# Uradni list C 158/2009

| | ISSN 1725-5244
  doi:10.3000/17255244.C_2009.158.slv |
| --- | --- |
| Uradni list
  Evropske unije | C 158 |
| | |
| Slovenska izdaja | Informacije in objave | Zvezek 5211. julij 2009 |

ISSN 1725-5244

doi:10.3000/17255244.C_2009.158.slv

Uradni list

Evropske unije

C 158

Slovenska izdaja

Informacije in objave

Zvezek 5211. julij 2009

---

| Obvestilo št. | Vsebina | Stran |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Sporočila |
| | SPOROČILA INSTITUCIJ IN ORGANOV EVROPSKE UNIJE |
| | Komisija |
| 2009/C 158/01 | Nenasprotovanje priglašeni koncentraciji (Primera COMP/M.5403 – Lufthansa/BMI) (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Obvestilo št.

Vsebina

Stran

II   Sporočila

SPOROČILA INSTITUCIJ IN ORGANOV EVROPSKE UNIJE

Komisija

2009/C 158/01

Nenasprotovanje priglašeni koncentraciji (Primera COMP/M.5403 – Lufthansa/BMI) (
  1
  )

1

1

| | IV   Informacije |
| --- | --- |
| | INFORMACIJE INSTITUCIJ IN ORGANOV EVROPSKE UNIJE |
| | Komisija |
| 2009/C 158/02 | Menjalni tečaji eura | 2 |
| | INFORMACIJE DRŽAV ČLANIC |
| 2009/C 158/03 | Seznam reguliranih trgov in nacionalnih določb o izvajanju ustreznih zahtev Direktive o trgih finančnih instrumentov (Direktiva 2004/39/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta) | 3 |
| 2009/C 158/04 | Sporočilo Komisije v skladu s členom 16(4) Uredbe (ES) št. 1008/2008 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o skupnih pravilih za opravljanje zračnih prevozov v Skupnosti – Obveznosti javne službe glede rednih zračnih prevozov (
  1
  ) | 9 |

IV   Informacije

INFORMACIJE INSTITUCIJ IN ORGANOV EVROPSKE UNIJE

Komisija

2009/C 158/02

Menjalni tečaji eura

2

INFORMACIJE DRŽAV ČLANIC

2009/C 158/03

Seznam reguliranih trgov in nacionalnih določb o izvajanju ustreznih zahtev Direktive o trgih finančnih instrumentov (Direktiva 2004/39/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta)

3

2009/C 158/04

Sporočilo Komisije v skladu s členom 16(4) Uredbe (ES) št. 1008/2008 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o skupnih pravilih za opravljanje zračnih prevozov v Skupnosti – Obveznosti javne službe glede rednih zračnih prevozov (
  1
  )

1

9

| | V   Objave |
| --- | --- |
| | UPRAVNI POSTOPKI |
| | Komisija |
| 2009/C 158/05 | Razpis za zbiranje predlogov – EACEA/11/2009 – Strukturna pomoč za raziskovalne organizacije in možganske truste na področju evropskih javnih politik ter za organizacije civilne družbe na evropski ravni – Program Evropa za državljane, akcija 2, ukrepa 1 in 2 – 2010 | 10 |
| | POSTOPKI V ZVEZI Z IZVAJANJEM KONKURENČNE POLITIKE |
| | Komisija |
| 2009/C 158/06 | Državne Pomoči – Nizozemska – Državna Pomoč C 10/2009 (prej N 138/2009) – ING – Poziv k predložitvi pripomb na podlagi člena 88(2) Pogodbe ES (
  1
  ) | 13 |
| | DRUGI AKTI |
| | Komisija |
| 2009/C 158/07 | Objava vloge na podlagi člena 8(2) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 509/2006 o zajamčenih tradicionalnih posebnostih kmetijskih proizvodov in živil | 24 |

V   Objave

UPRAVNI POSTOPKI

Komisija

2009/C 158/05

Razpis za zbiranje predlogov – EACEA/11/2009 – Strukturna pomoč za raziskovalne organizacije in možganske truste na področju evropskih javnih politik ter za organizacije civilne družbe na evropski ravni – Program Evropa za državljane, akcija 2, ukrepa 1 in 2 – 2010

10

POSTOPKI V ZVEZI Z IZVAJANJEM KONKURENČNE POLITIKE

Komisija

2009/C 158/06

Državne Pomoči – Nizozemska – Državna Pomoč C 10/2009 (prej N 138/2009) – ING – Poziv k predložitvi pripomb na podlagi člena 88(2) Pogodbe ES (
  1
  )

1

13

DRUGI AKTI

Komisija

2009/C 158/07

Objava vloge na podlagi člena 8(2) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 509/2006 o zajamčenih tradicionalnih posebnostih kmetijskih proizvodov in živil

24

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Besedilo velja za EGP |

---

(1)   Besedilo velja za EGP

1

| SL | |
| --- | --- |

SL

---

II Sporočila

SPOROČILA INSTITUCIJ IN ORGANOV EVROPSKE UNIJE

Komisija

| 11.7.2009 | SL | Uradni list Evropske unije | C 158/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2009

SL

Uradni list Evropske unije

C 158/1

---

Nenasprotovanje priglašeni koncentraciji

(Primera COMP/M.5403 – Lufthansa/BMI)

(Besedilo velja za EGP)

2009/C 158/01

Komisija je 14. maja 2009 odločila, da ne bo nasprotovala zgoraj navedeni priglašeni koncentraciji in jo bo razglasila za združljivo s skupnim trgom. Ta odločitev je sprejeta v skladu s členom 6(1)(b) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 139/2004. Celotno besedilo odločitve je na voljo samo v angleščini in bo objavljeno po tem, ko bodo iz besedila odstranjene morebitne poslovne skrivnosti. Na voljo bo:

| — | v razdelku o združitvah na spletišču Komisije o konkurenci (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). Spletišče vsebuje različne pripomočke za iskanje posameznih odločitev o združitvah, vključno z nazivi podjetij, številkami zadev, datumi ter indeksi področij, |
| --- | --- |

—

v razdelku o združitvah na spletišču Komisije o konkurenci (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). Spletišče vsebuje različne pripomočke za iskanje posameznih odločitev o združitvah, vključno z nazivi podjetij, številkami zadev, datumi ter indeksi področij,

| — | v elektronski obliki na spletišču EUR-Lex (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/sl/index.htm) pod dokumentarno številko 32009M5403. EUR-Lex zagotavlja spletni dostop do evropskega prava. |
| --- | --- |

—

v elektronski obliki na spletišču EUR-Lex (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/sl/index.htm) pod dokumentarno številko 32009M5403. EUR-Lex zagotavlja spletni dostop do evropskega prava.

---

IV Informacije

INFORMACIJE INSTITUCIJ IN ORGANOV EVROPSKE UNIJE

Komisija

| 11.7.2009 | SL | Uradni list Evropske unije | C 158/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2009

SL

Uradni list Evropske unije

C 158/2

---

Menjalni tečaji eura (1)

10. julija 2009

2009/C 158/02

1 euro =

| | Valuta | Menjalni tečaj |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | ameriški dolar | 1,3901 |
| JPY | japonski jen | 128,21 |
| DKK | danska krona | 7,4466 |
| GBP | funt šterling | 0,85800 |
| SEK | švedska krona | 11,0022 |
| CHF | švicarski frank | 1,5140 |
| ISK | islandska krona | |
| NOK | norveška krona | 9,0840 |
| BGN | lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | češka krona | 26,030 |
| EEK | estonska krona | 15,6466 |
| HUF | madžarski forint | 277,50 |
| LTL | litovski litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | latvijski lats | 0,6993 |
| PLN | poljski zlot | 4,3740 |
| RON | romunski leu | 4,2160 |
| TRY | turška lira | 2,1636 |
| AUD | avstralski dolar | 1,7940 |
| CAD | kanadski dolar | 1,6212 |
| HKD | hongkonški dolar | 10,7736 |
| NZD | novozelandski dolar | 2,2250 |
| SGD | singapurski dolar | 2,0331 |
| KRW | južnokorejski won | 1 786,89 |
| ZAR | južnoafriški rand | 11,4023 |
| CNY | kitajski juan | 9,4983 |
| HRK | hrvaška kuna | 7,3315 |
| IDR | indonezijska rupija | 14 174,11 |
| MYR | malezijski ringit | 4,9731 |
| PHP | filipinski peso | 67,026 |
| RUB | ruski rubelj | 45,4005 |
| THB | tajski bat | 47,382 |
| BRL | brazilski real | 2,8084 |
| MXN | mehiški peso | 19,0303 |
| INR | indijska rupija | 67,8230 |

Valuta

Menjalni tečaj

USD

ameriški dolar

1,3901

JPY

japonski jen

128,21

DKK

danska krona

7,4466

GBP

funt šterling

0,85800

SEK

švedska krona

11,0022

CHF

švicarski frank

1,5140

ISK

islandska krona

NOK

norveška krona

9,0840

BGN

lev

1,9558

CZK

češka krona

26,030

EEK

estonska krona

15,6466

HUF

madžarski forint

277,50

LTL

litovski litas

3,4528

LVL

latvijski lats

0,6993

PLN

poljski zlot

4,3740

RON

romunski leu

4,2160

TRY

turška lira

2,1636

AUD

avstralski dolar

1,7940

CAD

kanadski dolar

1,6212

HKD

hongkonški dolar

10,7736

NZD

novozelandski dolar

2,2250

SGD

singapurski dolar

2,0331

KRW

južnokorejski won

1 786,89

ZAR

južnoafriški rand

11,4023

CNY

kitajski juan

9,4983

HRK

hrvaška kuna

7,3315

IDR

indonezijska rupija

14 174,11

MYR

malezijski ringit

4,9731

PHP

filipinski peso

67,026

RUB

ruski rubelj

45,4005

THB

tajski bat

47,382

BRL

brazilski real

2,8084

MXN

mehiški peso

19,0303

INR

indijska rupija

67,8230

---

(1)  Vir: referenčni menjalni tečaj, ki ga objavlja ECB.

---

INFORMACIJE DRŽAV ČLANIC

| 11.7.2009 | SL | Uradni list Evropske unije | C 158/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2009

SL

Uradni list Evropske unije

C 158/3

---

Seznam reguliranih trgov in nacionalnih določb o izvajanju ustreznih zahtev Direktive o trgih finančnih instrumentov (Direktiva 2004/39/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta)

2009/C 158/03

Člen 47 Direktive o trgih finančnih instrumentov (Direktiva 2004/39/ES, UL L 145, 30.4.2004) vsaki državi članici omogoča, da dodeli status „reguliranega trga“ tistim trgom, ki se oblikujejo na njenem ozemlju in so v skladu z njenimi predpisi.

Člen 4(1)(14) Direktive 2004/39/ES opredeljuje „regulirani trg“ kot večstranski sistem, ki ga upravlja in/ali vodi upravljavec trga in ki združuje ali omogoča združevanje več nakupnih in prodajnih interesov tretjih oseb v zvezi s finančnimi instrumenti – znotraj sistema in v skladu s pravili, ki niso diskrecijska – pri čemer pride do pogodbe v zvezi s finančnimi instrumenti, sprejetimi v trgovanje v skladu z njegovimi pravili in/ali sistemi, ter za katerega je pridobljeno dovoljenje in ki deluje redno in v skladu z določbami naslova III Direktive 2004/39/ES.

