the Taxonomy Regulation specifies that ‘any undertaking which is subject to an obligation to publish non-financial information pursuant to Article 19a or Article 29a of Directive 2013/34/EU shall include in its non-financial statement or consolidated non-financial statement information on how and to what extent the undertaking’s activities are associated with economic activities that qualify as environmentally sustainable under Articles 3 and 9 of this Regulation’. In other words, undertakings that are subject to mandatory reporting obligations under the Accounting Directive, also have reporting obligations under the Taxonomy Regulation.

In accordance with Articles 19a and 29a of the Accounting Directive, the following undertakings are subject to the obligation to publish non-financial information: a large undertaking as defined in Article 3(4) of that Directive which is a public-interest entity as defined in Article 2 point (1) of that Directive with more than 500 employees on average during the financial year; and a public-interest entity which is a parent undertaking of a large group as defined in Article 3(7) of that Directive with more than 500 employees on average on a consolidated basis during the financial year. Based on Article 8(1) of the Taxonomy Regulation, such undertakings are also subject to the Taxonomy Regulation related disclosure obligations.

Article 8(1) of the Taxonomy Regulation does not specifically refer to national measures transposing the NFRD that potentially extend the scope of its application to cover other categories of smaller undertakings. Therefore, the reporting requirements under Article 8(1) of the Taxonomy Regulation apply to undertakings directly in the scope of the NFRD. They do not apply to those undertakings covered only by national law transposing the NFRD. However, under the Disclosures Delegated Act, undertakings covered only by national law transposing the NFRD can report their alignment with the Taxonomy voluntarily.

2.   How is an ‘economic activity’ defined in the Disclosures Delegated Act?

The Taxonomy Regulation lays down a classification of environmentally sustainable economic activities. This classification is largely based on the Nomenclature of Economic Activities (NACE), the statistical classification of economic activities in the EU.

An economic activity takes place when resources such as capital, goods, labour, manufacturing techniques or intermediary products are combined to produce specific goods or services. It is characterised by an input of resources, a production process and an output of products (goods or services).

Regulation EU 2021/2139 (the Climate Delegated Act) (5) describes and assigns criteria on a high level. It does not refer to only one specific economic activity, but rather to categories of economic activities. For example, it sets criteria for the general category ‘manufacture of cement’, rather than the manufacturing of cement in one specific plant by one specific operator.

The reference to NACE sectors in the Climate Delegated Act is only indicative and not necessarily exhaustive. Therefore, an economic activity could match the description of an activity and the technical screening criteria laid out the Climate Delegated Act (Annexes I and II thereof) even if the NACE sector of the company is not listed in the relevant section of the Climate Delegated Act.

3.   What is a Taxonomy-eligible economic activity?

Article 1(5) of the Disclosures Delegated Act defines an eligible economic activity as an activity that is described in the delegated acts adopted under Article 10(3), Article 11(3), Article 12(2), Article 13(2), Article 14(2) and Article 15(2) of the Taxonomy Regulation. For the reporting period ending in 2022 (and for activities conducted in 2021), this definition corresponds to economic activities described in the Climate Delegated Act as adopted on 4 June 2021.

More specifically, according to Article 1(5) of the Disclosures Delegated Act, an economic activity is eligible irrespective of whether it meets any or all of the technical screening criteria laid down in the Climate Delegated Act (and future delegated acts). Therefore, the fact that an economic activity is Taxonomy-eligible does not give any indication of the environmental performance and sustainability of that activity.

In principle, if an undertaking generates turnover or invests in capital expenditure (CapEx) or operating expenditure (OpEx) corresponding to an economic activity that is described in the Climate Delegated Act, it would count as eligible for Taxonomy-eligibility disclosure. On the contrary, if an activity is not yet included in the Delegated Act, it should not be considered as being eligible. Furthermore, the Taxonomy is a dynamic framework that should expand its scope of activities overtime, in particular by including other environmental objectives, which should expand the scope of eligible activities accordingly.

In practical terms, identifying Taxonomy-eligible economic activities is the first step towards assessing the alignment of economic activities with the Taxonomy technical screening criteria. Eligible activities constitute the baseline universe of activities that have the potential to align with the technical screening criteria, including as transitional or enabling activities.

As a general principle, eligibility reporting, in accordance with Article 10 of the Disclosures Delegated Act, should serve to help undertakings prepare for their future alignment disclosures (6).

Finally, the Taxonomy Regulation, the Climate Delegated Act and the Disclosures Delegated Act do not differentiate between core and non-core economic or business activities. Therefore, undertakings should report all of their economic activities in line with the definition of eligibility under Article 1(5) of the Disclosures Delegated Act, as explained above.

The timeline for eligibility and alignment disclosures is further described in the FAQs Question 2, published on 20 December 2021.

4.   What are ‘enabling’ and ‘transitional’ economic activities in the context of Taxonomy-eligibility reporting?

Articles 16 and 10(2) of the Taxonomy Regulation define enabling and transitional economic activities (7). Transitional activities are those for which low-carbon alternatives are not yet available and that have greenhouse gas emission levels that correspond to the best performance in the sector or industry, which fulfil the two following conditions: (i) they should not hamper the development and deployment of low-carbon alternatives, and (ii) they should not lead to a lock-in of carbon-intensive assets, considering the economic lifetime of those assets. On the other hand, enabling activities are those that directly enable others to make a substantial contribution to an environmental objective.

For eligibility reporting in accordance with Article 10 of the Disclosures Delegated Act, economic activities defined as enabling or transitional activities should not be treated differently from other activities. If they are within the scope of the respective description, they should be identified as eligible.

It is noted however that an economic activity is only transitional or enabling under EU Taxonomy provided it meets the technical screening criteria in the respective section of Annex I and II to the Climate Delegated Act. Therefore, and in particular for the first year(s) of eligibility reporting in accordance with Article 10 of the Disclosures Delegated Act, those activities can only be considered as eligible-to be-transitional or eligible-to-be-enabling and reported i.e marked as such, on a voluntary basis. This is not different from eligibility reporting for other activities, where eligibility does not give an indication of the environmental performance of the activity.

5.   How to identify and report eligibility for adaptation-related economic activities?

There are two different types of activities that can make a substantial contribution to climate change adaptation included in Annex II to the Climate Delegated Act:

| — | adaptation activities, i.e. activities including adaptation solutions in accordance with Article 11 (1)(a) of the Taxonomy Regulation (8), |
| --- | --- |

—

adaptation activities, i.e. activities including adaptation solutions in accordance with Article 11 (1)(a) of the Taxonomy Regulation (8),

| — | enabling economic activities, i.e. activities providing adaptation solutions in accordance with Article 11 (1)(b) of the Taxonomy Regulation (9). |
| --- | --- |

—

enabling economic activities, i.e. activities providing adaptation solutions in accordance with Article 11 (1)(b) of the Taxonomy Regulation (9).

Eligibility reporting requirements differ depending on whether the economic activity is marked as an enabling activity or an adaptation activity in Annex II to the Climate Delegated Act. For the former category (enabling activities), the turnover and corresponding CapEx and OpEx can qualify as eligible activities (10).

For the latter category (adaptation activities), the reporting entity needs to demonstrate that a climate risk and vulnerability assessment has been performed and that an expenditure plan has been set up to implement adaptation solutions that reduce the activity’s most significant physical climate risks as set out in Appendix A to Annex II. Only if these requirements are fulfilled can the reporting entity count the CapEx and OpEx of the adaptation activity for Taxonomy-eligibility.

It is important to note here that the turnover derived from products and services associated with an adapted activity cannot be recognised for Taxonomy-eligibility. This is because once the substantial contribution to climate change adaptation of an activity has taken place (i.e. once the activity has been made resilient to climate change), the turnover corresponding to that activity should not count as eligible. Note that the adapted activity may or may not provide environmental benefits.

6.   How should NACE codes be used to identify Taxonomy-eligible activities in the context of eligibility-reporting?

NACE is a classification system for products and economic activities. NACE codes provide a framework to collect and present a wide range of statistics in economic fields, based on economic activity.

NACE uses four levels. The National transpositions of NACE codes sometimes include more than four levels, but the first four levels are the same for all Member States.

All descriptions of economic activities included in Annexes I and II to the Climate Delegated Act provide that the economic activities in the respective category can correspond to one or more specific NACE codes.

Furthermore, recital 6 of the Climate Delegated Act clarifies that the references to NACE codes should be understood as indicative. The assessment of Taxonomy-eligibility should be made in view of the specific description of the activity provided in the Annexes of the Climate Delegated Act.

More specifically, NACE codes should help users navigate through the Taxonomy, in particular those users that already work with NACE codes. NACE codes can help identify taxonomy-eligible activities (not aligned ones). However, only the specific activity description in the Climate Delegated Act sets out the exact scope of the activities included in the Act.

In practice, this means that:

| — | if a NACE code is broader than the activity description, the description prevails over the scope of the NACE code; |
| --- | --- |

—

if a NACE code is broader than the activity description, the description prevails over the scope of the NACE code;

| — | if an economic activity does not have a NACE code but does meet the activity description, it can qualify as Taxonomy-eligible; |
| --- | --- |

—

if an economic activity does not have a NACE code but does meet the activity description, it can qualify as Taxonomy-eligible;

| — | if an activity description does not fully correspond to the undertaking’s activity, it might be necessary to segment the undertaking’s activities so the respective parts can fall under the activity description or under several activities that are described separately; |
| --- | --- |

—

if an activity description does not fully correspond to the undertaking’s activity, it might be necessary to segment the undertaking’s activities so the respective parts can fall under the activity description or under several activities that are described separately;

| — | if the NACE code of an economic activity is not mentioned in the Climate Delegated Act, but the economic activity corresponds to the description of the activity, it can qualify as Taxonomy-eligible. |
| --- | --- |

—

if the NACE code of an economic activity is not mentioned in the Climate Delegated Act, but the economic activity corresponds to the description of the activity, it can qualify as Taxonomy-eligible.

7.   Can undertakings report voluntary information in the context of Taxonomy-eligibility reporting?

As a general rule, the Disclosures Delegated Act does not preclude voluntary disclosures of undertakings’ activities. On the contrary, all undertakings subject to the reporting obligation are encouraged to voluntarily report any relevant additional information where they consider that this is relevant to investors to gain a better understanding of the entity’s taxonomy-eligibility.

Nevertheless, and as a general principle for all undertakings, voluntary disclosures are not part of the mandatory disclosures under Article 8 of the Taxonomy Regulation and entities should always explain the reasons for making such disclosures.

Moreover, voluntary disclosures should not contradict or misrepresent mandatory information under the Disclosures Delegated Act. Voluntary disclosures should also not be more prominent than mandatory disclosures. If an undertaking includes a voluntary disclosure, it should add supporting detail setting out (11):

| — | the basis for this disclosure; |
| --- | --- |

—

the basis for this disclosure;

| — | the methods used for its preparation; and |
| --- | --- |

—

the methods used for its preparation; and

| — | a clear explanation of how it differs from mandatory reporting. |
| --- | --- |

—

a clear explanation of how it differs from mandatory reporting.

The briefing (12) of the Platform on Sustainable Finance provides further advice on best practices for voluntary reporting and voluntary use of the templates for eligibility reporting in the first year(s) of reporting.

NON-FINANCIAL UNDERTAKINGS

8.   How far should undertakings assess and report Taxonomy-eligible activities in their value chain, both upstream and downstream?

Generally, reporting on Taxonomy-eligible activities does not entail an assessment of an undertaking’s value-chain, as in most cases the descriptions of the activities in the Climate Delegated Act do not contain value-chain references. Likewise, companies are not expected to assess the sustainability of their suppliers in particular in the phase of eligibility reporting.

The Taxonomy sets criteria per sector and activity, not per product line or company. Companies that generate revenue in several sectors within the value chain of one product, must disclose the various processes and parts in the value chain across those sectors and activities. This applies to activities that are carried out by the reporting entity, not by its suppliers. Operators that are active in several sectors across the value chain of one product or technology, but generate revenue from that product only under one activity, must disclose only under that specific revenue-generating activity.

For reporting turnover, assets and processes in the value chain of an activity are only eligible if they are explicitly included in the activity description. For example, if the description only refers to manufacturing of final products, intermediary activities in the value chain are not automatically eligible. Accordingly, manufacturing specific car and vehicle components is not automatically eligible under the section ‘manufacture of low carbon technologies for transport’. From a supplier’s perspective, this means that the activity of a company that is a supplier to a Taxonomy-eligible activity is not by definition Taxonomy-eligible and the manufacturing of specific components for cars is not by default eligible under the activity ‘manufacture of low carbon technologies for transport’. This is because the EU Taxonomy does not take a blanket approach for upstream activities. Instead it sets out specific criteria for each included activity, including the relevant ‘do no significant harm’ criteria.

However, certain key components that are spelled out in separate Sections, such as for batteries or hydrogen (in Sections 3.2 and 3.4) are eligible. Furthermore, the manufacture of components can qualify under the section ‘manufacture of other low carbon technologies’ (Section 3.6 of Annex I to the Climate Delegated Act) where not covered by other sections and where they meet the activity description. As the activity description in Section 3.6 is very broad, NACE codes C22, C25, C26, C27 and C28 should be considered as advice for the scope of this activity. The scope of NACE codes for this activity notably includes tyres and semi-conductors, if those products meet the activity description (see also question 19). Mining, by contrast, would not be covered by the description.

For reporting CapEx and OpEx, all purchases of assets and processes or services that are essential to carry out a particular eligible activity are eligible as well. The components that car manufacturers purchase to manufacture low-carbon cars are eligible. Under eligibility reporting, the car or vehicle manufacturers do not need to screen their suppliers and individual purchases. They must only determine whether their own manufacturing process is a Taxonomy-eligible economic activity. If the own activity is considered Taxonomy-eligible, the CapEx for investments in essential assets or components corresponding to that activity is considered Taxonomy-eligible. Another example is the purchase of software that is essential to develop or use ICT solutions for climate change mitigation, if these solutions are eligible under activity 8.2.

From a client’s perspective, the purchase of outputs of Taxonomy-eligible activities is not by definition Taxonomy-eligible. For example, the purchase of renewable energy does not by definition qualify as Taxonomy-eligible (13). The purchase of Taxonomy-eligible output is only eligible when it can be reported as one of the various types of CapEx or OpEx described in Annex I to the Disclosures Delegated Act, in particular such as for example the installation of solar panels on buildings covered by category (c) of CapEx mentioned in Section 1.1.2.2 of Annex I of to the Disclosures Delegated Act (see also Question 11).

9.   How to identify Taxonomy-eligible activities of which activity descriptions contain qualifiers, such as ‘low carbon’, and ‘climate-related perils’?

The activity descriptions in the Climate Delegated Act serve as a reference point to identify Taxonomy-eligible activities. However, some descriptions contain ‘qualifiers’ which could be understood in a subjective way, such as ‘low carbon’, which may in some cases impact the eligibility.

Eligibility does not depend on compliance with the technical screening criteria but is assessed solely on the basis of the description of the activity. The qualifiers, such as ‘low carbon’ vehicles or ‘low carbon’ vessels for the purpose of Section 3.3 in the Annex I to the Climate Delegated Act (‘manufacture of low carbon technologies for transport’), which are not defined in a clear way, should only be taken into account for the purposes of determining the compliance with the technical screening criteria and are therefore not relevant for the reporting on eligibility. For example, a car manufacturer would be able to report as eligible all their car manufacturing activities, including those of combustion engine cars.

On the other hand, in the case of the activity ‘manufacture of other low carbon technologies’ (Section 3.6) the description of the activity points to the objective of the activity. The activity covers manufactured technologies that are ‘aimed at substantial life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emission savings in other sectors of the economy’. For any activity or product to be eligible for climate change mitigation under this category, the activity or product needs to have the objective of enabling a substantial reduction of GHG emissions in another sector of the economy. This means that if a technology is the best in their sector, but does not aim at substantial emission reductions in another sector, it would not be eligible. For example, a very energy efficient manufacturing process of a screw which does not aim to lead to emission reduction in another sector, would not qualify.

In a similar way, activity 10.1 in Annex II to the Climate Delegated Act (‘Non-life insurance: underwriting of climate-related perils’) refers to ‘climate related perils’. These are set out in Appendix A to Annex II to the Climate Delegated Act (‘Classification of climate-related hazards’). Insurance undertakings may only count a line of business as Taxonomy-eligible if it contains a policy with terms related to the treatment of climate perils.

10.   Should undertakings report a breakdown of Taxonomy-eligibility per environmental objective?

Activities contributing to both climate change mitigation and climate change adaptation as defined in the Climate Delegated Act are within the scope of the first reporting year(s).

Article 10(2) and 10(3) of the Disclosures Delegated Act do not require the use of the reporting templates provided in the Annexes for eligibility reporting. They also do not explicitly require a distinction between environmental objectives for mitigation and adaptation in the first year(s) of eligibility reporting.

However, advice is for undertakings to use on voluntary basis the templates included in the Annexes to the Disclosures Delegated Act that require a split of environmental objectives for alignment reporting.

This suggestion is justified by the fact that when reporting their Taxonomy-alignment key performance indicators (KPIs) in accordance with the Disclosures Delegated Act, undertakings will be required to break down their economic activities based on their contributions across environmental objectives as specified in the tables of the Annexes to the Disclosures Delegated Act. This would make it easier to compare Taxonomy-eligibility reporting and Taxonomy-alignment reporting. It would also make reporting more consistent across undertakings’ first year(s) of eligibility reporting to prepare for their Taxonomy-alignment reporting, on a voluntary basis.

For activities covered, climate change mitigation and adaptation largely overlap in scope. However, for reporting the alignment KPIs, it should be noted that there are some important differences between the two Annexes to the Climate Delegated Act catering for specificities for each objective. These differences are set out in the bullet points below.

| — | Certain activities are included only for climate change mitigation (Annex I) and not for climate change adaptation (Annex II), notably:






  — | ‘Data-driven solutions for GHG emissions reductions’ (Section 8.2); |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

Certain activities are included only for climate change mitigation (Annex I) and not for climate change adaptation (Annex II), notably:

—

‘Data-driven solutions for GHG emissions reductions’ (Section 8.2);

| — | ‘Research, development and innovation for direct air capture of CO2’ (Section 9.2); and |
| --- | --- |

—

‘Research, development and innovation for direct air capture of CO2’ (Section 9.2); and

| — | ‘Professional services related to energy performance of buildings’ (Section 9.3). |
| --- | --- |

—

‘Professional services related to energy performance of buildings’ (Section 9.3).

| — | Certain activities are included only for climate change adaptation (Annex II) and not for climate change mitigation (Annex I), notably:






  — | ‘Computer programming, consultancy and related activities’ (Section 8.2); |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

Certain activities are included only for climate change adaptation (Annex II) and not for climate change mitigation (Annex I), notably:

—

‘Computer programming, consultancy and related activities’ (Section 8.2);

| — | ‘Programming and broadcasting activities’ (Section 8.3); and |
| --- | --- |

—

‘Programming and broadcasting activities’ (Section 8.3); and

| — | ‘Engineering activities and related technical consultancy dedicated to adaptation to climate change’ (Section 9.1). |
| --- | --- |

—

‘Engineering activities and related technical consultancy dedicated to adaptation to climate change’ (Section 9.1).

| — | In addition, activities across the following sectors are only included for climate change adaptation:






  — | insurance; |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

In addition, activities across the following sectors are only included for climate change adaptation:

—

insurance;

| — | education; |
| --- | --- |

—

education;

| — | human health; |
| --- | --- |

—

human health;

| — | social work; and |
| --- | --- |

—

social work; and

| — | arts, entertainment, and recreation. |
| --- | --- |

—

arts, entertainment, and recreation.

| — | Certain activities are included in both Annexes to the Climate Delegated Act but their names and descriptions differ. Notably, this concerns certain infrastructure for transport activities (Sections 6.15, 6.16 and 6.17) and certain manufacturing activities (such as Sections 3.2 and 3.4). The names and descriptions of these activities were tailored to the specificities of the respective objective. |
| --- | --- |

—

Certain activities are included in both Annexes to the Climate Delegated Act but their names and descriptions differ. Notably, this concerns certain infrastructure for transport activities (Sections 6.15, 6.16 and 6.17) and certain manufacturing activities (such as Sections 3.2 and 3.4). The names and descriptions of these activities were tailored to the specificities of the respective objective.

| — | Lastly, some inconsistencies in the titles and descriptions of activities in Annexes I and Annex II have been signalled. For example, the words ‘light’ and ‘renting’ are missing in respectively the title and the description of activity 6.5. ‘Transport by motorbikes, passenger cars and commercial vehicles’ in Annex II. Any such inconsistencies should be signalled to the Commission for further correction. |
| --- | --- |

—

Lastly, some inconsistencies in the titles and descriptions of activities in Annexes I and Annex II have been signalled. For example, the words ‘light’ and ‘renting’ are missing in respectively the title and the description of activity 6.5. ‘Transport by motorbikes, passenger cars and commercial vehicles’ in Annex II. Any such inconsistencies should be signalled to the Commission for further correction.

The briefing (14) of the Platform on Sustainable Finance provides further advice on best practices for voluntary reporting for eligibility reporting in the first year(s) of reporting.

11.   How are turnover, CapEx and OpEx defined in the context of Taxonomy-eligibility reporting?

The Disclosures Delegated Act sets out the definitions of Turnover, CapEx and OpEx key performance indicators (KPIs) in Sections 1.1.1, 1.1.2 and 1.1.3 of Annex I respectively.

Non-financial undertakings should disclose the part of their net turnover (as defined in Section 1.1.1 of Annex I to the Disclosures Delegated Act) that corresponds to their Taxonomy-eligible economic activities.

