# Official Journal C 182/2022

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 182 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 654 May 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 182

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 654 May 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 182/01 | Communication from the Commission – Ecodesign and Energy Labelling Working Plan 2022-2024 | 1 |

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 182/01

Communication from the Commission – Ecodesign and Energy Labelling Working Plan 2022-2024

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 182/02 | Euro exchange rates — 3 May 2022 | 13 |
| | Court of Auditors |
| 2022/C 182/03 | Opinion No 1/2022
  (pursuant to Article 287(4), TFEU)
  concerning the Commission’s proposal for a Regulation on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations | 14 |
| | European Data Protection Supervisor |
| 2022/C 182/04 | Summary of the Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the two Proposals for Council Decisions authorising Member States to sign and to ratify, in the interest of the European Union, the Second Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime on enhanced co - operation and disclosure of electronic evidence (The full text of this Opinion can be found in English, French and German on the EDPS website: www.edps.europa.eu) | 15 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 182/02

Euro exchange rates — 3 May 2022

13

Court of Auditors

2022/C 182/03

Opinion No 1/2022
  (pursuant to Article 287(4), TFEU)
  concerning the Commission’s proposal for a Regulation on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations

(pursuant to Article 287(4), TFEU)

14

European Data Protection Supervisor

2022/C 182/04

Summary of the Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the two Proposals for Council Decisions authorising Member States to sign and to ratify, in the interest of the European Union, the Second Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime on enhanced co - operation and disclosure of electronic evidence (The full text of this Opinion can be found in English, French and German on the EDPS website: www.edps.europa.eu)

(The full text of this Opinion can be found in English, French and German on the EDPS website: www.edps.europa.eu)

15

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | OTHER ACTS |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 182/05 | Publication of an application for registration of a name pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs | 20 |
| 2022/C 182/06 | Publication of the amended single document following the approval of a minor amendment pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 | 25 |

V   Announcements

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

2022/C 182/05

Publication of an application for registration of a name pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs

20

2022/C 182/06

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

25

---

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

EN

---

II Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

| 4.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/1

---

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION

Ecodesign and Energy Labelling Working Plan 2022-2024

(2022/C 182/01)

1.   Introduction

The energy market tensions in which the EU has found itself in recent months is a stark reminder of the risks and costs that tend to come with extensive reliance on imported fossil fuels, exacerbated by Russia’s attack on Ukraine. Energy prices are once again at the centre of political attention, given the very real impact they have on Europe’s citizens and business. Yet, it is not Europe’s first energy crisis, nor is it likely to be the last unless we increase resilience by stepping up investments in the green transition and, in doing so, putting energy efficiency first (1). Current decarbonised energy capacities are far from able to satisfy all energy needs and lower energy consumption can make an immediate contribution in these circumstances. Looking into the future, energy savings are an intrinsic part of developing a cost-optimal, resilient energy system capable of providing affordable energy services to all and tackling energy poverty (2). Energy efficiency will also be a core component of the RePowerEU plan that EU leaders have tasked the Commisison to present by May.

The EU’s ecodesign and energy labelling policies are a key part of this agenda. They are Single Market rules that make it easier and less costly for business, citizens and governments alike to contribute to the clean energy transition and deliver on the EU’s energy efficiency and wider ‘European Green Deal’ objectives, including the Circular Economy agenda. They create business opportunities and increase resilience by setting harmonised rules for ‘energy-related products’ on aspects such as energy consumption, water consumption, emission levels and material efficiency, they stimulate both demand for and supply of more sustainable products whilst reducing energy user expenditure significantly: estimates indicate that savings in 2021 exceeded EUR 120 billion and could reach the double in 2022 (3).

Within the possibilities of the existing EU ecodesign rules and in synergy with the focus on energy efficiency, this working plan strengthens the focus on the circularity aspects of ecodesign, following the example set in the previous Working Plan9 and in line with the Circular Economy Action Plan 2020 (4). As such, already before the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation enters into force and replaces the current Ecodesign Directive, new product-specific requirements on material efficiency aspects can and will be explored. This should result in further improved circularity and overall reduction of environmental and climate footprints of energy-related products, as well as stronger EU resilience.

Both the Ecodesign Directive (5) and the Energy Labelling Framework Regulation (6) lay down criteria for adopting measures for specific product groups. They also require that priorities are established through regularly updated rolling Working Plans that take stock of progress made and include indicative priorities for new energy-related product groups to be considered.

This plan builds on work done since the adoption of the first Ecodesign Directive and the previous Working Plans (covering the periods 2009-2011 (7), 2012-2014 (8) and 2016-2019 (9)), but it also covers the work required under the Energy Labelling Framework Regulation, which sets out deadlines for the rescaling of existing labels, and it takes stock of the progress made with the European Product Registry for Energy Labelling (EPREL). Finally, the plan also covers similar work on tyre labelling although it is based on a specific legal basis (10).

The Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation adopted at the same time as this working plan will replace the Ecodesign Directive with a Regulation applicable to a broader range of products and make it possible to further expand sustainability requirements for the regulated products. Until this new regulation enters into force, implementation will continue within the current Directive. This document focuses on energy-related products (‘ErPs’) and lays out the priorities and planning for these. It presents the product-specific and horizontal work involved in implementing, consolidating and further developing this major body of directly applicable EU legislation. In the future, once the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR) has been adopted, work on ErPs will be integrated in broader ESPR Working Plans and remain a prominent focus.

Currently, about 30 ‘ErP’ product groups are regulated through some 50 measures. They apply to billions of products (11) placed on the market each year, and have direct implications for suppliers, retailers, businesses and consumers on a daily basis. About half of the EU total final energy use is consumed in products that are subject to this legislation.

The preparation of the working plan has shown there is still potential for substantial, cost-effective savings from expanding the scope to new ErPs. At the same time a key lesson learned from the implementation of the last working plan is that harvesting the full benefits of this policy area will require a better match between ambition and resources, both for policy implementation at EU level and when it comes to Member States’ efforts in market surveillance.

2.   Estimated impacts of the policies

The latest Ecodesign Impact Accounting report (12) estimates that the cumulative effect of EU rules on ecodesign and energy labelling in 2020 reduced EU primary energy demand by 7 % or 1 037 TWh/year (ca. 170 Mt CO2 equivalent GHG reduction), including some 16 bcm of gas. Energy savings from the measures currently in place will increase substantially in coming years, notably thanks to stock turnover, with an average exceeding 1 500 TWh/year over the period 2021-2030. Over 60 % of the energy savings in 2020 came from the residential sector, 24 % from the tertiary sector and 10 % from the industry sector. The EU rules in 2020 delivered energy consumer benefits to the tune of EUR 60 billion/year (ca. 0,4 % of the EU GDP) – EUR 210/year per household. Similarly, compared to a no-policy scenario, additional business revenues of some EUR 21 billion/year were generated in 2020 and are estimated to grow to EUR 29 billion/year by 2030. This corresponds to an increase of over 320 000 direct new jobs in 2020 (430 000 by 2030). These estimates are based on energy price levels before the price spikes in 2021 (see staff working document for details).

More generally, a recent study by the IEA (13) showed that in countries with long-running policies, appliances are now typically consuming 30 % less energy than they would have otherwise. The longest operating programmes, such as those in the US and the EU, are estimated to deliver annual cuts of around 15 % of total electricity use (which for the EU programme is about as much as the total present EU production from wind energy, or 2-3 times that of solar panels).

A Eurobarometer survey has shown that the vast majority of EU consumers (93 %) recognize the energy label and 79 % are influenced by it when buying appliances (14). Recent scientific research (15) confirms that graded labels like the EU energy label have a higher effect on consumer behaviour than alternative designs.

3.   State of play and lessons learned from previous working plans

An overview of the measures in place is available online (16). As of 1 March 2022, Ecodesign Regulations are in force for 29 product groups, whereas Energy Labelling Regulations apply for 15 product groups. Voluntary Agreements by industry have been recognised for Game Consoles and Imaging Equipment. An older agreement on Complex Set Top Boxes was terminated in 2020 by the parties due to decreasing market share of the products concerned (such products remain subject to horizontal rules on standby and off-mode power consumption (17)).

Accompanying this working plan is a detailed status for the progress made with the priorities and work identified in the last working plan from 2016 (18). A lot has been accomplished, including the modernization of energy labels for key consumer products light fridges, washing machines, TVs and light sources and the adoption of ecodesign requirements for several products ranging from servers to electric motors. However, about 40 % is still ongoing and will be rolled over to the current planning period. Among the concluded work streams many have not led to adoption of new rules but have ended because the Commission has decided to discontinue work or at least not to pursue legislation for now, either because detailed investigations showed that potentials were smaller or harder to exploit than initially thought or because other priorities prevailed in the context of limited staff resources - or a combination of these two. Windows, hand dryers, compressor packages and electric kettles are all examples of such discontinued workstreams representing potentials that are either limited or complex to exploit and which it has not been possible to pursue with the administrative resources available.

The need for regularly reviewing and adapting existing rules, to ensure they remain relevant, effective and fit for purpose in the light of market and technological developments, is a fundamental principle of Better Regulation. In recognition of this fact, all ecodesign and energy labelling regulations as well as the framework legislation contain specific review clauses with legal deadlines for the Commission to present reviews or to adopt revised regulations. To avoid unnecessary delays, the Commission henceforth will adopt individual measures for specific product groups whenever they are ready, unless exceptional circumstances warrant otherwise (19).

A key lesson learned is that over time the aggregate effort required for such critical ‘maintenance’ efforts becomes significant as the scope of the legislation increases (in terms of products and types of requirements), and that this work needs to be better factored in when setting priorities. Otherwise, it will entail delays that have important consequences in terms of foregone benefits. This was a key finding of the audit carried out in 2019 by the European Court of Auditors (ECA) (20). For three selected products, the audit found that the preparatory process took 8, 7 and 6 years respectively, instead of the expected 3.5 years. The ‘maintenance’ work is therefore a very prominent feature in the working plan. At the same time, the Commission will aim to streamline the process by integrating review studies into ‘back-to-back’ evaluations/impact assessments, and better align discussions in the Consultation Forum with the general Better Regulation process.

Another key lesson of the last period is the critical role of technical standardisation work for ecodesign and energy labelling. The 2018 ruling (21) of the General Court annulling the energy label regulation for vacuum cleaners showed that regulations may be vulnerable to litigation if any doubts arise about test conditions being representative of actual conditions of use. At the same time, a more recent and related ruling (22) clearly reaffirmed the need for tests also to be accurate and reproducible. Given the diversity of technologies and user behaviour, the timely development of harmonized standards with methods representing a good compromise between these criteria is an inherent and often difficult, resource intensive challenge. The new EU Strategy on Standardisation (23) proposes a set of actions to render the European standardisation system more functional and agile, put standards back at the core of a resilient, green and digital EU single market and strengthen the global role of the European standardisation system.