Člen 47 Direktive 2004/39/ES določa, da vsaka država članica redno posodablja seznam reguliranih trgov, ki jih je odobrila. Te podatke mora sporočiti drugim državam članicam in Evropski komisiji. Isti člen (člen 47 Direktive 2004/39/ES) od Komisije zahteva, da enkrat letno v Uradnem listu Evropske unije objavi seznam priglašenih reguliranih trgov. Ta seznam je pripravljen v skladu s to zahtevo.

Priloženi seznam vsebuje poimenovanja posameznih trgov, ki jih pristojni nacionalni organi priznavajo kot skladne z opredelitvijo „reguliranega trga“. Poleg tega vsebuje imena ustanov, pooblaščenih za upravljanje teh trgov, ter pristojnih organov, odgovornih za izdajanje ali potrditev tržnih pravil.

Zaradi zmanjšanja vstopnih ovir in specializacije v segmentih trgovanja so pri seznamu „reguliranih trgov“ potrebne večje spremembe, kot jih predvideva Direktiva o investicijskih storitvah 93/22/EGS. Tudi člen 47 Direktive o trgih finančnih instrumentov od Evropske komisije zahteva, da objavi seznam reguliranih trgov na svoji spletni strani in ga redno posodablja. Zato bo Komisija poleg letne objave seznama v UL skrbela za posodabljanje seznama na svojem uradnem spletišču (http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/securities/isd/mifid_en.htm). Ta seznam se bo redno posodabljal na podlagi podatkov, ki jih bodo sporočili nacionalni organi. Ti so pozvani, da Komisijo še naprej obveščajo o kakršnih koli dopolnitvah ali črtanjih s seznama reguliranih trgov matične države članice.

| Država | Poimenovanje reguliranega trga | Pooblaščene ustanove | Pristojni organ za poimenovanje in nadzor trga |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Avstrija | 1. | Amtlicher Handel (uradni trg) |

Država

Poimenovanje reguliranega trga

Pooblaščene ustanove

Pristojni organ za poimenovanje in nadzor trga

Avstrija

1.

Amtlicher Handel (uradni trg)

| 2. | Geregelter Freiverkehr (poluradni trg) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Geregelter Freiverkehr (poluradni trg)

| 1.-2. | Wiener Börse AG |
| --- | --- |

1.-2.

Wiener Börse AG

| 1.-2. | Finanzmarktaufsichtsbehörde (urad za nadzor finančnega trga) |
| --- | --- |

1.-2.

Finanzmarktaufsichtsbehörde (urad za nadzor finančnega trga)

Belgija

| 1. | a) | Le marché «Euronext Brussels»/De «Euronext Brussels» markt, |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

a)

Le marché «Euronext Brussels»/De «Euronext Brussels» markt,

| b) | Le marché des instruments dérivés d'Euronext Brussels/De markt voor afgeleide producten van Euronext Brussels. |
| --- | --- |

b)

Le marché des instruments dérivés d'Euronext Brussels/De markt voor afgeleide producten van Euronext Brussels.

| 1. | Euronext Brussels SA/NV. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Euronext Brussels SA/NV.

| 1. | a) | Reconnaissance: Ministre des Finances sur avis de la Commission bancaire, financière et des assurances (CBFA).
  Erkenning: Minister van Financiën op advies van de Commissie voor het Bank-, Financie- en Assurantiewezen (CBFA) |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

a)

Reconnaissance: Ministre des Finances sur avis de la Commission bancaire, financière et des assurances (CBFA).

Erkenning: Minister van Financiën op advies van de Commissie voor het Bank-, Financie- en Assurantiewezen (CBFA)

| b) | Surveillance: CBFA.
  Toezicht: CBFA |
| --- | --- |

b)

Surveillance: CBFA.

Toezicht: CBFA

| 2. | Le marché réglementé hors bourse des obligations linéaires, des titres scindés et des certificats de trésorerie/De gereglementeerde buitenbeursmarkt van de lineaire obligaties, de gesplitste effecten en de schatkistcertificaten. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Le marché réglementé hors bourse des obligations linéaires, des titres scindés et des certificats de trésorerie/De gereglementeerde buitenbeursmarkt van de lineaire obligaties, de gesplitste effecten en de schatkistcertificaten.

| 2. | Fonds des rentes/Rentenfonds. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Fonds des rentes/Rentenfonds.

| 2. | a) | Reconnaissance: Législateur (art.144, §2 de la loi du 2.8.2002).
  Erkenning: Regelgever (art. 144, §2 van de wet van 2.8.2002). |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

a)

Reconnaissance: Législateur (art.144, §2 de la loi du 2.8.2002).

Erkenning: Regelgever (art. 144, §2 van de wet van 2.8.2002).

| b) | Surveillance: Comité du Fonds des rentes, pour compte de la CBFA.
  Toezicht: Comité van het Rentenfonds, voor rekening van de CBFA |
| --- | --- |

b)

Surveillance: Comité du Fonds des rentes, pour compte de la CBFA.

Toezicht: Comité van het Rentenfonds, voor rekening van de CBFA

Bolgarija

| 1. | Официален пазар (uradni trg) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Официален пазар (uradni trg)

| 2. | Неофициален пазар (neuradni trg) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Неофициален пазар (neuradni trg)

Българска Фондова Борса – София АД (Bolgarska borza – Sofija JSCo)

Комисия за финансов надзор (Komisija za finančni nadzor)

Ciper

Ciprska borza

| 1. | glavni trg |
| --- | --- |

1.

glavni trg

| 2. | vzporedni trg |
| --- | --- |

2.

vzporedni trg

| 3. | alternativni trg |
| --- | --- |

3.

alternativni trg

| 4. | trg obveznic |
| --- | --- |

4.

trg obveznic

| 5. | trg investicijskih družb |
| --- | --- |

5.

trg investicijskih družb

| 6. | trg velikih projektov |
| --- | --- |

6.

trg velikih projektov

| 7. | trg za čezoceanski ladijski promet |
| --- | --- |

7.

trg za čezoceanski ladijski promet

| 1.-7. | Ciprska borza |
| --- | --- |

1.-7.

Ciprska borza

| 1.-7. | Ciprska komisija za vrednostne papirje |
| --- | --- |

1.-7.

Ciprska komisija za vrednostne papirje

Češka

| 1. | glavni trg (Hlavni Trh) |
| --- | --- |

1.

glavni trg (Hlavni Trh)

| 2. | prosti trg (Volny trh) |
| --- | --- |

2.

prosti trg (Volny trh)

| 3. | uradni trg |
| --- | --- |

3.

uradni trg

| 4. | terminski trg |
| --- | --- |

4.

terminski trg

| 5. | promptni trg |
| --- | --- |

5.

promptni trg

| 1.-2. | Praška borza vrednostnih papirjev
  (Burza cenných papírů Praha, a.s.) |
| --- | --- |

1.-2.

Praška borza vrednostnih papirjev

(Burza cenných papírů Praha, a.s.)

| 3. | RM-SYSTEM, češka borza vrednostnih papirjev
  (RM-SYSTÉM, česká burza cenných papírů a.s.) |
| --- | --- |

3.

RM-SYSTEM, češka borza vrednostnih papirjev

(RM-SYSTÉM, česká burza cenných papírů a.s.)

| 4.-5. | Praška borza trga za energetiko
  (Energetická burza Praha) |
| --- | --- |

4.-5.

Praška borza trga za energetiko

(Energetická burza Praha)

| 1.-5. | Češka nacionalna banka |
| --- | --- |

1.-5.

Češka nacionalna banka

Danska

| 1. | NASDAQ OMX København A/S






  — | trg lastniških vrednostnih papirjev; |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

NASDAQ OMX København A/S

—

trg lastniških vrednostnih papirjev;

| — | trg obveznic; |
| --- | --- |

—

trg obveznic;

| — | trg izvedenih finančnih instrumentov |
| --- | --- |

—

trg izvedenih finančnih instrumentov

| 1. | Borza v Københavnu AS |
| --- | --- |

1.

Borza v Københavnu AS

Finanstilsynet (danski organ za finančni nadzor)

| 1. | Dansk Autoriseret Markedsplads A/S (danski pooblaščeni trg Ltd. (DAMP)) [pooblaščeni trg = redno trgovanje z vrednostnimi papirji, sprejetimi v trgovanje, ki ne kotirajo na borzi] |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dansk Autoriseret Markedsplads A/S (danski pooblaščeni trg Ltd. (DAMP)) [pooblaščeni trg = redno trgovanje z vrednostnimi papirji, sprejetimi v trgovanje, ki ne kotirajo na borzi]

| 2. | Danski pooblaščeni trg AS (DAMP) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Danski pooblaščeni trg AS (DAMP)

Estonija

| 1. | Väärtpaberibörs (borza)






  — | Põhinimekiri (glavni trg) |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

Väärtpaberibörs (borza)

—

Põhinimekiri (glavni trg)

| — | Võlakirjade nimekiri (trg obveznic) |
| --- | --- |

—

Võlakirjade nimekiri (trg obveznic)

| — | Fondiosakute nimekri (trg investicijskih skladov) |
| --- | --- |

—

Fondiosakute nimekri (trg investicijskih skladov)

NASDAQ OMX Tallinn AS

(NASDAQ OMX Tallinn Ltd.)

Finantsinspektsioon

(estonski organ za finančni nadzor)

| 2. | Reguleeritud turg
  (regulirani trg)






  — | Lisanimekiri (sekondarni trg) |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

Reguleeritud turg

(regulirani trg)

—

Lisanimekiri (sekondarni trg)

Finska

Arvopaperipörssi (borza);

| — | Pörssilista (uradni trg); |
| --- | --- |

—

Pörssilista (uradni trg);

| — | Pre-lista (trg vrednostnih papirjev pred uvrstitvijo v redno trgovanje); |
| --- | --- |

—

Pre-lista (trg vrednostnih papirjev pred uvrstitvijo v redno trgovanje);

| — | Muut arvopaperit -lista (trg ostalih vrednostnih papirjev) |
| --- | --- |

—

Muut arvopaperit -lista (trg ostalih vrednostnih papirjev)

NASDAQ OMX Helsinki Oy (NASDAQ OMX Helsinki Ltd.)

Imenovanje:

ministrstvo za finance.

nadzor:

| — | odobritev pravil: ministrstvo za finance |
| --- | --- |

—

odobritev pravil: ministrstvo za finance

| — | nadzor skladnosti:
  Finanssivalvonta, finski organ za finančni nadzor |
| --- | --- |

—

nadzor skladnosti:

Finanssivalvonta, finski organ za finančni nadzor

Francija

| 1. | Euronext Paris |
| --- | --- |

1.

Euronext Paris

| 2. | MATIF |
| --- | --- |

2.

MATIF

| 3. | MONEP |
| --- | --- |

3.

MONEP

Euronext Paris (1-3)

Proposition de l’Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF).

Reconnaissance par le ministre chargé de l’économie (cf. article L. 421-1 du code monétaire et financier).

Nemčija

Börsenaufsichtsbehörden der Länder (organi zveznih dežel za nadzor borze) in Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin).

državni organi:

| 1. | Börse Berlin (Regulierter Markt) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Börse Berlin (Regulierter Markt)

| 1. | Börse Berlin AG. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Börse Berlin AG.

| 1. | Senatsverwaltung für Wirtschaft, Technologie und Frauen, Berlin |
| --- | --- |

1.

Senatsverwaltung für Wirtschaft, Technologie und Frauen, Berlin

| 2. | Düsseldorfer Börse (Regulierter Markt) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Düsseldorfer Börse (Regulierter Markt)

| 2. | Börse Düsseldorf AG. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Börse Düsseldorf AG.

| 2. | Finanzministerium des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, Düsseldorf |
| --- | --- |

2.