As regards eligible CapEx information, in accordance with Section 1.1.3.2 of Annex I to the Disclosures Delegated Act, reporting focuses on the three categories of CapEx:

| a) | CapEx that is related to assets or processes corresponding to Taxonomy-eligible economic activities; |
| --- | --- |

a)

CapEx that is related to assets or processes corresponding to Taxonomy-eligible economic activities;

| b) | CapEx that is part of a plan to expand Taxonomy-eligible economic activities or enable Taxonomy-eligible economic activities to become Taxonomy-aligned. |
| --- | --- |

b)

CapEx that is part of a plan to expand Taxonomy-eligible economic activities or enable Taxonomy-eligible economic activities to become Taxonomy-aligned.

| c) | CapEx mentioned in category (c) of Section 1.1.2.2 of Annex I to the Disclosures Delegated Act, relating to the purchase of output from Taxonomy-eligible economic activities and individual measures enabling the target activities to become low-carbon or to lead to greenhouse gas reductions, notably activities listed in points 7.3 to 7.6 of Annex I to the Climate Delegated Act and other economic activities listed in the delegated acts adopted under Article 10(3), Article 11(3), Article 12(2), Article 13(2), Article 14(2) and Article 15(2) of the Taxonomy Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

c)

CapEx mentioned in category (c) of Section 1.1.2.2 of Annex I to the Disclosures Delegated Act, relating to the purchase of output from Taxonomy-eligible economic activities and individual measures enabling the target activities to become low-carbon or to lead to greenhouse gas reductions, notably activities listed in points 7.3 to 7.6 of Annex I to the Climate Delegated Act and other economic activities listed in the delegated acts adopted under Article 10(3), Article 11(3), Article 12(2), Article 13(2), Article 14(2) and Article 15(2) of the Taxonomy Regulation.

The measures corresponding to category (c) must be implemented and operational within 18 months.

For CapEx category c), the assessment focuses on the output and individual measures. It does not focus on the target economic activity for which the expenditure is incurred. Entities must assess whether the expenditure qualifies as:

| — | a purchase of an output of a Taxonomy-eligible activity; or |
| --- | --- |

—

a purchase of an output of a Taxonomy-eligible activity; or

| — | an individual measure to improve energy efficiency included in the Taxonomy. |
| --- | --- |

—

an individual measure to improve energy efficiency included in the Taxonomy.

In other words such outputs and measures must be listed in the Climate Delegated Act. Expenditures on assets or processes which might be useful to enable the target activity to become low-carbon but which are not activities listed in the Climate Delegated Act do not fall under category (c).

For a non-eligible target activity, for example a restaurant purchasing and installing solar panels, such expenditures could fall under category (c). For renovation of buildings, category (c) only covers measures corresponding to activities listed in the Climate Delegated Act (e.g. certain energy-efficient windows).

The reporting of OpEx for the first year(s) of implementation of the Disclosures Delegated Act must follow the same approach. Reporting on the three categories mentioned in Section 1.1.3.2 should focus on the eligibility of the economic activities to which this expenditure correspond. Therefore, the three categories (a), (b) and (c) mentioned in Sections 1.1.2.2 and 1.1.3.2 relating to the numerator of CapEx and OpEx, respectively, are relevant for eligibility reporting in the first year(s) of implementation of the Disclosures Delegated Act.

For example, regarding category (b), any CapEx on eligible activities made in 2021 (and reported in 2022 disclosures) would count as eligible in the 2022 report. This is regardless of whether the investment under the CapEx plan will meet the technical screening criteria set out in the Climate Delegated Act at maturity.

Similarly, OpEx category (b) on eligible activities made in 2021 (and reported in 2022 disclosures) would count as eligible in the 2022 report. This is irrespective of whether the corresponding economic activity meets the technical screening criteria. This is because entities do not need to report on the alignment of their economic activities in the first year of reporting.

The briefing (15) of the Platform on Sustainable Finance provides further advice on best practices for voluntary reporting for eligibility reporting in the first year(s) of reporting.

12.   What is the scope of ‘other direct expenditures’ set out in Annex I to the Disclosures Delegated Act?

Section 1.1.3.1 (‘Denominator’) of Annex 1 to the Disclosures Delegated Act sets out that the denominator of the KPI for Taxonomy-aligned reporting ‘shall cover direct non-capitalised costs that relate to research and development, building renovation measures, short-term lease, maintenance and repair, and any other direct expenditures relating to the day-to-day servicing of assets of property, plant and equipment by the undertaking or third party to whom activities are outsourced that are necessary to ensure the continued and effective functioning of such assets.’

The OpEx category in that sense is closely related to maintenance and repair costs which are already explicitly mentioned in the OpEx definition, in Section 1.1.3.1 of Annex I.

In practice, this means the denominator of the OpEx KPI for Taxonomy-alignment reporting includes/excludes the costs set out in the table below.

| Inclusions | Exclusions (16) |
| --- | --- |
| — | Maintenance material |

Inclusions

Exclusions (16)

—

Maintenance material

| — | Cost of employee repairing a machine |
| --- | --- |

—

Cost of employee repairing a machine

| — | Cost of employee cleaning a factory |
| --- | --- |

—

Cost of employee cleaning a factory

| — | IT dedicated to maintenance |
| --- | --- |

—

IT dedicated to maintenance

| — | Overheads |
| --- | --- |

—

Overheads

| — | Raw materials |
| --- | --- |

—

Raw materials

| — | Cost of employee operating the machine |
| --- | --- |

—

Cost of employee operating the machine

| — | Cost of managing research and development projects |
| --- | --- |

—

Cost of managing research and development projects

| — | Electricity, fluids, or reagents needed to operate property, plant, and equipment |
| --- | --- |

—

Electricity, fluids, or reagents needed to operate property, plant, and equipment

The briefing (17) of the Platform on Sustainable Finance provides further advice on best practices for voluntary reporting for eligibility reporting in the first year(s) of reporting.

13.   How should undertakings account for negative revenues in the context of Taxonomy-eligibility reporting?

The Disclosures Delegated Act does not specify how to treat negative revenues under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

Negative revenue could be treated as a 0 % value for Taxonomy-eligibility reporting. However, undertakings could, report the negative value in monetary amount.

If the entity makes negative revenue within one activity, the denominator could be the absolute value of the positive turnover from the remaining activities. This could be used to calculate the proportion of eligible activities. Please see the example in Table 2.

Table 2

Example of how to report Taxonomy-eligible turnover if there is negative revenue

| Activity | Example: absolute turnover | Example: proportion of turnover |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Activity A | EUR 50 million | 33  % |
| Activity B | EUR 100 million | 67  % |
| Activity C | EUR –50 million | 0  % |

Activity

Example: absolute turnover

Example: proportion of turnover

Activity A

EUR 50 million

33  %

Activity B

EUR 100 million

67  %

Activity C

EUR –50 million

0  %

14.   Should undertakings avoid double reporting of Taxonomy-eligible activities?

Under Article 10 (2) of the Disclosures Delegated Act, undertakings must use Section 1.2 of Annex I to report Taxonomy-eligibility information as it relates to the reporting of qualitative information. Annex I, Section 1.2.2.1, point (c), explicitly states that undertakings should explain how they avoided double counting in the allocation of the amounts of Taxonomy-aligned turnover, CapEx and OpEx in the numerator of the relevant KPIs. The intention behind this requirement is to ensure reliability and consistency in reporting the three KPIs.

It is suggested that under their Taxonomy-eligibility reporting, undertakings adopt a similar approach to that under Annex I, Section 1.2.2.1. Undertakings must explain how they have avoided double counting of the relevant amounts of turnover and expenditure across their reporting of eligible economic activities.

15.   Should an entity report Taxonomy-eligible turnover when the economic activity has not been performed by itself, but by a subcontractor?

Annex I, Section 1.1.1, clarifies that the reported turnover of Taxonomy-aligned activities must cover the revenue recognised under international accounting standard 1, paragraph 82(a), as adopted by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1126/2008 (18).

For Taxonomy-eligibility reporting, in accordance with Article 10 of the Disclosures Delegated Act, entities reporting under the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are encouraged to use the revenue accounted for in their financial statements in accordance with IFRS to disclose their turnover for the eligible activities.

An entity should first determine the underlying economic activity in accordance with Annex I to the Climate Delegated Act to assess how it should report turnover from Taxonomy-eligible activities, although the goods or services have been provided by a subcontractor. This is in line with the IFRS rules. Then, the entity should determine whether it controls the economic activity provided by a subcontractor. ‘Control’ in this context means whether the entity controls the circumstances under which the subcontractor works.

The briefing (19) of the Platform on Sustainable Finance provides further advice on best practices for voluntary reporting for eligibility reporting in the first year(s) of reporting.

16.   How should a non-financial undertaking report on products and services that are both consumed internally and sold externally?

Annex I to the Disclosures Delegated Act clarifies that undertakings must use the same accounting principles that apply to the preparation of their consolidated annual financial statements to calculate their Taxonomy-aligned turnover. This is to ensure comparability with the turnover reported in the entity’s consolidated financial statements. As a result, when a consolidated non-financial statement is prepared, the accounting principles of consolidation would exclude intercompany sales and turnover from own consumption.

Section 1.2.3 of Annex I to the Disclosures Delegated Act provides that however non-financial undertakings ‘shall disclose information about the amounts related to Taxonomy-aligned activities pursued for non-financial undertakings’ own internal consumption’.

As a consequence, under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting, an entity should only include in its numerator the turnover from external sales. Turnover from ‘internal sales’ could be disclosed voluntarily, separately from the mandatory disclosure under the Disclosures Delegated Act (20).

The briefing (21) of the Platform on Sustainable Finance provides further advice on best practices for voluntary reporting for eligibility reporting in the first year(s) of reporting.

17.   How should non-financial undertakings treat intangibles under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting?

The Disclosures Delegated Act refers to intangibles in the context of Taxonomy-alignment reporting in two sections:

| a) | Section 1.1.1 in relation to the turnover KPIs; and |
| --- | --- |

a)

Section 1.1.1 in relation to the turnover KPIs; and

| b) | Section 1.1.2.1 in relation to the denominator of the CapEx KPI. |
| --- | --- |

b)

Section 1.1.2.1 in relation to the denominator of the CapEx KPI.

Therefore, CapEx reporting under Article 10 (2) of the Disclosures Delegated Act must include intangible assets that correspond to eligible economic activities as defined in Article 1(5) of the Disclosures Delegated Act.

The same approach should be followed for eligible turnover disclosures. This means that net turnover from intangible assets should be counted if it corresponds to eligible economic activities under the Disclosures Delegated Act.

Intangible assets are not included in the OpEx definition. However, the definition of the denominator of the OpEx KPI in Section 1.1.3.1, which refers to ‘direct non-capitalised costs’ (see Question 12 just above). Therefore, intangibles that are not capitalised under international accounting standard 38 do not count as assets and are therefore allocated to OpEx.

18.   Should non-financial undertakings report the Taxonomy-eligibility of their non-EU activities?

Non-financial undertakings that fall within scope of the NFRD must cover in their non-financial reporting their economic activities regardless of whether these take place outside the Union. The same approach applies to the reporting obligation under Article 8 of the Taxonomy Regulation and under the Disclosures Delegated Act (22).

Article 10 (2) of the Disclosures Delegated Act sets out the reporting obligations of non-financial undertakings for their first year of reporting. Non-financial undertakings must include the turnover, CapEx and OpEx related to non-EU eligible activities in their eligibility disclosures.

Non-financial undertakings would also be expected to provide information on the assessment of economic activities carried out in non-EU countries in the narrative information required under Annex I, Section 1.2 (Specification of disclosures accompanying the KPIs of non-financial undertakings). The information disclosed under this section would focus on the assessment of eligibility of economic activities.

19.   How should non-financial undertakings treat the turnover of eligible activities that are deconsolidated during the financial year?

Annex I, Section 1.1.1 clarifies that the reported turnover of Taxonomy-aligned activities must cover the revenue recognised under international accounting standard 1, paragraph 82(a), as adopted by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1126/2008.

For Taxonomy-eligibility reporting and in accordance with Article 10 of the Disclosures Delegated Act, entities reporting under the IFRS are encouraged to use the revenue accounted for in their financial statements under the IFRS to disclose their turnover for the eligible activities.

Under IFRS 10, paragraphs 25 and B98, if a parent undertaking loses control over a subsidiary, it must continue to recognise any income and expenses arising from that subsidiary and incurred up to the date of deconsolidation (i.e. where a subsidiary no longer forms part of a parent undertaking/group) in its income statement. However, all related assets and liabilities must be derecognised from the statement of financial position upon deconsolidation.

For example, a subsidiary is sold on 30 June and up to that date it has generated Taxonomy-eligible turnover. Therefore, on 31 December, the parent undertaking reporting under IFRS will no longer consolidate the assets and liabilities of that subsidiary due to the loss of control that occurred on 30 June. However, it will still account in its income statement for the Taxonomy-eligible turnover arising from the former subsidiary up until June 30. For reporting under the Disclosures Delegated Act, this means that Taxonomy-eligible sales must also be recognised up to 30 June.

FINANCIAL UNDERTAKINGS

20.   What should financial undertakings report if underlying entities’ information is not publicly available?

Undertakings falling under the NFRD must report their Taxonomy-eligibility in their non-financial statement alongside their annual accounts. Different undertakings report their annual accounts at different points throughout the fiscal year. Therefore, financial undertakings may not have all the information publicly available to enable their own eligibility disclosures in the first reporting cycle (in 2022) (23).

Article 10(3) of the Disclosures Delegated Act does not exclude application of Article 8(4) of the Disclosures Delegated Act. Under this Article, financial undertakings must use the most recently available information provided by the financial or non-financial underlying investee entity or counterparty for their eligibility reporting. This aids consistency between Taxonomy-eligibility reporting and Taxonomy-alignment reporting, and across undertakings.

If information is not readily or publicly available, financial undertakings are encouraged to contact their underlying entities that fall under the scope of the NFRD. These could use either voluntary disclosures or bilateral exchanges with their underlying investees or counterparties to provide Taxonomy-related information.

In addition, financial undertakings could choose to estimate their eligibility disclosures and report the information voluntarily, separately from their mandatory disclosures under the Disclosures Delegated Act (24).

The briefing (25) of the Platform on Sustainable Finance provides further advice on best practices for voluntary reporting for eligibility reporting in the first year(s) of reporting.

21.   What is the difference between covered assets and total assets in the context of Taxonomy-eligibility reporting?

The Annexes to the Disclosures Delegated Act set out the scope of the KPIs for Taxonomy-alignment reporting.

For instance, Annex V, Section 1.1 (‘Scope of the KPIs’), sets out that, for credit institutions, covered assets are the total on-balance sheet assets minus those assets that are excluded from the calculation of the green asset ratio. This means that covered assets are all assets in the balance-sheet or portfolio of an asset manager, excluding exposures to central banks, supranational issuers and central governments, as set out in Article 7(1) of the Disclosures Delegated Act. For credit institutions, assets held for trading as defined in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/451 (26) (FINREP)) also do not fall under the KPIs.

In line with the exclusions under Article 10(3) (b) and (c), financial undertakings should use a scope of covered assets for their eligibility reporting disclosures that is similar to the scope of covered assets for their alignment reporting. This would make it easier to compare Taxonomy-eligibility reporting and Taxonomy-alignment reporting.

This means that the financial undertaking should clearly indicate:

| — | the assets that are excluded from the denominator of the Taxonomy-eligible assets ratio (e.g. exposures to central governments, central banks and supranational issuers; the trading portfolio of credit institutions); and |
| --- | --- |

—

the assets that are excluded from the denominator of the Taxonomy-eligible assets ratio (e.g. exposures to central governments, central banks and supranational issuers; the trading portfolio of credit institutions); and

| — | the percentage of covered assets that are Taxonomy-eligible over total assets. |
| --- | --- |

—

the percentage of covered assets that are Taxonomy-eligible over total assets.

22.   Should cash and cash equivalent assets be considered in the context of Taxonomy-eligibility reporting?

Article 10(3) should be read in conjunction with Article 7 (1), (2) and (3) of the Disclosures Delegated Act. Cash and cash equivalent assets are not excluded from the exposures referred to in Article 7 (1), (2) and (3).

Under the Disclosures Delegated Act and its Annex I, these exposures are included in the denominator of the Taxonomy-aligned KPIs of financial institutions. However, it does not seem feasible to assess the eligibility of cash and cash equivalent assets as they are not actually funding an economic activity. It is also not clear which economic activity these assets will be allocated. These assets can only be reported as funding eligible activities once the funds have been allocated to a specific activity.

ASSET MANAGERS

23.   How may asset managers weight their holdings in a portfolio to report Taxonomy-eligible assets?

Article 10(3) of the Disclosures Delegated Act do not require the use of the reporting templates provided in the Annexes for eligibility reporting. However, advice is for undertakings to voluntarily use the templates provided in the Annexes to the Disclosures Delegated Act to prepare their Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

In this regard, Annex III to the Disclosures Delegated Act, sets out the details of the numerator and denominator of asset managers’ for their Taxonomy-aligned KPIs.

In accordance with Annex III Section 1 (‘Content of KPI to be disclosed by asset managers’), eligibility reporting is not weighted by the stake in the undertaking’s equity, debt or enterprise value including cash. It is weighted by the value of the exposures in the total assets of the asset manager (see the definition of the numerator in Annex III, Section 1.1).

For example, where an asset manager is exposed to two assets:

| — | EUR 100 million equity in 100 % eligible company A; |
| --- | --- |

—

EUR 100 million equity in 100 % eligible company A;

| — | EUR 100 million bond in 0 % eligible company B
  = EUR 200 million total assets. |
| --- | --- |

—

EUR 100 million bond in 0 % eligible company B

= EUR 200 million total assets.

This means: 50 % eligibility over total assets = (100 × 100 % + 100 × 0 %) / 200.

The briefing (27) of the Platform on Sustainable Finance provides further advice on best practices for voluntary reporting for eligibility reporting in the first year(s) of reporting.

24.   Do mortgages qualify as eligible for an asset manager (as an investment) or only for the bank that provided the loan originally?

Article 10(3) should be read in conjunction with Article 7 (1), (2) and (3) of the Disclosures Delegated Act. Mortgages are not excluded from the exposures referred to in Article 7(1), (2) and (3). Therefore, mortgages should qualify as eligible assets for both asset managers and credit institutions.

INSURERS

25.   What activities should an insurer and a reinsurer consider when reporting their underwriting activities in the context of Taxonomy-eligibility reporting?

The Climate Delegated Act sets out the activities covered by the underwriting. These activities relate to non-life insurance and reinsurance activities consisting in underwriting of climate-related perils.

Eligible non-life insurance activities are specified in, Section 10.1, sub-section ‘Description of the activity’, points (a) to (h) of Annex II to the Climate Delegated Act. As indicated in the name of the activity, apart from belonging to a relevant line of business, the insurance policy terms must provide coverage of risks related to ‘climate perils’ in view of Appendix A to Annex II to the Climate Delegated Act in order to be counted for Taxonomy-eligibility.

The reinsurance of eligible insurance activities can also be counted for Taxonomy-eligibility.

CREDIT INSTITUTIONS

26.   Do the reporting obligations under the Disclosures Delegated Act apply to a large entity that is not a credit institution under Article 4 of the Capital Requirements Regulation but is treated as a financial undertaking under Articles 19a and 29a of the NFRD?

This situation can arise if specialised financial undertakings (e.g. factoring or guarantee businesses) that are not credit institutions under Article 4 of Regulation EU 575/2013 (28) (the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR)) are treated as such under national law. If an entity does not meet the definition of a credit institution set out in Article 4 of the CRR, normally it does not fall under in scope of the Disclosures Delegated Act.

If, on the other hand, the same entity is deemed a large public-interest undertaking with more than 500 employees, it falls under the NFRD and thus the Disclosures Delegated Act. Then it is also subject to the Taxonomy Regulation and the related disclosure obligations. Furthermore, such firms are encouraged to disclose voluntarily under Annex VI if they consider this Annex to be more relevant and also if they are submitting supervisory reporting in accordance with (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/451 (29) (FINREP)) to their National Competent Authority (NCA).

27.   How can CapEx be associated with general purpose lending in the context of Taxonomy-eligibility reporting?

Article 10(2) and 10(3) of the Disclosures Delegated Act do not require the use of the reporting templates provided in the Annexes for eligibility reporting. However, advice is for undertakings to voluntarily use the templates provided in the Annexes to the Disclosures Delegated Act to prepare their Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

In this regard, Annex V to the Disclosures Delegated Act, sets out the details of how credit institutions must report their Taxonomy-alignment KPIs:

If the use of proceeds is unknown ((i) loans and advances – general purpose, (ii) debt securities – general purpose, and (iii) equity holdings, all of which are recorded in the banking book), Taxonomy aligned/eligibility exposures should be calculated twice. They are the sum of the gross carrying amount of the total loans and advances, debt securities, and equity holdings, with unknown use of proceeds to non-financial undertakings. The sum must be weighted by the proportion of Taxonomy-aligned/eligible economic activities of the counterparty calculated based on:

| — | the turnover KPI of the counterparty (share of the turnover that is Taxonomy aligned); and |
| --- | --- |

—

the turnover KPI of the counterparty (share of the turnover that is Taxonomy aligned); and

| — | the CapEx KPI of the counterparty (share of the CapEx that is Taxonomy aligned). |
| --- | --- |

—

the CapEx KPI of the counterparty (share of the CapEx that is Taxonomy aligned).

Therefore, to report Taxonomy-alignment KPIs, credit institutions must assign the published CapEx KPI of the underlying company to the relevant general purpose loan, debt security, or equity holding in the same manner as the turnover KPI (30).