4.   Product specific priorities in the years ahead

4.1.   Reviews of existing measures

The Commission is due to present or adopt 38 reviews before the end of 2024, and another 8 in 2025 which consequently will need to be initiated in advance (cf. list in Staff Working Document). These reviews together constitute significant opportunities for further energy and material efficiency savings: a rough first estimate suggests a potential of at least 170 TWh (ca. 600 petajoute (PJ), or the heat demand of ca. 15 million dwellings) of additional use-phase savings, complemented by additional benefits related to material efficiency/circular economy but they will also represent a major effort and dominate the work carried out under the current working plan.

The Commission intends to prioritise work on reviews in three main groups, based on the following justifications:

| — | Heating and cooling appliances; in the context of the Renovation Wave, the Council has called on the Commission to ‘accelerate the ongoing work on heating and cooling appliances by rescaling energy labels as soon as possible’ (24). This work will indeed be a critical contribution to the decarbonisation of buildings and the Zero Pollution action plan (25) as part of the overall Green Deal objectives, and these products are those with the highest energy consumption of all regulated products. |
| --- | --- |

—

Heating and cooling appliances; in the context of the Renovation Wave, the Council has called on the Commission to ‘accelerate the ongoing work on heating and cooling appliances by rescaling energy labels as soon as possible’ (24). This work will indeed be a critical contribution to the decarbonisation of buildings and the Zero Pollution action plan (25) as part of the overall Green Deal objectives, and these products are those with the highest energy consumption of all regulated products.

| — | Other product groups with energy labels up for rescaling (26); consumers need to able to continue trusting the EU Energy label as a relevant and up-to-date tool for guiding the choices; timely rescaling and updating the remaining ‘old’ energy labels is therefore important, and also necessary to take full advantage of the new features offered by EPREL. |
| --- | --- |

—

Other product groups with energy labels up for rescaling (26); consumers need to able to continue trusting the EU Energy label as a relevant and up-to-date tool for guiding the choices; timely rescaling and updating the remaining ‘old’ energy labels is therefore important, and also necessary to take full advantage of the new features offered by EPREL.

| — | Concluding certain other reviews that represent significant additional savings potential in terms of energy or material savings, that are long overdue, or where particular circumstances imply a clear or urgent need for revisions (e.g. water pumps, fans, external power supplies). |
| --- | --- |

—

Concluding certain other reviews that represent significant additional savings potential in terms of energy or material savings, that are long overdue, or where particular circumstances imply a clear or urgent need for revisions (e.g. water pumps, fans, external power supplies).

4.2.   New measures initiated under previous working plans to be completed

Previous working plans have identified products for which ecodesign and energy labelling measures seemed most promising, based on scoping studies and preliminary estimates. Some of these workstreams are still ongoing and carried over to the current working plan due to the expected additional benefits.

Work has advanced significantly with assessing the feasibility of ecodesign requirements and an energy labelling scheme for mobile phones and tablets. The requirements would be affecting energy efficiency as well as material efficiency (durability, reparability, upgradability and recycling) aspects. The regulations are expected to be adopted before the end of 2022.

Likewise, work is well advanced to assess the feasibility of ecodesign requirements and energy labelling for solar photovoltaic modules, inverters and systems, including possible requirements on carbon footprint.

Regarding imaging equipment, the Commission has assessed the revision of the Voluntary Agreement proposed by representatives of the sector and concludes that accepting this revision would not achieve the objectives considered in the Circular Economy Action Plan (CEAP), and cannot be considered compliant with the guidelines on self-regulatory instruments in particular regarding the possible re-use of consumables (27). As announced in the CEAP, the Commission will launch the preparation of regulatory measures for this product group.

The Commission is continuing horizontal work on ICT products as announced in the 2016-2019 Working Plan through a dedicated ICT study (28). The first part provided evidence for the preparatory study completed ahead of the present working plan on the performance and the potential savings of several ICT product groups (29). The second part will address overall energy consumption of ICT products (including due to their connectivity and data transmission), material efficiency and behavioural aspects with a view of identifying the most efficient ways of regulating them where appropriate. The assessment should consider the pace of technological developments in each product group category.

In parallel, the Commission is continuing work on Energy Smart Appliances to develop the potential for demand side flexibility in the residential or service sectors. Since the main issue identified in previous studies was interoperability, the Commission intends to foster coherent development on the market and adherence of industry to open standards through a voluntary approach (30). This work has links to several other strands of action, including some that will be addressed in more detail in the forthcoming Digitalisation of Energy Action Plan (31).

4.3.   Specific tasks required under tyre labelling

Under the Tyre Labelling Regulation, the Commission is required to carry out a number of specific tasks, including to:

| — | adopt a Delegated Act introducing new information requirements for retreaded tyres by June 2022 provided that a suitable testing method is available. However, a method is not yet available but work is underway to establish one. Retreading represents important savings potentials for savings of on oil and other materials; |
| --- | --- |

—

adopt a Delegated Act introducing new information requirements for retreaded tyres by June 2022 provided that a suitable testing method is available. However, a method is not yet available but work is underway to establish one. Retreading represents important savings potentials for savings of on oil and other materials;

| — | adopt a Delegated Act on labelling for abrasion/mileage provided that a suitable testing method is available, contributing to wider CEAP action on micro-plastics. However, a method is not yet available but work is underway to establish one; |
| --- | --- |

—

adopt a Delegated Act on labelling for abrasion/mileage provided that a suitable testing method is available, contributing to wider CEAP action on micro-plastics. However, a method is not yet available but work is underway to establish one;

| — | coordinate work related to inter-laboratory alignment of testing under the tyre labelling regulation, which also has important implications for EU legislation on CO2 emissions of light vehicles and heavy-duty vehicles. The latest report was published in December 2021 (32). |
| --- | --- |

—

coordinate work related to inter-laboratory alignment of testing under the tyre labelling regulation, which also has important implications for EU legislation on CO2 emissions of light vehicles and heavy-duty vehicles. The latest report was published in December 2021 (32).

| — | Although the review of the Regulation is foreseen by 2025, industry has signaled a need to advance it as the rescaling, originally proposed by the Commission but not retained by Parliament and Council in the last review, is now clearly needed. |
| --- | --- |

—

Although the review of the Regulation is foreseen by 2025, industry has signaled a need to advance it as the rescaling, originally proposed by the Commission but not retained by Parliament and Council in the last review, is now clearly needed.

4.4.   Indicative list of new energy-related product groups to be studied

This Working Plan has been prepared following a detailed preparatory study with a screening of numerous potential areas of effort and extensive consultations of citizens and stakeholders. More details are available in the accompanying staff document.

A list of the 31 most promising candidates for further work (including products already studied in the past but not regulated so far) identified in the preparatory study. Together these represent, based on the preliminary estimates, new potential use phase savings in 2030 in the order of 1 000 PJ, or 278 TWh, i.e. ca. 2 % of EU primary energy use in 2020 (33). The estimated potential related to embedded energy in materials is of the same order of magnitude (and highly dependent on the assumptions regarding the scope and stringency of horizontal measures on durability but also associated with other benefits). Importantly, the impact will increase over time with the gradual replacement of the stock of products with units meeting the new requirements. Starting from the set of 31 products, a more limited list (given in the table below) was identified, with products on which the Commission envisages initiating exploratory studies. Priority was given to those products which have the highest potential for energy and/or material efficiency, and at the same time scored well on other criteria and where stakeholder feedback did not cast significant doubts about the prospects for success, as set out below.

| Product group | Energy saving potential 2030 (related to use phase or material efficiency) | Considerations (34) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Low temperature emitters (radiators, convectors..) | 170 petajoule (PJ) (use phase) | Highest energy saving potential, important for Renovation Wave/building decarbonisation |
| Professional laundry appliances | 33 PJ (use phase) | Studied in the past (35) and now considered more mature in view of progress in technical standardisation |
| Professional dishwashers | 20 PJ (use phase) | Studied in the past (36) and now considered more mature in view of progress in technical standardisation |
| Universal External Power Supplies (EPS) | 12-27 PJ (embedded) | Link to Common Charger initiative, will be done as part of review of existing EPS regulation (37) |
| Electric vehicle chargers | 11 PJ (use phase) | After 2030 the potential savings increase, to in 2050 almost 76 PJ annually. Hence, it is reasonable to consider setting requirements before large volumes of potentially inefficient chargers are installed. |

Product group

Energy saving potential 2030 (related to use phase or material efficiency)

Considerations (34)

Low temperature emitters (radiators, convectors..)

170 petajoule (PJ) (use phase)

Highest energy saving potential, important for Renovation Wave/building decarbonisation

Professional laundry appliances

33 PJ (use phase)

Studied in the past (35) and now considered more mature in view of progress in technical standardisation

Professional dishwashers

20 PJ (use phase)

Studied in the past (36) and now considered more mature in view of progress in technical standardisation

Universal External Power Supplies (EPS)

12-27 PJ (embedded)

Link to Common Charger initiative, will be done as part of review of existing EPS regulation (37)

Electric vehicle chargers

11 PJ (use phase)

After 2030 the potential savings increase, to in 2050 almost 76 PJ annually. Hence, it is reasonable to consider setting requirements before large volumes of potentially inefficient chargers are installed.

5.   Horizontal aspects

5.1.   Contribution to the circular economy

While energy efficiency has naturally been the core focus of ecodesign work for energy-related products, other aspects have increasingly been considered and integrated over time, especially since the first Circular Economy Action Plan (38). In addition to certain existing requirements on durability, several measures adopted in 2019 (39) include new circular economy elements with requirements on reparability, recyclability, ease of end-of-life disassembly and reuse (cf. examples in the accompanying Commission Staff Working Document).

In parallel, following the Commissions’ standardisation request M/543 (40) the European Committee for Standardisation and the European Committee for Electrical Standardisation (CEN-CENELEC) has finalised horizontal standards on material efficiency aspects for energy-related products. These include horizontal standards (41) on durability, recyclability, ability to repair, reuse and upgrade, recycled contents etc. They can be the basis for developing product-specific material efficiency standards for energy-related products.

Based on the standard on the ability to repair, reuse and upgrade (EN 45554) the Commission’s Joint Research Centre has developed a repair score system. The Commission is exploring the potential of introducing it for relevant products, possibly as information on the energy label for specific products such as smart phones and tablets. This work is ground breaking and is likely to influence industry practices globally for the better.

In addition, the Methodology of Ecodesign for Energy-related Products (MEErP – cf. in Annex) is currently being revised to introduce a more systematic way of covering circular economy aspects when performing preparatory or review studies on specific product groups.

In the upcoming work, the trend towards increased emphasis on circular economy will continue by integrating relevant requirements based on the experiences gathered so far, in particular with the implementation of the 2019 measures. Such requirements would be supported by improvements in the methodology and possibilities for standardisation, and they should contribute to the transition to the new legislative framework on Ecodesign for Sustainable Products.

Looking ahead, the Commission will also further assess the possibility and appropriateness of establishing more product-specific requirements on the following aspects:

| Typology of requirement | Energy saving potential 2030 (related to use or material efficiency) |
| --- | --- |
| Recycled content | 160PJ (material content) |
| Durability, firmware and software | At least 175-1 052 PJ (material content) |
| Scarce, environmentally relevant and critical raw materials | High resource potential |

Typology of requirement

Energy saving potential 2030 (related to use or material efficiency)

Recycled content

160PJ (material content)

Durability, firmware and software

At least 175-1 052 PJ (material content)

Scarce, environmentally relevant and critical raw materials

High resource potential

The requirements are theoretically applicable to all energy related products; dedicated preparatory studies will be needed to help identifying the product categories that are most relevant for potential regulatory approaches.