Finanzministerium des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, Düsseldorf

| 3. | Frankfurter Wertpapierbörse (Regulierter Markt); |
| --- | --- |

3.

Frankfurter Wertpapierbörse (Regulierter Markt);

| 3. | Deutsche Börse AG. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Deutsche Börse AG.

| 3 & 4. | Hessisches Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Verkehr und Landesentwicklung, Wiesbaden |
| --- | --- |

3 & 4.

Hessisches Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Verkehr und Landesentwicklung, Wiesbaden

| 4. | Eurex Deutschland |
| --- | --- |

4.

Eurex Deutschland

| 4. | Eurex Frankfurt AG |
| --- | --- |

4.

Eurex Frankfurt AG

| 5. | Hanseatische Wertpapierbörse Hamburg (Regulierter Markt, Startup market) |
| --- | --- |

5.

Hanseatische Wertpapierbörse Hamburg (Regulierter Markt, Startup market)

| 5. | BÖAG Börsen AG |
| --- | --- |

5.

BÖAG Börsen AG

| 5. | Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg, Behörde für Wirtschaft und Arbeit |
| --- | --- |

5.

Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg, Behörde für Wirtschaft und Arbeit

| 6. | Niedersächsische Börse zu Hannover (Regulierter Markt) |
| --- | --- |

6.

Niedersächsische Börse zu Hannover (Regulierter Markt)

| 6. | BÖAG Börsen AG |
| --- | --- |

6.

BÖAG Börsen AG

| 6. | Niedersächsisches Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Arbeit und Verkehr, Hannover |
| --- | --- |

6.

Niedersächsisches Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Arbeit und Verkehr, Hannover

| 7. | Börse München (Regulierter Markt) |
| --- | --- |

7.

Börse München (Regulierter Markt)

| 7. | Bayerische Börse AG |
| --- | --- |

7.

Bayerische Börse AG

| 7. | Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Wirtschaft, Infrastruktur, Verkehr und Technologie, München |
| --- | --- |

7.

Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Wirtschaft, Infrastruktur, Verkehr und Technologie, München

| 8. | Baden-Württembergische Wertpapierbörse(Regulierter Markt) |
| --- | --- |

8.

Baden-Württembergische Wertpapierbörse(Regulierter Markt)

| 8. | Börse-Stuttgart AG |
| --- | --- |

8.

Börse-Stuttgart AG

| 8. | Wirtschaftsministerium Baden-Württemberg, Stuttgart |
| --- | --- |

8.

Wirtschaftsministerium Baden-Württemberg, Stuttgart

| 9. | Risk Management Exchange Hannover (Regulierter Markt) |
| --- | --- |

9.

Risk Management Exchange Hannover (Regulierter Markt)

| 9. | RMX Hannover |
| --- | --- |

9.

RMX Hannover

| 9. | Niedersächsisches Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Arbeit und Verkehr, Hannover |
| --- | --- |

9.

Niedersächsisches Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Arbeit und Verkehr, Hannover

| 10. | European Energy Exchange |
| --- | --- |

10.

European Energy Exchange

| 10. | European Energy Exchange AG, Leipzig |
| --- | --- |

10.

European Energy Exchange AG, Leipzig

| 10. | Sächsisches Staatsministerium für Wirtschaft und Arbeit, Dresden |
| --- | --- |

10.

Sächsisches Staatsministerium für Wirtschaft und Arbeit, Dresden

Grčija

| 1. | Atenska borza






  — | trgi vrednostnih papirjev |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

Atenska borza

—

trgi vrednostnih papirjev

| — | trgi izvedenih finančnih instrumentov |
| --- | --- |

—

trgi izvedenih finančnih instrumentov

| 1. | Atenska borza |
| --- | --- |

1.

Atenska borza

| 1. | Helenska komisija za kapitalski trg (HCMC) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Helenska komisija za kapitalski trg (HCMC)

| 2. | Elektronski sekundarni trg vrednostnih papirjev (HDAT– trg dolžniških instrumentov) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Elektronski sekundarni trg vrednostnih papirjev (HDAT– trg dolžniških instrumentov)

| 2. | Banka Grčije |
| --- | --- |

2.

Banka Grčije

| 2. | Helenska komisija za kapitalski trg (HCMC) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Helenska komisija za kapitalski trg (HCMC)

Madžarska

Budapesti Értéktőzsde Zrt. (budimpeška borza)

| — | Részvényszekció (oddelek za navadne delnice) |
| --- | --- |

—

Részvényszekció (oddelek za navadne delnice)

| — | Hitelpapír szekció (oddelek za dolžniške vrednostne papirje) |
| --- | --- |

—

Hitelpapír szekció (oddelek za dolžniške vrednostne papirje)

| — | Hitelpapír szekció (oddelek za izvedene vrednostne papirje) |
| --- | --- |

—

Hitelpapír szekció (oddelek za izvedene vrednostne papirje)

| — | Hitelpapír szekció (oddelek za blago) |
| --- | --- |

—

Hitelpapír szekció (oddelek za blago)

Budapesti Értéktőzsde Zrt. (budimpeška borza)

Pénzügyi Szervezetek Állami Felügyelete (Hungarian madžarski organ za finančni nadzor)

Irska

Glavni trg irske borze

Irish Stock Exchange Ltd.

Regulativni organ Irske finančne službe („finančni regulator“) odobri „regulirane trge“ in (razen pogojev za kotacijo) upravljavca trga glede upoštevanja zahtev Direktive o trgih finančnih instrumentov.

Italija

| 1. | elektronska borza (MTA) |
| --- | --- |

1.

elektronska borza (MTA)

| 2. | elektronski trg obveznic (MOT) |
| --- | --- |

2.

elektronski trg obveznic (MOT)

| 3. | elektronski trg odprtih skladov in ETC (ETF-Plus) |
| --- | --- |

3.

elektronski trg odprtih skladov in ETC (ETF-Plus)

| 4. | elektronski trg listninskih izvedenih vrednostnih papirjev (SeDeX) |
| --- | --- |

4.

elektronski trg listninskih izvedenih vrednostnih papirjev (SeDeX)

| 5. | trg After Hour (TAH) |
| --- | --- |

5.

trg After Hour (TAH)

| 6. | italijanski trg izvedenih vrednostnih papirjev za trgovanje s finančnimi inštrumenti iz členov 1(2)(f) in 1(2)(i) konsolidiranega zakona o financah (IDEM) |
| --- | --- |

6.

italijanski trg izvedenih vrednostnih papirjev za trgovanje s finančnimi inštrumenti iz členov 1(2)(f) in 1(2)(i) konsolidiranega zakona o financah (IDEM)

| 7. | grosistični trg italijanskih in tujih državnih obveznic (MTS) |
| --- | --- |

7.

grosistični trg italijanskih in tujih državnih obveznic (MTS)

| 8. | grosistično trgovanje z nevladnimi obveznicami in vrednostnimi papirji, ki jih izdajajo mednarodne organizacije z vladno udeležbo (MTS Corporate) |
| --- | --- |

8.

grosistično trgovanje z nevladnimi obveznicami in vrednostnimi papirji, ki jih izdajajo mednarodne organizacije z vladno udeležbo (MTS Corporate)

| 9. | grosistično spletno trgovanje z državnimi obveznicami (BondVision) |
| --- | --- |

9.

grosistično spletno trgovanje z državnimi obveznicami (BondVision)

| 10. | trg TLX |
| --- | --- |

10.

trg TLX

| 1-6 | Borsa Italiana S.p.A. |
| --- | --- |

1-6

Borsa Italiana S.p.A.

| 7-9 | Società per il Mercato dei Titoli di Stato - MTS S.p.A. |
| --- | --- |

7-9

Società per il Mercato dei Titoli di Stato - MTS S.p.A.

| 10. | TLX s.p.a. |
| --- | --- |

10.

TLX s.p.a.

Consob pooblasti podjetja, ki upravljajo trge, in odobri njihove predpise ter pravila.

Ministrstvo za gospodarstvo in finance pooblasti podjetja, ki upravljajo grosistične trge z državnimi vrednostnimi papirji, pri čemer upošteva mnenje, ki ga dasta Consob in Banca d’Italia.

Latvia

NASDAQ OMX Riga:

| — | glavni trg; |
| --- | --- |

—

glavni trg;

| — | dolžniški trg; |
| --- | --- |

—

dolžniški trg;

| — | sekondarni trg; |
| --- | --- |

—

sekondarni trg;

| — | trg skladov. |
| --- | --- |

—

trg skladov.

JSC NASDAQ OMX Riga

Finanšu un kapitāla tirgus komisija (Komisija za finančni in kapitalski trg)

Litva

Nasdaq OMX Vilnius:

| — | glavni trg Nasdaq OMX Vilnius |
| --- | --- |

—

glavni trg Nasdaq OMX Vilnius

| — | sekondarni trg Nasdaq OMX Vilnius |
| --- | --- |

—

sekondarni trg Nasdaq OMX Vilnius

| — | trg za dolžniških vrednostnih papirjev Nasdaq OMX Vilnius |
| --- | --- |

—

trg za dolžniških vrednostnih papirjev Nasdaq OMX Vilnius

| — | trg skaldov Nasdaq OMX Vilnius |
| --- | --- |

—

trg skaldov Nasdaq OMX Vilnius

Nasdaq OMX Vilnius

Litovska komisija za vrednostne papirje

Luksemburg

Bourse de Luxembourg

Société de la Bourse de Luxembourg S.A.

Commission de surveillance du Secteur Financier

Malta

Malta Stock Exchange

Malta Stock Exchange

Malteški organ finančnih služb

Nizozemska

| 1. | a) | Gotovinski trg Euronext Amsterdam:






  — | Euronext Amsterdam |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.

a)

Gotovinski trg Euronext Amsterdam:

—

Euronext Amsterdam

| b) | Trg izvedenih vrednostnih papirjev Euronext Amsterdam |
| --- | --- |

b)

Trg izvedenih vrednostnih papirjev Euronext Amsterdam

| 1. | NYSE Euronext (International) BV, NYSE Euronext (Holding) BV, Euronext NV, Euronext (Holdings) NV en Euronext Amsterdam NV |
| --- | --- |

1.

NYSE Euronext (International) BV, NYSE Euronext (Holding) BV, Euronext NV, Euronext (Holdings) NV en Euronext Amsterdam NV

| 1.-3. | Dovoljenje ministra za finance po nasvetu nizozemskega organa za finančne trge
  Nadzor nizozemskega organa za finančne trge in nizozemskega ministrstva za finance. |
| --- | --- |

1.-3.

Dovoljenje ministra za finance po nasvetu nizozemskega organa za finančne trge

Nadzor nizozemskega organa za finančne trge in nizozemskega ministrstva za finance.

| 2. | Endex |
| --- | --- |

2.

Endex

| 2. | ENDEX European Energy Derivatives Exchange N.V. |
| --- | --- |

2.

ENDEX European Energy Derivatives Exchange N.V.

| 3. | MTS Amsterdam |
| --- | --- |

3.

MTS Amsterdam

| 3. | MTS Amsterdam N.V. |
| --- | --- |

3.

MTS Amsterdam N.V.

Poljska

| 1. | Rynek podstawowy (glavni trg) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Rynek podstawowy (glavni trg)

| 2. | Rynek równolegly (vzporedni trg) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Rynek równolegly (vzporedni trg)

| 3. | Rynek Papierów Wartosciowych CeTO (regulowany rynek pozagieldowy) (trg vrednostnih papirjev CeTO; regulirani trg zunaj borze) |
| --- | --- |

3.