For eligibility-reporting, credit institutions could disclose the proportion of their eligible general-purpose assets based on:

| — | the underlying entity’s reported eligible turnover; |
| --- | --- |

—

the underlying entity’s reported eligible turnover;

| — | and on the underlying entity’s reported eligible CapEx. |
| --- | --- |

—

and on the underlying entity’s reported eligible CapEx.

The briefing (31) of the Platform on Sustainable Finance provides further advice on best practices for voluntary reporting for eligibility reporting and use of the reporting templates in the first year(s) of reporting.

28.   How should a credit institution with a Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MifiD) investment firm license report its Taxonomy-eligible economic activities?

If a parent undertaking is classified as a credit institution (under the CRR), but undertakes investment activities, it should follow the requirements for credit institutions under the Disclosures Delegated Act.

Article 10(2) and 10(3) of the Disclosures Delegated Act do not require the use of the reporting templates provided in the Annexes for eligibility reporting. However, advice is for undertakings to voluntarily use the templates provided in the Annexes of the Disclosures Delegated Act to prepare their Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

In this regard, Annex VI to the Disclosures Delegated Act, sets out the templates that credit institutions must use to report their Taxonomy-alignment key KPIs for investment activities. Therefore, for eligibility-reporting, credit institutions could disclose, on a voluntary basis, the proportion of their eligible investment activities.

The briefing (32) of the Platform on Sustainable Finance provides further advice on best practices for voluntary reporting for eligibility reporting and use of the reporting templates in the first year(s) of reporting.

DEBT MARKET

29.   How to assess and report the Taxonomy-eligibility of a debt asset such as a bond or a loan?

Article 10(2) and (3) of the Disclosures Delegated Act do not require the use of the reporting templates provided in the Annexes for eligibility reporting. However, advice is for undertakings to voluntarily use the templates provided in the Annexes of the Disclosures Delegated Act to prepare their Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

In this regard, Annex V to the Disclosures Delegated Act, sets out the details of how to assess and report loans and debt instruments for Taxonomy-alignment KPIs. Annex V explains that general purpose lending and/or debt carries the Taxonomy-eligibility turnover or CapEx value of the underlying entity (i.e. investee or counterparty).

To calculate Taxonomy-eligibility of general-purpose debt instruments, it is recommended to apply the eligibility value of the underlying entity (turnover and CapEx).

If all or a portion of the use of proceeds of a debt instrument is Taxonomy-eligible, reporting of this value would take precedence over the issuer-level value within the Taxonomy-alignment KPIs. Such proceeds may be directly allocated to Taxonomy-eligible activities or be part of a CapEx or OpEx plan to render an activity or asset Taxonomy-aligned.

For Taxonomy-eligibility reporting, it could be considered, for example, that if 50 % of the proceeds of the debt instrument are allocated to Taxonomy-eligible projects or programmes, the Taxonomy-eligibility Turnover and CapEx values of the bond should be 50 %.

In this sense, not all of a use of proceeds (green) debt instrument would be eligible under the Taxonomy in its entirety. However, it would be eligible for the portion of the proceeds that can be allocated to Taxonomy-eligible activities.

The briefing (33) of the Platform on Sustainable Finance provides further advice on best practices for voluntary reporting for eligibility reporting in the first year(s) of reporting.

30.   Does the use of all proceeds from debt products need to be independently verified if reported as Taxonomy-eligible?

There is no requirement that proceeds from debt products be independently verified as Taxonomy-eligible. This answer has no bearing on specific requirements for external review or external assurance under Union legislation.

31.   Can green debt instruments from non-EU entities be reported as Taxonomy-eligible?

Article 10(3) of the Disclosures Delegated Act clarifies that financial undertakings should disclose information taking into consideration the provisions under Article 7(3) of the Disclosures Delegated Act.

In accordance with Article 7(3) of the Disclosures Delegated Act, undertakings which do not fall under the NFRD (including non-EU undertakings) are excluded from the numerator but included in the denominator of the KPIs for Taxonomy-alignment reporting of financial undertakings. This treatment will be reviewed by 30 June 2024.

However, Article 7(4) states: ‘Without prejudice to paragraph 1, environmentally sustainable bonds or debt securities with the purpose of financing specific identified activities that are issued by an investee undertaking shall be included in the numerator of KPIs up to the full value of Taxonomy-aligned economic activities that the proceeds of those bonds and debt securities finance, on the basis of information provided by the investee undertaking.’

Therefore, financial undertakings shall include in the numerator of the eligibility disclosure the Taxonomy-eligible proceeds of environmentally sustainable bonds and debt securities whose purpose is to finance specific identified activities.

Debt securities under Article 7(4) include non-EU issuers’ use of proceeds bonds, and do not include use of proceed loans, in line with the definitions set out in the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/451 (FINREP) (34).

As a general remark, the scope of this exclusion from the numerator of the KPI will be reviewed in 2024 in accordance with Article 9 of the Disclosures Delegated Act.

In addition, the Disclosures Delegated Act does not prevent financial undertakings from including voluntary information about their exposures to non-EU entities’ investments with use of proceeds that is deemed to be eligible. Such information must always be reported separately from mandatory disclosures under the Disclosures Delegated Act (35).

The briefing (36) of the Platform on Sustainable Finance provides further advice on best practices for voluntary reporting for eligibility reporting in the first year(s) of reporting.

32.   Can green sovereign debt be reported as Taxonomy-eligible?

Article 10(3) of the Disclosures Delegated Act clarifies that financial undertakings should disclose information taking into consideration the provisions set out in Article 7(1) of the Disclosures Delegated Act.

Article 7(1) excludes exposures to central governments, central banks and supranational issuers from the calculation of the numerator and denominator of KPIs of financial undertakings. Therefore, in accordance with Article 10 of the Disclosures Delegated Act, financial undertakings should not include their sovereign exposures in their Taxonomy-eligible disclosures.

The briefing (37) of the Platform on Sustainable Finance provides further advice on best practices for voluntary reporting for eligibility reporting in the first year(s) of reporting.

INTERACTION WITH OTHER REGULATIONS

33.   How does the Disclosures Delegated Act interact with the proposed requirements on corporate sustainability reporting?

The proposed corporate sustainability reporting directive (CSRD), amending the existing reporting requirements introduced in the Accounting Directive by the NFRD should complement the Disclosures Delegated Act, which has the same mandatory scope of application as the rules on sustainability reporting in the Accounting Directive (38). The proposed CSRD will extend the personal scope of the current reporting requirements to cover:

| — | all large listed and non-listed companies; and |
| --- | --- |

—

all large listed and non-listed companies; and

| — | all listed SMEs, except micro companies. |
| --- | --- |

—

all listed SMEs, except micro companies.

In addition to the Taxonomy related reporting requirements currently detailed in the Taxonomy Delegated Act, these companies will need to publish sustainability information in their management reports, in accordance with sustainability reporting standards which the Commission will adopt via delegated acts.

According to the CSRD proposal, companies concerned would need to disclose sustainability information under the new requirements for the first time in 2024, for the financial year 2023. Under the proposal, listed SMEs would benefit from a transition period of 3 years and would be required to disclose the information for the first time in 2027 for the financial year 2026.

In principle and depending on the outcome of the legislative process on the CSRD, reporting requirements under each regulation will be clearly defined and should also be streamlined and coherent to the extent possible so that companies should not report the same information twice.

The information under the Disclosures Delegated Act should be reported in the same management report at company level, alongside other sustainability related information required under the CSRD provisions as proposed. To this information, the same assurance and digitalisation requirements would apply as to the rest of the sustainability information reported.

---

(1)  Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2178 of 6 July 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council by specifying the content and presentation of information to be disclosed by undertakings subject to Articles 19a or 29a of Directive 2013/34/EU concerning environmentally sustainable economic activities, and specifying the methodology to comply with that disclosure obligation (OJ L 443, 10.12.2021, p. 9).

(2)  Directive 2014/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 amending Directive 2013/34/EU as regards disclosure of non-financial and diversity information by certain large undertakings and groups (OJ L 330, 15.11.2014, p. 1).

(3)  Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2020 on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment, and amending Regulation (EU) 2019/2088 (OJ L 198, 22.6.2020, p. 13).

(4)  Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19).

(5)  Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2139 of 4 June 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing the technical screening criteria for determining the conditions under which an economic activity qualifies as contributing substantially to climate change mitigation or climate change adaptation and for determining whether that economic activity causes no significant harm to any of the other environmental objectives (OJ L 442, 9.12.2021, p. 1).

(6)  For the sake of clarity, it is noted that eligible activities do not equal to the denominator of the Taxonomy-alignment KPI. For non-financial undertakings total CapEx, OpEx and turnover will be used. Covered assets for the KPI of financial undertakings.

(7)  Please refer to Articles 10(2) and 16 of the Taxonomy Regulation EU 2020/852.

(8)  Article 11(1)(a) of the Taxonomy Regulation EU 2020/852 refers to activities, including adaptation solutions that either substantially reduce the risk of the adverse impact of the current climate and the expected future climate on that economic activity or substantially reduce that adverse impact, without increasing the risk of an adverse impact on people, nature or assets.

(9)  Article 11 (1)(b) of the Taxonomy Regulation refers to activities that provide adaptation solutions that, in addition to satisfying the conditions set out in Article 16, contribute substantially to preventing or reducing the risk of the adverse impact of the current climate and the expected future climate on people, nature or assets, without increasing the risk of an adverse impact on other people, nature or assets.

(10)  In accordance with recital 48 of the Climate Delegated Act ‘...However, when the core business of economic activities enabling adaptation in accordance with Article 11(1), point (b), of Regulation (EU) 2020/852 is to provide technologies, products, services, information, or practices with the objectives of increasing the level of resilience to physical climate risks of other people, nature, cultural heritage, assets or of other economic activities, in addition to capital expenditure, the turnover derived from products or services associated with those economic activities should be considered as proportion of turnover derived from products or services associated with economic activities that qualify as environmentally sustainable.’

(11)  See also question 12 of the FAQs published on 20 December 2021.

(12)  Platform considerations on reporting voluntary information under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

(13)  This may be reviewed overtime in light of the Fit for 55 package and climate goals agreed by the Council and the European Parliament.

(14)  Platform considerations on the reporting of voluntary information under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

(15)  Platform considerations on the reporting of voluntary information under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

(16)  This list is non-exhaustive and provides examples of expenses that would not fit with the OpEx notion of ‘maintenance and repair, and any other direct expenditures relating to the day-to-day servicing of assets of property, plant and equipment by the undertaking or third party to whom activities are outsourced that are necessary to ensure the continued and effective functioning of such assets’ per Section 1.1.3.1 of Annex I. As a general remark, expenses relating to overheads should be excluded to avoid as much as possible the subjectivity inherent in making allocations of those overheads to the specific item of property, plant and equipment concerned.

(17)  Platform considerations on the reporting of voluntary information under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

(18)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1126/2008 of 3 November 2008 adopting certain international accounting standards in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 320, 29.11.2008, p. 1).

(19)  Platform considerations on the reporting of voluntary information under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

(20)  Voluntary reporting should be prepared on a basis that does not contradict or misrepresent the mandatory information pursuant to the Disclosures Delegated Act and it should not be given more prominence than the mandatory disclosures. Where an undertaking includes voluntary reporting, this should be accompanied by supporting detail setting out the basis for this disclosure and methods used for its preparation along with a clear explanation on how it differs from mandatory reporting.

(21)  Platform considerations on the reporting of voluntary information under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

(22)  For financial undertakings, Article 7 of the Disclosures Delegated Act clarifies that non-NFRD exposures (which include non-EU) shall not be reported in the numerator of the KPI, subject to a review to be carried out in accordance with Article 9 of the Disclosures Delegated Act.

(23)  For further detail on reporting obligations, please see Question 4 (‘How should mixed groups composed of financial and non-financial undertakings, or with diversified and multiple lines of activities report?’) of the published FAQs.

(24)  Voluntary reporting should not contradict or misrepresent mandatory information under the Disclosures Delegated Act. It should also not be more prominent than mandatory disclosures. If an undertaking includes voluntary reporting, it should add supporting detail to it setting out the basis for this disclosure, the methods used for its preparation, and a clear explanation of how it differs from mandatory reporting.

(25)  Platform considerations on the reporting of voluntary information under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

(26)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/451 of 17 December 2020 laying down implementing technical standards for the application of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to supervisory reporting of institutions and repealing Implementing Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 (OJ L 97, 19.3.2021, p. 1).

(27)  Platform considerations on the reporting of voluntary information under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

(28)  Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 1).

(29)  Regulation (EU) 2021/451 of 17 December 2020 laying down implementing technical standards for the application of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to supervisory reporting of institutions and repealing Implementing Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 (OJ L 97, 19.3.2021, p. 1).

(30)  This approach is aligned with the reporting rules set out in the Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD). If there is no information on the issuer, the entity may use disclosures of the parent entity if it falls under the NFRD.

(31)  Platform considerations on the reporting of voluntary information under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

(32)  Platform considerations on the reporting of voluntary information under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

(33)  Platform considerations on the reporting of voluntary information under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

(34)  See Annex V to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/451 and Art 1 2(a) of Commission Recommendation of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).

(35)  Voluntary reporting should not contradict or misrepresent mandatory information under the Disclosures Delegated Act. It should also not be more prominent than mandatory disclosures. If an undertaking includes voluntary reporting, it should add supporting detail to it setting out the basis for this disclosure, the methods used for its preparation, and a clear explanation of how it differs from mandatory reporting.

(36)  Platform considerations on the reporting of voluntary information under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

(37)  Platform considerations on the reporting of voluntary information under Taxonomy-eligibility reporting.

(38)  The proposed corporate sustainability reporting directive (CSRD) is expected to amend the provisions of the Accounting Directive introduced by the Non-Financial Reporting Directive, subject to the outcome of the process of negotiations of the proposal. See proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2013/34/EU, Directive 2004/109/EC, Directive 2006/43/EC and Regulation (EU) No 537/2014, as regards corporate sustainability reporting, COM/2021/189 final.

---

IV Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

| 6.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/20

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

5 October 2022

(2022/C 385/02)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 0,9915 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 143,18 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4388 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,87340 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,8376 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 0,9756 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 141,30 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 10,4858 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,524 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 423,60 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,7910 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,9385 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 18,4201 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5380 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3493 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 7,7831 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7419 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,4124 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 406,71 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 17,6228 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,0555 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5255 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 061,81 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,5911 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 58,212 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | |
| THB | Thai baht | 37,102 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 5,1575 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 19,8625 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 80,9090 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

0,9915

JPY

Japanese yen

143,18

DKK

Danish krone

7,4388

GBP

Pound sterling

0,87340

SEK

Swedish krona

10,8376

CHF

Swiss franc

0,9756

ISK

Iceland króna

141,30

NOK

Norwegian krone

10,4858

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,524

HUF

Hungarian forint

423,60

PLN

Polish zloty

4,7910

RON

Romanian leu

4,9385

TRY

Turkish lira

18,4201

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5380

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3493

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

7,7831

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7419

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,4124

KRW

South Korean won

1 406,71

ZAR

South African rand

17,6228

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,0555

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5255

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 061,81

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,5911

PHP

Philippine peso

58,212

RUB

Russian rouble

THB

Thai baht

37,102

BRL

Brazilian real

5,1575

MXN

Mexican peso

19,8625

INR

Indian rupee

80,9090

---

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

---

NOTICES CONCERNING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA

EFTA Surveillance Authority

| 6.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/21

---

State aid – Decision to raise no objections

(2022/C 385/03)

The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:

| Date of adoption of the decision | 21 June 2022 |
| --- | --- |
| Case No | 88873 |
| Decision No | 153/22/COL |
| EFTA State | Iceland |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | COVID-19 – amendment to the Icelandic temporary guarantee scheme |
| Legal basis | Act No 25/2020 amending Act No 121/1997 on State Guarantees. |
| Type of measure | Scheme |
| Objective | Ensure access to liquidity for undertakings facing a sudden shortage of liquidity due to the COVID-19 outbreak |
| Form of aid | Public guarantees |
| Budget | ISK 50 billion |
| Duration | 20 April 2020 – 31 December 2020 |
| Economic sectors | All sectors |
| Name and address of the granting authority | The Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs |
| Arnarhvoli við Lindargötu, |
| 101 Reykjavík, Iceland |

Date of adoption of the decision

21 June 2022

Case No

88873

Decision No

153/22/COL

EFTA State

Iceland

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

COVID-19 – amendment to the Icelandic temporary guarantee scheme

Legal basis

Act No 25/2020 amending Act No 121/1997 on State Guarantees.

Type of measure

Scheme

Objective

Ensure access to liquidity for undertakings facing a sudden shortage of liquidity due to the COVID-19 outbreak

Form of aid

Public guarantees

Budget

ISK 50 billion

Duration

20 April 2020 – 31 December 2020

Economic sectors

All sectors

Name and address of the granting authority

The Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs

Arnarhvoli við Lindargötu,

101 Reykjavík, Iceland

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website: http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/decisions/

---

| 6.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/22

---

EFTA Surveillance Authority’s notice on state aid recovery interest rates and reference/discount rates for the EFTA States applicable as from 1 July 2022

Published in accordance with the rules on reference and discount rates set out in Part VII of ESA’s State Aid Guidelines and Article 10 of ESA’s Decision No 195/04/COL 14 July 2004 (1)

(2022/C 385/04)

Base rates are calculated in accordance with the Chapter on the method for setting reference and discount rates of ESA’s State Aid Guidelines as amended by ESA’s Decision No 788/08/COL of 17 December 2008. To obtain the applicable reference rates, appropriate margins shall be added to the base rate in accordance with the State Aid Guidelines.

Base rates have been determined as follows:

| | Iceland | Liechtenstein | Norway |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1.7.2022 – | 3,90 | -0,57 | 1,17 |

Iceland

Liechtenstein

Norway

1.7.2022 –

3,90

-0,57

1,17

---

(1)  OJ L 139, 25.5.2006, p. 37 and EEA Supplement to the OJ No. 26/2006, 25.5.2006, p. 1.

---

| 6.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/23

---

State aid – Decision to raise no objections

(2022/C 385/05)

The EFTA Surveillance Authority raises no objections to the following state aid measure:

| Date of adoption of the decision | 23 June 2022 |
| --- | --- |
| Case No | 88760 |
| Decision No | 154/22/COL |
| EFTA State | Norway |
| Region | Helgeland |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Investment aid to Avinor AS for the construction of a new airport in Mo i Rana |
| Legal basis | The revised national budget proposition for 2021, adopted by the Parliament on 11 June 2021 (Innst. 648 S– 2020–2021)
  A letter of assignment from the Ministry of Transport of 25 August 2021
  Decision of Rana Municipality of 12 May 2020, case 36/20
  Three-part agreement between Avinor AS, Polarsirkelen Lufthavnutvikling AS, and Rana Municipality |
| Type of measure | Ad hoc aid |
| Objective | Airport infrastructure or equipment |
| Form of aid | Direct grant |
| Budget | Up to NOK 2 888 989 000 (discounted) |
| Intensity | 95 % |
| Duration | From 2022 to 2026 |
| Economic sectors | Passenger air transport |
| Name and address of the granting authority | The Ministry of Transport |
| PO Box 8010 Dep, N-0030 Oslo |
| NORWAY |
| Rana Municipality |
| P.O. Box 173, 8601 Mo i Rana |
| NORWAY |

Date of adoption of the decision

23 June 2022

Case No

88760

Decision No

154/22/COL

EFTA State

Norway

Region

Helgeland

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Investment aid to Avinor AS for the construction of a new airport in Mo i Rana

Legal basis

The revised national budget proposition for 2021, adopted by the Parliament on 11 June 2021 (Innst. 648 S– 2020–2021)

A letter of assignment from the Ministry of Transport of 25 August 2021

Decision of Rana Municipality of 12 May 2020, case 36/20

Three-part agreement between Avinor AS, Polarsirkelen Lufthavnutvikling AS, and Rana Municipality

Type of measure

Ad hoc aid

Objective

Airport infrastructure or equipment

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

Up to NOK 2 888 989 000 (discounted)

Intensity

95 %

Duration

From 2022 to 2026

Economic sectors

Passenger air transport

Name and address of the granting authority

The Ministry of Transport

PO Box 8010 Dep, N-0030 Oslo

NORWAY

Rana Municipality

P.O. Box 173, 8601 Mo i Rana

NORWAY

Other information

—

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website:

http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/decisions/

---

V Announcements

COURT PROCEEDINGS

European Commission

| 6.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/24

---

Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by Landsréttur dated 9 June 2022 in the case of Verkfræðingafélag Íslands, Stéttarfélag tölvunarfræðinga og Lyfjafræðingafélag Íslands v the Icelandic State

(Case E-9/22)

(2022/C 385/06)

A request has been made to the EFTA Court, dated 9 June 2022, from Landsréttur (the Court of Appeal), which was received at the Court Registry on 9 June 2022, for an Advisory Opinion in the case of Verkfræðingafélag Íslands) (Association of Chartered Engineers in Iceland), Stéttarfélag tölvunarfræðinga (Computer Scientists’ Union) and Lyfjafræðingafélag Íslands (Pharmaceutical Society of Iceland) versus the Icelandic State, on the following questions:

| 1. | Does it follow from Article 1(1) and Article 2 of Council Directive 98/59/EC, and also from the principle of effectiveness, that an employer who intends to terminate contracts with a group of workers covering fixed overtime is required to observe the procedural rules laid down in the Directive, including as regards consultation with workers’ representatives under Article 2 of the Directive and notification of the competent public authority under Article 3 of the Directive? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does it follow from Article 1(1) and Article 2 of Council Directive 98/59/EC, and also from the principle of effectiveness, that an employer who intends to terminate contracts with a group of workers covering fixed overtime is required to observe the procedural rules laid down in the Directive, including as regards consultation with workers’ representatives under Article 2 of the Directive and notification of the competent public authority under Article 3 of the Directive?

| 2. | If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, does the employer’s obligation cease to apply if termination of contracts covering fixed overtime does not subsequently result in the full termination of the workers’ employment contracts? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, does the employer’s obligation cease to apply if termination of contracts covering fixed overtime does not subsequently result in the full termination of the workers’ employment contracts?

| 3. | Is it of significance for the answer to the first two questions whether the contracts covering fixed overtime which the employer terminates were specifically made in independent contracts that were additional to the workers’ employment contracts? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Is it of significance for the answer to the first two questions whether the contracts covering fixed overtime which the employer terminates were specifically made in independent contracts that were additional to the workers’ employment contracts?