5.2.   Standardisation work

Enforcing ecodesign requirements or labelling of products based on their respective characteristics requires clear definitions of how performance is defined and can be tested for any given product. To this end, harmonised technical standards defining suitable test methods can help manufacturers – if they apply the methods therein - enjoy ‘presumption of conformity’ for demonstrating compliance with legal requirements. Technical standardization work is a vital but often overlooked part of implementation, and the recent experience demonstrates the importance of initiating this work as early as possible in parallel with the preparation of the new or revised regulations. Standardisation requests can be finalised and adopted only once the corresponding ecodesign or labelling regulations are adopted. Ideally, their elaboration starts prior to that, so that they can be completed in a timely manner upon adoption of the regulations in view of the ca. 27 months typically required for the development of a standard itself. The overall process tends to take significantly longer, including also the prior adoption of the standardisation request and the subsequent assessment and approval of the standards for referencing the Official Journal. Where harmonized European standards covering all relevant aspects are not available at the time of adoption, the implementing measures may have to incorporate transitional methods.

New standardisation requests need to be written for most if not all new or revised regulations under development. Requests have recently been made, or are currently under development, for lighting, electronic displays, commercial refrigeration and household refrigeration. Draft standards have been developed for several other product groups based on older mandates.

5.3.   The European Product Registry for Energy Labelling (EPREL)

The European Product Registry for Energy Labelling (EPREL) is a database set up and operated by the Commission. As of 1 January 2019, suppliers (manufacturers, importers or authorised representatives) have had a legal obligation to register any products subject to energy labelling rules in EPREL before placing them on the European market.

In accordance with the legislation, EPREL serves the following purposes:

| — | to provide the public with information about products placed on the market and their energy labels, and Product Information Sheets; |
| --- | --- |

—

to provide the public with information about products placed on the market and their energy labels, and Product Information Sheets;

| — | to support market surveillance authorities in carrying out their tasks under the energy (and tyre) labelling legislation, including enforcement thereof; |
| --- | --- |

—

to support market surveillance authorities in carrying out their tasks under the energy (and tyre) labelling legislation, including enforcement thereof;

| — | to provide the Commission with up-to-date energy efficiency information for products for reviewing energy labels. |
| --- | --- |

—

to provide the Commission with up-to-date energy efficiency information for products for reviewing energy labels.

Following the recent March 2022 ‘beta version’ launch of its public interface (42), information from EPREL will increasingly also support the implementation of other Green Deal policies. Indeed, EPREL data are henceforth the natural starting point for any assessments of which energy label classes are the ‘two highest significantly populated’ classes, or higher classes, for any given product. This is a criterion now used to operationalize several EU policies, including in relation to public incentives (43), sustainable private sector investments (44), green public procurement (45) and reduced VAT rates for certain energy-labelled products that meet specific energy label and, where applicable, low particulate emission criteria (46).

EPREL also provides features that facilitate compliance by suppliers and retailers. Suppliers can choose to rely on the built-in label generator to obtain graphic label images in compliant formats based on the declared values for product performance and characteristics. Retailers can reference EPREL, including through application programming interfaces (APIs), when displaying labels or product information sheets online, thereby minimizing the effort of presenting up-to-date, coherent and multi-lingual information.

Although EPREL is in operation, there are important functionalities that need to be addressed in 2022 to fulfil the above-mentioned objectives. These include:

| — | A dedicated web portal that will be the single access point, providing targeted information for citizens, national authorities, suppliers, dealers and policy makers (Q2/Q3). |
| --- | --- |

—

A dedicated web portal that will be the single access point, providing targeted information for citizens, national authorities, suppliers, dealers and policy makers (Q2/Q3).

| — | Improving the user interface and tools available to market surveillance authorities to better streamline their activities (Q3). |
| --- | --- |

—

Improving the user interface and tools available to market surveillance authorities to better streamline their activities (Q3).

| — | Transforming the structure of the technical documentation to streamline registration activity by suppliers and facilitate analysis thereof by compliance authorities (Q1 to Q3). |
| --- | --- |

—

Transforming the structure of the technical documentation to streamline registration activity by suppliers and facilitate analysis thereof by compliance authorities (Q1 to Q3).

| — | Start implementation of revised regulations for some product groups and possibly adding new ones (PVs, smartphones/tablets) (Q4). |
| --- | --- |

—

Start implementation of revised regulations for some product groups and possibly adding new ones (PVs, smartphones/tablets) (Q4).

In addition, it will be necessary to consider the conditions for, and modalities of, granting access to EPREL or some of its features to operators and possibly authorities from specific third countries, notably those that are part of the customs union or the Energy Community. The concrete modalities and implications of such developments will however have to be carefully analysed, prepared, and - eventually – rolled out and cannot be done in the very short term.

5.4.   Market surveillance and support to economic operators

Effective market surveillance is key to ensure that rules are properly enforced, that the expected benefits materialise, that the level playing field for businesses is secured, that reliable product information is supplied to consumers, and that the framework is trusted by citizens, regulators and businesses alike.

Market surveillance is a national competence, and data on enforcement and compliance is scarce because there is currently no reporting obligation. Based on available evidence, and as confirmed by the ECA 2020 ecodesign audit, non-compliance is a significant problem. In EU-funded market surveillance projects, it is common to observe high double-digit percentage of products showing compliance issues (both on formal and substance aspects) (47) but these include relatively minor formal non-compliances that can be corrected by voluntary action (e.g. a wrong value in the product information sheet) and not just severe issues like not meeting the minimum ecodesign requirement. Overall, it is estimated that at least 10 % of the potential energy savings delivered by ecodesign and energy labelling are lost due to non-compliance, representing 15.3 Mtoe primary energy annually in 2020 (or 178 TWh) and EUR 6.4 billion annual expenditure for consumers on energy bills (based on 2020 energy price levels). This corresponds to 31 Mt CO2eq additional emissions per year and entails significant losses of revenue and jobs for industry. These figures suggest that any additions to the modest resources spent by Member States on national market surveillance for ecodesign and energy labelling would be highly cost-effective in terms of the returns generated.

In the coming period, the Commission will step up its support to Member States to contribute to a more effective and uniform application of market surveillance in the field of ecodesign and energy labelling. This will include:

| — | Continuous improvement of IT tools such as the Information and Communication System for Market Surveillance (48) (ICSMS) and EPREL and support to other tools, e.g. those that help address challenges related to market surveillance for e-commerce and new supply chains. |
| --- | --- |

—

Continuous improvement of IT tools such as the Information and Communication System for Market Surveillance (48) (ICSMS) and EPREL and support to other tools, e.g. those that help address challenges related to market surveillance for e-commerce and new supply chains.

| — | Technical and logistical support to the Administrative Cooperation Groups (AdCos). |
| --- | --- |

—

Technical and logistical support to the Administrative Cooperation Groups (AdCos).

| — | Financing of joint or concerted actions and campaigns. |
| --- | --- |

—

Financing of joint or concerted actions and campaigns.

| — | Engage with the Member States at political level on ways to improve market surveillance, including the level of resources they make available. |
| --- | --- |

—

Engage with the Member States at political level on ways to improve market surveillance, including the level of resources they make available.

| — | Propose new legal provisions that will improve market surveillance, in the framework of the proposed the Ecodesign Regulation (cf. the SPI). |
| --- | --- |

—

Propose new legal provisions that will improve market surveillance, in the framework of the proposed the Ecodesign Regulation (cf. the SPI).

| — | Other relevant activities, as planned in the European Product Compliance Network (EUPCN) Work Programme for 2021-22, including involvement of customs authorities. |
| --- | --- |

—

Other relevant activities, as planned in the European Product Compliance Network (EUPCN) Work Programme for 2021-22, including involvement of customs authorities.

The Commission will also continue to support economic operators’ efforts to comply in different ways, e.g. through the operation of functional mailboxes where questions can be addressed, with specific guidance documents, FAQs, information on the Commission website etc. It will also consider providing EU-funding to set up an industry-driven compliance support facility boosting proactive outreach actions and providing timely and targeted assistance to help suppliers and retailers more easily understand and meet their obligations.

5.5.   International aspects and cooperation

EU policy measures on ecodesign and, in particular, energy labelling, and related technical standards and test procedures for regulated products, have had extensive positive influence in third countries far beyond the EU borders (49).

On the one hand, several of the EU’s significant trading partners systematically apply the EU’s ecodesign and/or labelling rules in the context of their various relations with the EU. This is notably the case in the framework of the EEA, the Customs Union with Turkey and the Energy Community. On the other hand, manufacturers in other major exporting countries anyhow need to meet EU requirements to be able to place goods on the EU market, which in turn may motivate and facilitate the setting of domestic requirements that are fully or partially aligned with the EU’s. At the same time, it is important that the EU continues to be compliant with the applicable rules in this regard at the level of the WTO.

International cooperation on product efficiency is also a factor in the speed and direction of programme developments around the world. Some third country jurisdictions consider it beneficial to apply similar or identical requirements to take advantage of the considerable work that has already gone into developing the EU rules. At the same time, the EU is far from leading on all accounts or products, so it can also benefit and learn from efforts made elsewhere. Regulatory convergence can also alleviate the compliance and conformity assessment costs faced by EU companies serving both important export markets and the EU market. To promote such mutually beneficial exchanges the Commission will continue to support and participate in well-established international multilateral product policy fora such as the IEA’s Energy Efficient End-use Equipment (4E) Technology Collaboration Programme (50) and the Super-efficient Equipment and Appliances Deployment (SEAD) Initiative (51). Bilateral cooperation will also be pursued in order to accelerate the uptake of eco-design and energy labelling best practices in partner countries and further enhance regulatory convergence globally.

6.   Conclusion

The EUs ecodesign and energy labelling programme is one of the world’s largest and longest-running appliance programmes, leveraging the power of the single market in the EU and abroad, to the benefit of consumers, businesses and the environment.

Ecodesign/energy labelling delivers a vital and growing contribution to European Green Deal and Fitfor55 objectives and to consumers faced with high energy prices whose bills would otherwise have been much higher: at current price levels, existing policies are estimated to save EU energy users expenditure in excess of EUR 250 bn/year.

Investing in pursuing and strengthening this programme to better match ambitions and resources is also investing in stronger EU resilience to better withstand future energy price crises and challenges to security of supply related to EU dependence on imported fossil fuels. Similarly, the increasing focus on material efficiency, e.g. the recyclability, contributes to increased supply chain resilience in the EU.

Enhancing international cooperation, both at the multilateral and bilateral level, is necessary to accelerate the speed of product energy efficiency programmes uptake around the world and can also help improve regulatory convergence to the benefit of the EU and of partner countries.