Rynek Papierów Wartosciowych CeTO (regulowany rynek pozagieldowy) (trg vrednostnih papirjev CeTO; regulirani trg zunaj borze)

| 1 in 2 | Gielda Papierów Wartościowych w Warszawie (Warsaw Stock Exchange) |
| --- | --- |

1 in 2

Gielda Papierów Wartościowych w Warszawie (Warsaw Stock Exchange)

| 3. | MTS-CeTO S.A. |
| --- | --- |

3.

MTS-CeTO S.A.

Komisja Nadzoru Finansowego (komisija za finančni nadzor)

Portugalska

| 1. | Eurolist by Euronext Lisbon (Uradni kotacijski trg) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Eurolist by Euronext Lisbon (Uradni kotacijski trg)

| 2. | Mercado de Futuros e Opções (trg terminskih poslov in opcij) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mercado de Futuros e Opções (trg terminskih poslov in opcij)

| 3. | MEDIP — Mercado Especial de Dívida Pública (posebni trg za javni dolg) |
| --- | --- |

3.

MEDIP — Mercado Especial de Dívida Pública (posebni trg za javni dolg)

| 4. | MIBEL — Mercado Regulamentado de Derivados do MIBEL. |
| --- | --- |

4.

MIBEL — Mercado Regulamentado de Derivados do MIBEL.

(trg za energetiko)

| 1 - 2. | Euronext Lisbon — Sociedade Gestora de Mercados Regulamentados, S.A. |
| --- | --- |

1 - 2.

Euronext Lisbon — Sociedade Gestora de Mercados Regulamentados, S.A.

| 3. | MTS Portugal — Sociedade Gestora do Mercado Especial de Dívida Pública, SGMR, S.A. |
| --- | --- |

3.

MTS Portugal — Sociedade Gestora do Mercado Especial de Dívida Pública, SGMR, S.A.

| 4. | OMIP — Operador do Mercado Ibérico de Energia (Pólo Português), Sociedade Gestora de Mercado Regulamentado, SA (OMIP). |
| --- | --- |

4.

OMIP — Operador do Mercado Ibérico de Energia (Pólo Português), Sociedade Gestora de Mercado Regulamentado, SA (OMIP).

Ministrstvo za finance odobri trge s predlogom Comissão do Mercado de Valores Mobiliários (CMVM – pooblaščen za reguliranje in nadzor trga).

Romunija

| 1. | Piața reglementată (regulirani trg za promptne nakupe – BVB) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Piața reglementată (regulirani trg za promptne nakupe – BVB)

| 2. | Piața reglementată la termen (regulirani trg izvedenih vrednostnih papirjev – BVB) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Piața reglementată la termen (regulirani trg izvedenih vrednostnih papirjev – BVB)

| 3. | Piața reglementată (regulirani trg izvedenih vrednostnih papirjev – BMFMS) |
| --- | --- |

3.

Piața reglementată (regulirani trg izvedenih vrednostnih papirjev – BMFMS)

| 1 in 2. | S.C. Bursa de Valori București S.A. (Bucharest Stock Exchange S.A.) |
| --- | --- |

1 in 2.

S.C. Bursa de Valori București S.A. (Bucharest Stock Exchange S.A.)

| 3. | S.C. Bursa Monetar - Financiară și de Mărfuri S.A. Sibiu (Monetary - Financial and Commodities Exchange S.A. Sibiu) |
| --- | --- |

3.

S.C. Bursa Monetar - Financiară și de Mărfuri S.A. Sibiu (Monetary - Financial and Commodities Exchange S.A. Sibiu)

Comisia Națională a Valorilor Mobiliare (romunska nacionalna komisija za vrednostne papirje)

Comisia Națională a Valorilor Mobiliare (romunska nacionalna komisija za vrednostne papirje)

Slovaška

| 1. | Trg vrednostnih papirjev, ki kotirajo na borzi






  — | primarni trg |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

Trg vrednostnih papirjev, ki kotirajo na borzi

—

primarni trg

| — | vzporedni trg |
| --- | --- |

—

vzporedni trg

| 2. | regulirani prosti trg |
| --- | --- |

2.

regulirani prosti trg

Bratislava Stock Exchange

Nacionalna banka Slovaške

Slovenia

Ljubljana Stock Exchange uradni trg (borzni trg)

Ljubljanska borza

Agencija za trg vrednostnih papirjev

Španija

| A. | Bolsas de Valores (vse vključujejo segmente prvega in drugega trga) |
| --- | --- |

A.

Bolsas de Valores (vse vključujejo segmente prvega in drugega trga)

CNMV (Comisión Nacional del Mercado de Valores)

Banco de España pooblaščena za javni dolg.

| 1. | Bolsa de Valores de Barcelona; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Bolsa de Valores de Barcelona;

| A1: | Sociedad Rectora de la Bolsa de Valores de Barcelona S.A. |
| --- | --- |

A1:

Sociedad Rectora de la Bolsa de Valores de Barcelona S.A.

| 2. | Bolsa de Valores de Bilbao; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Bolsa de Valores de Bilbao;

| A2: | Soc. Rectora de la Bolsa de Valores de Bilbao S.A. |
| --- | --- |

A2:

Soc. Rectora de la Bolsa de Valores de Bilbao S.A.

| 3. | Bolsa de Valores de Madrid; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Bolsa de Valores de Madrid;

| A3: | Soc. Rectora de la Bolsa de Valores de Madrid S.A. |
| --- | --- |

A3:

Soc. Rectora de la Bolsa de Valores de Madrid S.A.

| 4. | Bolsa de valores de Valencia. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Bolsa de valores de Valencia.

| A4: | Soc. Rectora de la Bolsa de Valores de Valencia. S.A. |
| --- | --- |

A4:

Soc. Rectora de la Bolsa de Valores de Valencia. S.A.

| B. | Mercados oficiales de Productos Financieros Derivados |
| --- | --- |

B.

Mercados oficiales de Productos Financieros Derivados

| 1. | MEFF Renta Fija; |
| --- | --- |

1.

MEFF Renta Fija;

| B1: | Soc. Rectora de Productos Financieros Derivados de RENTA Fija S.A. |
| --- | --- |

B1:

Soc. Rectora de Productos Financieros Derivados de RENTA Fija S.A.

| 2. | MEFF Renta Variable. |
| --- | --- |

2.

MEFF Renta Variable.

| B2: | Soc. Rectora de Productos Financieros Derivados de Renta Variable S.A. |
| --- | --- |

B2:

Soc. Rectora de Productos Financieros Derivados de Renta Variable S.A.

| C. | Mercado MFAO de Futuros del Aceite de Oliva |
| --- | --- |

C.

Mercado MFAO de Futuros del Aceite de Oliva

| C: | (MFAO) Sociedad rectora del Mercado de Futuros del Aceite de Oliva, S.A. |
| --- | --- |

C:

(MFAO) Sociedad rectora del Mercado de Futuros del Aceite de Oliva, S.A.

| D. | AIAF Mercado de Renta Fija |
| --- | --- |

D.

AIAF Mercado de Renta Fija

| D: | AIAF Mercado de Renta Fija |
| --- | --- |

D:

AIAF Mercado de Renta Fija

| E. | Mercados de Deuda Pública en Anotaciones |
| --- | --- |

E.

Mercados de Deuda Pública en Anotaciones

| E: | Banco de España |
| --- | --- |

E:

Banco de España

Švedska

Nasdaq OMX Stockholm AB

| — | regulirani trg za delnice in finančne instrumente, enakovredne delnicam |
| --- | --- |

—

regulirani trg za delnice in finančne instrumente, enakovredne delnicam

| — | regulirani trg izvedenih finančnih instrumentov |
| --- | --- |

—

regulirani trg izvedenih finančnih instrumentov

| — | regulirani trg za obveznice in finančne instrumente, enakovredne obveznicam |
| --- | --- |

—

regulirani trg za obveznice in finančne instrumente, enakovredne obveznicam

OMX Nordic Exchange Stockholm AB

Finansinspektionen (organ za finančni nadzor)

Združeno kraljestvo

| 1. | EDX |
| --- | --- |

1.

EDX

| 1. | EDX London Limited |
| --- | --- |

1.

EDX London Limited

| 1.-6. | Organ finančnih služb |
| --- | --- |

1.-6.

Organ finančnih služb

| 2. | PLUS-Markets Group – PLUS- kotacijski trg |
| --- | --- |

2.

PLUS-Markets Group – PLUS- kotacijski trg

| 2. | PLUS Markets plc |
| --- | --- |

2.

PLUS Markets plc

| 3. | Londonska mednarodna finančna borza terminskih poslov in opcij) (LIFFE) |
| --- | --- |

3.

Londonska mednarodna finančna borza terminskih poslov in opcij) (LIFFE)

| 3. | LIFFE Administration and Management |
| --- | --- |

3.

LIFFE Administration and Management

| 4. | The London Metal Exchange |
| --- | --- |

4.

The London Metal Exchange

| 4. | The London Metal Exchange Limited |
| --- | --- |

4.

The London Metal Exchange Limited

| 5. | Intercontinental Exchange - ICE Futures Europe |
| --- | --- |

5.

Intercontinental Exchange - ICE Futures Europe

| 5. | ICE Futures Europe |
| --- | --- |

5.

ICE Futures Europe

| 6. | London Stock Exchange – regulirani trg |
| --- | --- |

6.

London Stock Exchange – regulirani trg

| 6. | London Stock Exchange plc |
| --- | --- |

6.

London Stock Exchange plc

Islandija

OMX Nordic Exchange á Islandi (regulirani trg)

OMX Nordic Exchange

Fjármálaeftirlitið (organ za finančni nadzor)

Lihtenštajn

—

—

—

Norveška

| 1. | Borza v Oslu (uradni trg)






  — | trg lastniških vrednostnih papirjev |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

Borza v Oslu (uradni trg)

—

trg lastniških vrednostnih papirjev

| — | trgi izvedenih finančnih instrumentov (finančni) |
| --- | --- |

—

trgi izvedenih finančnih instrumentov (finančni)

| — | trg obveznic |
| --- | --- |

—

trg obveznic

| 1. | Oslo Børs ASA |
| --- | --- |

1.

Oslo Børs ASA

Kredittilsynet (norveški organ za finančni nadzor)

| 2. | Oslo Axess






  — | trg lastniških vrednostnih papirjev |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

Oslo Axess

—

trg lastniških vrednostnih papirjev

| 2. | Oslo Børs ASA |
| --- | --- |

2.

Oslo Børs ASA

| 3. | Nord Pool (uradni trg)






  — | trgi izvedenih finančnih instrumentov (blagovni) |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.

Nord Pool (uradni trg)

—

trgi izvedenih finančnih instrumentov (blagovni)

| 3. | Nord Pool ASA |
| --- | --- |

3.

Nord Pool ASA

| 4. | Imarex






  — | trgi izvedenih finančnih instrumentov (blagovni) |
| --- | --- | --- |

4.

Imarex

—

trgi izvedenih finančnih instrumentov (blagovni)

| 4. | Imarex ASA |
| --- | --- |

4.

Imarex ASA

| 5. | Fish Pool






  — | trgi izvedenih finančnih instrumentov (blagovni) |
| --- | --- | --- |

5.

Fish Pool

—

trgi izvedenih finančnih instrumentov (blagovni)

| 5. | Fish Pool ASA |
| --- | --- |

5.