---

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

| 6.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/25

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.10904 – CVC / MATICMIND / SIO)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 385/07)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | CVC Capital Partners SICAV-FIS S.A. (‘CVC’, Luxembourg), |
| --- | --- |

—

CVC Capital Partners SICAV-FIS S.A. (‘CVC’, Luxembourg),

| — | Maticmind S.p.A. (‘Maticmind’, Italy), |
| --- | --- |

—

Maticmind S.p.A. (‘Maticmind’, Italy),

| — | SIO S.p.A. (‘SIO’, Italy), currently controlled by EDA S.r.l. (‘EDA’, Italy). |
| --- | --- |

—

SIO S.p.A. (‘SIO’, Italy), currently controlled by EDA S.r.l. (‘EDA’, Italy).

CVC will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Maticmind and SIO.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

| — | CVC: a manager of investment funds and platforms, |
| --- | --- |

—

CVC: a manager of investment funds and platforms,

| — | Maticmind: a systems integrator and value-added reseller operating in the IT sector in Italy, |
| --- | --- |

—

Maticmind: a systems integrator and value-added reseller operating in the IT sector in Italy,

| — | SIO: a supplier of products and solutions designed for intelligence operations and lawful interception in Italy and other European countries, currently solely controlled by EDA, whose sole activity is holding shares in SIO. |
| --- | --- |

—

SIO: a supplier of products and solutions designed for intelligence operations and lawful interception in Italy and other European countries, currently solely controlled by EDA, whose sole activity is holding shares in SIO.

3.

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

4.

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

M.10904 – CVC / MATICMIND / SIO

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 |

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

---

| 6.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/27

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.10697 – ARAMCO OVERSEAS COMPANY / LOTOS SPV 1)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 385/08)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Aramco Overseas Company B.V. (‘AOC’, the Netherlands), controlled by Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Arabia), |
| --- | --- |

—

Aramco Overseas Company B.V. (‘AOC’, the Netherlands), controlled by Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Arabia),

| — | Lotos SPV 1 sp. z o.o. (‘Target’, Poland).
  AOC will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of the Target.
  The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares. |
| --- | --- |

—

Lotos SPV 1 sp. z o.o. (‘Target’, Poland).

AOC will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of the Target.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

| — | AOC provides its affiliates in the Saudi Aramco group with a wide range of services including finance support services, supply chain management, technical support services and a variety of administrative support services, |
| --- | --- |

—

AOC provides its affiliates in the Saudi Aramco group with a wide range of services including finance support services, supply chain management, technical support services and a variety of administrative support services,

| — | The Target is a special purpose vehicle and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Lotos (currently Orlen) active in the wholesale distribution of fuels in Poland. |
| --- | --- |

—

The Target is a special purpose vehicle and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Lotos (currently Orlen) active in the wholesale distribution of fuels in Poland.

3.

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

4.

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

M.10697 – ARAMCO OVERSEAS COMPANY / LOTOS SPV 1

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 |

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

---

| 6.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/28

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.10857 – CINVEN / ZURICH SANDER VERMÖGENSVERWALTUNG)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 385/09)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Viridium Holding AG (‘Viridium’ Germany), controlled by Cinven Partnership LLP (‘Cinven’, United Kingdom), |
| --- | --- |

—

Viridium Holding AG (‘Viridium’ Germany), controlled by Cinven Partnership LLP (‘Cinven’, United Kingdom),

| — | Zurich Sander Vermögensverwaltungs AG (Germany), belonging to the group Zurich Insurance Group Ltd. (Switzerland). |
| --- | --- |

—

Zurich Sander Vermögensverwaltungs AG (Germany), belonging to the group Zurich Insurance Group Ltd. (Switzerland).

Cinven will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Zurich Sander Vermögensverwaltungs AG.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

| — | Cinven is a private equity business. Viridium is a provider of life insurance products, specialised in the management of closed life insurance portfolios in Germany, |
| --- | --- |

—

Cinven is a private equity business. Viridium is a provider of life insurance products, specialised in the management of closed life insurance portfolios in Germany,

| — | Zurich Sander Vermögensverwaltungs AG holds a closed portfolio of life insurance policies held almost exclusively by German customers. |
| --- | --- |

—

Zurich Sander Vermögensverwaltungs AG holds a closed portfolio of life insurance policies held almost exclusively by German customers.

3.

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

4.

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

M.10857 – CINVEN / ZURICH SANDER VERMÖGENSVERWALTUNG

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 |

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

| 6.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/29

---

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

(2022/C 385/10)

This communication is published in accordance with Article 17(5) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33 (1).

COMMUNICATING THE APPROVAL OF A STANDARD AMENDMENT

‘Alsace grand cru Kessler’

PDO-FR-A0414-AM02

Date of communication: 20 July 2022

DESCRIPTION OF AND REASONS FOR THE APPROVED AMENDMENT

1.   Additional indication

In Chapter I, Section II(1), of the specification, the following common forms of the names of grape varieties have been added: ‘Sylvaner’ and ‘Pinot Noir’, with the corresponding official names, respectively: Sylvaner B and Pinot Noir N.

The common form ‘Sylvaner’ has been added to correct an oversight in the original version of the specification. The original version stated in Chapter I, Section X(1)(b), that the authorised varieties ‘can be made into wine and placed on the market under their respective common names’. However, the corresponding common form of the name was not included in the list of permitted common names. Prior to the approval of the original version of the specification, a national decision meant that Sylvaner B had been added to the varieties authorised for the production of wines with the designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Zotzenberg’. This took into account local custom and the reputation of these wines.

The common name ‘Pinot Noir’ has been added to the specification. This is because of an application submitted at national level for recognition of the still red wines of certain ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin. This application for the recognition of a red wine is based on long-standing practice, reputation and the characteristics of the wines produced with grapes of the variety Pinot Noir N grown on demarcated parcels of these ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations. Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised for these red wines.

Chapter I, Section II(1), of the specification concerns the varieties of Muscat à petits grains, commonly referred to as ‘Muscat’. The words ‘blancs’ and ‘roses’ have been added to the names of these varieties, in order to correct an oversight in the previous version of the specification.

These amendments do not require any amendments to the single document.

2.   Types of product

In Chapter I, Section III, of the specification, the text has been amended to show that the protected designations of origin covered by the current specification no longer refer exclusively to still white wines.

The ‘Alsace grand cru’ protected designations of origin which cover red and white still wines are mentioned by name: ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’ and ‘Alsace grand cru Kirchberg de Barr’.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

3.   Geographical area

In Chapter I, Section IV(1), of the specification, a paragraph has been added giving the dates on which the geographical area was approved by the relevant INAO (National Institute for Origin and Quality) committee. The new paragraph also refers to the 2021 Official Geographic Code as the source for the demarcation of the area boundary as it appears in the specification. Reference to the source gives legal certainty to the demarcation of the area.

As a result of the reference to the 2021 Official Geographic Code, the list of names of municipalities has been updated. The municipalities of Kientzheim and Sigolsheim have been abolished. Their territory is now part of the municipality of Kaysersberg Vignoble.

These editorial changes do not affect the boundary of the geographical area.

The following sentences have also been added to Section IV(1):

‘Maps of the geographical area can be accessed on the INAO website.

A map defining the boundaries of the geographical area has been lodged with the municipal authorities in the case of the partially included municipality.’

These amendments require the amendment of point 6 of the single document.

4.   Demarcated parcel area

Demarcated parcel area

In Chapter I, Section IV(2), of the specification:

| — | in order to correct an oversight, the words ‘6 and 7 September 2006’ have been added to the first paragraph. This is a date on which the parcel area was approved by the relevant national committee; |
| --- | --- |

—

in order to correct an oversight, the words ‘6 and 7 September 2006’ have been added to the first paragraph. This is a date on which the parcel area was approved by the relevant national committee;

| — | in the second paragraph, the wording has been amended to take into account the changes made to the names of municipalities in Section IV(1); |
| --- | --- |

—

in the second paragraph, the wording has been amended to take into account the changes made to the names of municipalities in Section IV(1);

| — | the ‘Municipalities’ column in the table has been updated to correspond to the names of municipalities mentioned in Section IV(1). |
| --- | --- |

—

the ‘Municipalities’ column in the table has been updated to correspond to the names of municipalities mentioned in Section IV(1).

These amendments do not affect the single document.

5.   Area in immediate proximity

Area in immediate proximity

In Chapter I, Section IV(3), of the specification, a paragraph has been amended to give the 2021 Official Geographic Code as the source for the demarcation of the area boundary as it appears in the specification. Reference to the source gives legal certainty to the demarcation of the area.

As a result of the reference to the 2021 Official Geographic Code, the list of names of municipalities has been updated. The name of the municipality of Kaysersberg has been deleted and that of Kaysersberg Vignoble added, together with the information that the only part of this municipality included is that belonging to the delegated municipality of Kaysersberg.

These editorial changes do not affect the boundary of the area in immediate proximity.

These amendments require the amendment of point 9 of the single document.

6.   Vine varieties

Vine varieties

In Chapter I, Section V(1)(a), of the specification, two phrases have been added: ‘— for white wines:’ and ‘— for red wines: from grape variety Pinot Noir N’. This is because an application for recognition of the still red wines was submitted at national level for certain ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin. Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised for these red wines. It is also the only variety authorised for the production of red wine in the ‘Alsace’ designation of origin.

In Sections V(1)(a), (b) and (e) and V(2)(b), the words ‘blancs’ and ‘roses’ have been added to the names of the different varieties of Muscat à petits grains. This corrects an oversight in the previous version of the specification.

The single document has not been changed on account of these amendments.

7.   Planting density

Planting density

In Chapter I, Section VI(1)(a), of the specification, the following phrases have been added: ‘For white wine production’ and ‘For red wine production’. This is to distinguish between the minimum planting densities according to the colour of the wines. These densities are stated for the designations authorised to produce red wines.

The single document has not been changed on account of these additions.

In Chapter I, Section VI(1)(a), of the specification, the date of ‘25 October 2011’ has been specified for the effective application of the rule regarding the possibility of the density changing due to grubbing-up. It replaces the wording ‘on the date on which this specification was approved’.

This amendment requires the amendment of point 5 of the single document.

8.   Pruning rule

Pruning rule

In Chapter I, Section VI(1)(b), of the specification, the previous rule for white wines regarding the number of buds per square metre of soil differed according to the grape varieties. This rule has been abolished and replaced by a single rule of 18 buds per plant.

This development makes it possible to harmonise the wording in the specifications of the Alsace designations of origin, and to simplify the methods of checking.

Point 5 of the single document has been amended.

The words ‘For white wines’ have been added at the start of the sentence. This is due to the application for recognition for still red wines submitted at national level for some ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin.

A pruning rule has been added for red wines, setting the maximum number of buds per plant at 14. This is less than the number authorised for white wine production. This rule makes it possible to comply with the rules on yields and to produce good-quality grapes.

The above amendments do not affect the single document.

9.   Rules on trellising and foliage height

Rules on trellising and foliage height

In Chapter I, Section VI(1)(c), of the specification, the maximum height of the wires supporting the arched canes has been deleted, and the method of measuring the height of trellised foliage has been changed.

These amendments make it possible to verify that the foliage height is compliant as the plants grow. Previously this was possible only through a requirement relating to the support.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

10.   Average maximum crop load per parcel

Average maximum crop load per parcel

In Chapter I, Section VI(1)(d), of the specification, the average maximum crop load per parcel for white wines has been reduced from 10 000 to 8 500 kilograms per hectare, reflecting the reduced yields for these wines.

An average maximum crop load per parcel has been established for red wines. It is less than that for white wine, reflecting the yields for red wines.

These amendments do not affect the single document.

11.   Ripeness of grapes and minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume

Ripeness of grapes and minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume

In Chapter I, Section VII(2)(a), of the specification, the table has been amended. It now takes into account the application for recognition of still red wines submitted at national level for some ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin.

For these ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations for red wines, minimum levels have been established for the sugar content of the different grape varieties when harvested, and for their minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume.

These amendments do not affect the single document.

For white wines, the minimum levels for the sugar content of the grapes have been increased by 2 or 3 grams per litre of must in order to respect the same 1 % variation with the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume for each grape variety, as in the previous version of the specification. The protection and management body has chosen to calculate the transformation of grams of sugar into alcohol on the basis of 17 grams of sugar producing 1 % alcohol by volume for white wines. The original version of the specification had used the figure of 16,83 grams. The amount of 17 grams had been recommended by the competent national committee of the INAO when the original version of the specifications was established.

These amendments do not affect the single document.

12.   Yields

Yields

In Chapter I, Section VIII(1) and (2), of the specification, the yields and upper yield limits have been reduced for white wines and white wines labelled ‘Vendanges Tardives’ [Late Harvest], in accordance with the hierarchy of designations in the Alsace region. This amendment will allow better quality control.

Point 5 of the single document has been amended for the maximum yields (upper yield limits).

The words ‘Vins blancs’ have been added for wines without a description. This is due to an application submitted at national level for recognition of still red wines for some ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin.

The yield and upper yield limit for red wines have been established in accordance with the hierarchy of designations of the Alsace regions, meaning that the amounts are lower for these ‘grand cru’ designations.

The latter amendments do not affect the single document.

13.   Malolactic fermentation, fermentable sugar content for red wines

Malolactic fermentation, fermentable sugar content for red wines

Chapter I, Section IX(1)(c), of the specification lays down that malolactic fermentation is carried out for red wines.

For the purpose of checking compliance with this rule, the maximum malic acid content has been established as 0,4 grams per litre at the time of packaging.

Section IX(1)(d) lays down a maximum content for fermentable sugars (glucose and fructose) of 2 grams per litre after fermentation.

The single document has not been amended.

14.   Increasing the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume prohibited for red wines

Increasing the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume prohibited for red wines

Chapter I, Section IX(1)(e), of the specification lays down that red wines must not be enriched in any way. This restriction applies to the production process. It is consistent with demarcation of parcels for grape-growing, minimum planting density, pruning rules and restricted yields.

The single document has not been amended.

15.   Capacity of the winery

Capacity of the winery

In Chapter I, Section IX(1)(g), of the specification, the coefficient for calculating the capacity of the winery has been reduced.

The capacity of the winery does not need to be as large in proportion to the volume of the preceding harvest.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

16.   Date of maturing and placing on the market for consumers in the case of red wines

Date of maturing and placing on the market for consumers in the case of red wines

In Chapter I, Section IX(2), of the specification, a minimum maturation period has been established for red wines: until 1 October of the year following the harvest. Wines made with grapes of the variety Pinot Noir N from these vineyards need a minimum period in order to fully express their characteristics.

In Chapter I, Section IX(5)(a), it is stated that, following the maturation period, red wines cannot be placed on the market for consumers until 1 October of the year following the harvest.

These amendments do not require any amendments to the single document.

17.   Checks on packaged batches

Checks on packaged batches

In Chapter I, Section IX(3)(b), of the specification, the rule has been abolished that required sample bottles to be kept for checks on packaged batches.

This rule is a measure of verifiability. It is now part of the checking plan.

The single document is not affected by this amendment.

18.   Storing packaged wines

Storing packaged wines

In Chapter I, Section IX(4), of the specification, further details have been provided of the characteristics of the place where packaged wines are stored.

This helps operators to comply with this rule, and makes checking easier.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

19.   Human factors contributing to the link with the geographical area

Human factors contributing to the link with the geographical area

In Chapter I, Section X(1)(b), of the specification, the text has been amended to take account of the fact that still red wines have been approved for the designations of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’ and ‘Alsace grand cru Kirchberg de Barr’.

| — | The following information has been added for the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’: red wines approved in 2022; Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised; the minimum planting density is 5 500 plants per hectare for the production of red wine; enrichment is not permitted in any form; there must be a minimum maturing period of 10 months. |
| --- | --- |

—

The following information has been added for the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’: red wines approved in 2022; Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised; the minimum planting density is 5 500 plants per hectare for the production of red wine; enrichment is not permitted in any form; there must be a minimum maturing period of 10 months.

| — | The following information has been added for the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Kirchberg de Barr’: red wines approved in 2022; Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised; the minimum planting density is 5 000 plants per hectare for the production of red wine; enrichment is not permitted in any form; there must be a minimum maturing period of 10 months. |
| --- | --- |

—

The following information has been added for the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Kirchberg de Barr’: red wines approved in 2022; Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised; the minimum planting density is 5 000 plants per hectare for the production of red wine; enrichment is not permitted in any form; there must be a minimum maturing period of 10 months.

In Section X(1)(b), information to the effect that these two designations of origin were recognised for white wines has been deleted. The words ‘for white wines’ have been added where necessary for understanding the text.

The single document has not been changed on account of these amendments.

The words ‘blancs’ and ‘roses’ have been added to the names of the different varieties of Muscat à petits grains. This corrects an oversight in the previous version of the specification. These additions do not affect the single document.

20.   Description of the wine(s)

Description of the wine(s)

In Chapter I, Section X(2), of the specification, details have been added of the visual appearance of the white wines in order to characterise them more fully.

In the case of the first two types of wine described: ‘The colour of these two types of wine is deep and intense and ranges to golden yellow.’

Details of the last two types of wine: ‘The colour of these two types of wine is deep and intense and ranges to amber yellow.’

Point 4 of the single document has been amended.

A description of the main organoleptic characteristics of the red wines has been added for the designations of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’ and ‘Alsace grand cru Kirchberg de Barr’.

These descriptions do not affect the single document.

21.   Link with the geographical area

Link with the geographical area

In Chapter I, Section X(3), of the specification, for the designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’, there are details about the link between the geographical origin and the characteristics of the wines which could also apply to the red wines of this designation. These details have been supplemented by information specific to the red wines.

The single document has not been amended.

22.   Transitional measures

Transitional measures

In Chapter I, Section XI(2), of the specification, in accordance with the amendments to Chapter I, Section VI, the maximum height of the wires supporting the arched canes has been deleted and the maximum number of buds per plant has been reduced.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

23.   Requirement to state the sugar content on labelling and other formats giving information for white wines

Requirement to state the sugar content on labelling and other formats giving information for white wines

Under the previous specification, mention of the sugar content was optional. Chapter I, Section XII(2)(d), of the specification has been replaced by a new text making it obligatory to mention the sugar content as laid down in Regulation (EU) 2019/33.

This information makes it easier for consumers to understand the type of wine.

The new rule does not apply to wines bearing the traditional terms ‘Vendanges Tardives’ and ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’ [includes botrytised grapes].

Point 9 of the single document has been supplemented.

The original point (d) of Section XII(2) is now point (e).

This amendment does not affect the single document.

24.   Advance declaration of the assignment of parcels

Advance declaration of the assignment of parcels

In Chapter II, Section I(1), of the specification, a clarification has been added to the rules regarding the advance declaration of the assignment of parcels. Such declarations are submitted by operators to the protection and management body for the ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin when they cease production under the designation.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

1.   Name(s)

Name(s)

Alsace grand cru Kessler

2.   Geographical indication type

Geographical indication type

PDO – Protected designation of origin

3.   Categories of grapevine products

Categories of grapevine products

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

1.

Wine

4.   Description of the wine(s)

Description of the wine(s)

BRIEF WRITTEN DESCRIPTION

The wines are still and white.

The minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume of the wines is 12,5 % for Gewürztraminer Rs and Pinot Gris G, and 11 % for other varieties. After enrichment, the total alcoholic strength by volume of the wines does not exceed 15 % for wines made from the varieties Gewürztraminer B and Pinot Gris G, and 14 % for wines made from other varieties.

The other analytical characteristics are as laid down by EU legislation.

Excellent examples of white wines suitable for ageing, they are characterised by powerful freshness underpinned by dominant tartaric acid combined with beautifully ripened grapes. The name of the designation may be supplemented by the common names of the grape varieties, on condition that the wines are made exclusively from grape varieties that can be referred to using the names in question. These are wines of great substance and complexity, with powerful aromas and numerous subtleties. Very long in the mouth, they become more complex over time.

There are two types: — dry wines with minerality; — aromatic wines that are fruity, unctuous and rich. The colour of these two types of wine is deep and intense and ranges to golden yellow.

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

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum total acidity

in milliequivalents per litre

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

2.   Designation followed by the words ‘Vendanges Tardives’

Designation followed by the words ‘Vendanges Tardives’

BRIEF WRITTEN DESCRIPTION

The minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume of the wines is 16 % for Gewürztraminer Rs and Pinot Gris G, and 14,5 % for the other varieties.

The other analytical characteristics are as laid down by EU legislation.

Wines with the description ‘Vendanges Tardives’ often have very exotic aromas, of candied fruits with a fresh finish. They are remarkably concentrated with long-lasting aromas. The colour of these wines is deep and intense and ranges to amber yellow.

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

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum total acidity

in milliequivalents per litre

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

3.   Designation followed by the words ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’

Designation followed by the words ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’

BRIEF WRITTEN DESCRIPTION

The minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume of the wines is 18,2 % for Gewürztraminer Rs and Pinot Gris G, and 16,4 % for other varieties.

The other analytical characteristics are as laid down by EU legislation.