The European Product Registry for Energy Labelling, EPREL, provides unprecedented market transparency and opens up new opportunities to empower and engage with EU consumers. It will increasingly also be a practical tool to operationalise recently introduced conditionalities concerning product performance in other EU policies (green taxonomy, Green Public Procurement under the Energy Efficiency Directive, public incentives, VAT Directive).

This policy area still represents substantial potential for delivering additional, highly cost-effective benefits for EU consumers, reduced air pollution, and energy/CO2 savings that otherwise might have to be delivered by other policies at EU or national level. However, timely reviews of existing rules, support for correct application/enforcement, developing EPREL and exploring regulation of new energy-related products requires substantial efforts.

The Commission has, therefore, in the context of the sustainable product policy package, clearly indicated the need to significantly step up resources allocated to implement ecodesign policy as part of a more ambitious sustainable product policy and invites Member States to do the same as regards national market surveillance efforts.

---

(1)  Commission Recommendation (EU) 2021/1749 of 28 September 2021 on Energy Efficiency First: from principles to practice — Guidelines and examples for its implementation in decision-making in the energy sector and beyond (OJ L 350, 4.10.2021, p. 9).

(2)  See also COM(2021) 801 - Proposal for a COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION on ensuring a fair transition towards climate neutrality.

(3)  See Staff Working Document.

(4)  https://ec.europa.eu/environment/strategy/circular-economy-action-plan_it

(5)  Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-related products (OJ L 285, 31.10.2009, p. 10).

(6)  Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2017 setting a framework for energy labelling and repealing Directive 2010/30/EU (OJ L 198, 28.7.2017, p. 1).

(7)  COM(2008)0660 final.

(8)  SWD(2012) 434 final.

(9)  COM(2016) 773 final.

(10)  Regulation (EU) 2020/740 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 2020 on the labelling of tyres with respect to fuel efficiency and other parameters, amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1222/2009 ( OJ L 177, 5.6.2020, p. 1).

(11)  In 2020, it is estimated that ca. 3 billion products subject to measures were sold in EU27, of which 1.5 billion light sources, 880 million electronics products, 350 million tyres and 240 million other products.

(12)  Ecodesign Impact Accounting (‘EIA’) report 2020: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2833/72143

The EIA makes use of Eurostat data, including Energy Balance sheets (nrg_bal_c) and disaggregated final energy consumption in households - quantities (nrg_d_hhq).

(13)  ‘Achievements of Energy Efficiency Appliance and Equipment Standards and Labelling Programs: 2021 update’: https://www.iea-4e.org/projects/eesl-achievements-reports/

(14)  Eurobarometer n.492, May 2019: https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2238

(15)  https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC127006

(16)  https://ec.europa.eu/info/energy-climate-change-environment/standards-tools-and-labels/products-labelling-rules-and-requirements/energy-label-and-ecodesign_en

(17)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1275/2008 of 17 December 2008 implementing Directive 2005/32/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to ecodesign requirements for standby and off mode electric power consumption of electrical and electronic household and office equipment (OJ L 339, 18.12.2008, p. 45).

(18)  (SWD(2022) 101).

(19)  See also Article 16(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1369.

(20)  Special Report No 01/2020: EU action on Ecodesign and Energy Labelling: important contribution to greater energy efficiency reduced by significant delays and non-compliance (OJ C 18, 20.1.2020, p. 2).

(21)  Judgement of the General Court of 8 November 2018 in Case T-544/13 RENV.

(22)  Judgement of the General Court of 8 December 2021 in Case T-127/19.

(23)  COM(2022) 31 final, 2 February 2022.

(24)  https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/eu_renovation_wave_strategy.pdf

(25)  COM(2021) 400 final, 12 May 2021.

(26)  Tumble dryers, ventilation units, domestic cooking appliances.

(27)  Commission Recommendation (EU) 2016/2125 of 30 November 2016 on guidelines for self-regulation measures concluded by industry under Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 329, 3.12.2016, p. 109).

(28)  https://susproc.jrc.ec.europa.eu/product-bureau//product-groups/522/home

(29)  For example on enterprise network equipment, small network equipment for home and office use, interconnected home audio and video.

(30)  https://ses.jrc.ec.europa.eu/development-of-policy-proposals-for-energy-smart-appliances

(31)  https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/13141-Digitalising-the-energy-sector-EU-action-plan_en

(32)  https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/energy_climate_change_environment/standards_tools_and_labels/documents/egla_report_2021_final.pdf

(33)  Note that these savings are not to be cumulated with figures given in the Working Plan 2016-19 for the same year.

(34)  Please refer to staff working document for more details.

(35)  Mentioned first in the 2012 Working Plan.

(36)  Ibid

(37)  Despite external power supplies are already regulated, ‘universal’ ones are indicated as a new product group, because of the relevance and specificity of the analysis needed to derive the necessary criteria/features. See information on the ongoing review at: https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/13351-External-power-supplies-ecodesign-&-information-requirements-review-_en

(38)  COM (2015) 614.

(39)  https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_19_5895

(40)  https://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/mandates/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.detail&id=564

(41)  https://standards.cencenelec.eu/dyn/www/f?p=205:32:0::::FSP_ORG_ID,FSP_LANG_ID:2240017.25&cs=10B7B067CC7107748A52C1C034BB4CFD3

(42)  https://eprel.ec.europa.eu

(43)  See Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU)2017/1369.

(44)  See EU Taxonomy for sustainable activities and the EIF Sustainability Guarantee pilot initiative under InvestEU SME window.

(45)  See Annex IV to the proposed revision of the Energy Efficiency Directive.

(46)  See the new point (22) added to Annex III in Directive 2006/112/EC https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-14754-2021-INIT/en/pdf

(47)  This was the case e.g. for fridges inspected under the EEPLIANT2 project in 2018-2019. Preliminary results of the EEPLIANT3 project in November 2021 largely confirm this, 75 % of the inspected products having issues with the technical documentation or with online labelling requirements, noting however that the figures may not be fully representative due to the risk-based approach generally used in product sampling.

(48)  https://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market/goods/building-blocks/information-and-communication-system-market-surveillance_en

(49)  Study on Impacts of the EU’s Ecodesign and Energy/Tyre Labelling Legislation on Third Jurisdictions, Waide et al, https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/201404_ieel_third_jurisdictions.pdf

(50)  https://www.iea-4e.org/

(51)  https://www.superefficient.org/

---

ANNEX

Methodology for the Ecodesign for Energy-related Products (MEErP)

The Methodology for the Ecodesign of Energy-related Products (MEErP) was developed to provide operational guidance to the European Commission and contractors providing it with technical assistance in performing the preparatory study for the Ecodesign of a product. The full methodology reports and calculation template are available online (1). The MEErP has evolved over time with the involvement of stakeholders. The administrative and legal stages following the preparatory study are not covered by the MEErP. Nevertheless, the MEErP is designed so that its outputs can be integrated in a European Commission Impact Assessment.

The MEErP is comprised of 7 tasks. The first 4 tasks are to gather data and carry out initial analysis. These address:

| — | Task 1 - Scope (product definitions, standards and legislation); |
| --- | --- |

—

Task 1 - Scope (product definitions, standards and legislation);

| — | Task 2 – Markets (economic and market analysis, including volumes and prices) |
| --- | --- |

—

Task 2 – Markets (economic and market analysis, including volumes and prices)

| — | Task 3 – Users (product demand side, consumer behaviour and local infrastructure); |
| --- | --- |

—

Task 3 – Users (product demand side, consumer behaviour and local infrastructure);

| — | Task 4 - Technologies (product supply side, includes Best Available Technology (BAT) and Best Not-yet Available Technology (BNAT)); |
| --- | --- |

—

Task 4 - Technologies (product supply side, includes Best Available Technology (BAT) and Best Not-yet Available Technology (BNAT));

Apart from providing the inputs for tasks 5 to 7, tasks 1 to 4 have an additional purpose of capacity building. The reports of Tasks 1 to 4 provide policy makers and stakeholders with the background to understand each other’s problems and take part in a dialogue.

| — | Task 5 – Environment & Economics (base case (2) Life Cycle Assessment & Life Cycle Cost); |
| --- | --- |

—

Task 5 – Environment & Economics (base case (2) Life Cycle Assessment & Life Cycle Cost);

| — | Task 6 – Design options (improvement potential); |
| --- | --- |

—

Task 6 – Design options (improvement potential);

| — | Task 7 – Scenarios (Policy, scenario, impact and sensitivity analysis). |
| --- | --- |

—

Task 7 – Scenarios (Policy, scenario, impact and sensitivity analysis).

Tasks 5 to 7 are intended to provide the analysis whether and, if so, which ecodesign requirements should be set for the energy-related product in question. In task 5 the ‘base case’ is identified through a synthesis of the results of Tasks 1 to 4. The base case is a conscious abstraction of reality and the point-of-reference for assessing improvement potential and the policy, scenario, impact and sensitivity analysis.

Design options, their consumer Life Cycle Cost consequences, their environmental costs and benefits, the solution with the Least Life Cycle Costs (LLCC) and the BAT are identified in Task 6. The BAT indicates a medium-term target that could be appropriate for promotional measures rather than mandatory minimum requirements. The BNAT indicates long-term possibilities and helps to define the exact scope and definition of possible measures

Under Task 7 the outcomes of the previous tasks are brought together to explore suitable policy means to realise the improvement potential. It creates scenarios with projections until 2050 quantifying the achievable improvements compared to Business as Usual. The outcomes are compared to EU targets and the societal cost of achieving the benefit in another way. The impacts on consumers (purchasing power, societal costs) and industry (employment, profitability, competitiveness, investment level) are estimated, explicitly describing and accounting for the typical design cycle in the product sector. Finally, the robustness of the outcomes is explored through a sensitivity analysis of the main parameters.

It is important for the validity of the assessments and the added value of the legislative proposal flowing from them that the methodology is kept up to date. The current methodology has gradually evolved over time through periodic reviews, involving the input of stakeholders, and leading to periodic adaptations.

The current version of MEErP has been in use since 2013 (3) and the current version 3.06 of the Ecoreport tool since 2014 (4). Work on a review is now underway that will, where necessary, update data used in the analysis and ensure it remains fit for its purpose, in line with recent policy developments. The process of the revision is being managed by the Joint Research Centre and details of the ongoing process and the involvement of stakeholders will be published (5).