Fish Pool ASA

---

| 11.7.2009 | SL | Uradni list Evropske unije | C 158/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2009

SL

Uradni list Evropske unije

C 158/9

---

Sporočilo Komisije v skladu s členom 16(4) Uredbe (ES) št. 1008/2008 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o skupnih pravilih za opravljanje zračnih prevozov v Skupnosti

Obveznosti javne službe glede rednih zračnih prevozov

(Besedilo velja za EGP)

2009/C 158/04

| Država članica | Italija |
| --- | --- |
| Zadevna proga | Bolzano – Roma Fiumicino in v obratni smeri |
| Datum začetka veljavnosti obveznosti javne službe | 1. decembra 2009 |
| Naslov, kjer je mogoče dobiti besedilo in vse pomembne informacije in/ali dokumentacijo v zvezi z obveznostjo javne službe | E.N.A.C. Ente nazionale dell’aviazione civile
  Direzione centrale regolazione economica.





  Direzione trasporto aereo |
| Viale del Castro Pretorio, n. 118 |
| 00185 Roma |
| ITALIA |
| www.enac-italia.it |
| E-mail: trasporto.aereo@enac.gov.it |

Država članica

Italija

Zadevna proga

Bolzano – Roma Fiumicino in v obratni smeri

Datum začetka veljavnosti obveznosti javne službe

1. decembra 2009

Naslov, kjer je mogoče dobiti besedilo in vse pomembne informacije in/ali dokumentacijo v zvezi z obveznostjo javne službe

E.N.A.C. Ente nazionale dell’aviazione civile

Direzione centrale regolazione economica.

Direzione trasporto aereo

Viale del Castro Pretorio, n. 118

00185 Roma

ITALIA

www.enac-italia.it

E-mail: trasporto.aereo@enac.gov.it

---

V Objave

UPRAVNI POSTOPKI

Komisija

| 11.7.2009 | SL | Uradni list Evropske unije | C 158/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2009

SL

Uradni list Evropske unije

C 158/10

---

RAZPIS ZA ZBIRANJE PREDLOGOV – EACEA/11/2009

Strukturna pomoč za raziskovalne organizacije in možganske truste na področju evropskih javnih politik ter za organizacije civilne družbe na evropski ravni

Program „Evropa za državljane“, akcija 2, ukrepa 1 in 2 – 2010

2009/C 158/05

1.   CILJI IN OPIS

Ta razpis za zbiranje predlogov EACEA/11/2009 temelji na Sklepu Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o uvedbi programa „Evropa za državljane“ za spodbujanje aktivnega evropskega državljanstva za obdobje 2007–2013 (1) (v nadaljevanju besedila: program).

Program predstavlja pravno podlago za ta razpis za zbiranje predlogov, ki se posebej nanaša na akcijo 2 „Aktivna civilna družba v Evropi“, ukrepa 1 in 2 „Strukturna pomoč za raziskovalne organizacije in možganske truste na področju evropskih javnih politik ter za organizacije civilne družbe na evropski ravni“.

1.1   Splošni cilji programa

Namen programa je prispevati k naslednjim splošnim ciljem:

| (a) | dati državljanom priložnost za vzajemno delovanje in sodelovanje pri gradnji še tesneje povezane Evrope, ki je demokratična in usmerjena v svet in jo združuje in bogati njena kulturna raznolikost ter tako razvijati državljanstvo Unije; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

dati državljanom priložnost za vzajemno delovanje in sodelovanje pri gradnji še tesneje povezane Evrope, ki je demokratična in usmerjena v svet in jo združuje in bogati njena kulturna raznolikost ter tako razvijati državljanstvo Unije;

| (b) | ustvariti občutek evropske identitete, ki temelji na skupnih vrednotah, zgodovini in kulturi; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

ustvariti občutek evropske identitete, ki temelji na skupnih vrednotah, zgodovini in kulturi;

| (c) | med državljani Evropske unije krepiti občutek pripadnosti Uniji; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

med državljani Evropske unije krepiti občutek pripadnosti Uniji;

| (d) | krepiti medsebojno razumevanje med evropskimi državljani ob spoštovanju in spodbujanju kulturne in jezikovne raznolikosti ter hkrati prispevati k medkulturnemu dialogu. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

krepiti medsebojno razumevanje med evropskimi državljani ob spoštovanju in spodbujanju kulturne in jezikovne raznolikosti ter hkrati prispevati k medkulturnemu dialogu.

1.2   Posebni cilji razpisa

Posebni cilji tega razpisa za zbiranje predlogov so:

| (a) | Z dejavnostmi in sodelovanjem znotraj možganskih trustov („think tankov“ ali struktur za razmislek) in organizacij civilne družbe na evropski ravni pospeševati dejavnosti, razprave in razmišljanja, ki so povezana z evropskim državljanstvom in demokracijo, skupnimi vrednotami ter skupno zgodovino in kulturo; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

Z dejavnostmi in sodelovanjem znotraj možganskih trustov („think tankov“ ali struktur za razmislek) in organizacij civilne družbe na evropski ravni pospeševati dejavnosti, razprave in razmišljanja, ki so povezana z evropskim državljanstvom in demokracijo, skupnimi vrednotami ter skupno zgodovino in kulturo;

| (b) | krepiti medsebojno delovanje med državljani in organizacijami civilne družbe ter tako prispevati k medkulturnemu dialogu in v ospredje postaviti tako raznolikost Evrope kot tudi njeno enotnost. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

krepiti medsebojno delovanje med državljani in organizacijami civilne družbe ter tako prispevati k medkulturnemu dialogu in v ospredje postaviti tako raznolikost Evrope kot tudi njeno enotnost.

1.3   Tematske prednostne naloge

| — | prihodnost Evropske unije in njene temeljne vrednote, |
| --- | --- |

—

prihodnost Evropske unije in njene temeljne vrednote,

| — | aktivno evropsko državljanstvo, udeležba in demokracija, |
| --- | --- |

—

aktivno evropsko državljanstvo, udeležba in demokracija,

| — | medkulturni dialog, |
| --- | --- |

—

medkulturni dialog,

| — | vpliv politik Skupnosti na družbe, |
| --- | --- |

—

vpliv politik Skupnosti na družbe,

| — | blaginja državljanov v Evropi, zaposlovanje, socialna kohezija in trajnostni razvoj. |
| --- | --- |

—

blaginja državljanov v Evropi, zaposlovanje, socialna kohezija in trajnostni razvoj.

1.4   Opis razpisa

Ta razpis za zbiranje predlogov se nanaša na strukturno pomoč oziroma donacije za poslovanje, organizacijam, ki si prizadevajo za cilj v splošnem evropskem interesu. Donacije za poslovanje so finančna podpora za del operativnih stroškov, ki nastanejo ob običajnih in rednih dejavnostih izbrane organizacije.

Ob upoštevanju nekaterih meril je mogoče to pomoč odobriti v obliki letne pomoči ali večletnega partnerstva. Večletno partnerstvo je mehanizem za sodelovanje med izbrano organizacijo in Izvajalsko agencijo za izobraževanje, avdiovizualno področje in kulturo (v nadaljevanju besedila: Izvajalska agencija), na podlagi katerega so podeljene posebne pomoči. Na podlagi tega razpisa bo mogoče tako partnerstvo skleniti za tri leta.

2.   UPRAVIČENI KANDIDATI

2.1   Organizacije

Za upravičenost do pomoči za poslovanje mora organizacija, ki si prizadeva za cilj skupnega evropskega interesa, izpolnjevati naslednje pogoje:

| (a) | biti mora neprofitna pravna oseba; v primeru omrežij brez ločene strukture delovanja z lastnim statusom lahko kandidira organizacija članica, ki skrbi za koordinacijo omrežja; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

biti mora neprofitna pravna oseba; v primeru omrežij brez ločene strukture delovanja z lastnim statusom lahko kandidira organizacija članica, ki skrbi za koordinacijo omrežja;

| (b) | biti mora dejavna na področju evropskega državljanstva (kot je to področje opredeljeno v njenem statutu ali opisu nalog) in spadati v eno od naslednjih kategorij organizacij: | ukrep 1:







  A. | raziskovalne organizacije in možganski trusti, ki delujejo na področju evropskih javnih politik; |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

(b)

biti mora dejavna na področju evropskega državljanstva (kot je to področje opredeljeno v njenem statutu ali opisu nalog) in spadati v eno od naslednjih kategorij organizacij:

ukrep 1:

A.

raziskovalne organizacije in možganski trusti, ki delujejo na področju evropskih javnih politik;

| | ukrep 2:







  B. | organizacije civilne družbe na evropski ravni;






  — | osrednje evropske organizacije (platforme); |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

ukrep 2:

B.

organizacije civilne družbe na evropski ravni;

—

osrednje evropske organizacije (platforme);

| — | evropska omrežja; |
| --- | --- |

—

evropska omrežja;

| — | organizacije, ki izvajajo dejavnosti s širokim vplivom na evropski ravni; |
| --- | --- |

—

organizacije, ki izvajajo dejavnosti s širokim vplivom na evropski ravni;

| C. | organizacije civilne družbe, povezane z akcijo evropskega spominjanja; |
| --- | --- |

C.

organizacije civilne družbe, povezane z akcijo evropskega spominjanja;

| D. | vseevropske osrednje organizacije; |
| --- | --- |

D.

vseevropske osrednje organizacije;

| (c) | večino svojih dejavnosti mora opravljati v upravičenih državah (glej točko 2.2).

  Za večletno partnerstvo morajo imeti sodelujoče organizacije več kot štiri (4) leta (na dan 15. oktobra 2009) zakonit sedež in status pravne osebe v eni od upravičenih držav; spodaj navedene kategorije morajo poleg tega zajemati naslednje geografsko območje:






  — | osrednja evropska organizacija ali evropsko omrežje mora imeti člane v vsaj dvanajstih (12) upravičenih državah; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(c)

večino svojih dejavnosti mora opravljati v upravičenih državah (glej točko 2.2).

Za večletno partnerstvo morajo imeti sodelujoče organizacije več kot štiri (4) leta (na dan 15. oktobra 2009) zakonit sedež in status pravne osebe v eni od upravičenih držav; spodaj navedene kategorije morajo poleg tega zajemati naslednje geografsko območje:

—

osrednja evropska organizacija ali evropsko omrežje mora imeti člane v vsaj dvanajstih (12) upravičenih državah;

| — | organizacija, ki razvija dejavnosti s širokim vplivom na evropski ravni, mora biti dejavna v vsaj dvanajstih (12) upravičenih državah; |
| --- | --- |

—

organizacija, ki razvija dejavnosti s širokim vplivom na evropski ravni, mora biti dejavna v vsaj dvanajstih (12) upravičenih državah;

| — | v vseevropsko platformo organizacij mora biti včlanjenih vsaj šest (6) osrednjih organizacij, prek katerih mora biti taka platforma prisotna v vseh 27 državah članicah. |
| --- | --- |

—

v vseevropsko platformo organizacij mora biti včlanjenih vsaj šest (6) osrednjih organizacij, prek katerih mora biti taka platforma prisotna v vseh 27 državah članicah.