Wines entitled to be labelled ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’ are more concentrated, powerful wines, often with aromas of candied fruits. They are remarkably concentrated with long-lasting aromas. The colour of these wines is deep and intense and ranges to amber yellow.

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

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum total acidity

in milliequivalents per litre

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

5.   Wine-making practices

Wine-making practices

5.1.   Specific oenological practices

Specific oenological practices

1.   Training systems: planting density

Training systems: planting density

Cultivation method

The minimum vine planting density is 4 500 plants per hectare.

The distance between the rows of vines must not exceed 2 metres.

Vines have an in-the-row spacing of no less than 0,75 metres and no more than 1,50 metres.

As of 25 October 2011, grubbing-up of rows within a parcel must not result in spacing wider than 3 metres between the rows.

2.   Training systems: pruning rule

Training systems: pruning rule

Cultivation method

The vines are pruned to single or double Guyot with a maximum of 18 buds per plant.

3.   Harvest

Harvest

Cultivation method

The wines are made from grapes harvested manually.

4.   Increase in the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume

Increase in the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume

Specific oenological practice

Any increase in the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume must not exceed:

| | 0,5 % for wines made from the varieties Gewürztraminer B and Pinot Gris G, |
| --- | --- |

0,5 % for wines made from the varieties Gewürztraminer B and Pinot Gris G,

| | 1,5 % for wines made from other varieties. |
| --- | --- |

1,5 % for wines made from other varieties.

Wines eligible for the term ‘Vendanges Tardives’ or ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’ must not be enriched.

5.   Production

Production

Wine-making restriction

Use of wood chips is prohibited.

6.   Maturing the wines

Maturing the wines

Specific oenological practice

The wines must be matured until at least 1 June of the year following the harvest.

Wines eligible for the term ‘Vendanges Tardives’ or ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’ must be matured until at least 1 June of the second year following the harvest.

5.2.   Maximum yields

Maximum yields

1.   Designation with or without the additional term ‘Vendanges Tardives’

Designation with or without the additional term ‘Vendanges Tardives’

60 hectolitres per hectare

2.   Designation followed by the words ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’

Designation followed by the words ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’

48 hectolitres per hectare

6.   Demarcated geographical area

Demarcated geographical area

The grapes are harvested and the wines are produced, developed and matured in the following municipalities, based on the 2021 Official Geographic Code:

| — | Department of Haut-Rhin: Entire municipalities: Ammerschwihr, Beblenheim, Bennwihr, Bergheim, Bergholtz, Eguisheim, Gueberschwihr, Guebwiller, Hattstatt, Hunawihr, Ingersheim, Katzenthal, Mittelwihr, Niedermorschwihr, Orschwihr, Pfaffenheim, Ribeauvillé, Riquewihr, Rodern, Rouffach, Saint-Hippolyte, Soultzmatt, Thann, Turckheim, Vieux-Thann, Voegtlinshoffen, Westhalten, Wettolsheim, Wintzenheim, Wuenheim and Zellenberg. |
| --- | --- |

—

Department of Haut-Rhin: Entire municipalities: Ammerschwihr, Beblenheim, Bennwihr, Bergheim, Bergholtz, Eguisheim, Gueberschwihr, Guebwiller, Hattstatt, Hunawihr, Ingersheim, Katzenthal, Mittelwihr, Niedermorschwihr, Orschwihr, Pfaffenheim, Ribeauvillé, Riquewihr, Rodern, Rouffach, Saint-Hippolyte, Soultzmatt, Thann, Turckheim, Vieux-Thann, Voegtlinshoffen, Westhalten, Wettolsheim, Wintzenheim, Wuenheim and Zellenberg.

Municipalities partially included: Kaysersberg Vignoble, only the territory of the delegated municipalities of Kientzheim and Sigolsheim.

| — | Department of Bas-Rhin: Andlau, Barr, Bergbieten, Blienschwiller, Dahlenheim, Dambach-la-Ville, Eichhoffen, Kintzheim, Marlenheim, Mittelbergheim, Molsheim, Nothalten, Scharrachbergheim-Irmstett and Wolxheim. |
| --- | --- |

—

Department of Bas-Rhin: Andlau, Barr, Bergbieten, Blienschwiller, Dahlenheim, Dambach-la-Ville, Eichhoffen, Kintzheim, Marlenheim, Mittelbergheim, Molsheim, Nothalten, Scharrachbergheim-Irmstett and Wolxheim.

A map defining the boundaries of the geographical area has been lodged with the municipal authorities of the partially included municipalities.

Maps of the geographical area can be accessed on the INAO website.

7.   Wine grape variety(-ies)

Wine grape variety(-ies)

| | Gewürztraminer Rs |
| --- | --- |

Gewürztraminer Rs

| | Muscat Ottonel B – Muscat, Moscato |
| --- | --- |

Muscat Ottonel B – Muscat, Moscato

| | Muscat à petits grains blancs B – Muscat, Moscato |
| --- | --- |

Muscat à petits grains blancs B – Muscat, Moscato

| | Muscat à petits grains roses Rs – Muscat, Moscato |
| --- | --- |

Muscat à petits grains roses Rs – Muscat, Moscato

| | Pinot Gris G |
| --- | --- |

Pinot Gris G

| | Riesling B |
| --- | --- |

Riesling B

8.   Description of the link(s)

Description of the link(s)

Thanks to the favourable climate conditions characteristic of the vineyards of Alsace, the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Kessler’ benefits from one of the best locations. Nestling in the picturesque countryside of Alsace, the vineyards enable the production of highly expressive wines, with distinctive character and unique personality.

The homogeneity of the substrate allows the different grape varieties to express all their specific characteristics, with wines that are dry and mineral, with distinctive liveliness and floral, fruity, long-lasting and harmonious aromas.

The excellent climate conditions at the end of the season are favourable to concentration on the vine and to the development of the noble rot. As a result, it is possible to produce wines from grapes harvested when overripe.

The maturation period laid down in the specification allows the wines to improve.

There are strict rules relating to production, such as maintaining a broad canopy and harvesting by hand. By adopting these rules, the winegrowers of Alsace preserve the established character of the wines, which are known for their complexity and their suitability for long keeping.

They are the top of the range for this region. These wines are more prestigious than wines with the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace’.

The work by Médard Barth entitled Der Rebbau des Elsass und die Absatzgebieten seiner Weine, written in 1958, spoke highly of this lieu-dit, which today is famous.

Der Rebbau des Elsass und die Absatzgebieten seiner Weine

lieu-dit

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

Essential further conditions (packaging, labelling, other requirements)

Area in immediate proximity

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Derogation concerning production in the demarcated geographical area

Description of the condition

The area in the immediate vicinity, defined by derogation for winemaking, processing and maturing, comprises the territory of the following municipalities, based on the 2021 Official Geographic Code:

| — | Department of Haut-Rhin: Entire municipalities: Bergholtz-Zell, Berrwiller, Buhl, Cernay, Colmar, Gundolsheim, Hartmanswiller, Herrlisheim, Houssen, Husseren-les-Châteaux, Jungholtz, Leimbach, Obermorschwihr, Osenbach, Ostheim, Rorschwihr, Soultz, Steinbach, Uffholtz, Walbach, Wattwiller, Wihr-au-Val and Zimmerbach. |
| --- | --- |

—

Department of Haut-Rhin: Entire municipalities: Bergholtz-Zell, Berrwiller, Buhl, Cernay, Colmar, Gundolsheim, Hartmanswiller, Herrlisheim, Houssen, Husseren-les-Châteaux, Jungholtz, Leimbach, Obermorschwihr, Osenbach, Ostheim, Rorschwihr, Soultz, Steinbach, Uffholtz, Walbach, Wattwiller, Wihr-au-Val and Zimmerbach.

Municipalities partially included: Kaysersberg Vignoble, only the territory of the delegated municipality of Kaysersberg.

| — | Department of Bas-Rhin: Albé, Avolsheim, Balbronn, Bernardswiller, Bernardvillé, Bischoffsheim, Boersch, Bourgheim, Châtenois, Cleebourg, Dachstein, Dangolsheim, Dieffenthal, Dorlisheim, Epfig, Ergersheim, Ernolsheim-Bruche, Fessenheim-le-Bas, Flexbourg, Furdenheim, Gertwiller, Gimbrett-Berstett, Goxwiller, Heiligenstein, Itterswiller, Kienheim, Kirchheim, Kuttolsheim, Mittelhausen, Mutzig, Nordheim, Oberhoffen-les-Wissenbourg, Obernai, Odratzheim, Orschwiller, Osthoffen, Ottrott, Petersbach, Reichsfeld, Riedseltz, Rosenwiller, Rosheim, Rott, Saint-Nabor, Saint-Pierre, Scherwiller, Seebach, Soultz-les-Bains, Steinseltz, Stotzheim, Strasbourg, Traenheim, Villé, Wangen, Westhoffen, Wissembourg and Zellwiller. |
| --- | --- |

—

Department of Bas-Rhin: Albé, Avolsheim, Balbronn, Bernardswiller, Bernardvillé, Bischoffsheim, Boersch, Bourgheim, Châtenois, Cleebourg, Dachstein, Dangolsheim, Dieffenthal, Dorlisheim, Epfig, Ergersheim, Ernolsheim-Bruche, Fessenheim-le-Bas, Flexbourg, Furdenheim, Gertwiller, Gimbrett-Berstett, Goxwiller, Heiligenstein, Itterswiller, Kienheim, Kirchheim, Kuttolsheim, Mittelhausen, Mutzig, Nordheim, Oberhoffen-les-Wissenbourg, Obernai, Odratzheim, Orschwiller, Osthoffen, Ottrott, Petersbach, Reichsfeld, Riedseltz, Rosenwiller, Rosheim, Rott, Saint-Nabor, Saint-Pierre, Scherwiller, Seebach, Soultz-les-Bains, Steinseltz, Stotzheim, Strasbourg, Traenheim, Villé, Wangen, Westhoffen, Wissembourg and Zellwiller.

Packaging in the area

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Packaging in the demarcated geographical area

Description of the condition

The wines are packaged in ‘Vin du Rhin’ bottles, in accordance with Decree No 55-673 of 20 May 1955, the Order of 13 May 1959 and the Decree of 19 March 1963. No other type of bottle is permitted.

Since the Law of 5 July 1972, the wines must be bottled in the departments of Bas-Rhin and Haut-Rhin in tall, thin ‘Vin du Rhin’ bottles, as laid down in the Decree of 1955.

Stating the vintage

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition

The vintage must appear, together with the name of the designation, in any harvest and stock declarations, supporting documents or publicity and on any leaflets, labels, invoices or containers.

Common name

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition

The name of the protected designation of origin may be supplemented by one of the common names of the grape varieties, on condition that the wines are made exclusively from grape varieties that can be referred to using the names in question.

Use of two or more common names on the same label is prohibited.

The common names are as follows:

| | Gewürztraminer |
| --- | --- |

Gewürztraminer

| | Muscat |
| --- | --- |

Muscat

| | Muscat Ottonel |
| --- | --- |

Muscat Ottonel

| | Pinot Gris |
| --- | --- |

Pinot Gris

| | Riesling. |
| --- | --- |

Riesling.

Traditional terms ‘Vendanges Tardives’ and ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition

For wines eligible for the term ‘Vendanges Tardives’ or ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’, the following must also be stated:

| — | vintage |
| --- | --- |

—

vintage

| — | one of the common forms of the grape variety name. |
| --- | --- |

—

one of the common forms of the grape variety name.

Indication of the sugar content

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition

The sugar content, as defined by European law, must be clearly stated in the case of white wines for which one of the 51 protected designations of origin ‘Alsace Grand Cru – lieu-dit’ is claimed under the terms of this specification. This applies when such wines are presented under the aforementioned designation and made available to the public, dispatched, offered for sale or sold, which cannot happen unless the sugar content is stated in any publicity and on any leaflets, labels, invoices or containers. It does not apply to wines labelled ‘Vendanges Tardives’ or ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’.

Link to the product specification

Link to the product specification

https://info.agriculture.gouv.fr/gedei/site/bo-agri/document_administratif-4cec3ff9-abd4-4253-a1db-245ddd809faa

---

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

1

---

| 6.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/40

---

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

(2022/C 385/11)

This communication is published in accordance with Article 17(5) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33 (1).

COMMUNICATING THE APPROVAL OF A STANDARD AMENDMENT

‘Alsace grand cru Kanzlerberg’

PDO-FR-A0410-AM02

Date of communication: 20 July 2022

DESCRIPTION OF AND REASONS FOR THE APPROVED AMENDMENT

1.   Additional indication

In Chapter I, Section II(1), of the specification, the following common forms of the names of grape varieties have been added: ‘Sylvaner’ and ‘Pinot Noir’, with the corresponding official names, respectively: Sylvaner B and Pinot Noir N.

The common form ‘Sylvaner’ has been added to correct an oversight in the original version of the specification. The original version stated in Chapter I, Section X(1)(b), that the authorised varieties ‘can be made into wine and placed on the market under their respective common names’. However, the corresponding common form of the name was not included in the list of permitted common names. Prior to the approval of the original version of the specification, a national decision meant that Sylvaner B had been added to the varieties authorised for the production of wines with the designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Zotzenberg’. This took into account local custom and the reputation of these wines.

The common name ‘Pinot Noir’ has been added to the specification. This is because of an application submitted at national level for recognition of the still red wines of certain ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin. This application for the recognition of a red wine is based on long-standing practice, reputation and the characteristics of the wines produced with grapes of the variety Pinot Noir N grown on demarcated parcels of these ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations. Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised for these red wines.

Chapter I, Section II(1), of the specification concerns the varieties of Muscat à petits grains, commonly referred to as ‘Muscat’. The words ‘blancs’ and ‘roses’ have been added to the names of these varieties, in order to correct an oversight in the previous version of the specification.

These amendments do not require any amendments to the single document.

2.   Types of product

In Chapter I, Section III, of the specification, the text has been amended to show that the protected designations of origin covered by the current specification no longer refer exclusively to still white wines.

The ‘Alsace grand cru’ protected designations of origin which cover red and white still wines are mentioned by name: ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’ and ‘Alsace grand cru Kirchberg de Barr’.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

3.   Geographical area

In Chapter I, Section IV(1), of the specification, a paragraph has been added giving the dates on which the geographical area was approved by the relevant INAO (National Institute for Origin and Quality) committee. The new paragraph also refers to the 2021 Official Geographic Code as the source for the demarcation of the area boundary as it appears in the specification. Reference to the source gives legal certainty to the demarcation of the area.

As a result of the reference to the 2021 Official Geographic Code, the list of names of municipalities has been updated. The municipalities of Kientzheim and Sigolsheim have been abolished. Their territory is now part of the municipality of Kaysersberg Vignoble.

These editorial changes do not affect the boundary of the geographical area.

The following sentences have also been added to Section IV(1):

‘Maps of the geographical area can be accessed on the INAO website.

A map defining the boundaries of the geographical area has been lodged with the municipal authorities in the case of the partially included municipality.’

These amendments require the amendment of point 6 of the single document.

4.   Demarcated parcel area

Demarcated parcel area

In Chapter I, Section IV(2), of the specification:

| — | in order to correct an oversight, the words ‘6 and 7 September 2006’ have been added to the first paragraph. This is a date on which the parcel area was approved by the relevant national committee; |
| --- | --- |

—

in order to correct an oversight, the words ‘6 and 7 September 2006’ have been added to the first paragraph. This is a date on which the parcel area was approved by the relevant national committee;

| — | in the second paragraph, the wording has been amended to take into account the changes made to the names of municipalities in Section IV(1); |
| --- | --- |

—

in the second paragraph, the wording has been amended to take into account the changes made to the names of municipalities in Section IV(1);

| — | the ‘Municipalities’ column in the table has been updated to correspond to the names of municipalities mentioned in Section IV(1). |
| --- | --- |

—

the ‘Municipalities’ column in the table has been updated to correspond to the names of municipalities mentioned in Section IV(1).

These amendments do not affect the single document.

5.   Area in immediate proximity

Area in immediate proximity

In Chapter I, Section IV(3), of the specification, a paragraph has been amended to give the 2021 Official Geographic Code as the source for the demarcation of the area boundary as it appears in the specification. Reference to the source gives legal certainty to the demarcation of the area.

As a result of the reference to the 2021 Official Geographic Code, the list of names of municipalities has been updated. The name of the municipality of Kaysersberg has been deleted and that of Kaysersberg Vignoble added, together with the information that the only part of this municipality included is that belonging to the delegated municipality of Kaysersberg.

These editorial changes do not affect the boundary of the area in immediate proximity.

These amendments require the amendment of point 9 of the single document.

6.   Vine varieties

Vine varieties

In Chapter I, Section V(1)(a), of the specification, two phrases have been added: ‘— for white wines:’ and ‘— for red wines: from grape variety Pinot Noir N’. This is because an application for recognition of the still red wines was submitted at national level for certain ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin. Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised for these red wines. It is also the only variety authorised for the production of red wine in the ‘Alsace’ designation of origin.

In Sections V(1)(a), (b) and (e) and V(2)(b), the words ‘blancs’ and ‘roses’ have been added to the names of the different varieties of Muscat à petits grains. This corrects an oversight in the previous version of the specification.

The single document has not been changed on account of these amendments.

7.   Planting density

Planting density

In Chapter I, Section VI(1)(a), of the specification, the following phrases have been added: ‘For white wine production’ and ‘For red wine production’. This is to distinguish between the minimum planting densities according to the colour of the wines. These densities are stated for the designations authorised to produce red wines.

The single document has not been changed on account of these additions.

In Chapter I, Section VI(1)(a), of the specification, the date of ‘25 October 2011’ has been specified for the effective application of the rule regarding the possibility of the density changing due to grubbing-up. It replaces the wording ‘on the date on which this specification was approved’.

This amendment requires the amendment of point 5 of the single document.

8.   Pruning rule

Pruning rule

In Chapter I, Section VI(1)(b), of the specification, the previous rule for white wines regarding the number of buds per square metre of soil differed according to the grape varieties. This rule has been abolished and replaced by a single rule of 18 buds per plant.

This development makes it possible to harmonise the wording in the specifications of the Alsace designations of origin, and to simplify the methods of checking.

Point 5 of the single document has been amended.

The words ‘For white wines’ have been added at the start of the sentence. This is due to the application for recognition for still red wines submitted at national level for some ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin.

A pruning rule has been added for red wines, setting the maximum number of buds per plant at 14. This is less than the number authorised for white wine production. This rule makes it possible to comply with the rules on yields and to produce good-quality grapes.

The above amendments do not affect the single document.

9.   Rules on trellising and foliage height

Rules on trellising and foliage height

In Chapter I, Section VI(1)(c), of the specification, the maximum height of the wires supporting the arched canes has been deleted, and the method of measuring the height of trellised foliage has been changed.

These amendments make it possible to verify that the foliage height is compliant as the plants grow. Previously this was possible only through a requirement relating to the support.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

10.   Average maximum crop load per parcel

Average maximum crop load per parcel

In Chapter I, Section VI(1)(d), of the specification, the average maximum crop load per parcel for white wines has been reduced from 10 000 to 8 500 kilograms per hectare, reflecting the reduced yields for these wines.

An average maximum crop load per parcel has been established for red wines. It is less than that for white wine, reflecting the yields for red wines.

These amendments do not affect the single document.

11.   Ripeness of grapes and minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume

Ripeness of grapes and minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume

In Chapter I, Section VII(2)(a), of the specification, the table has been amended. It now takes into account the application for recognition of still red wines submitted at national level for some ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin.

For these ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations for red wines, minimum levels have been established for the sugar content of the different grape varieties when harvested, and for their minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume.

These amendments do not affect the single document.

For white wines, the minimum levels for the sugar content of the grapes have been increased by 2 or 3 grams per litre of must in order to respect the same 1 % variation with the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume for each grape variety, as in the previous version of the specification. The protection and management body has chosen to calculate the transformation of grams of sugar into alcohol on the basis of 17 grams of sugar producing 1 % alcohol by volume for white wines. The original version of the specification had used the figure of 16,83 grams. The amount of 17 grams had been recommended by the competent national committee of the INAO when the original version of the specifications was established.

These amendments do not affect the single document.

12.   Yields

Yields

In Chapter I, Section VIII(1) and (2), of the specification, the yields and upper yield limits have been reduced for white wines and white wines labelled ‘Vendanges Tardives’ [Late Harvest], in accordance with the hierarchy of designations in the Alsace region. This amendment will allow better quality control.

Point 5 of the single document has been amended for the maximum yields (upper yield limits).

The words ‘Vins blancs’ have been added for wines without a description. This is due to an application submitted at national level for recognition of still red wines for some ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin.

The yield and upper yield limit for red wines have been established in accordance with the hierarchy of designations of the Alsace regions, meaning that the amounts are lower for these ‘grand cru’ designations.

The latter amendments do not affect the single document.

13.   Malolactic fermentation, fermentable sugar content for red wines

Malolactic fermentation, fermentable sugar content for red wines

Chapter I, Section IX(1)(c), of the specification lays down that malolactic fermentation is carried out for red wines.

For the purpose of checking compliance with this rule, the maximum malic acid content has been established as 0,4 grams per litre at the time of packaging.

Section IX(1)(d) lays down a maximum content for fermentable sugars (glucose and fructose) of 2 grams per litre after fermentation.

The single document has not been amended.

14.   Increasing the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume prohibited for red wines

Increasing the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume prohibited for red wines

Chapter I, Section IX(1)(e), of the specification lays down that red wines must not be enriched in any way. This restriction applies to the production process. It is consistent with demarcation of parcels for grape-growing, minimum planting density, pruning rules and restricted yields.

The single document has not been amended.