---

(1)  Methodology for Ecodesign of Energy-related Products - MEErP 2011 - Methodology Report - Part 1: Methods, https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/26525, Methodology for Ecodesign of Energy-related Products - MEErP 2011 - Methodology Report - Part 2: Environmental policies and data, https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/26526, EcoReport Calculations’ template: https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/5308/attachments/1/translations

(2)  One or more average EU product (s) or a representative product category have to be chosen as the ‘Base-case’ for the whole of the EU-27

(3)  SWD(2012) 434 final: https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/9952/attachments/1/translations/en/renditions/pdf

(4)  Material efficiency study for MEErP (published in December 2013) at: https://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/sustainability/sustainable-product-policy-ecodesign_en, Ecoreport Tool available at: https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/5308/attachments/1/translations

(5)  https://susproc.jrc.ec.europa.eu/product-bureau/product-groups/521/home

---

IV Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

| 4.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/13

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

3 May 2022

(2022/C 182/02)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0556 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 137,06 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4403 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,84130 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,3978 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0272 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 137,60 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,9090 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,662 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 382,15 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,6925 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,9475 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 15,6941 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4825 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3570 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,2838 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6366 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,4605 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 335,64 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 16,8303 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 6,9759 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5555 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 288,47 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,5956 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 55,455 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | |
| THB | Thai baht | 36,387 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 5,3143 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 21,5025 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 80,8420 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0556

JPY

Japanese yen

137,06

DKK

Danish krone

7,4403

GBP

Pound sterling

0,84130

SEK

Swedish krona

10,3978

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0272

ISK

Iceland króna

137,60

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,9090

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,662

HUF

Hungarian forint

382,15

PLN

Polish zloty

4,6925

RON

Romanian leu

4,9475

TRY

Turkish lira

15,6941

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4825

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3570

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,2838

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6366

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,4605

KRW

South Korean won

1 335,64

ZAR

South African rand

16,8303

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

6,9759

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5555

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 288,47

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,5956

PHP

Philippine peso

55,455

RUB

Russian rouble

THB

Thai baht

36,387

BRL

Brazilian real

5,3143

MXN

Mexican peso

21,5025

INR

Indian rupee

80,8420

---

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

---

Court of Auditors

| 4.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/14

---

Opinion No 1/2022

(pursuant to Article 287(4), TFEU)

concerning the Commission’s proposal for a Regulation on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations

(2022/C 182/03)

The European Court of Auditors has published its opinion No 1/2022 (pursuant to Article 287(4), TFEU) concerning the Commission’s proposal for a Regulation on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations.

The opinion can be consulted directly or downloaded at the European Court of Auditors’ Internet:

https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=61068

---

European Data Protection Supervisor

| 4.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/15

---

Summary of the Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the two Proposals for Council Decisions authorising Member States to sign and to ratify, in the interest of the European Union, the Second Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime on enhanced co - operation and disclosure of electronic evidence

(The full text of this Opinion can be found in English, French and German on the EDPS website: www.edps.europa.eu)

(2022/C 182/04)

On 25 November 2021, the Commission adopted two Proposals for Council Decisions, under Articles 16, 82(1) and 218(5) and (6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, one authorising Member States to sign and the other to ratify, in the interest of the European Union, the Second Additional Protocol to the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime. The Annex to the Proposals sets out the Council’s directives for the reservations, declarations and communications, when signing and ratifying the Protocol.

Investigating and prosecuting crime is a legitimate aim, and international co-operation including information exchange has become more important than ever. As the EDPS has long argued, the EU needs sustainable arrangements for sharing personal data with third countries for law enforcement purposes, fully compatible with the EU Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Even when investigating domestic cases, law enforcement authorities increasingly find themselves in ‛cross-border situations’ because information is stored electronically in a third country. The growing volume of requests and the volatility of digital information put a strain on existing models of co-operation, such as MLATs. The EDPS understands that authorities face a race against time to obtain data for their investigations and supports efforts to devise new models of co-operation, including in the context of co-operation with third countries.

The Protocol aims to improve the traditional co-operation channels and includes provisions to enhance direct co-operation between law enforcement authorities and service providers in a cross-border context. In particular, the Protocol would enhance co-operation on cybercrime and the collection of evidence in electronic form concerning criminal offences for the purpose of specific criminal investigations or proceedings.

While recognising that it is not possible to replicate entirely the terminology and definitions of EU law in a multilateral international agreement, the EDPS underlines that the appropriate safeguards for individuals must be ensured in order to fully comply with EU law.

Data protection principles including fairness, accuracy and relevance of information, independent oversight and individual rights of individuals are as relevant for public bodies as they are for private companies. These basic principles are all the more important considering the sensitivity of the data required for criminal investigations.

This Opinion aims to provide objective analysis and constructive advice to the EU institutions as the Council is examining the Commission’s Proposals to sign and ratify the Protocol and before the European Parliament is called to provide its consent to the conclusion of the Protocol.

The EDPS welcomes that no provision on direct access to data by law enforcement authorities has been included in the final text of the Protocol. He also welcomes that the Protocol contains a dedicated Article on the protection of personal data. In addition, the EDPS notes positively the many safeguards that have been included in the Protocol.

The EDPS understands that it is confirmed that the EU-US Umbrella Agreement would apply to transfers from the EU to the United States of America in the framework of the provisions set out in the Protocol related to the co-operation between authorities. The EDPS regrets such outcome.

Should a Council Decision be adopted authorising the Member States to, respectively sign and ratify, in the interest of the Union, the Protocol, the EDPS welcomes the proposals of the Commission for the Member States to make, in the interest of the Union, the declaration, notification and communication under Article 7(2)(b), (5)(a) and (e) of the Protocol. These proposals ensure that service providers in the Union may be requested the transfer of personal data only on the basis of orders issued, in the requesting third country Party to the Protocol, by, or under the supervision of, a prosecutor or other judicial authority, or under independent supervision and under the control of a competent authority within the requested Member State.

The EDPS also notes positively the proposal that Member States make the declaration under Article 8(4) of the Protocol (on the co-operation between competent authorities to give effect to production orders of subscriber information and traffic data), so as to ensure that additional supporting information is required to give effect to orders under this provision.

In addition, the EDPS has the following recommendations in relation to the future Council Decisions, should the Protocol be signed and ratified by the Member States, in the interest of the Union:

| — | Certain data contained in the category of subscriber information within the meaning of the Cybercrime Convention, may be deemed under EU law as traffic data entailing a serious interference with the fundamental rights of the data subject, access to which may be justified only by the fight against serious crime. Therefore, the EDPS recommends Member States, contrary to the proposal of the Commission, to reserve the right not to apply Article 7 of the Protocol on disclosure of subscriber data by service providers directly to competent authorities of another country in relation to certain types of access numbers, pursuant to Article 7(9)(b); |
| --- | --- |

—

Certain data contained in the category of subscriber information within the meaning of the Cybercrime Convention, may be deemed under EU law as traffic data entailing a serious interference with the fundamental rights of the data subject, access to which may be justified only by the fight against serious crime. Therefore, the EDPS recommends Member States, contrary to the proposal of the Commission, to reserve the right not to apply Article 7 of the Protocol on disclosure of subscriber data by service providers directly to competent authorities of another country in relation to certain types of access numbers, pursuant to Article 7(9)(b);

| — | Member States should designate, pursuant to Article 7(5)(e) of the Protocol, a judicial or other independent authority; |
| --- | --- |

—

Member States should designate, pursuant to Article 7(5)(e) of the Protocol, a judicial or other independent authority;

| — | The proposed communication by the Member States to the United States authorities, at the time of signature or when depositing their instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval, in relation to the EU-US Umbrella Agreement should be clarified; |
| --- | --- |

—

The proposed communication by the Member States to the United States authorities, at the time of signature or when depositing their instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval, in relation to the EU-US Umbrella Agreement should be clarified;

| — | The proposed consideration, in relation to other agreements or arrangements under Article 14(1)(c) of the Protocol that could replace the data protection provision of the Protocol (Article 14), should be amended. |
| --- | --- |

—

The proposed consideration, in relation to other agreements or arrangements under Article 14(1)(c) of the Protocol that could replace the data protection provision of the Protocol (Article 14), should be amended.

1.   INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

| 1. | In June 2017, the Cybercrime Convention Committee of the Council of Europe approved the Terms of Reference for the preparation of a Second Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime during the period from September 2017 to December 2019 (1). |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | On 5 February 2019, the Commission adopted a Recommendation (2) for a Council Decision to authorise the participation of the Commission, on behalf of the European Union, in the negotiations on a Second Additional Protocol (hereinafter ‘the Protocol’) (3) to the Council of Europe Convention on enhanced international co-operation on cybercrime and electronic evidence (hereinafter the ‘Cybercrime Convention’) (CETS No. 185) (4). |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | The European Data Protection Supervisor (hereinafter ‛the EDPS’) adopted an Opinion regarding the Recommendation on 2 April 2019 (5). By Decision of 6 June 2019, the Council of the European Union authorised the Commission to participate, on behalf of the European Union, in the negotiations in view of the Protocol (6). |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | The Cybercrime Convention Committee extended the terms of reference twice, until December 2020, and subsequently until May 2021. The Protocol was prepared by the Cybercrime Convention Committee (T-CY) between September 2017 and May 2021. Over ninety sessions of the T-CY Protocol Drafting Plenary, Drafting Group and Sub-groups as well as six rounds of stakeholder consultations were held in this period. |
| --- | --- |

4.

| 5. | The European Data Protection Board contributed to the public consultations on the draft Protocol on 13 November 2019, 2 February 2021 and 4 May 2021 (7). |
| --- | --- |

5.

| 6. | The European Parliament recognised the need to conclude the work on the Protocol in its 2021 Resolution on the EU Cybersecurity Strategy for the Digital Decade (8). |
| --- | --- |

6.

| 7. | On 17 November 2021, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe adopted the Protocol. It should be opened for signature in May 2022. Amendments to it may therefore only be proposed by a Party to the Protocol and adopted by the Committee of Ministers. The Protocol requires acceptance of all Parties for the amendments to come into force (9). |
| --- | --- |

7.

| 8. | The European Union cannot become a Party to the Protocol, as both the Protocol and the Cybercrime Convention are open to States only (10). |
| --- | --- |

8.

| 9. | On 25 November 2021, the Commission adopted two Proposals for Council Decisions, under Articles 16, 82(1) and 218(5) and (6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) (11). |
| --- | --- |

9.

| 10. | According to these Proposals (12), the Protocol falls within an area covered to a large extent by common rules within the meaning of Article 3(2) TFEU. The Commission seeks to obtain, with these Proposals, two Decisions from Council authorising Member States to respectively sign and ratify, in the interest of the European Union, the Protocol. Both Proposals are accompanied by an Annex (hereinafter ‘the Annex’) which provides instructions for Member States, regarding the reservations, declarations, notifications or communications and other considerations to be made, when signing and ratifying, in the interest of the European Union, the Protocol. The Proposal relating to the ratification is also accompanied by the text of the Protocol in Annex. |
| --- | --- |

10.

| 11. | In order for the agreement to be concluded, should the Council decide to authorise its signature by the Member States, in the interest of the Union, the Council should adopt a decision authorising the Member States, in the interest of the Union, to ratify the agreement, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament. The Protocol will enter into force on the first day of the month following the expiration of a period of three months after the date on which five Parties to the Cybercrime Convention have expressed their consent to be bound by the Protocol in accordance with the provisions of Article 16(1) and (2) of the Protocol (13). |
| --- | --- |

11.

| 12. | The EDPS has been consulted on both Proposals by the European Commission following their adoption, pursuant to Article 42(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 (14). Reference to this Opinion is made in Recitals 12 and 13 of the Proposals on the ratification and the signature of the Protocol respectively. He wishes to underline that this Opinion is without prejudice to any additional comments that the EDPS could make on the basis of further available information. |
| --- | --- |

12.