Za letno pomoč morajo imeti organizacije več kot eno (1) leto (na dan 15. oktobra 2009) zakonit sedež in status pravne osebe v eni od upravičenih držav; spodaj navedene kategorije morajo poleg tega pokrivati naslednje geografsko območje:

| — | osrednja evropska organizacija ali evropsko omrežje mora imeti člane v vsaj osmih (8) upravičenih državah; |
| --- | --- |

—

osrednja evropska organizacija ali evropsko omrežje mora imeti člane v vsaj osmih (8) upravičenih državah;

| — | organizacija, ki izvaja dejavnosti s širokim vplivom na evropski ravni, mora biti dejavna v vsaj osmih (8) upravičenih državah. |
| --- | --- |

—

organizacija, ki izvaja dejavnosti s širokim vplivom na evropski ravni, mora biti dejavna v vsaj osmih (8) upravičenih državah.

Vseevropske platforme organizacij lahko kandidirajo le za večletno partnerstvo.

Fizične osebe in javne organizacije na tem razpisu ne morejo kandidirati.

2.2   Upravičene države

| (a) | države članice Evropske unije: Avstrija, Belgija, Bolgarija, Ciper, Češka republika, Danska, Estonija, Finska, Francija, Nemčija, Grčija, Madžarska, Irska, Italija, Latvija, Litva, Luksemburg, Malta, Nizozemska, Poljska, Portugalska, Romunija, Slovaška, Slovenija, Španija, Švedska in Združeno kraljestvo; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

države članice Evropske unije: Avstrija, Belgija, Bolgarija, Ciper, Češka republika, Danska, Estonija, Finska, Francija, Nemčija, Grčija, Madžarska, Irska, Italija, Latvija, Litva, Luksemburg, Malta, Nizozemska, Poljska, Portugalska, Romunija, Slovaška, Slovenija, Španija, Švedska in Združeno kraljestvo;

| (b) | Hrvaška; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

Hrvaška;

| (c) | nekdanja jugoslovanska republika Makedonija; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

nekdanja jugoslovanska republika Makedonija;

| (d) | Albanija. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

Albanija.

3.   UPRAVIČENE AKCIJE

Dejavnosti organizacije kandidatke morajo očitno pripomoči k razvoju in izvajanju posebnih ciljev in tematskih prednostnih nalog tega razpisa. Zajemati morajo vsaj enega od posebnih ciljev in eno tematsko prednostno nalogo iz točke 1.

Delovni program organizacije kandidatke za leto 2010 ter triletni strateški program (za večletno partnerstvo) morata zajemati statutarne dejavnosti, zlasti konference, seminarje, okrogle mize, predstavitvene dejavnosti, dejavnosti za obveščanje in vrednotenje ter druge periodične evropske dejavnosti.

Obdobje upravičenosti

Za letno pomoč in večletno partnerstvo mora obdobje upravičenosti ustrezati proračunskemu letu kandidata, razvidnemu iz potrjenih izkazov organizacije. Če proračunsko leto ustreza koledarskemu letu, je obdobje upravičenosti od 1. januarja 2009 do 31. decembra 2010.

Pri kandidatih, kjer se proračunsko leto razlikuje od koledarskega leta, obdobje upravičenosti traja 12 mesecev od datuma, ko se v letu 2010 začne njihovo proračunsko leto.

4.   MERILA ZA DODELITEV

Kandidature, ki bodo izpolnjevale merila za dodelitev in izključitev, bo ocenil ocenjevalni odbor na podlagi meril za dodelitev, z namenom določitve, katere kandidature bi se lahko sofinancirale.

Uporabljena bodo spodaj navedena merila za dodelitev. Kakovostna merila znašajo 80 %, količinska merila pa 20 % ocene, ki se dodeli vlogam. Za večletno partnerstvo se bosta enako upoštevala 12-mesečni delovni program in triletni strateški program.

4.1   Kakovostna merila (80 %)

Ocenjujejo se naslednji dejavniki:

| (a) | ustreznost glede na cilje in prednostne naloge programa „Evropa za državljane“ (30 %); |
| --- | --- |

(a)

ustreznost glede na cilje in prednostne naloge programa „Evropa za državljane“ (30 %);

| (b) | primernost, skladnost in celovitost delovnega programa (20 %); |
| --- | --- |

(b)

primernost, skladnost in celovitost delovnega programa (20 %);

| (c) | učinek delovnega programa (10 %); |
| --- | --- |

(c)

učinek delovnega programa (10 %);

| (d) | evropska dodana vrednost (10 %); |
| --- | --- |

(d)

evropska dodana vrednost (10 %);

| (e) | odmevnost dejavnosti in razširjanje ter izkoriščanje rezultatov za evropske državljane in druge zainteresirane strani (10 %). |
| --- | --- |

(e)

odmevnost dejavnosti in razširjanje ter izkoriščanje rezultatov za evropske državljane in druge zainteresirane strani (10 %).

4.2   Količinska merila (20 %)

Ocenjujejo se naslednji dejavniki:

| (a) | število upravičenih držav, ki so vključene v dejavnosti delovnega programa (10 %); |
| --- | --- |

(a)

število upravičenih držav, ki so vključene v dejavnosti delovnega programa (10 %);

| (b) | število potencialnih neposrednih upravičencev (10 %). |
| --- | --- |

(b)

število potencialnih neposrednih upravičencev (10 %).

5.   PRORAČUN

Skupni proračun, predviden za sofinanciranje stroškov za poslovanje, je v letu 2010 približno 8,2 milijona EUR. Izvajalska agencija namerava iz tega razpisa financirati približno 55 organizacij, vendar si pridržuje pravico, da glede na kakovost kandidatur ne porabi vseh razpoložljivih sredstev.

Informativno naj bi pomoči za večletna partnerstva znašale približno 85 % razpoložljivega proračuna, letne pomoči pa približno 15 %.

Ta pomoč bo dodeljena iz postavke 15.06.66 splošnega proračuna Evropske unije.

6.   ROK ZA ODDAJO

Kandidature je treba vložiti najpozneje do 15. oktobra 2009.

Izvajalska agencija si trenutno prizadeva vzpostaviti sistem za oddajo vseh kandidatur v elektronski obliki.

Kandidati morajo vloge za ta razpis za zbiranje predlogov poslati na elektronskem obrazcu, ki bo na voljo od 15. septembra 2009. Ta različica (skupaj s prilogami) se šteje za glavno različico. Izvajalska agencija ima pred tem datumom na voljo obrazec v formatu pdf, na podlagi katerega lahko kandidati začnejo pripravljati dokumentacijo.

Poleg tega morajo kandidati pred iztekom roka za oddajo po pošti poslati tudi vlogo na papirju na naslov:

| Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency |
| --- |
| Unit P7 |
| Call for proposals EACEA/11/2009 |
| Avenue du Bourget 1 (BOUR 01/17) |
| 1140 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency

Unit P7

Call for proposals EACEA/11/2009

Avenue du Bourget 1 (BOUR 01/17)

1140 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Sprejete bodo samo vloge na ustreznem obrazcu, pravilno izpolnjene in datirane ter s podpisom osebe, pooblaščene za sprejemanje pravno zavezujočih odločitev v imenu organizacije, ki se prijavlja.

7.   DODATNE INFORMACIJE

Podrobna navodila in obrazci za prijavo na razpis so na voljo na naslednjem spletnem naslovu: http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/citizenship/index_en.htm

---

(1)  Sklep št. 1904/2006/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 12. decembra 2006 (UL L 378, 27.12.2006, str. 32), kakor je bil spremenjen s Sklepom št. 1358/2008/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 16. decembra 2008 (UL L 350, 30.12.2008).

---

POSTOPKI V ZVEZI Z IZVAJANJEM KONKURENČNE POLITIKE

Komisija

| 11.7.2009 | SL | Uradni list Evropske unije | C 158/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2009

SL

Uradni list Evropske unije

C 158/13

---

DRŽAVNE POMOČI – NIZOZEMSKA

Državna Pomoč C 10/2009 (prej N 138/2009) – ING

Poziv k predložitvi pripomb na podlagi člena 88(2) Pogodbe ES

(Besedilo velja za EGP)

2009/C 158/06

Z dopisom v verodostojnem jeziku z dne 31. marca 2009 na straneh, ki sledijo temu povzetku, je Komisija uradno obvestila Nizozemsko o svoji odločitvi, da sproži postopek na podlagi člena 88(2) Pogodbe ES v zvezi z zgoraj navedenim ukrepom.

Zainteresirane stranke lahko predložijo svoje pripombe o ukrepu, v zvezi s katerim Komisija sproža postopek, v enem mesecu od datuma objave tega povzetka in dopisa, ki sledi, na naslednji naslov:

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| State aid Greffe |
| Office: SPA3, 6/5 |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |
| Fax +32 22961242 |

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

State aid Greffe

Office: SPA3, 6/5

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Fax +32 22961242

Te pripombe se posredujejo Nizozemski. Zainteresirana stranka, ki predloži pripombe, lahko pisno zaprosi za zaupno obravnavo svoje identitete in navede razloge za to.

POVZETEK

POSTOPEK

Nizozemski organi so Komisijo 4. marca 2009 uradno obvestili o rezervni kreditni liniji za nelikvidna sredstva za ING Support Holding (neposredna podružnica ING Group).

OPIS UKREPA

Družba ING, ki ima sedež na Nizozemskem, je ena največjih finančnih institucij na svetu s skupno bilanco stanja 1 332 milijard EUR. Država Nizozemska in družba ING sta januarja 2009 podpisali nezavezujoč dogovor za prenos tveganj in vračilo deleža portfelja RMBS (Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities = vrednostni papirji, zavarovani s stanovanjskim hipotekarnim kreditom), ki ga ima družba ING v ZDA. Slednji je večinoma sestavljen iz Alt-A hipotekarnih posojil. Neporavnani saldo portfelja družbe ING znaša 39 milijard USD (nominalna vrednost, 30 milijard EUR).

Načrtovani ukrep zajema zamenjavo denarnega toka med Nizozemsko in družbo ING, pri čemer družba ING prenaša donose v višini 80 % nominalne vrednosti portfelja (odplačilo obresti in glavnice) v zameno za zajamčena plačila države v višini 72 % (tj. 80 % od 90 %) nominalne vrednosti portfelja (samo glavnica), dopolnjeno s provizijo za financiranje, ki jo država plačuje družbi ING in znaša 3,50 % deleža vrednostnih papirjev s fiksno obrestno mero v portfelju, ter enomesečni Libor za ameriški dolar + 50 bazičnih točk za delež vrednostnih papirjev s spremenljivo obrestno mero v portfelju.

Nizozemska plačuje družbi ING dodatno provizijo za upravljanje v višini 25 bazičnih točk na leto na neplačano glavnico. V zameno za ta ukrep pa družba ING plačuje Nizozemski letno nadomestilo za garancijo v višini 55 bazičnih točk na 80 % neplačanega zneska portfelja.

OCENA

Komisija je ocenila transakcijo v skladu s Sporočilom Komisije o oslabljenih sredstvih. Komisija ima na tej stopnji pomisleke glede vrednotenja, še posebej glede metodologije vrednotenja za oceno realne ekonomske vrednosti. Komisija mora nadalje proučiti temeljne predpostavke, ki jih je zagotovila Nizozemska, zlasti glede (i) izbire diskontne stopnje, (ii) predpostavk glede cen stanovanj, (iii) ravni izboljšanja kreditne kvalitete in (iv) drugih vprašanj vrednotenja.

Komisija zato tudi dvomi o pravični razdelitvi bremena med državo in družbo ING. Komisija se sprašuje, ali banka resnično krije razliko med nominalno vrednostjo in realno ekonomsko vrednostjo portfelja, pri čemer upošteva navedene pomisleke o oceni vrednotenja. Komisija prav tako ni prepričana, ali je navedena zamenjava denarnih tokov za državo dejansko koristna, kot je navedeno. Komisija zlasti nekoliko dvomi o ustreznosti provizije za upravljanje portfelja, saj to očitno ne zahteva veliko dela.