15.   Capacity of the winery

Capacity of the winery

In Chapter I, Section IX(1)(g), of the specification, the coefficient for calculating the capacity of the winery has been reduced.

The capacity of the winery does not need to be as large in proportion to the volume of the preceding harvest.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

16.   Date of maturing and placing on the market for consumers in the case of red wines

Date of maturing and placing on the market for consumers in the case of red wines

In Chapter I, Section IX(2), of the specification, a minimum maturation period has been established for red wines: until 1 October of the year following the harvest. Wines made with grapes of the variety Pinot Noir N from these vineyards need a minimum period in order to fully express their characteristics.

In Chapter I, Section IX(5)(a), it is stated that, following the maturation period, red wines cannot be placed on the market for consumers until 1 October of the year following the harvest.

These amendments do not require any amendments to the single document.

17.   Checks on packaged batches

Checks on packaged batches

In Chapter I, Section IX(3)(b), of the specification, the rule has been abolished that required sample bottles to be kept for checks on packaged batches.

This rule is a measure of verifiability. It is now part of the checking plan.

The single document is not affected by this amendment.

18.   Storing packaged wines

Storing packaged wines

In Chapter I, Section IX(4), of the specification, further details have been provided of the characteristics of the place where packaged wines are stored.

This helps operators to comply with this rule, and makes checking easier.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

19.   Human factors contributing to the link with the geographical area

Human factors contributing to the link with the geographical area

In Chapter I, Section X(1)(b), of the specification, the text has been amended to take account of the fact that still red wines have been approved for the designations of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’ and ‘Alsace grand cru Kirchberg de Barr’.

| — | The following information has been added for the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’: red wines approved in 2022; Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised; the minimum planting density is 5 500 plants per hectare for the production of red wine; enrichment is not permitted in any form; there must be a minimum maturing period of 10 months. |
| --- | --- |

—

The following information has been added for the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’: red wines approved in 2022; Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised; the minimum planting density is 5 500 plants per hectare for the production of red wine; enrichment is not permitted in any form; there must be a minimum maturing period of 10 months.

| — | The following information has been added for the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Kirchberg de Barr’: red wines approved in 2022; Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised; the minimum planting density is 5 000 plants per hectare for the production of red wine; enrichment is not permitted in any form; there must be a minimum maturing period of 10 months. |
| --- | --- |

—

The following information has been added for the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Kirchberg de Barr’: red wines approved in 2022; Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised; the minimum planting density is 5 000 plants per hectare for the production of red wine; enrichment is not permitted in any form; there must be a minimum maturing period of 10 months.

In Section X(1)(b), information to the effect that these two designations of origin were recognised for white wines has been deleted. The words ‘for white wines’ have been added where necessary for understanding the text.

The single document has not been changed on account of these amendments.

The words ‘blancs’ and ‘roses’ have been added to the names of the different varieties of Muscat à petits grains. This corrects an oversight in the previous version of the specification. These additions do not affect the single document.

20.   Description of the wine(s)

Description of the wine(s)

In Chapter I, Section X(2), of the specification, details have been added of the visual appearance of the white wines in order to characterise them more fully.

In the case of the first two types of wine described: ‘The colour of these two types of wine is deep and intense and ranges to golden yellow.’

Details of the last two types of wine: ‘The colour of these two types of wine is deep and intense and ranges to amber yellow.’

Point 4 of the single document has been amended.

A description of the main organoleptic characteristics of the red wines has been added for the designations of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’ and ‘Alsace grand cru Kirchberg de Barr’.

These descriptions do not affect the single document.

21.   Link with the geographical area

Link with the geographical area

In Chapter I, Section X(3), of the specification, for the designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’, there are details about the link between the geographical origin and the characteristics of the wines which could also apply to the red wines of this designation. These details have been supplemented by information specific to the red wines.

The single document has not been amended.

22.   Transitional measures

Transitional measures

In Chapter I, Section XI(2), of the specification, in accordance with the amendments to Chapter I, Section VI, the maximum height of the wires supporting the arched canes has been deleted and the maximum number of buds per plant has been reduced.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

23.   Requirement to state the sugar content on labelling and other formats giving information for white wines

Requirement to state the sugar content on labelling and other formats giving information for white wines

Under the previous specification, mention of the sugar content was optional. Chapter I, Section XII(2)(d), of the specification has been replaced by a new text making it obligatory to mention the sugar content as laid down in Regulation (EU) 2019/33.

This information makes it easier for consumers to understand the type of wine.

The new rule does not apply to wines bearing the traditional terms ‘Vendanges Tardives’ and ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’ [includes botrytised grapes].

Point 9 of the single document has been supplemented.

The original point (d) of Section XII(2) is now point (e).

This amendment does not affect the single document.

24.   Advance declaration of the assignment of parcels

Advance declaration of the assignment of parcels

In Chapter II, Section I(1), of the specification, a clarification has been added to the rules regarding the advance declaration of the assignment of parcels. Such declarations are submitted by operators to the protection and management body for the ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin when they cease production under the designation.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

1.   Name(s)

Name(s)

Alsace grand cru Kanzlerberg

2.   Geographical indication type

Geographical indication type

PDO – Protected designation of origin

3.   Categories of grapevine products

Categories of grapevine products

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

1.

Wine

4.   Description of the wine(s)

Description of the wine(s)

BRIEF WRITTEN DESCRIPTION

The wines are still and white.

The minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume of the wines is 12,5 % for Gewürztraminer Rs and Pinot Gris G, and 11 % for other varieties. After enrichment, the total alcoholic strength by volume of the wines does not exceed 15 % for wines made from the varieties Gewürztraminer B and Pinot Gris G, and 14 % for wines made from other varieties.

The other analytical characteristics are as laid down by EU legislation.

Excellent examples of white wines suitable for ageing, they are characterised by powerful freshness underpinned by dominant tartaric acid combined with beautifully ripened grapes. The name of the designation may be supplemented by the common names of the grape varieties, on condition that the wines are made exclusively from grape varieties that can be referred to using the names in question. These are wines of great substance and complexity, with powerful aromas and numerous subtleties. Very long in the mouth, they become more complex over time.

There are two types: — dry wines with minerality; — aromatic wines that are fruity, unctuous and rich. The colour of these two types of wine is deep and intense and ranges to golden yellow.

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

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum total acidity

in milliequivalents per litre

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

2.   Designation followed by the words ‘Vendanges Tardives’

Designation followed by the words ‘Vendanges Tardives’

BRIEF WRITTEN DESCRIPTION

The minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume of the wines is 16 % for Gewürztraminer Rs and Pinot Gris G, and 14,5 % for the other varieties.

The other analytical characteristics are as laid down by EU legislation.

Wines with the description ‘Vendanges Tardives’ often have very exotic aromas, of candied fruits with a fresh finish. They are remarkably concentrated with long-lasting aromas. The colour of these wines is deep and intense and ranges to amber yellow.

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

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum total acidity

in milliequivalents per litre

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

3.   Designation followed by the words ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’

Designation followed by the words ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’

BRIEF WRITTEN DESCRIPTION

The minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume of the wines is 18,2 % for Gewürztraminer Rs and Pinot Gris G, and 16,4 % for other varieties.

The other analytical characteristics are as laid down by EU legislation.

Wines entitled to be labelled ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’ are more concentrated, powerful wines, often with aromas of candied fruits. They are remarkably concentrated with long-lasting aromas. The colour of these wines is deep and intense and ranges to amber yellow.

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

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum total acidity

in milliequivalents per litre

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

5.   Wine-making practices

Wine-making practices

5.1.   Specific oenological practices

Specific oenological practices

1.   Training systems: planting density

Training systems: planting density

Cultivation method

The minimum vine planting density is 4 500 plants per hectare.

The distance between the rows of vines must not exceed 2 metres.

Vines have an in-the-row spacing of no less than 0,75 metres and no more than 1,50 metres.

As of 25 October 2011, grubbing-up of rows within a parcel must not result in spacing wider than 3 metres between the rows.

2.   Training systems: pruning rule

Training systems: pruning rule

Cultivation method

The vines are pruned to single or double Guyot with a maximum of 18 buds per plant.

3.   Harvest

Harvest

Cultivation method

The wines are made from grapes harvested manually.

4.   Increase in the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume

Increase in the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume

Specific oenological practice

Any increase in the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume must not exceed:

| | 0,5 % for wines made from the varieties Gewürztraminer B and Pinot Gris G, |
| --- | --- |

0,5 % for wines made from the varieties Gewürztraminer B and Pinot Gris G,

| | 1,5 % for wines made from other varieties. |
| --- | --- |

1,5 % for wines made from other varieties.

Wines eligible for the term ‘Vendanges Tardives’ or ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’ must not be enriched.

5.   Production

Production

Wine-making restriction

Use of wood chips is prohibited.

6.   Maturing the wines

Maturing the wines

Specific oenological practice

The wines must be matured until at least 1 June of the year following the harvest.

Wines eligible for the term ‘Vendanges Tardives’ or ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’ must be matured until at least 1 June of the second year following the harvest.

5.2.   Maximum yields

Maximum yields

1.   Designation with or without the additional term ‘Vendanges Tardives’

Designation with or without the additional term ‘Vendanges Tardives’

60 hectolitres per hectare

2.   Designation followed by the words ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’

Designation followed by the words ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’

48 hectolitres per hectare

6.   Demarcated geographical area

Demarcated geographical area

The grapes are harvested and the wines are produced, developed and matured in the following municipalities, based on the 2021 Official Geographic Code:

| — | Department of Haut-Rhin: Entire municipalities: Ammerschwihr, Beblenheim, Bennwihr, Bergheim, Bergholtz, Eguisheim, Gueberschwihr, Guebwiller, Hattstatt, Hunawihr, Ingersheim, Katzenthal, Mittelwihr, Niedermorschwihr, Orschwihr, Pfaffenheim, Ribeauvillé, Riquewihr, Rodern, Rouffach, Saint-Hippolyte, Soultzmatt, Thann, Turckheim, Vieux-Thann, Voegtlinshoffen, Westhalten, Wettolsheim, Wintzenheim, Wuenheim and Zellenberg. |
| --- | --- |

—

Department of Haut-Rhin: Entire municipalities: Ammerschwihr, Beblenheim, Bennwihr, Bergheim, Bergholtz, Eguisheim, Gueberschwihr, Guebwiller, Hattstatt, Hunawihr, Ingersheim, Katzenthal, Mittelwihr, Niedermorschwihr, Orschwihr, Pfaffenheim, Ribeauvillé, Riquewihr, Rodern, Rouffach, Saint-Hippolyte, Soultzmatt, Thann, Turckheim, Vieux-Thann, Voegtlinshoffen, Westhalten, Wettolsheim, Wintzenheim, Wuenheim and Zellenberg.

Municipalities partially included: Kaysersberg Vignoble, only the territory of the delegated municipalities of Kientzheim and Sigolsheim.

| — | Department of Bas-Rhin: Andlau, Barr, Bergbieten, Blienschwiller, Dahlenheim, Dambach-la-Ville, Eichhoffen, Kintzheim, Marlenheim, Mittelbergheim, Molsheim, Nothalten, Scharrachbergheim-Irmstett and Wolxheim. |
| --- | --- |

—

Department of Bas-Rhin: Andlau, Barr, Bergbieten, Blienschwiller, Dahlenheim, Dambach-la-Ville, Eichhoffen, Kintzheim, Marlenheim, Mittelbergheim, Molsheim, Nothalten, Scharrachbergheim-Irmstett and Wolxheim.

A map defining the boundaries of the geographical area has been lodged with the municipal authorities of the partially included municipalities.

Maps of the geographical area can be accessed on the INAO website.

7.   Wine grape variety(-ies)

Wine grape variety(-ies)

| | Gewürztraminer Rs |
| --- | --- |

Gewürztraminer Rs

| | Muscat Ottonel B – Muscat, Moscato |
| --- | --- |

Muscat Ottonel B – Muscat, Moscato

| | Muscat à petits grains blancs B – Muscat, Moscato |
| --- | --- |

Muscat à petits grains blancs B – Muscat, Moscato

| | Muscat à petits grains roses Rs – Muscat, Moscato |
| --- | --- |

Muscat à petits grains roses Rs – Muscat, Moscato

| | Pinot Gris G |
| --- | --- |

Pinot Gris G

| | Riesling B |
| --- | --- |

Riesling B

8.   Description of the link(s)

Description of the link(s)

Thanks to the favourable climate conditions characteristic of the vineyards of Alsace, the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Kanzlerberg’ benefits from one of the best locations. Nestling in the picturesque countryside of Alsace, the vineyards enable the production of highly expressive wines, with distinctive character and unique personality.

The vines of Kanzlerberg hug the sloping terrain, exposing their fruits to the summer heat, which is tempered by the coolness of the Bergenbach stream and the light breeze of the bottom of the valley. The yield is regular. Physiological ripeness is reached effortlessly, regularly capable of good ripeness.

This well-exposed location of the Kanzlerberg grand cru and the exceptional geology of this place, consisting of gypseous marl on the surface on sedimentary bedrock with multiple crystals in the subsoil, combine to produce very powerful wines with a broad, complex, mineral underlying acidity. They remain discreet and elegant while young, and reveal all their complexity and freshness after being kept for a few years.

The excellent climate conditions at the end of the season are favourable to concentration on the vine and to the development of the noble rot. As a result, it is possible to produce wines from grapes harvested when overripe.

The maturation period laid down in the specification allows the wines to improve.

There are strict rules relating to production, such as maintaining a broad canopy and harvesting by hand. By adopting these rules, the winegrowers of Alsace preserve the established character of the wines, which are known for their complexity and their suitability for long keeping. These wines, which have a uniquely high potential for being kept, improve over several decades whilst keeping the excellent liveliness and energy of the terroir.

terroir

They are the top of the range for this region. Kanzlerberg wines are among the most prestigious wines produced in Alsace.

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

Essential further conditions (packaging, labelling, other requirements)

Area in immediate proximity

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Derogation concerning production in the demarcated geographical area

Description of the condition

The area in the immediate vicinity, defined by derogation for winemaking, processing and maturing, comprises the territory of the following municipalities, based on the 2021 Official Geographic Code:

| — | Department of Haut-Rhin: Entire municipalities: Bergholtz-Zell, Berrwiller, Buhl, Cernay, Colmar, Gundolsheim, Hartmanswiller, Herrlisheim, Houssen, Husseren-les-Châteaux, Jungholtz, Leimbach, Obermorschwihr, Osenbach, Ostheim, Rorschwihr, Soultz, Steinbach, Uffholtz, Walbach, Wattwiller, Wihr-au-Val and Zimmerbach. |
| --- | --- |

—

Department of Haut-Rhin: Entire municipalities: Bergholtz-Zell, Berrwiller, Buhl, Cernay, Colmar, Gundolsheim, Hartmanswiller, Herrlisheim, Houssen, Husseren-les-Châteaux, Jungholtz, Leimbach, Obermorschwihr, Osenbach, Ostheim, Rorschwihr, Soultz, Steinbach, Uffholtz, Walbach, Wattwiller, Wihr-au-Val and Zimmerbach.

Municipalities partially included: Kaysersberg Vignoble, only the territory of the delegated municipality of Kaysersberg.

| — | Department of Bas-Rhin: Albé, Avolsheim, Balbronn, Bernardswiller, Bernardvillé, Bischoffsheim, Boersch, Bourgheim, Châtenois, Cleebourg, Dachstein, Dangolsheim, Dieffenthal, Dorlisheim, Epfig, Ergersheim, Ernolsheim-Bruche, Fessenheim-le-Bas, Flexbourg, Furdenheim, Gertwiller, Gimbrett-Berstett, Goxwiller, Heiligenstein, Itterswiller, Kienheim, Kirchheim, Kuttolsheim, Mittelhausen, Mutzig, Nordheim, Oberhoffen-les-Wissenbourg, Obernai, Odratzheim, Orschwiller, Osthoffen, Ottrott, Petersbach, Reichsfeld, Riedseltz, Rosenwiller, Rosheim, Rott, Saint-Nabor, Saint-Pierre, Scherwiller, Seebach, Soultz-les-Bains, Steinseltz, Stotzheim, Strasbourg, Traenheim, Villé, Wangen, Westhoffen, Wissembourg and Zellwiller. |
| --- | --- |

—

Department of Bas-Rhin: Albé, Avolsheim, Balbronn, Bernardswiller, Bernardvillé, Bischoffsheim, Boersch, Bourgheim, Châtenois, Cleebourg, Dachstein, Dangolsheim, Dieffenthal, Dorlisheim, Epfig, Ergersheim, Ernolsheim-Bruche, Fessenheim-le-Bas, Flexbourg, Furdenheim, Gertwiller, Gimbrett-Berstett, Goxwiller, Heiligenstein, Itterswiller, Kienheim, Kirchheim, Kuttolsheim, Mittelhausen, Mutzig, Nordheim, Oberhoffen-les-Wissenbourg, Obernai, Odratzheim, Orschwiller, Osthoffen, Ottrott, Petersbach, Reichsfeld, Riedseltz, Rosenwiller, Rosheim, Rott, Saint-Nabor, Saint-Pierre, Scherwiller, Seebach, Soultz-les-Bains, Steinseltz, Stotzheim, Strasbourg, Traenheim, Villé, Wangen, Westhoffen, Wissembourg and Zellwiller.

Packaging in the area

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Packaging in the demarcated geographical area

Description of the condition

The wines are packaged in ‘Vin du Rhin’ bottles, in accordance with Decree No 55-673 of 20 May 1955, the Order of 13 May 1959 and the Decree of 19 March 1963. No other type of bottle is permitted.

Since the Law of 5 July 1972, the wines must be bottled in the departments of Bas-Rhin and Haut-Rhin in tall, thin ‘Vin du Rhin’ bottles, as laid down in the Decree of 1955.

Stating the vintage

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition

The vintage must appear, together with the name of the designation, in any harvest and stock declarations, supporting documents or publicity and on any leaflets, labels, invoices or containers.

Common name

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition

The name of the protected designation of origin may be supplemented by one of the common names of the grape varieties, on condition that the wines are made exclusively from grape varieties that can be referred to using the names in question.

Use of two or more common names on the same label is prohibited.

The common names are as follows:

| | Gewürztraminer |
| --- | --- |

Gewürztraminer

| | Muscat |
| --- | --- |

Muscat

| | Muscat Ottonel |
| --- | --- |

Muscat Ottonel

| | Pinot Gris |
| --- | --- |

Pinot Gris

| | Riesling. |
| --- | --- |

Riesling.

Traditional terms ‘Vendanges Tardives’ and ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition

For wines eligible for the term ‘Vendanges Tardives’ or ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’, the following must also be stated:

| — | vintage |
| --- | --- |

—

vintage

| — | one of the common forms of the grape variety name. |
| --- | --- |

—

one of the common forms of the grape variety name.

Indication of the sugar content

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition

The sugar content, as defined by European law, must be clearly stated in the case of white wines for which one of the 51 protected designations of origin ‘Alsace Grand Cru – lieu-dit’ is claimed under the terms of this specification. This applies when such wines are presented under the aforementioned designation and made available to the public, dispatched, offered for sale or sold, which cannot happen unless the sugar content is stated in any publicity and on any leaflets, labels, invoices or containers. It does not apply to wines labelled ‘Vendanges Tardives’ or ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’.

Link to the product specification

Link to the product specification

https://info.agriculture.gouv.fr/gedei/site/bo-agri/document_administratif-4cec3ff9-abd4-4253-a1db-245ddd809faa

---

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

1

---

| 6.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/52

---

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

(2022/C 385/12)

This communication is published in accordance with Article 17(5) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33 (1).

COMMUNICATING THE APPROVAL OF A STANDARD AMENDMENT

‘Alsace grand cru Rangen’

PDO-FR-A0386-AM02

Date of communication: 20 July 2022

DESCRIPTION OF AND REASONS FOR THE APPROVED AMENDMENT

1.   Additional indication

In Chapter I, Section II(1), of the specification, the following common forms of the names of grape varieties have been added: ‘Sylvaner’ and ‘Pinot Noir’, with the corresponding official names, respectively: Sylvaner B and Pinot Noir N.

The common form ‘Sylvaner’ has been added to correct an oversight in the original version of the specification. The original version stated in Chapter I, Section X(1)(b), that the authorised varieties ‘can be made into wine and placed on the market under their respective common names’. However, the corresponding common form of the name was not included in the list of permitted common names. Prior to the approval of the original version of the specification, a national decision meant that Sylvaner B had been added to the varieties authorised for the production of wines with the designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Zotzenberg’. This took into account local custom and the reputation of these wines.

The common name ‘Pinot Noir’ has been added to the specification. This is because of an application submitted at national level for recognition of the still red wines of certain ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin. This application for the recognition of a red wine is based on long-standing practice, reputation and the characteristics of the wines produced with grapes of the variety Pinot Noir N grown on demarcated parcels of these ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations. Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised for these red wines.

Chapter I, Section II(1), of the specification concerns the varieties of Muscat à petits grains, commonly referred to as ‘Muscat’. The words ‘blancs’ and ‘roses’ have been added to the names of these varieties, in order to correct an oversight in the previous version of the specification.

These amendments do not require any amendments to the single document.

2.   Types of product

In Chapter I, Section III, of the specification, the text has been amended to show that the protected designations of origin covered by the current specification no longer refer exclusively to still white wines.

The ‘Alsace grand cru’ protected designations of origin which cover red and white still wines are mentioned by name: ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’ and ‘Alsace grand cru Kirchberg de Barr’.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

3.   Geographical area

In Chapter I, Section IV(1), of the specification, a paragraph has been added giving the dates on which the geographical area was approved by the relevant INAO (National Institute for Origin and Quality) committee. The new paragraph also refers to the 2021 Official Geographic Code as the source for the demarcation of the area boundary as it appears in the specification. Reference to the source gives legal certainty to the demarcation of the area.