7.   CONCLUSIONS

| 129. | Considering the proliferation of cybercrime and the increasing importance of electronic evidence for criminal investigations, in view of the complexity of obtaining such evidence when it is not within the Member States jurisdiction, the EDPS understands the need for law enforcement authorities to obtain electronic evidence quickly and effectively to ensure they can effectively fight crime. |
| --- | --- |

129.

| 130. | The EDPS is therefore in favour of finding an international response with appropriate safeguards to existing issues in this context. |
| --- | --- |

130.

| 131. | The Protocol aims both at improving the traditional co-operation channels and at providing for direct co-operation between law enforcement authorities and service providers cross-border. It does not contain provisions on direct access to data by law enforcement authorities, which the EDPS welcomes. |
| --- | --- |

131.

| 132. | While recognising that it is not possible to replicate entirely the terminology and definitions of EU law in a multilateral international agreement, the EDPS underlines that appropriate data protection safeguards for individuals must be ensured in order to fully comply with EU law. |
| --- | --- |

132.

| 133. | The EDPS is satisfied that the Protocol contains a dedicated Article on the protection of personal data. He also notes positively the many safeguards that have been included in the Protocol. |
| --- | --- |

133.

| 134. | The EDPS understands that it is confirmed that the Umbrella Agreement would apply to transfers from the EU to the United States of America in the framework of the provisions set out in the Protocol related to the co-operation between authorities. The EDPS regrets such outcome. |
| --- | --- |

134.

| 135. | Should a Council Decision be adopted authorising the Member States to, respectively sign and ratify, in the interest of the Union, the Protocol, the EDPS welcomes the proposals of the Commission for the Member States to make, in the interest of the Union, the declaration, notification and communication under Article 7(2)(b), (5)(a) and (e) of the Protocol. These proposals ensure that service providers in the Union may be requested the transfer of personal data only on the basis of orders issued in the requesting third country Party to the Protocol by, or under the supervision of, a prosecutor or other judicial authority, or under independent supervision and under the control of a competent authority within the requested Member State. |
| --- | --- |

135.

| 136. | He also notes positively the proposal that Member States make the declaration under Article 8(4) of the Protocol (on the co-operation between competent authorities to give effect to production orders of subscriber information and traffic data), so as to ensure that additional supporting information is required to give effect to orders under this provision. |
| --- | --- |

136.

| 137. | The EDPS has the following recommendations in relation to the future Council Decisions, should the Protocol be signed and ratified by the Member States, in the interest of the Union:






  — | Certain data contained within the category of subscriber information within the meaning of the Cybercrime Convention, may be deemed under EU law as traffic data entailing a serious interference with the fundamental rights of the data subject, access to which may be justified only by the fight against serious crime. Therefore, the EDPS recommends Member States, contrary to the Proposals of the Commission, to reserve the right not to apply Article 7 of the Protocol on disclosure of subscriber information by service providers directly to competent authorities of another country in relation to certain types of access numbers, pursuant to Article 7(9)(b); |
| --- | --- | --- |

137.

—

Certain data contained within the category of subscriber information within the meaning of the Cybercrime Convention, may be deemed under EU law as traffic data entailing a serious interference with the fundamental rights of the data subject, access to which may be justified only by the fight against serious crime. Therefore, the EDPS recommends Member States, contrary to the Proposals of the Commission, to reserve the right not to apply Article 7 of the Protocol on disclosure of subscriber information by service providers directly to competent authorities of another country in relation to certain types of access numbers, pursuant to Article 7(9)(b);

| — | Member States should designate, pursuant to Article 7(5)(e) of the Protocol, a judicial or other independent authority; |
| --- | --- |

—

Member States should designate, pursuant to Article 7(5)(e) of the Protocol, a judicial or other independent authority;

| — | The proposed communication by the Member States to the United States authorities, at the time of signature or when depositing their instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval, in relation to the EU-US Umbrella Agreement should be clarified; |
| --- | --- |

—

The proposed communication by the Member States to the United States authorities, at the time of signature or when depositing their instrument of ratification, acceptance or approval, in relation to the EU-US Umbrella Agreement should be clarified;

| — | The proposed consideration in relation to other agreements or arrangements under Article 14(1)(c) of the Protocol that could replace the data protection provision of the Protocol (Article 14) should be amended. |
| --- | --- |

—

The proposed consideration in relation to other agreements or arrangements under Article 14(1)(c) of the Protocol that could replace the data protection provision of the Protocol (Article 14) should be amended.

| 138. | The EDPS finally underlines that a prosecutor of a Member State and therefore also the EPPO should be able to submit an order or transfer data based on the order of another Party under Article 8 only where it is ascertained that such order is subject to a review by a judicial authority or an independent body within the meaning of the case law of the CJEU. |
| --- | --- |

138.

| 139. | The EDPS remains at the disposal of the Commission, the Council and the European Parliament to provide further advice during the process. This Opinion is without prejudice to any additional comments that the EDPS could make on the basis of further available information. |
| --- | --- |

139.

Brussels, 20 January 2022.

Wojciech Rafał WIEWIÓROWSKI

---

(1)  https://rm.coe.int/t-cy-terms-of-reference-protocol/1680a03690

1

(2)  Recommendation for a Council Decision authorising the participation in negotiations on a second Additional Protocol to the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime (CETS No. 185), COM(2019) 71 final.

2

(3)  https://rm.coe.int/1680a49dab (provisional version as approved by the Committee of Ministers).

3

(4)  https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=0900001680081561

4

(5)  EDPS Opinion 3/2019 regarding the participation in the negotiations in view of a Second Additional Protocol to the Budapest Cybercrime Convention of 2 April 2019.

5

(6)  Council Decision adopted on 6 June 2019 authorising the European Commission to participate, on behalf of the European Union, in negotiations on a Second Additional Protocol to the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime (CETS No. 185)

6

(7)  ‘EDPB contribution to the consultation on a draft second additional protocol to the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime (Budapest Convention) of 13 November 2019’; ‘Statement 02/201 on new draft provisions of the second additional protocol to the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime (Budapest Convention) as adopted on 2 February 2021’; ‘EDPB Contribution to the 6th round of consultations on the draft Second Additional Protocol to the Council of Europe Budapest Convention on Cybercrime of 4 May 2021’

7

(8)  European Parliament resolution of 10 June 2021 on the EU’s Cybersecurity Strategy for the Digital Decade.

8

(9)  Article 21 of the Protocol.

9

(10)  Recital 10 of the Proposals for a Council Decision authorising Member States to sign and ratify, in the interest of the European Union, the Second Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime on enhanced co-operation and disclosure of electronic evidence.

10

(11)  Proposal for a Council Decision authorising Member States to sign, in the interest of the European Union, the Second Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime on enhanced co-operation and disclosure of electronic evidence (COM(2021)718 final).

11

Proposal for a Council Decision authorising Member States to ratify, in the interest of the European Union, the Second Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime on enhanced co-operation and disclosure of electronic evidence (COM(2021)719 final).

According to Recitals 14 and 15 of the Proposal on signature and Recitals 13 and 14 of the Proposal on the ratification, Ireland has the option to take part in the adoption and application of the Decision and Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Decision and is not bound by it or subject to its application.

(12)  Recital 3 of the Proposals.

12

(13)  Article 16(1). ‘[...][Parties to the Convention] may express their consent to be bound by either:

13

| a. | signature without reservation as to ratification, acceptance or approval; or |
| --- | --- |

a.

signature without reservation as to ratification, acceptance or approval; or

| b. | signature subject to ratification, acceptance or approval, followed by ratification, acceptance or approval’. |
| --- | --- |

b.

signature subject to ratification, acceptance or approval, followed by ratification, acceptance or approval’.

Article 16(2). Instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval shall be deposited with the Secretary General of the Council of Europe.

(14)  OJ L 295, 21.11.2018, p. 39.

14

---

V Announcements

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

| 4.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/20

---

Publication of an application for registration of a name pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs

(2022/C 182/05)

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

SINGLE DOCUMENT

‘Alubia de Anguiano’

EU No: PDO-ES-02642 – 14.10.2020

PDO (X) PGI ( )

1.   Name

‘Alubia de Anguiano’

2.   Member State or Third Country

Spain

3.   Description of the agricultural product or foodstuff

3.1.   Type of product

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

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

The product covered by the ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ protected designation of origin consists of the dry, shelled seeds of the Phaseolus vulgaris L species belonging to the Fabaceae family, a climbing variety associated to the ‘El Encinar’ staked pole bean, produced and packaged in the municipality of Anguiano.

The ‘El Encinar’ cultivar was formed by a range of local ecotypes selected over the centuries by farmers seeking to enhance its productivity and quality characteristics. Its growth pattern is indeterminate with long internodes and therefore it needs to be staked to develop properly. Its growing cycle ranges between 120 and 180 days.

The ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ is a legume with the following characteristics: medium-sized, oval-shaped, purple or wine-coloured, with low luminosity and saturation, thin-skinned, with a low oxalic acid content (about 625 mg/kg) and a high percentage of water absorption (minimum 95 %) when soaked prior to cooking. This has the effect of softening the beans and reducing the cooking time, making it a high-quality culinary product.

| Size | Medium |
| --- | --- |
| Width | 5,80 mm ± 0,5 mm |
| Length | 10,95  mm ± 1  mm |
| Thickness | 5,10  mm ± 0,5  mm |
| Weight of 100 seeds (g) | 38,36 ±1,19 |
| Density g/cm3 | 1,37 ±0,03 |
| Hardness (compression test) (N/mm2) | 0,58 ±0,10 |
| % water absorption | ≥ 98 ±3,29 |
| Hardness after soaking (compression test) (N/mm2) | 0,07 ±0,02 |
| Hardness (puncture test) (N/mm2) | 6,41 ±1,25 |
| Hardness after soaking (puncture test) (N/mm2) | 0,3 ±0,03 |
| Shape | Oval |
| Brightness | Shiny |
| Colour | Purplish/wine-coloured |
| Speckling | None |
| Pattern | No pattern |

Size

Medium

Width

5,80 mm ± 0,5 mm

Length

10,95  mm ± 1  mm

Thickness

5,10  mm ± 0,5  mm

Weight of 100 seeds (g)

38,36 ±1,19

Density g/cm3

1,37 ±0,03

Hardness (compression test) (N/mm2)

0,58 ±0,10

% water absorption

≥ 98 ±3,29

Hardness after soaking (compression test) (N/mm2)

0,07 ±0,02

Hardness (puncture test) (N/mm2)

6,41 ±1,25

Hardness after soaking (puncture test) (N/mm2)

0,3 ±0,03

Shape

Oval

Brightness

Shiny

Colour

Purplish/wine-coloured

Speckling

None

Pattern

No pattern

When packaged, the beans must be whole, healthy and with no blemishes except for very slight speckling on the surface which must not be detrimental to the general appearance or quality or to the presentation of the packaging. The moisture content of the seeds must not exceed 17 %. Seed size must be larger than the 5 mm grading sieve.