Komisija se je po primernem pomisleku glede potrebe za ohranitev finančne stabilnosti odločila, da ukrep odobri za šest mesecev, saj izpolnjuje številne pogoje iz Sporočila o oslabljenih sredstvih. Istočasno se je Komisija na podlagi navedenih pomislekov tudi odločila, da sproži postopek na podlagi člena 88(2) Pogodbe ES, s katerim bo preverila pogoje iz Sporočila o oslabljenih sredstvih glede vrednotenja (vključno z metodologijo vrednotenja) in razdelitve bremena ukrepa.

BESEDILO DOPISA

„The Commission wishes to inform the Netherlands that, having examined the information supplied by your authorities on the measure referred to above, it has decided to approve the measure temporarily for six months and to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty since the Commission has doubts as to the compatibility of certain aspects of the measure when assessed in the light of the Commission's Communication on the treatment of impaired assets.

I.   PROCEDURE

| (1) | On 26 January 2009 the Dutch authorities informed the Commission of their intention to implement an illiquid assets back-up facility in favour of ING Support Holding (a direct subsidiary of ING Group) subject to Commission approval. On 30 January the Commission sent an information request to the Dutch authorities, which was partially answered with the notification. On 4 March the Dutch authorities notified the measure formally with the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 26 January 2009 the Dutch authorities informed the Commission of their intention to implement an illiquid assets back-up facility in favour of ING Support Holding (a direct subsidiary of ING Group) subject to Commission approval. On 30 January the Commission sent an information request to the Dutch authorities, which was partially answered with the notification. On 4 March the Dutch authorities notified the measure formally with the Commission.

| (2) | The measure notified is the second individual aid announced in favour of ING in the context of this financial crisis. ING has already received an emergency recapitalisation of EUR 10 billion from the Netherlands which the Commission approved on 13 November 2008. (1) Furthermore, ING has access to the Dutch Credit Guarantee scheme where the Dutch State granted a guarantee in the amount of USD 9 billion (of which ING has already used USD 8 billion through bond issuance) and an additional EUR 5 billion of granted guarantees of which ING has already used EUR 4 billion by issuing a bond. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The measure notified is the second individual aid announced in favour of ING in the context of this financial crisis. ING has already received an emergency recapitalisation of EUR 10 billion from the Netherlands which the Commission approved on 13 November 2008. (1) Furthermore, ING has access to the Dutch Credit Guarantee scheme where the Dutch State granted a guarantee in the amount of USD 9 billion (of which ING has already used USD 8 billion through bond issuance) and an additional EUR 5 billion of granted guarantees of which ING has already used EUR 4 billion by issuing a bond.

| (3) | On 17, 23 and 26 March meetings between the Dutch authorities and the Commission services were held. In the meantime a great number of information exchanges via email and phone took place. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On 17, 23 and 26 March meetings between the Dutch authorities and the Commission services were held. In the meantime a great number of information exchanges via email and phone took place.

| (4) | On 13 March, the Commission asked the Dutch authorities to waive the confidentiality requirements for allowing technical experts from the European Central Bank (ECB) to assist the Commission in the assessment of the ING US Residential Mortgage-Backed Security (RMBS) portfolio affected by the aid measure under the Impaired Assets Communication (IAC). Confirmation was provided on 19 March. Thereafter the Commission forwarded to the ECB designated expert all available information to which the technical experts from the ECB replied. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

On 13 March, the Commission asked the Dutch authorities to waive the confidentiality requirements for allowing technical experts from the European Central Bank (ECB) to assist the Commission in the assessment of the ING US Residential Mortgage-Backed Security (RMBS) portfolio affected by the aid measure under the Impaired Assets Communication (IAC). Confirmation was provided on 19 March. Thereafter the Commission forwarded to the ECB designated expert all available information to which the technical experts from the ECB replied.

II.   DESCRIPTION OF THE FACTS

1.   The beneficiary

| (5) | Based in Amsterdam, ING Group offers banking, insurance and asset management to over 85 million private, corporate and institutional clients in more than 50 countries. With a global workforce of about 130,000 people, ING comprises a broad spectrum of prominent companies that serve their clients under the ING brand. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

Based in Amsterdam, ING Group offers banking, insurance and asset management to over 85 million private, corporate and institutional clients in more than 50 countries. With a global workforce of about 130,000 people, ING comprises a broad spectrum of prominent companies that serve their clients under the ING brand.

| (6) | ING is composed of ING Groep N.V., the mother holding company that controls 100 % of ING Bank N.V. and ING Verzekeringen N.V., two sub-holding companies respectively controlling ING's banking and insurance subsidiaries. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

ING is composed of ING Groep N.V., the mother holding company that controls 100 % of ING Bank N.V. and ING Verzekeringen N.V., two sub-holding companies respectively controlling ING's banking and insurance subsidiaries.

| (7) | ING is the 19th biggest financial institution globally by market value (based on October 2008 values) with a total balance sheet of EUR 1,332 billion at the end of 2008 and total risk weighed assets of EUR 343 billion. In Q4 2008 the group made a total net loss of EUR 3,7 billion and a loss of EUR 0,7 billion for the full year 2008. The Tier-1 capital ratio of ING stands at 9,3 % at the end of 2008. These numbers do not take into account the new measure. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

ING is the 19th biggest financial institution globally by market value (based on October 2008 values) with a total balance sheet of EUR 1,332 billion at the end of 2008 and total risk weighed assets of EUR 343 billion. In Q4 2008 the group made a total net loss of EUR 3,7 billion and a loss of EUR 0,7 billion for the full year 2008. The Tier-1 capital ratio of ING stands at 9,3 % at the end of 2008. These numbers do not take into account the new measure.

2.   The US RMBS portfolio of ING

| (8) | On January 26, 2009 the Dutch State and ING signed a term sheet to transfer the risk and cash flows of a portion of ING’s US based RMBS portfolio (thereafter referred to as “the portfolio”). |
| --- | --- |

(8)

On January 26, 2009 the Dutch State and ING signed a term sheet to transfer the risk and cash flows of a portion of ING’s US based RMBS portfolio (thereafter referred to as “the portfolio”).

| (9) | [...] (2) |
| --- | --- |

(9)

[...] (2)

| (10) | The outstanding balance of the portfolio amounts to USD 38,7 billion (par value, EUR 30 billion) (3), of which most is held by ING Direct (USD 34,1 billion), a US subsidiary of ING. ING Insurance Americas has a portfolio of USD 4,5 billion US mortgage-backed securities divided over several insurance companies. |
| --- | --- |

(10)

The outstanding balance of the portfolio amounts to USD 38,7 billion (par value, EUR 30 billion) (3), of which most is held by ING Direct (USD 34,1 billion), a US subsidiary of ING. ING Insurance Americas has a portfolio of USD 4,5 billion US mortgage-backed securities divided over several insurance companies.

| (11) | About 2/3rds of the portfolio is composed of Alt-A residential mortgage backed securities (RMBS) and about 1/3rd in Prime RMBS. All securities in the portfolio are senior RMBS tranches and were originally rated triple A, according to ING. This implies a high level of loss protection. However, following the recent developments in the US mortgage markets, a significant proportion of these tranches were downgraded by rating agencies. Currently, about 29 % of the securities (weighted by outstanding amounts) carry still a triple A rating, with a negative outlook attached to 6 % of them. Depending on the rating agency used and according to information provided by the Dutch authorities, about 56 % are now rated sub-investment grade. So far the level of credit enhancement provided in the structures has been sufficient and explains why few actual impairments have been accounted for on the portfolio and no actual credit loss has occurred. |
| --- | --- |

(11)

About 2/3rds of the portfolio is composed of Alt-A residential mortgage backed securities (RMBS) and about 1/3rd in Prime RMBS. All securities in the portfolio are senior RMBS tranches and were originally rated triple A, according to ING. This implies a high level of loss protection. However, following the recent developments in the US mortgage markets, a significant proportion of these tranches were downgraded by rating agencies. Currently, about 29 % of the securities (weighted by outstanding amounts) carry still a triple A rating, with a negative outlook attached to 6 % of them. Depending on the rating agency used and according to information provided by the Dutch authorities, about 56 % are now rated sub-investment grade. So far the level of credit enhancement provided in the structures has been sufficient and explains why few actual impairments have been accounted for on the portfolio and no actual credit loss has occurred.

| (12) | The Dutch authorities state that the market for Alt-A loans has dried up and there are few if any buyers and sellers willing to transact at these low levels. |
| --- | --- |

(12)

The Dutch authorities state that the market for Alt-A loans has dried up and there are few if any buyers and sellers willing to transact at these low levels.

| (13) | Although the Alt-A portfolio is not large in terms of ING's total balance sheet, it is significant relative to its equity. This was already noted in the explanation of the events triggering the State recapitalisation measure of ING during 2008, when the Commission noted that the “perceived toxicity of the Alt-A portfolio of ING was a particular cause for concern.” (4) |
| --- | --- |

(13)

Although the Alt-A portfolio is not large in terms of ING's total balance sheet, it is significant relative to its equity. This was already noted in the explanation of the events triggering the State recapitalisation measure of ING during 2008, when the Commission noted that the “perceived toxicity of the Alt-A portfolio of ING was a particular cause for concern.” (4)

| (14) | The underlying mortgages of the portfolio are heavily concentrated in California (almost 39 % of all underlying mortgages) and another combined 5,5 % of mortgages were originated in Arizona and Nevada. A further 7,6 % were originated in Florida. In the portfolio, about 61 % of all mortgages were originated either in 2006 or in 2007. About 30 % of ING's total portfolio is currently made up of so-called Option adjustable rate mortgages (Option ARMS) (5) which are part of the almost 70 % of all mortgages which have adjustable interest rates. The remaining 30 % have fixed interest rates. |
| --- | --- |

(14)

The underlying mortgages of the portfolio are heavily concentrated in California (almost 39 % of all underlying mortgages) and another combined 5,5 % of mortgages were originated in Arizona and Nevada. A further 7,6 % were originated in Florida. In the portfolio, about 61 % of all mortgages were originated either in 2006 or in 2007. About 30 % of ING's total portfolio is currently made up of so-called Option adjustable rate mortgages (Option ARMS) (5) which are part of the almost 70 % of all mortgages which have adjustable interest rates. The remaining 30 % have fixed interest rates.

| (15) | The “fair value” of the portfolio — an available for sale asset — was alleged to be on the 31 December 2008 EUR 18,442 million that is 71,5 % of its book value (EUR 25,809 million). (6) The book value of the portfolio is for the most part based on a mark-to-model with valuation techniques not supported by observable market inputs. Due to this decline in valuation from the original value, the bank had to build a negative revaluation reserve of EUR 7 billion (pre-tax), which is subtracted from shareholder equity under IFRS (7). However, this negative revaluation reserve is not taken into account for regulatory capital calculations due to so-called prudential filters introduced by supervisors for mitigating the effects of fair value changes on regulatory capital. A valuation change in an “available for sales” asset is only reflected through the profits and loss account at the point when an asset against which there has been a negative revaluation reserve is “impaired”. (8) |
| --- | --- |

(15)

The “fair value” of the portfolio — an available for sale asset — was alleged to be on the 31 December 2008 EUR 18,442 million that is 71,5 % of its book value (EUR 25,809 million). (6) The book value of the portfolio is for the most part based on a mark-to-model with valuation techniques not supported by observable market inputs. Due to this decline in valuation from the original value, the bank had to build a negative revaluation reserve of EUR 7 billion (pre-tax), which is subtracted from shareholder equity under IFRS (7). However, this negative revaluation reserve is not taken into account for regulatory capital calculations due to so-called prudential filters introduced by supervisors for mitigating the effects of fair value changes on regulatory capital. A valuation change in an “available for sales” asset is only reflected through the profits and loss account at the point when an asset against which there has been a negative revaluation reserve is “impaired”. (8)

| (16) | The par value of the portfolio is USD 38,7 billion. Due mostly to USD 2,7 billion (EUR 2,1 billion) impairments on the portfolio, the cost basis from an accountant’s point of view under IFRS amounts to USD 36 billion as per 31 December 2008. The agreed base for the measure is 90 percent of the par value of the portfolio. |
| --- | --- |

(16)

The par value of the portfolio is USD 38,7 billion. Due mostly to USD 2,7 billion (EUR 2,1 billion) impairments on the portfolio, the cost basis from an accountant’s point of view under IFRS amounts to USD 36 billion as per 31 December 2008. The agreed base for the measure is 90 percent of the par value of the portfolio.