As a result of the reference to the 2021 Official Geographic Code, the list of names of municipalities has been updated. The municipalities of Kientzheim and Sigolsheim have been abolished. Their territory is now part of the municipality of Kaysersberg Vignoble.

These editorial changes do not affect the boundary of the geographical area.

The following sentences have also been added to Section IV(1):

‘Maps of the geographical area can be accessed on the INAO website.

A map defining the boundaries of the geographical area has been lodged with the municipal authorities in the case of the partially included municipality.’

These amendments require the amendment of point 6 of the single document.

4.   Demarcated parcel area

Demarcated parcel area

In Chapter I, Section IV(2), of the specification:

| — | in order to correct an oversight, the words ‘6 and 7 September 2006’ have been added to the first paragraph. This is a date on which the parcel area was approved by the relevant national committee; |
| --- | --- |

—

in order to correct an oversight, the words ‘6 and 7 September 2006’ have been added to the first paragraph. This is a date on which the parcel area was approved by the relevant national committee;

| — | in the second paragraph, the wording has been amended to take into account the changes made to the names of municipalities in Section IV(1); |
| --- | --- |

—

in the second paragraph, the wording has been amended to take into account the changes made to the names of municipalities in Section IV(1);

| — | the ‘Municipalities’ column in the table has been updated to correspond to the names of municipalities mentioned in Section IV(1). |
| --- | --- |

—

the ‘Municipalities’ column in the table has been updated to correspond to the names of municipalities mentioned in Section IV(1).

These amendments do not affect the single document.

5.   Area in immediate proximity

Area in immediate proximity

In Chapter I, Section IV(3), of the specification, a paragraph has been amended to give the 2021 Official Geographic Code as the source for the demarcation of the area boundary as it appears in the specification. Reference to the source gives legal certainty to the demarcation of the area.

As a result of the reference to the 2021 Official Geographic Code, the list of names of municipalities has been updated. The name of the municipality of Kaysersberg has been deleted and that of Kaysersberg Vignoble added, together with the information that the only part of this municipality included is that belonging to the delegated municipality of Kaysersberg.

These editorial changes do not affect the boundary of the area in immediate proximity.

These amendments require the amendment of point 9 of the single document.

6.   Vine varieties

Vine varieties

In Chapter I, Section V(1)(a), of the specification, two phrases have been added: ‘— for white wines:’ and ‘— for red wines: from grape variety Pinot Noir N’. This is because an application for recognition of the still red wines was submitted at national level for certain ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin. Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised for these red wines. It is also the only variety authorised for the production of red wine in the ‘Alsace’ designation of origin.

In Sections V(1)(a), (b) and (e) and V(2)(b), the words ‘blancs’ and ‘roses’ have been added to the names of the different varieties of Muscat à petits grains. This corrects an oversight in the previous version of the specification.

The single document has not been changed on account of these amendments.

7.   Planting density

Planting density

In Chapter I, Section VI(1)(a), of the specification, the following phrases have been added: ‘For white wine production’ and ‘For red wine production’. This is to distinguish between the minimum planting densities according to the colour of the wines. These densities are stated for the designations authorised to produce red wines.

The single document has not been changed on account of these additions.

In Chapter I, Section VI(1)(a), of the specification, the date of ‘25 October 2011’ has been specified for the effective application of the rule regarding the possibility of the density changing due to grubbing-up. It replaces the wording ‘on the date on which this specification was approved’.

This amendment requires the amendment of point 5 of the single document.

8.   Pruning rule

Pruning rule

In Chapter I, Section VI(1)(b), of the specification, the previous rule for white wines regarding the number of buds per square metre of soil differed according to the grape varieties. This rule has been abolished and replaced by a single rule of 18 buds per plant.

This development makes it possible to harmonise the wording in the specifications of the Alsace designations of origin, and to simplify the methods of checking.

Point 5 of the single document has been amended.

The words ‘For white wines’ have been added at the start of the sentence. This is due to the application for recognition for still red wines submitted at national level for some ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin.

A pruning rule has been added for red wines, setting the maximum number of buds per plant at 14. This is less than the number authorised for white wine production. This rule makes it possible to comply with the rules on yields and to produce good-quality grapes.

The above amendments do not affect the single document.

9.   Rules on trellising and foliage height

Rules on trellising and foliage height

In Chapter I, Section VI(1)(c), of the specification, the maximum height of the wires supporting the arched canes has been deleted, and the method of measuring the height of trellised foliage has been changed.

These amendments make it possible to verify that the foliage height is compliant as the plants grow. Previously this was possible only through a requirement relating to the support.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

10.   Average maximum crop load per parcel

Average maximum crop load per parcel

In Chapter I, Section VI(1)(d), of the specification, the average maximum crop load per parcel for white wines has been reduced from 10 000 to 8 500 kilograms per hectare, reflecting the reduced yields for these wines.

An average maximum crop load per parcel has been established for red wines. It is less than that for white wine, reflecting the yields for red wines.

These amendments do not affect the single document.

11.   Ripeness of grapes and minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume

Ripeness of grapes and minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume

In Chapter I, Section VII(2)(a), of the specification, the table has been amended. It now takes into account the application for recognition of still red wines submitted at national level for some ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin.

For these ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations for red wines, minimum levels have been established for the sugar content of the different grape varieties when harvested, and for their minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume.

These amendments do not affect the single document.

For white wines, the minimum levels for the sugar content of the grapes have been increased by 2 or 3 grams per litre of must in order to respect the same 1 % variation with the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume for each grape variety, as in the previous version of the specification. The protection and management body has chosen to calculate the transformation of grams of sugar into alcohol on the basis of 17 grams of sugar producing 1 % alcohol by volume for white wines. The original version of the specification had used the figure of 16,83 grams. The amount of 17 grams had been recommended by the competent national committee of the INAO when the original version of the specifications was established.

These amendments do not affect the single document.

12.   Yields

Yields

In Chapter I, Section VIII(1) and (2), of the specification, the yields and upper yield limits have been reduced for white wines and white wines labelled ‘Vendanges Tardives’ [Late Harvest], in accordance with the hierarchy of designations in the Alsace region. This amendment will allow better quality control.

Point 5 of the single document has been amended for the maximum yields (upper yield limits).

The words ‘Vins blancs’ have been added for wines without a description. This is due to an application submitted at national level for recognition of still red wines for some ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin.

The yield and upper yield limit for red wines have been established in accordance with the hierarchy of designations of the Alsace regions, meaning that the amounts are lower for these ‘grand cru’ designations.

The latter amendments do not affect the single document.

13.   Malolactic fermentation, fermentable sugar content for red wines

Malolactic fermentation, fermentable sugar content for red wines

Chapter I, Section IX(1)(c), of the specification lays down that malolactic fermentation is carried out for red wines.

For the purpose of checking compliance with this rule, the maximum malic acid content has been established as 0,4 grams per litre at the time of packaging.

Section IX(1)(d) lays down a maximum content for fermentable sugars (glucose and fructose) of 2 grams per litre after fermentation.

The single document has not been amended.

14.   Increasing the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume prohibited for red wines

Increasing the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume prohibited for red wines

Chapter I, Section IX(1)(e), of the specification lays down that red wines must not be enriched in any way. This restriction applies to the production process. It is consistent with demarcation of parcels for grape-growing, minimum planting density, pruning rules and restricted yields.

The single document has not been amended.

15.   Capacity of the winery

Capacity of the winery

In Chapter I, Section IX(1)(g), of the specification, the coefficient for calculating the capacity of the winery has been reduced.

The capacity of the winery does not need to be as large in proportion to the volume of the preceding harvest.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

16.   Date of maturing and placing on the market for consumers in the case of red wines

Date of maturing and placing on the market for consumers in the case of red wines

In Chapter I, Section IX(2), of the specification, a minimum maturation period has been established for red wines: until 1 October of the year following the harvest. Wines made with grapes of the variety Pinot Noir N from these vineyards need a minimum period in order to fully express their characteristics.

In Chapter I, Section IX(5)(a), it is stated that, following the maturation period, red wines cannot be placed on the market for consumers until 1 October of the year following the harvest.

These amendments do not require any amendments to the single document.

17.   Checks on packaged batches

Checks on packaged batches

In Chapter I, Section IX(3)(b), of the specification, the rule has been abolished that required sample bottles to be kept for checks on packaged batches.

This rule is a measure of verifiability. It is now part of the checking plan.

The single document is not affected by this amendment.

18.   Storing packaged wines

Storing packaged wines

In Chapter I, Section IX(4), of the specification, further details have been provided of the characteristics of the place where packaged wines are stored.

This helps operators to comply with this rule, and makes checking easier.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

19.   Human factors contributing to the link with the geographical area

Human factors contributing to the link with the geographical area

In Chapter I, Section X(1)(b), of the specification, the text has been amended to take account of the fact that still red wines have been approved for the designations of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’ and ‘Alsace grand cru Kirchberg de Barr’.

| — | The following information has been added for the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’: red wines approved in 2022; Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised; the minimum planting density is 5 500 plants per hectare for the production of red wine; enrichment is not permitted in any form; there must be a minimum maturing period of 10 months. |
| --- | --- |

—

The following information has been added for the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’: red wines approved in 2022; Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised; the minimum planting density is 5 500 plants per hectare for the production of red wine; enrichment is not permitted in any form; there must be a minimum maturing period of 10 months.

| — | The following information has been added for the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Kirchberg de Barr’: red wines approved in 2022; Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised; the minimum planting density is 5 000 plants per hectare for the production of red wine; enrichment is not permitted in any form; there must be a minimum maturing period of 10 months. |
| --- | --- |

—

The following information has been added for the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Kirchberg de Barr’: red wines approved in 2022; Pinot Noir N is the only variety authorised; the minimum planting density is 5 000 plants per hectare for the production of red wine; enrichment is not permitted in any form; there must be a minimum maturing period of 10 months.

In Section X(1)(b), information to the effect that these two designations of origin were recognised for white wines has been deleted. The words ‘for white wines’ have been added where necessary for understanding the text.

The single document has not been changed on account of these amendments.

The words ‘blancs’ and ‘roses’ have been added to the names of the different varieties of Muscat à petits grains. This corrects an oversight in the previous version of the specification. These additions do not affect the single document.

20.   Description of the wine(s)

Description of the wine(s)

In Chapter I, Section X(2), of the specification, details have been added of the visual appearance of the white wines in order to characterise them more fully.

In the case of the first two types of wine described: ‘The colour of these two types of wine is deep and intense and ranges to golden yellow.’

Details of the last two types of wine: ‘The colour of these two types of wine is deep and intense and ranges to amber yellow.’

Point 4 of the single document has been amended.

A description of the main organoleptic characteristics of the red wines has been added for the designations of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’ and ‘Alsace grand cru Kirchberg de Barr’.

These descriptions do not affect the single document.

21.   Link with the geographical area

Link with the geographical area

In Chapter I, Section X(3), of the specification, for the designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Hengst’, there are details about the link between the geographical origin and the characteristics of the wines which could also apply to the red wines of this designation. These details have been supplemented by information specific to the red wines.

The single document has not been amended.

22.   Transitional measures

Transitional measures

In Chapter I, Section XI(2), of the specification, in accordance with the amendments to Chapter I, Section VI, the maximum height of the wires supporting the arched canes has been deleted and the maximum number of buds per plant has been reduced.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

23.   Requirement to state the sugar content on labelling and other formats giving information for white wines

Requirement to state the sugar content on labelling and other formats giving information for white wines

Under the previous specification, mention of the sugar content was optional. Chapter I, Section XII(2)(d), of the specification has been replaced by a new text making it obligatory to mention the sugar content as laid down in Regulation (EU) 2019/33.

This information makes it easier for consumers to understand the type of wine.

The new rule does not apply to wines bearing the traditional terms ‘Vendanges Tardives’ and ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’ [includes botrytised grapes].

Point 9 of the single document has been supplemented.

The original point (d) of Section XII(2) is now point (e).

This amendment does not affect the single document.

24.   Advance declaration of the assignment of parcels

Advance declaration of the assignment of parcels

In Chapter II, Section I(1), of the specification, a clarification has been added to the rules regarding the advance declaration of the assignment of parcels. Such declarations are submitted by operators to the protection and management body for the ‘Alsace grand cru’ designations of origin when they cease production under the designation.

This amendment does not affect the single document.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

1.   Name(s)

Name(s)

Alsace grand cru Rangen

2.   Geographical indication type

Geographical indication type

PDO – Protected designation of origin

3.   Categories of grapevine products

Categories of grapevine products

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

1.

Wine

4.   Description of the wine(s)

Description of the wine(s)

BRIEF WRITTEN DESCRIPTION

The wines are still and white.

The minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume of the wines is 12, 5% for Gewürztraminer Rs and Pinot Gris G, and 11 % for other varieties. After enrichment, the total alcoholic strength by volume of the wines does not exceed 15 % for wines made from the varieties Gewürztraminer B and Pinot Gris G, and 14 % for wines made from other varieties.

The other analytical characteristics are as laid down by EU legislation.

Excellent examples of white wines suitable for ageing, they are characterised by powerful freshness underpinned by dominant tartaric acid combined with beautifully ripened grapes. The name of the designation may be supplemented by the common names of the grape varieties, on condition that the wines are made exclusively from grape varieties that can be referred to using the names in question. These are wines of great substance and complexity, with powerful aromas and numerous subtleties. Very long in the mouth, they become more complex over time.

There are two types:

| — | dry wines with minerality; |
| --- | --- |

—

dry wines with minerality;

| — | aromatic wines that are fruity, unctuous and rich. |
| --- | --- |

—

aromatic wines that are fruity, unctuous and rich.

The colour of these two types of wine is deep and intense and ranges to golden yellow / old gold with a hint of amber.

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

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum total acidity

in milliequivalents per litre

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

2.   Designation followed by the words ‘Vendanges Tardives’

Designation followed by the words ‘Vendanges Tardives’

BRIEF WRITTEN DESCRIPTION

The minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume of the wines is 16 % for Gewürztraminer Rs and Pinot Gris G, and 14,5 % for the other varieties.

The other analytical characteristics are as laid down by EU legislation.

Wines with the description ‘Vendanges Tardives’ often have very exotic aromas, of candied fruits with a fresh finish. They are remarkably concentrated with long-lasting aromas. The colour of these wines is deep and intense and ranges to amber yellow.

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

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum total acidity

in milliequivalents per litre

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

3.   Designation followed by the words ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’

Designation followed by the words ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’

BRIEF WRITTEN DESCRIPTION

The minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume of the wines is 18,2 % for Gewürztraminer Rs and Pinot Gris G, and 16,4 % for other varieties.

The other analytical characteristics are as laid down by EU legislation.

Wines entitled to be labelled ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’ are more concentrated, powerful wines, often with aromas of candied fruits. They are remarkably concentrated with long-lasting aromas. The colour of these wines is deep and intense and ranges to amber yellow.

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

General analytical characteristics

Maximum total alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum actual alcoholic strength (in % volume)

Minimum total acidity

in milliequivalents per litre

Maximum volatile acidity (in milliequivalents per litre)

Maximum total sulphur dioxide (in milligrams per litre)

5.   Wine-making practices

Wine-making practices

5.1.   Specific oenological practices

Specific oenological practices

1.   Training systems: planting density

Training systems: planting density

Cultivation method

The minimum vine planting density is 4 500 plants per hectare.

The distance between the rows of vines must not exceed 2 metres.

Vines have an in-the-row spacing of no less than 0,75 metres and no more than 1,50 metres.

As of 25 October 2011, grubbing-up of rows within a parcel must not result in spacing wider than 3 metres between the rows.

2.   Training systems: pruning rule

Training systems: pruning rule

Cultivation method

The vines are pruned to single or double Guyot with a maximum of 18 buds per plant.

3.   Harvest

Harvest

Cultivation method

The wines are made from grapes harvested manually.

4.   Increase in the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume

Increase in the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume

Specific oenological practice

Any increase in the minimum natural alcoholic strength by volume must not exceed:

| | 0,5 % for wines made from the varieties Gewürztraminer B and Pinot Gris G, |
| --- | --- |

0,5 % for wines made from the varieties Gewürztraminer B and Pinot Gris G,

| | 1,5 % for wines made from other varieties. |
| --- | --- |

1,5 % for wines made from other varieties.

Wines eligible for the term ‘Vendanges Tardives’ or ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’ must not be enriched.

5.   Production

Production

Wine-making restriction

Use of wood chips is prohibited.

6.   Maturing the wines

Maturing the wines

Specific oenological practice

The wines must be matured until at least 1 June of the year following the harvest.

Wines eligible for the term ‘Vendanges Tardives’ or ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’ must be matured until at least 1 June of the second year following the harvest.

5.2.   Maximum yields

Maximum yields

1.   Designation with or without the additional term ‘Vendanges Tardives’

Designation with or without the additional term ‘Vendanges Tardives’

60 hectolitres per hectare

2.   Designation followed by the words ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’

Designation followed by the words ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’

48 hectolitres per hectare

6.   Demarcated geographical area

Demarcated geographical area

The grapes are harvested and the wines are produced, developed and matured in the following municipalities, based on the 2021 Official Geographic Code:

| — | Department of Haut-Rhin: Entire municipalities: Ammerschwihr, Beblenheim, Bennwihr, Bergheim, Bergholtz, Eguisheim, Gueberschwihr, Guebwiller, Hattstatt, Hunawihr, Ingersheim, Katzenthal, Mittelwihr, Niedermorschwihr, Orschwihr, Pfaffenheim, Ribeauvillé, Riquewihr, Rodern, Rouffach, Saint-Hippolyte, Soultzmatt, Thann, Turckheim, Vieux-Thann, Voegtlinshoffen, Westhalten, Wettolsheim, Wintzenheim, Wuenheim and Zellenberg. |
| --- | --- |

—

Department of Haut-Rhin: Entire municipalities: Ammerschwihr, Beblenheim, Bennwihr, Bergheim, Bergholtz, Eguisheim, Gueberschwihr, Guebwiller, Hattstatt, Hunawihr, Ingersheim, Katzenthal, Mittelwihr, Niedermorschwihr, Orschwihr, Pfaffenheim, Ribeauvillé, Riquewihr, Rodern, Rouffach, Saint-Hippolyte, Soultzmatt, Thann, Turckheim, Vieux-Thann, Voegtlinshoffen, Westhalten, Wettolsheim, Wintzenheim, Wuenheim and Zellenberg.

Municipalities partially included: Kaysersberg Vignoble, only the territory of the delegated municipalities of Kientzheim and Sigolsheim.

| — | Department of Bas-Rhin: Andlau, Barr, Bergbieten, Blienschwiller, Dahlenheim, Dambach-la-Ville, Eichhoffen, Kintzheim, Marlenheim, Mittelbergheim, Molsheim, Nothalten, Scharrachbergheim-Irmstett and Wolxheim. |
| --- | --- |

—

Department of Bas-Rhin: Andlau, Barr, Bergbieten, Blienschwiller, Dahlenheim, Dambach-la-Ville, Eichhoffen, Kintzheim, Marlenheim, Mittelbergheim, Molsheim, Nothalten, Scharrachbergheim-Irmstett and Wolxheim.

A map defining the boundaries of the geographical area has been lodged with the municipal authorities of the partially included municipalities.

Maps of the geographical area can be accessed on the INAO website.

7.   Wine grape variety(-ies)

Wine grape variety(-ies)

| | Gewürztraminer Rs |
| --- | --- |

Gewürztraminer Rs

| | Muscat Ottonel B – Muscat, Moscato |
| --- | --- |

Muscat Ottonel B – Muscat, Moscato

| | Muscat à petits grains blancs B – Muscat, Moscato |
| --- | --- |

Muscat à petits grains blancs B – Muscat, Moscato

| | Muscat à petits grains roses Rs – Muscat, Moscato |
| --- | --- |

Muscat à petits grains roses Rs – Muscat, Moscato

| | Pinot Gris G |
| --- | --- |

Pinot Gris G

| | Riesling B |
| --- | --- |

Riesling B

8.   Description of the link(s)

Description of the link(s)

Thanks to the favourable climate conditions characteristic of the vineyards of Alsace, the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace grand cru Rangen’ benefits from one of the best locations. Nestling in the picturesque countryside of Alsace, the vineyards enable the production of highly expressive wines, with distinctive character and unique personality.

The volcanic nature of the grand cru, together with the exceptional geographical characteristics, give the wines their golden colour, their pronounced mineral flavour, acidity and noble bitterness. They have a long finish and a refined, ripe acidity.

The excellent climate conditions at the end of the season are favourable to concentration on the vine and to the development of the noble rot. As a result, it is possible to produce wines from grapes harvested when overripe.

The maturation period laid down in the specification allows the wines to improve.

There are strict rules relating to production, such as maintaining a broad canopy and harvesting by hand. By adopting these rules, the winegrowers of Alsace preserve the established character of the wines, which are known for their complexity and their suitability for long keeping.

They are the top of the range for this region. These wines are more prestigious than wines with the protected designation of origin ‘Alsace’.

If we look back through history, we see that Rangen is praised and mentioned numerous times in books and writings dating back as far as the 12th century. In the 16th century, decrees forbade the blending of Rangen wines with other wines if the designation Rangen was to be maintained on the label. During the same era, the town of Thann had a regulation concerning the vines in the Rangen vineyard. Decrees from 1548 and 1581 contained some paragraphs laying down certain rules governing production.