The culinary quality of the ‘Alubia de Anguiano’, which is linked to how it responds during the cooking process, has a direct impact on its characteristic taste when cooked. The beans do not form lumps, but remain whole and intact with a smooth buttery texture. The skin is imperceptible and the mouthfeel is very pleasant.

These characteristics mean the beans are highly sought after on the market and very adaptable and well-suited to creative cuisine. ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ beans are very easy and fast to cook and the grains do not break even when overcooked.

3.3.   Feed and raw materials

–

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

All of the processes involved in the production, shelling, drying, preservation and preparation of the ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ protected designation of origin must take place in the defined geographical area.

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

Although they take place after production, packaging and labelling at source are carried out by the operators registered with the designation and are considered crucial in ensuring quality and guaranteeing adequate traceability and monitoring. This is because beans are a product that can very easily be mixed with beans from other sources, dwarf beans, other varieties or beans which have not been properly preserved. This also protects the product’s reputation.

Packaging can be done by hand or using automatic or semi-automatic weighing machines. Packages with net weights of 0,5, 1, 2 and 3 kg are used. 5, 10 and 20 kg bags can also be used for sales to the catering sector.

On the condition that reference is made to the PDO and that there is an adequate monitoring system in place to guarantee the traceability of the product to the end consumer, the possibility of repackaging is allowed and individual producers can make bulk consignments with labels being attached a posteriori. Where applicable, such practices must be notified to the managing body or otherwise to the competent authority.

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

The label on each package must be numbered and feature the following: the name of the ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ protected designation of origin, its logo and (in a different visual field) the year in which the beans were harvested.

All of the producers and processors meeting the requirements set down in the specification shall have access to the specific logo that will identify the product.

Image 1

4.   Concise definition of the geographical area

The defined geographical area comprises the municipality of Anguiano (total area 90,89 km2), which is located in the Sierra district of the Rioja Alta region.

5.   Link with the geographical area

The specific climatic and soil conditions in the demarcated geographical area and the expertise of the local producers and processors ensure that there is a causal link between the characteristics and quality of the product and the geographical environment.

Quality or characteristics of the product

‘Alubia de Anguiano’ beans are obtained exclusively from the ‘El Encinar’ variety and are different from the beans obtained from other varieties on account of the specific physical characteristics defined in section 3.2. However, they are also markedly different to the beans grown in adjoining areas. The beans grown in the geographical area are notable for their considerable weight, density and rheological capacity (resistance to deformation or cracking) and their high water absorption capacity when soaked prior to cooking.

Their high water absorption capacity makes it possible for the hardness of the grain measured using the puncture test to drop from 6,4 N/mm2 at 0,30 N/mm2, thus speeding up the starch gelatinisation and protein denaturation processes and reducing the cooking time. ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ grains do not break even when overcooked. This characteristic has a direct impact on the taste and combined with other attributes, it accounts for the product’s high culinary quality.

Natural factors

Orography

The municipality of Anguiano is located in the middle/upper course of the river Najerilla. Altitude in the protected area ranges between 600 m in the lowest section of the river Najerilla to 750 m in the upland areas, where there are clear constraints on growing this crop. The relief consists of a series of peaks and massifs, often leading to major differences in altitude which prevent soil erosion (evolution).

The steep slopes and the composition of the calcareous rocks have given rise to talus deposits where the soil has barely developed. These areas are referred to as ‘poor soil’ and the ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ beans are grown in a different way here to the methods used in adjoining areas that do not have the same characteristics.

Soil conditions

These typical mountain soils (poor and not well developed) date back to the Tertiary period and mostly consist of conglomerates, slate and sandstone. The hardiness of the talus deposits is reflected in the crops, which produce a smaller harvest of seeds that are smaller in size but higher in quality.

The soils have very good drainage. This is crucial for the correct development of ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ beans, which require moisture as a limiting factor. However, excess water is also very detrimental as it can encourage the spread of many diseases.

The acidic, lime-free soils in the area mean that ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ beans have a thinner skin and a lower oxalic acid content (approx 625 mg/kg) in the cells located under the epidermis. This improves their water absorption capacity during the soaking stage and reduces the cooking time.

Climate

The average annual temperature in the geographical area covered by the PDO is 9,7 oC. The average maximum temperature is 13,8 oC and the hottest months are July, August and June (in that order). The average minimum temperature is 6 oC, with February and January being the coldest months. The temperature exceeds 25 oC on 37 days, dropping below 0 oC on 58 days (a year). There are also significant variations in temperature with very cold nights and warmer days. This also leads to a smaller harvest but better quality beans.

The specific climate conditions of the mountainous area are ideal for the ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ beans to develop properly. They are sown in spring and harvested in summer-autumn. The minimum growth temperature is about 8 oC. The minimum temperature for germination is 12 oC. As the plant can die if the temperature drops below 3 oC, it is very susceptible to frost.

‘Alubia de Anguiano’ beans also need moisture for proper development. The number of days with appreciable rainfall, i.e. more than one l/m2 is 80. The accumulated precipitation is 39,06 l/m2. The rainiest months are March, June and October and the months with the lowest rainfall are December, January and May. The reference evapotranspiration value is 913,9 mm. The relative air humidity is 68,33 % and the average overall irradiance is 185,44 W/m2. The average soil temperature is 15,03 oC.

As well as the rainfall, the crop also benefits from the high relative humidity levels in the springtime and even in the summer. This humidity is generated in the valley areas due to the variation in daytime and night-time temperatures and the proximity of the rivers.

Human factor

There are also distinctive social and cultural practices in the geographical area. For example, the way that farmers have been selecting varieties since time immemorial, the optimum growing practices to bring out the best qualities, the staking needed for the pole bean variety, knowing exactly when to harvest the beans and the natural process employed to dry them have all been acquired and passed on through the years. This is also an important factor in producing high-quality beans and preserving all of the intrinsic characteristics for as long as possible.

In order to qualify as ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ beans, the seeds must come exclusively from the local ‘El Encinar’ staked pole bean variety and be in perfect condition. The expertise of the local producers is very important in this regard, as they have been selecting seeds for years with a view to enhancing their quality and ability to adapt to the demarcated geographical environment, thus ensuring that they are differentiated from the same variety grown in other (including adjoining) areas.

This knowledge acquired by the producers that have been looking after and selecting the best plants all their lives is also essential in determining the best time to harvest the beans, depending on the ripeness of the plants and the colour of the pods.

The technical know-how of the producers is important in applying the right techniques so that the plant can dry out naturally after it has been uprooted and laid out. If this is done in the field, special care must be taken with the threshing, which must also be done at the right time depending on the moisture content of the bean. It is also crucial in selecting the best beans throughout the whole process, as only quality beans can be placed on the market. This refers both to their health status (cracked or blemished beans are removed) as well as to the fact that the beans in the same batch should be dried out evenly and have the same moisture content.

Given that the ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ beanstalks are climbers and can grow in all directions, the ground must be prepared with stakes to ensure that the plant develops properly. The stakes have to be inserted and secured properly. Considerable skill is required, as wind damage can lead to significant losses if the plants are knocked down, broken or tangled. This would also require the insertion of new stakes, with the additional labour costs involved.

In recent years, the area devoted to the red climbing or pole bean (as the ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ is also known) has been reduced significantly. This has led to a reduction in yield, not just because of the competition from other more profitable crops but because the climbing varieties have been replaced by dwarf varieties, which have lower production costs and enable full mechanisation of all growing practices.

There is a genuine risk that the climbing bean seed type will become overly homogenised and that other seeds from elsewhere - which do not share the same organoleptic qualities of the traditional varieties - will have to be introduced. Another problem that is emerging is unfair competition, whereby dwarf bean varieties are being sold as if they were climbing varieties, based on their apparent similarity and despite their inferior quality. It is vital to work together to preserve plant gene resources and safeguard the biodiversity of ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ beans by replenishing stocks of the ‘El Encinar’ variety that has traditionally been developed and grown in the protected geographical area.

It is also a known fact that protecting native varieties is very beneficial for rural environments, particularly in remote, disadvantaged areas such as the geographical area where ‘Alubia de Anguiano’ beans are grown. There are undeniable genetic, social, cultural, environmental and economic reasons to support the replenishment, conservation and development of native plant varieties. This is especially true of territories located in mountainous areas, such as Anguiano. Growers in this municipality are aware that highlighting the specificity of products like this one is basically their only option if they are to compete with other more specialised producer regions.

Reference to publication of the specification

In the product specification section:

https://www.larioja.org/agricultura/es/calidad-agroalimentaria

---

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

---

| 4.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/25

---

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

(2022/C 182/06)

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.

SINGLE DOCUMENT

‘LILIPUTAS’

EU No: PGI-LT-00868-AM02 – 28.10.2021

PDO ( ) PGI (X)

1.   Name(s)

‘Liliputas’

2.   Member State or Third Country

Lithuania

3.   Description of the agricultural product or foodstuff

3.1.   Type of product

Class 1.3. Cheeses

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

‘Liliputas’ is a handmade, high-fat (50 % in dry matter), semi-hard cheese in the shape of a cylinder with rounded ends. It is 5,0–15,0 cm in height, 7,0–8,5 cm in diameter and 0,25–0,7 kg in weight. The cheese is made in the village of Belvederis from pasteurised, standardised cow’s milk, by coagulating the milk and then processing the coagulum, wrapping the cheese mass in woven cotton napkins and pressing it in traditional cylindrical moulds. The cheese is matured for 20–30 days by means of internal microflora and surface microflora, namely the microscopic mould Penicillium pallidum Smith, which grows naturally in cheese cellars in the geographical area defined in point 4.

The cheese got the name ‘Liliputas’ because of its size and derives its organoleptic characteristics from maturing in small rounds in the presence of the microscopic mould Penicillium pallidum Smith.

Table 1

Organoleptic indicators of ‘Liliputas’ cheese

| Indicator | Description |
| --- | --- |
| Appearance | The rind is smooth, with no thick layer underneath, and is covered with a paraffin/polymer or other composite coating. It may bear the imprints of the napkin and the cheese mould. |
| Flavour and aroma | Lactic-acid, fresh, flavour and aroma of fermented cheese. There may be a hint of sharpness and saltiness. |
| Texture | Homogeneous, quite firm, elastic, yielding in the mouth. |
| Cross-section | The cross-section may or may not show small, unevenly distributed oval, angular or slightly flattened holes. |
| Colour | Cream to yellow, uniform throughout. |

Indicator

Description

Appearance

The rind is smooth, with no thick layer underneath, and is covered with a paraffin/polymer or other composite coating. It may bear the imprints of the napkin and the cheese mould.

Flavour and aroma

Lactic-acid, fresh, flavour and aroma of fermented cheese. There may be a hint of sharpness and saltiness.

Texture

Homogeneous, quite firm, elastic, yielding in the mouth.

Cross-section

The cross-section may or may not show small, unevenly distributed oval, angular or slightly flattened holes.

Colour

Cream to yellow, uniform throughout.