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

Essential further conditions (packaging, labelling, other requirements)

Area in immediate proximity

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Derogation concerning production in the demarcated geographical area

Description of the condition

The area in the immediate vicinity, defined by derogation for winemaking, processing and maturing, comprises the territory of the following municipalities, based on the 2021 Official Geographic Code:

| — | Department of Haut-Rhin: Entire municipalities: Bergholtz-Zell, Berrwiller, Buhl, Cernay, Colmar, Gundolsheim, Hartmanswiller, Herrlisheim, Houssen, Husseren-les-Châteaux, Jungholtz, Leimbach, Obermorschwihr, Osenbach, Ostheim, Rorschwihr, Soultz, Steinbach, Uffholtz, Walbach, Wattwiller, Wihr-au-Val and Zimmerbach. |
| --- | --- |

—

Department of Haut-Rhin: Entire municipalities: Bergholtz-Zell, Berrwiller, Buhl, Cernay, Colmar, Gundolsheim, Hartmanswiller, Herrlisheim, Houssen, Husseren-les-Châteaux, Jungholtz, Leimbach, Obermorschwihr, Osenbach, Ostheim, Rorschwihr, Soultz, Steinbach, Uffholtz, Walbach, Wattwiller, Wihr-au-Val and Zimmerbach.

Municipalities partially included: Kaysersberg Vignoble, only the territory of the delegated municipality of Kaysersberg.

| — | Department of Bas-Rhin: Albé, Avolsheim, Balbronn, Bernardswiller, Bernardvillé, Bischoffsheim, Boersch, Bourgheim, Châtenois, Cleebourg, Dachstein, Dangolsheim, Dieffenthal, Dorlisheim, Epfig, Ergersheim, Ernolsheim-Bruche, Fessenheim-le-Bas, Flexbourg, Furdenheim, Gertwiller, Gimbrett-Berstett, Goxwiller, Heiligenstein, Itterswiller, Kienheim, Kirchheim, Kuttolsheim, Mittelhausen, Mutzig, Nordheim, Oberhoffen-les-Wissenbourg, Obernai, Odratzheim, Orschwiller, Osthoffen, Ottrott, Petersbach, Reichsfeld, Riedseltz, Rosenwiller, Rosheim, Rott, Saint-Nabor, Saint-Pierre, Scherwiller, Seebach, Soultz-les-Bains, Steinseltz, Stotzheim, Strasbourg, Traenheim, Villé, Wangen, Westhoffen, Wissembourg and Zellwiller. |
| --- | --- |

—

Department of Bas-Rhin: Albé, Avolsheim, Balbronn, Bernardswiller, Bernardvillé, Bischoffsheim, Boersch, Bourgheim, Châtenois, Cleebourg, Dachstein, Dangolsheim, Dieffenthal, Dorlisheim, Epfig, Ergersheim, Ernolsheim-Bruche, Fessenheim-le-Bas, Flexbourg, Furdenheim, Gertwiller, Gimbrett-Berstett, Goxwiller, Heiligenstein, Itterswiller, Kienheim, Kirchheim, Kuttolsheim, Mittelhausen, Mutzig, Nordheim, Oberhoffen-les-Wissenbourg, Obernai, Odratzheim, Orschwiller, Osthoffen, Ottrott, Petersbach, Reichsfeld, Riedseltz, Rosenwiller, Rosheim, Rott, Saint-Nabor, Saint-Pierre, Scherwiller, Seebach, Soultz-les-Bains, Steinseltz, Stotzheim, Strasbourg, Traenheim, Villé, Wangen, Westhoffen, Wissembourg and Zellwiller.

Packaging in the area

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Packaging in the demarcated geographical area

Description of the condition

The wines are packaged in ‘Vin du Rhin’ bottles, in accordance with Decree No 55-673 of 20 May 1955, the Order of 13 May 1959 and the Decree of 19 March 1963. No other type of bottle is permitted.

Since the Law of 5 July 1972, the wines must be bottled in the departments of Bas-Rhin and Haut-Rhin in tall, thin ‘Vin du Rhin’ bottles, as laid down in the Decree of 1955.

Stating the vintage

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition

The vintage must appear, together with the name of the designation, in any harvest and stock declarations, supporting documents or publicity and on any leaflets, labels, invoices or containers.

Common name

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition

The name of the protected designation of origin may be supplemented by one of the common names of the grape varieties, on condition that the wines are made exclusively from grape varieties that can be referred to using the names in question.

Use of two or more common names on the same label is prohibited.

The common names are as follows:

| | Gewürztraminer |
| --- | --- |

Gewürztraminer

| | Muscat |
| --- | --- |

Muscat

| | Muscat Ottonel |
| --- | --- |

Muscat Ottonel

| | Pinot Gris |
| --- | --- |

Pinot Gris

| | Riesling. |
| --- | --- |

Riesling.

Traditional terms ‘Vendanges Tardives’ and ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition

For wines eligible for the term ‘Vendanges Tardives’ or ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’, the following must also be stated:

| — | vintage |
| --- | --- |

—

vintage

| — | one of the common forms of the grape variety name. |
| --- | --- |

—

one of the common forms of the grape variety name.

Indication of the sugar content

Legal framework

National legislation

Type of further condition

Additional provisions relating to labelling

Description of the condition

The sugar content, as defined by European law, must be clearly stated in the case of white wines for which one of the 51 protected designations of origin ‘Alsace Grand Cru – lieu-dit’ is claimed under the terms of this specification. This applies when such wines are presented under the aforementioned designation and made available to the public, dispatched, offered for sale or sold, which cannot happen unless the sugar content is stated in any publicity and on any leaflets, labels, invoices or containers. It does not apply to wines labelled ‘Vendanges Tardives’ or ‘Sélection de Grains Nobles’.

Link to the product specification

Link to the product specification

https://info.agriculture.gouv.fr/gedei/site/bo-agri/document_administratif-4cec3ff9-abd4-4253-a1db-245ddd809faa

---

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

1

---

| 6.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/64 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/64

---

Publication of the amended product specification following the approval of a minor amendment pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012

(2022/C 385/13)

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

The application for approval of this minor amendment can be consulted in the Commission’s eAmbrosia database.

PRODUCT SPECIFICATION OF A TRADITIONAL SPECIALITY GUARANTEED

‘Rögös túró’

EU No: TSG-HU-1113-AM01 – 1.6.2022

Member State or third country: Hungary

1.   Name to be registered

‘Rögös túró’

2.   Type of product

Class 1.3: Cheeses

3.   Grounds for the registration

3.1.   Whether the product:

| ☒ | results from a mode of production, processing or composition corresponding to traditional practice for that product or foodstuff; |
| --- | --- |

☒

results from a mode of production, processing or composition corresponding to traditional practice for that product or foodstuff;

| ☐ | is produced from raw materials or ingredients that are those traditionally used. |
| --- | --- |

☐

is produced from raw materials or ingredients that are those traditionally used.

The technique for producing ‘Rögös túró’ differs markedly from that of other fresh cheeses. The superfluous quantity of whey is removed from the curd produced from the basic milk ingredient by acid or mixed curdling, gently, by gravitational means, and by decanting, i.e. by self-pressing, ensuring ultimately – even at the portioning and packaging stage – that the crumbly, lumpy, cauliflower-like texture is preserved.

‘Rögös túró’ differs from other types of curd cheese primarily in terms of the texture conferred by its curd-production and whey-separation processes.

No other fresh cheese or dairy product has a texture consisting of clumps of loose lumps reminiscent of cauliflower formed thanks to the production technique.

Made without any flavourings, this product, which is marketed in a slightly sour, characteristically wet and crumbly state, differs from other types of fresh cheese sold on the market, which are produced using heat-treatment and kneading, for example, or as a basic ingredient of sweet and creamy cakes or pastries.

‘Rögös túró’ is considered one of the staples of Hungarian cooking. Only ‘Rögös túró’ can be used in the preparation of numerous classic dishes.

3.2.   Whether the name:

| ☒ | has been traditionally used to refer to the specific product; |
| --- | --- |

☒

has been traditionally used to refer to the specific product;

| ☐ | identifies the traditional character or specific character of the product. |
| --- | --- |

☐

identifies the traditional character or specific character of the product.

The term ‘Rögös’ [lumpy] in the name expresses the product’s specific character: it denotes the texture of the product, which consists of lumps of curd reminiscent of cauliflower. The term ‘túró’, which is difficult to translate into other languages, indicates an actual fresh cheese with a pleasantly sour, fresh, aromatic taste.

4.   Description

4.1.   Description of the product to which the name under point 1 applies, including its main physical, chemical, microbiological or organoleptic characteristics showing the product’s specific character (Article 7(2) of this Regulation)

Ivory or yellowish-white in colour, ‘Rögös túró’ is a dairy product reminiscent of cauliflower with its lumps of curd and has a pleasantly sour, fresh, flavoursome and aromatic taste. During production, the lumps remain whole; they are not damaged or crushed.

The surface of the lumps is covered by a whey film. The moisture content is distributed evenly within the lumps, so that the lumps are wet even on the inside.

Physical and chemical requirements:

| Degree of fat | Dry matter content, minimum, % (m/m) | Fat content in dry matter, % (m/m) | Acidity (°SH) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| full-fat | 40,0 | minimum | 60,0 | 60 –100 |
| fatty | 35,0 | minimum | 45,0 |
| lower than | 60,0 |
| partly skimmed | 25,0 | minimum | 25,0 |
| lower than | 45,0 |
| low-fat | 20,0 | minimum | 10,0 |
| lower than | 25,0 |
| skimmed | 15,0 | lower than | 10,0 | 60 –90 |

Degree of fat

Dry matter content, minimum, % (m/m)

Fat content in dry matter, % (m/m)

Acidity (°SH)

full-fat

40,0

minimum

60,0

60 –100

fatty

35,0

minimum

45,0

lower than

60,0

partly skimmed

25,0

minimum

25,0

lower than

45,0

low-fat

20,0

minimum

10,0

lower than

25,0

skimmed

15,0

lower than

10,0

60 –90

Organoleptic requirements:

| Appearance | Uniformly ivory, or in the case of the fatty and full-fat variety yellowish-white in colour. |
| --- | --- |
| Texture | Clumps (4–20 mm in size) of loose lumps reminiscent of cauliflower, in addition to which small quantities of whey may appear. In the case of machine-packaged products a homogeneous block which may be broken into clumps of loose lumps reminiscent of cauliflower. Its lumpy texture is apparent in the mouth but does not impede swallowing. |
| Aroma | Pleasantly sour, aromatic, pure, free of any foreign odours. |
| Taste | Pleasantly sour, fresh and aromatic, flavoursome, pure, free of any foreign tastes. |

Appearance

Uniformly ivory, or in the case of the fatty and full-fat variety yellowish-white in colour.

Texture

Clumps (4–20 mm in size) of loose lumps reminiscent of cauliflower, in addition to which small quantities of whey may appear. In the case of machine-packaged products a homogeneous block which may be broken into clumps of loose lumps reminiscent of cauliflower. Its lumpy texture is apparent in the mouth but does not impede swallowing.

Aroma

Pleasantly sour, aromatic, pure, free of any foreign odours.

Taste

Pleasantly sour, fresh and aromatic, flavoursome, pure, free of any foreign tastes.

4.2.   Description of the production method of the product to which the name under point 1 applies that the producers must follow including, where appropriate, the nature and characteristics of the raw materials or ingredients used, and the method by which the product is prepared (Article 7(2) of this Regulation)

Substances and instruments that may be used:

Substances that meet the quality standards laid down in the prevailing regulations:

| a) | raw or pasteurised cow’s milk, from skimmed milk to whole milk; |
| --- | --- |

a)

raw or pasteurised cow’s milk, from skimmed milk to whole milk;

| b) | cream, whether or not homogenised; |
| --- | --- |

b)

cream, whether or not homogenised;

| c) | lactic culture (e.g. in the form of a mass-produced culture or a deep-frozen or freeze-dried dairy starter culture); |
| --- | --- |

c)

lactic culture (e.g. in the form of a mass-produced culture or a deep-frozen or freeze-dried dairy starter culture);

| d) | rennet (for mixed curdling). |
| --- | --- |

d)

rennet (for mixed curdling).

Method of production:

‘Rögös túró’ can be produced using a mixed, slow or fast-curdling method. There is no difference between the quality parameters of ‘Rögös túró’ produced using the three methods.

While the stages are the same, the technological processes are accelerated by raising the temperature and the amount of lactic culture (rennet) added. The primary aim of the fast curdling method is to increase efficiency and to make better use of the vessels.

1.   Pre-maturation

This process applies under the fast-curdling method only. Under the slow-curdling method, the cow’s milk does not have to be pre-matured.

Under fast curdling, pre-maturing the cow’s milk shortens the curdling time. During pre-maturing, the milk, pasteurised at 6,0–7,2 °SH, is pre-matured until it reaches 9–11 °SH. Pre-maturation occurs at a temperature of 12–15 °C, for 6–8 hours.

The milk is pre-matured (pre-acidified) in tanks or milk silos. The pre-matured milk is then placed into a curdling device (vat) as quickly as possible.

2.   Adjusting the fat content

Where fat adjustment is required, full milk or homogenised cream is added to the cow’s milk, depending on the final degree of fat of the ‘Rögös túró’.

3.   Renneting

During slow curdling, the cow’s milk is renneted at 22–32 °C using an 0,5–1,5 % quantity lactic culture (or an equivalent powder or frozen lactic culture).

During fast curdling, the pre-matured milk is renneted at 30–32 °C using a 4–5 % quantity lactic culture.

4.   Curdling

The renneted milk is curdled in a curdling vessel for 12–20 hours in the case of slow curdling and for 4–6 hours in the case of fast curdling, until it reaches 30–38 °SH. Slow curdling occurs at a temperature of 22–32 °C, fast curdling at 30–32 °C. When the acid value required is reached, the curd makes a clean break, and mild whey separation can be observed. Rennet is also used in mixed curdling.

5.   Curd processing

The aim is to reduce the water content of the curd to the typical value for the product. The procedure consists of a first pressing, heating and second pressing stage. As the curd is quite crumbly, it requires careful processing.

During the first pressing stage, the curd is broken up using a device that ensures it is broken up gently, then chopped, mixed and left to rest if necessary. The aim at this stage is to ensure that the release of the whey from the curd (syneresis) happens quickly. During chopping, the solidified curd, having rested for a few minutes (at 30–38 °SH), is chopped into roughly walnut-sized (2–3 cm), granulated lumps. Once chopping has finished, some of the whey must be drained off. During the next stage, to prevent the curd from crumbling, a protective shield is placed on the cutting implement, or spatulas are used instead of the cutting implement. The chopped curd lumps still floating in the whey are kept in motion by stirring them. If the curd lumps do not solidify at the rate required to achieve the substance of ‘Rögös túró’, then the solidification process can be aided by letting them settle and rest for a short while. After resting for a short while, the curd lumps must be stirred again to prevent them from sticking together.

The first pressing stage is followed by heating. The aim is to shrink the curd lumps further and to release the whey. The curds are heated at an intensity of 1 °C per 2,5 minutes, stirring continuously, until a temperature of 30–40 °C in the case of slow curdling and 36–48 °C in the case of accelerated curdling is reached.

During second pressing, the wheyey curd must be stirred continuously and left to settle until the desired solidity of the curd is reached. The second pressing stage may be skipped in the case of production by slow curdling.

6.   Cooling and draining

The aim is to prevent the over-acidification of the chopped and warmed curd and any microbial contaminants from spreading, to stop the curd from clumping together and to regulate compaction. The curd is cooled in a curdling device (vat or tank) at an intensity of 3–4 °C per minute until it reaches 18–22 °C.

The cooling environment may be the vat or tank’s own whey, which should be allowed to circulate on the plate heat exchanger built into the draining line, and cooled to less than 5 °C. Drinking-water can also be used for cooling once the whey has been drained. Cooling down in a cooling chamber also provides adequate safety. Contemporary cultures in themselves also prevent over-acidification.

The ‘Rögös túró’ whey and curd mixture is drained from the curdling device by gravitational means or through a pump which preserves the texture of the curd.

7.   Separating the whey

Having been separated from the curd, the whey must now be removed. The pivotal stage in the formation of the lumpy texture is the whey separation (decanting) method. During separation the curd is moved carefully from time to time to ensure that the cauliflower-like texture is not damaged. The separation continues until the dry matter content and acid value required for the degree of fat is reached.

8.   Pouring, packaging, labelling and storage

During the pouring and packaging stage, it is important to ensure that the lumpy texture is not broken up or damaged. An inert protective gas may be used during packaging. The degree of fat referred to in point 4.1 must be indicated on the packaging.

‘Rögös túró’ must be stored at a maximum temperature of 10 °C using a method excluding any mechanical impact.

Minimum verification requirements

On account of the specific character of the product, the following items in particular must be examined when checking ‘Rögös túró’:

The specific quality characteristics of the following substances (cow’s milk, cream, pure cultures of lactic acid bacteria) used for production, including:

| — | fresh, max. 7,2 °SH cow’s milk; |
| --- | --- |

—

fresh, max. 7,2 °SH cow’s milk;

| — | cream with a plasma acidity of max. 7,2 °SH; |
| --- | --- |

—

cream with a plasma acidity of max. 7,2 °SH;

| — | a lactic culture containing 36–40 °SH, acidifying and aroma-producing lactic acid bacteria with good acidification ability (e.g. in the form of a mass-produced culture or a deep-frozen or freeze-dried dairy starter culture); |
| --- | --- |

—

a lactic culture containing 36–40 °SH, acidifying and aroma-producing lactic acid bacteria with good acidification ability (e.g. in the form of a mass-produced culture or a deep-frozen or freeze-dried dairy starter culture);

The provisions of point 4 must be adhered to during the production process, in particular:

| — | curdling: acidity (30–36 °SH) and curdling time (4–20 hours); |
| --- | --- |

—

curdling: acidity (30–36 °SH) and curdling time (4–20 hours);

| — | curd processing: checking the solidity of the curd (it should have a smooth feel, it should be possible to remove the curd from the lining with precision, 32–38 °SH); |
| --- | --- |

—

curd processing: checking the solidity of the curd (it should have a smooth feel, it should be possible to remove the curd from the lining with precision, 32–38 °SH);

| — | cooling the curd (until 18–22 °C is reached, at an intensity of 3–4 °C per minute); |
| --- | --- |

—

cooling the curd (until 18–22 °C is reached, at an intensity of 3–4 °C per minute);

| — | separating the whey (carefully, by draining without pressing, i.e. by gravitational means). |
| --- | --- |

—

separating the whey (carefully, by draining without pressing, i.e. by gravitational means).

Quality of the finished product:

| — | the provisions of point 4 must be adhered to when checking the physical and chemical requirements (degree of fat, dry matter content, fat content, acidity); |
| --- | --- |

—

the provisions of point 4 must be adhered to when checking the physical and chemical requirements (degree of fat, dry matter content, fat content, acidity);

| — | the provisions of point 4 must be adhered to when checking the organoleptic requirements (appearance, texture, taste and smell). |
| --- | --- |

—

the provisions of point 4 must be adhered to when checking the organoleptic requirements (appearance, texture, taste and smell).

4.3.   Description of the key elements establishing the product’s traditional character (Article 7(2) of this Regulation)

In the 18th–20th centuries curd cheeses were consumed fresh or preserved by grinding them in their natural state into grain- or hazelnut-sized pieces (Magyar Néprajz nyolc kötetben, Akadémiai Kiadó, Magyar Tudományos Akadémia).

One historical reference to the lumpiness of curd cheese dates back to the period after the First World War. It states that ‘curd cheese is chopped into hazelnut-sized lumps (...) the crumblier the curd cheese, the longer it keeps fresh’ (O. Gratz, A tej és tejtermékek, pp. 294-296, 1925).

The Tejgazdasági Szemle wrote in 1925 that curd cheese has a grainy or crumbly feel (A. Törs 1925, Tejgazdasági Szemle és Tejgazdasági Könyvtár (Tejgazdasági Szemle kiadása)).

Mihály Balatoni speaks of ‘curd lumps, a fine, loose, coarse, cauliflower-like texture, clumps and lumps reminiscent of cauliflower (Mihály Balatoni 1960, Étkezési Túró gyártása).

In 1979 Drs Sándor Szakály and Gábor Tomka published figures on consumption trends between 1970 and 1977 of this curd cheese with a ‘cauliflower-like texture’ (Tejipar, Vol. 28, No 1, 1979).

According to Dr Sándor Szakály, in Hungary ‘the lumpy variety accounts for 80 % of all curd cheese production’... ‘Rögös túró’ is fundamentally different from the other three types in that the curdling of the milk used to produce it can only occur by biological acidification... (Dr S. Szakály 1980, A rögös állományú étkezési túró korszerű gyártása, Magyar Tejgazdasági Kutató Intézet, Pécs).

According to Dr Sándor Szakály, ‘Rögös túró’, known only in Central Europe, is an ancient Hungarian dairy product originating to the west of the Ural Mountains and produced domestically through the centuries from raw milk (Tejgazdaságtan, 2001).

The traditional nature of ‘Rögös túró’ is demonstrated by the separate chapter devoted to it in the ‘Hagyományok-Ízek-Régiók’ [Traditions-Tastes-Regions] collection published by the Ministry of Agriculture and Agrármarketing Centrum in 2002. The collection is confined to products with a history that can be documented in line with the relevant criteria. To qualify, a product must be shown to date back at least two generations (50 years), and it must be a well-known, reputed product that is produced and distributed.

---

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

---

Corrigenda

| 6.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/69 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/69

---

Corrigendum to Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations: — 0,50 % on 1 October 2022 — Euro exchange rates (2022/C 381/04)

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 381 of 4 October 2022
  )

(2022/C 385/14)

On the cover, and page 4, in the title:

for:

‘0,50 % on 1 October 2022’,

read:

‘1,25 % on 1 October 2022’

---