Table 2

Physical and chemical characteristics of ‘Liliputas’ cheese

| Indicator | Amount (%) |
| --- | --- |
| Fat content in dry matter | 50,0±5 |
| Minimum dry matter content | 56,0 |
| Common salt content | 1,3–3,0 |

Indicator

Amount (%)

Fat content in dry matter

50,0±5

Minimum dry matter content

56,0

Common salt content

1,3–3,0

Table 3

Average nutritional value of 100 g of ‘Liliputas’ cheese

| Fat (g) | Protein (g) | Carbohydrates (g) | Energy value |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Kcal | KJ |
| 30,0 | 23,5 | – | 364 | 1 510 |

Fat (g)

Protein (g)

Carbohydrates (g)

Energy value

Kcal

KJ

30,0

23,5

–

364

1 510

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

| — | cow’s milk, |
| --- | --- |

—

cow’s milk,

| — | lactic acid and aromatic bacteria starter cultures, |
| --- | --- |

—

lactic acid and aromatic bacteria starter cultures,

| — | milk-coagulating enzymes, |
| --- | --- |

—

milk-coagulating enzymes,

| — | common salt. |
| --- | --- |

—

common salt.

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

| — | Preparation and enzymatic coagulation of the milk. Milk for cheese production is pasteurised and standardised in such a way that the fat content in dry matter of the mature cheese meets the requirements laid down in point 3.2. The milk is coagulated by adding the enzyme, starter cultures and calcium chloride. |
| --- | --- |

—

Preparation and enzymatic coagulation of the milk. Milk for cheese production is pasteurised and standardised in such a way that the fat content in dry matter of the mature cheese meets the requirements laid down in point 3.2. The milk is coagulated by adding the enzyme, starter cultures and calcium chloride.

| — | Processing of the coagulum and curd grains. The coagulum is mechanically processed until the grains are of the required size and then stirred. During formation of the curd grains, a third of the whey is drained off, after which the curd grains are heated. After heating, the curd grains are stirred until they reach a size of 4–5 mm, are no longer sticky and become dry and solid. The moisture content of the cheese must be no higher than 44 %. |
| --- | --- |

—

Processing of the coagulum and curd grains. The coagulum is mechanically processed until the grains are of the required size and then stirred. During formation of the curd grains, a third of the whey is drained off, after which the curd grains are heated. After heating, the curd grains are stirred until they reach a size of 4–5 mm, are no longer sticky and become dry and solid. The moisture content of the cheese must be no higher than 44 %.

| — | Shaping and pressing of the cheese. The cheese is formed from the curd layer. The process takes 20–25 minutes, after which the curd layer is cut into pieces, which are placed in the cylindrical moulds by hand to compress under their own weight. During self-pressing, the cheeses are turned two or three times. Self-pressing takes 20–25 minutes.
  After self-pressing, the cheeses are taken out of the moulds, wrapped in damp napkins to allow a rind to form and placed back in the moulds before putting the lids on. The moulds containing the cheeses are placed in presses and pressed for between one and a half and two hours. After pressing, the cheeses are taken out of the moulds, the napkins are removed and any crusts that may have formed between the cheese mould and the lid during pressing are trimmed off. |
| --- | --- |

—

Shaping and pressing of the cheese. The cheese is formed from the curd layer. The process takes 20–25 minutes, after which the curd layer is cut into pieces, which are placed in the cylindrical moulds by hand to compress under their own weight. During self-pressing, the cheeses are turned two or three times. Self-pressing takes 20–25 minutes.

After self-pressing, the cheeses are taken out of the moulds, wrapped in damp napkins to allow a rind to form and placed back in the moulds before putting the lids on. The moulds containing the cheeses are placed in presses and pressed for between one and a half and two hours. After pressing, the cheeses are taken out of the moulds, the napkins are removed and any crusts that may have formed between the cheese mould and the lid during pressing are trimmed off.

| — | Salting of the cheese. The cheeses are weighed and placed in brine. After 36–48 hours (determined on the basis of the progress and capabilities of the technological process), the cheeses are removed from the brine, placed on shelves, dried and then placed on the maturing racks in the cellar, which is kept at a temperature of 10–14 °C and a humidity of 85–94% and where the microscopic mould Penicillium pallidum Smith grows naturally. |
| --- | --- |

—

Salting of the cheese. The cheeses are weighed and placed in brine. After 36–48 hours (determined on the basis of the progress and capabilities of the technological process), the cheeses are removed from the brine, placed on shelves, dried and then placed on the maturing racks in the cellar, which is kept at a temperature of 10–14 °C and a humidity of 85–94% and where the microscopic mould Penicillium pallidum Smith grows naturally.

| — | Maturing of the cheese. The cheeses on the racks are turned at least every five days, as described by the first producers of the cheese, in order to prevent them from lying on their sides and to maintain their shape. During the maturing process, the cheese becomes covered with a coating of microscopic mould, which is washed off after 20–30 days, determined on the basis of a visual inspection and following an assessment of the organoleptic parameters of the cheese (flavour, aroma, consistency). Once the coating of mould has been washed from the surface of the cheese, the cheese is dried and covered with a wax coating. |
| --- | --- |

—

Maturing of the cheese. The cheeses on the racks are turned at least every five days, as described by the first producers of the cheese, in order to prevent them from lying on their sides and to maintain their shape. During the maturing process, the cheese becomes covered with a coating of microscopic mould, which is washed off after 20–30 days, determined on the basis of a visual inspection and following an assessment of the organoleptic parameters of the cheese (flavour, aroma, consistency). Once the coating of mould has been washed from the surface of the cheese, the cheese is dried and covered with a wax coating.

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

To preserve the unique characteristics of the cheese, to protect it from drying out, which happens if the protective paraffin layer becomes damaged, and because of its small size (weighing 0,25–0,7 kg), it is sold only uncut.

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

The label must clearly show the product name, i.e. ‘Liliputas’, the name of the manufacturer and the EU symbol.

4.   Concise definition of the geographical area

‘Liliputas’ cheese is made in the village of Belvederis, which is a small Lithuanian village in Jurbarkas District municipality that is situated in the Panemunė Regional Park, on the right bank of the river Nemunas, 1 km west of Seredžius.

5.   Link with the geographical area

5.1.   Specificity of the geographical area

Belvederis is the historical cradle of dairy specialists in Lithuania. In 1921, an agricultural school was set up in the manor house, where the subjects taught included dairying. After a few years, it was reorganised as a dairy college and, in 1944, as a technical dairy college. For many years, it fostered Lithuania’s dairy training traditions. During its 34 years of existence, the college / technical college trained more than 800 dairy specialists, most of whom gained their experience in Lithuania’s oldest cheese dairy, which was built in 1928 and is where ‘Liliputas’ is made. The milk used to produce the cheeses was heated in a vat with a wood-burning furnace. The separator was manual, and the cheese moulds wooden. The cheeses were washed using hand-held brushes, in the cellar in winter and in the open air in summer. The cheese dairy was next to an ice house, which was used to store blocks of ice brought from the river Nemunas. The ice was used to cool the cheese cellars. Initially, Belvederis cheese dairy produced larger (2,5–3,0 kg), round semi-hard cheeses, but, from 1958, when the dairy was extended, it started to produce small 0,4–0,7 kg cheeses, and the name ‘Liliputas’ caught on right away. Master cheese-maker Jonas Jarušaitis was the first to master the production of this cheese. In its first year of production, barely 8 tonnes of the cheese were matured, but, 40 years later, production had increased to 130 tonnes. The old wooden cheese moulds have been kept for posterity at Belvederis cheese dairy, along with souvenir cardboard packaging boxes and a postcard dating from the mid-20th century, which depicts cheeses being washed in a vat and issues an invitation to attend a kingly banquet and taste handmade Belvederis cheeses and other delicacies.

Today, ‘Liliputas’ is still made using the unique and authentic technology of 1958. The production skills and knowledge handed down from generation to generation by the employees of the cheese dairy have made it possible to preserve the product’s distinctive size, organoleptic characteristics and quality.

5.2.   Specificity of the product

A specific characteristic of ‘Liliputas’ cheese is that it is small, weighing only 0,25–0,7 kg, and is covered by a wax coating that protects it against damage. ‘Liliputas’ cheese gets its fresh, lactic-acid flavour and aroma from maturing in small rounds in a cool, damp cellar, cloaked with spores of the microscopic mould Penicillium pallidum Smith. No traces of the microscopic mould are visible on the walls, shelves or ceiling in the maturing room, but, a few days after the ‘Liliputas’ cheeses have been salted and lined up on the shelves, they start to resemble silkworm cocoons. In order to prevent the microscopic mould from penetrating into the cheese while it matures, it is protected by the rind formed during pressing. In order to form the rind, the cheeses are removed from the cylindrical moulds after self-pressing and wrapped in woven cotton napkins before being placed back in the cylindrical moulds and pressed in presses.

The cheeses are produced in the traditional way, almost entirely by hand, i.e. the curd layer is cut and placed in the moulds and the cheeses are wrapped in napkins, turned, washed, wiped and waxed by hand, a process during which each individual cheese is handled more than 50 times.

5.3.   Causal link between the geographical area and the quality or characteristics of the product (for PDO) or a specific quality, the reputation or other characteristic of the product (for PGI)

The application for registration of a protected geographical indication is based on tradition, the specific production method and reputation.

In the public consciousness, Belvederis, as the cradle of dairy science in Lithuania, is directly associated with the peerless ‘Liliputas’ cheese, which has been produced in the same way since 1958. Belvederis cheese dairy is currently the only producer of this unique handmade cheese.

‘Liliputas’ cheese gets its specific flavour and aroma from maturing in small rounds by means of internal microflora and the microscopic mould Penicillium pallidum Smith, which grows in cellars in the geographical area defined in point 4 when they are kept at a constant temperature of 10–14 °C and a humidity of 85–94 %.

‘Liliputas’ cheese has been exhibited at many exhibitions, both in Lithuania and abroad, meeting with great success at exhibitions in Leipzig, Poznań, Zagreb, London, Paris, Copenhagen, Vienna and elsewhere. ‘Liliputas’ won a gold medal at the ‘Agra-76’ exhibition in what was then the German Democratic Republic. It was awarded a first-class diploma in the cheese quality survey/competition in 1984 in Uglich, USSR, and won a gold medal in the ‘Lithuanian Product of the Year 2002’ competition, which was organised by the Lithuanian Confederation of Industrialists. At the international food and drink exhibition ‘World Food Moscow 2005’, it won a bronze medal, and, at the international exhibition for the agricultural and processing industries ‘Zolotaya osen 2008’, also in Moscow, ‘Liliputas’ graced the Lithuanian national stand put together by the Lithuanian Ministry of Agriculture. At ‘AgroBalt 2010’, a specialised international exhibition for companies in the agricultural, food and packaging industries, ‘Liliputas’ won an award for its natural and ecological qualities. Both ‘Liliputas’ and its dedicated producers have been written about many times in the Lithuanian press (1999-2003).

Although ‘Liliputas’ costs twice as much as cheese produced in a mechanised dairy, it has a loyal following of customers who appreciate quality and natural and handmade products. Production volumes have remained stable over the years.

Reference to publication of the specification

Product specification

---

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

---