3.   The measure

| (17) | In order to avoid dealing with the various subsidiaries holding the securities (see above) it is proposed that the legal owners of the securities enter into a participation agreement with ING Support Holding (a direct subsidiary of ING Group) to transfer 80 % of the economic risk from that portfolio while retaining legal ownership. ING Support Holding then enters into a so-called illiquid asset back-up facility for transferring this risk and all respective incoming payments (interest and principal repayments) to the Dutch State. |
| --- | --- |

(17)

In order to avoid dealing with the various subsidiaries holding the securities (see above) it is proposed that the legal owners of the securities enter into a participation agreement with ING Support Holding (a direct subsidiary of ING Group) to transfer 80 % of the economic risk from that portfolio while retaining legal ownership. ING Support Holding then enters into a so-called illiquid asset back-up facility for transferring this risk and all respective incoming payments (interest and principal repayments) to the Dutch State.

| (18) | The transaction is constructed as a cash-flow swap in which both the Dutch State and ING agree to exchange different cash flows over the duration of the deal. During the deal, the portfolio will not be actively managed as it mostly be held until maturity, although there might be activity expected due to possible legislative change in the US. |
| --- | --- |

(18)

The transaction is constructed as a cash-flow swap in which both the Dutch State and ING agree to exchange different cash flows over the duration of the deal. During the deal, the portfolio will not be actively managed as it mostly be held until maturity, although there might be activity expected due to possible legislative change in the US.

| (19) | In the transaction 80 % of the incoming payment flows, i.e. repayment and prepayment of principal and interest (thereafter called: portfolio cash flow) from ING's portfolio is swapped against an over-time payment from the Dutch State of the guaranteed amount of USD 28 billion which together with an interest component constitutes the funding fee. This interest component paid by the Dutch State amounts to 350 bp on the outstanding fixed part of the portfolio (amounting to 57 % of the portfolio) and to one month USD Libor + 50 bp on the variable part of the portfolio (amounting to 43 % of the portfolio). |
| --- | --- |

(19)

In the transaction 80 % of the incoming payment flows, i.e. repayment and prepayment of principal and interest (thereafter called: portfolio cash flow) from ING's portfolio is swapped against an over-time payment from the Dutch State of the guaranteed amount of USD 28 billion which together with an interest component constitutes the funding fee. This interest component paid by the Dutch State amounts to 350 bp on the outstanding fixed part of the portfolio (amounting to 57 % of the portfolio) and to one month USD Libor + 50 bp on the variable part of the portfolio (amounting to 43 % of the portfolio).

| (20) | For evaluating the terms of this deal it is necessary to look at the expected net present value of the various cash flows. For arriving at a net present value of the above cash flows it is necessary to apply a discount rate. (9) The transaction foresees a discount rate of 3 % for all cash flows in the swap. This discount rate is applied to all cash flows, regardless of whether they come from the Dutch State, from ING or from the portfolio transiting via ING to the Dutch State. The reason why a 3 % discount rate is used is because the Dutch State estimates its cost of funding in USD to be around 3 % for a maturity of 5-7 years, corresponding to the weighted average life of the portfolio. The Dutch State has provided two supporting opinions on this from its primary dealers. |
| --- | --- |

(20)

For evaluating the terms of this deal it is necessary to look at the expected net present value of the various cash flows. For arriving at a net present value of the above cash flows it is necessary to apply a discount rate. (9) The transaction foresees a discount rate of 3 % for all cash flows in the swap. This discount rate is applied to all cash flows, regardless of whether they come from the Dutch State, from ING or from the portfolio transiting via ING to the Dutch State. The reason why a 3 % discount rate is used is because the Dutch State estimates its cost of funding in USD to be around 3 % for a maturity of 5-7 years, corresponding to the weighted average life of the portfolio. The Dutch State has provided two supporting opinions on this from its primary dealers.

(a)   Valuation: methodology, scenarios and discount rate

| (21) | The Dutch State commissioned Dynamic Credit Partners to analyse the portfolio of ING for determining the real economic value of the portfolio. The overall approach consists in projecting the probability of default and loss severities on a tranche per tranche basis for the whole portfolio in order to calculate the expected losses. |
| --- | --- |

(21)

The Dutch State commissioned Dynamic Credit Partners to analyse the portfolio of ING for determining the real economic value of the portfolio. The overall approach consists in projecting the probability of default and loss severities on a tranche per tranche basis for the whole portfolio in order to calculate the expected losses.

| (22) | Dynamic Credit performed a bottom up evaluation of the underlying mortgages in each securitization deal (from which ING bought a tranche) and was able to calculate the expected losses it estimated would arise on the underlying mortgage loans. Such calculations were based on — inter alia — factors such as the original ratio between the value of the house and the principal (loan to value), the type of loan, the type of lender, the location at postcode level and the estimated change in house prices at postcode level since the loan was granted. |
| --- | --- |

(22)

Dynamic Credit performed a bottom up evaluation of the underlying mortgages in each securitization deal (from which ING bought a tranche) and was able to calculate the expected losses it estimated would arise on the underlying mortgage loans. Such calculations were based on — inter alia — factors such as the original ratio between the value of the house and the principal (loan to value), the type of loan, the type of lender, the location at postcode level and the estimated change in house prices at postcode level since the loan was granted.

| (23) | As a second step, the so-called cash waterfall is considered, as for a given securitization deal, there are various tranches each with different levels of seniority (or “credit cushion”) and credit enhancement. In practice, this means that any incoming cash flow shortfalls are first to be taken by more subordinated tranches, while more senior tranches are still being serviced by remaining cash flows and reserves built-up during times when there had not been defaults. The Dutch authorities claim that ING's portfolio has only very secure senior tranches. |
| --- | --- |

(23)

As a second step, the so-called cash waterfall is considered, as for a given securitization deal, there are various tranches each with different levels of seniority (or “credit cushion”) and credit enhancement. In practice, this means that any incoming cash flow shortfalls are first to be taken by more subordinated tranches, while more senior tranches are still being serviced by remaining cash flows and reserves built-up during times when there had not been defaults. The Dutch authorities claim that ING's portfolio has only very secure senior tranches.

| (24) | Two scenarios are projected: a scenario deemed more likely by the Dutch State, the base case, and a less likely stress case scenario. According to the Dutch authorities, key assumptions in the base case are house price declines of about 35 % nationwide peak to trough (2006 to 2009) and up to 65 % in hardest hit areas such as California and a US unemployment rate of 8 % in 2009. An annual decline in US GDP is assumed by 6 % in the fourth quarter of 2008 and 3 % in the first quarter of 2009. The stress case scenario assumes US home price declines of 45 % peak-to-trough and a 70-75 % peak-to-trough decline in the most vulnerable areas and an increase of the US unemployment rate to 9,5 % in 2009. Both scenarios assume a voluntary prepayment rate of 5 % over the lifetime of the mortgages figure when compared with the pre-crisis period. The Dutch State points out that this is a prudent assumption. Both scenarios are then translated into different total expected losses on the portfolio. |
| --- | --- |

(24)

Two scenarios are projected: a scenario deemed more likely by the Dutch State, the base case, and a less likely stress case scenario. According to the Dutch authorities, key assumptions in the base case are house price declines of about 35 % nationwide peak to trough (2006 to 2009) and up to 65 % in hardest hit areas such as California and a US unemployment rate of 8 % in 2009. An annual decline in US GDP is assumed by 6 % in the fourth quarter of 2008 and 3 % in the first quarter of 2009. The stress case scenario assumes US home price declines of 45 % peak-to-trough and a 70-75 % peak-to-trough decline in the most vulnerable areas and an increase of the US unemployment rate to 9,5 % in 2009. Both scenarios assume a voluntary prepayment rate of 5 % over the lifetime of the mortgages figure when compared with the pre-crisis period. The Dutch State points out that this is a prudent assumption. Both scenarios are then translated into different total expected losses on the portfolio.

| (25) | After having determined the expected net cash flows (net of expected losses), they are discounted at a discount rate of 3 % for arriving at a net present value. Alternatively, this corresponds to a discount rate of 4,19 % if gross cash flows (assuming no losses) were considered, under a base case valuation. Based on these calculations the Dutch authorities arrive at a valuation of 97 % of par in the base case scenario. In the stress case scenario, the value of the portfolio would be 89 % of par. |
| --- | --- |

(25)

After having determined the expected net cash flows (net of expected losses), they are discounted at a discount rate of 3 % for arriving at a net present value. Alternatively, this corresponds to a discount rate of 4,19 % if gross cash flows (assuming no losses) were considered, under a base case valuation. Based on these calculations the Dutch authorities arrive at a valuation of 97 % of par in the base case scenario. In the stress case scenario, the value of the portfolio would be 89 % of par.

(b)   Effect on ING's capital ratio

| (26) | The replacement of the risky portfolio by a secure government receivable reduces the capital required to be held against the risky asset by the bank. In regulatory terms, the Dutch authorities state that this results in a capital relief of EUR 1,26 billion, (10) deriving from a reduction of 13 billion risk weighted asset (RWA) based on 31 December 2008. This capital relief of EUR 1,26 billion can be used for additional lending. |
| --- | --- |

(26)

The replacement of the risky portfolio by a secure government receivable reduces the capital required to be held against the risky asset by the bank. In regulatory terms, the Dutch authorities state that this results in a capital relief of EUR 1,26 billion, (10) deriving from a reduction of 13 billion risk weighted asset (RWA) based on 31 December 2008. This capital relief of EUR 1,26 billion can be used for additional lending.

| (27) | According to the Dutch authorities from an accounting point of view the IFRS equity capital relief is EUR 5,6 billion — 80 % of pre-tax of the total equity capital relief of EUR 7 billion — which translates into approximately EUR 5 billion post tax. This is caused by the release of the negative revaluation reserve that in turn resulted from a sharp deterioration in market prices of RMBS over the last two years. However, this EUR 5 billion cannot be used for additional lending without reducing the regulatory ratios. |
| --- | --- |

(27)

According to the Dutch authorities from an accounting point of view the IFRS equity capital relief is EUR 5,6 billion — 80 % of pre-tax of the total equity capital relief of EUR 7 billion — which translates into approximately EUR 5 billion post tax. This is caused by the release of the negative revaluation reserve that in turn resulted from a sharp deterioration in market prices of RMBS over the last two years. However, this EUR 5 billion cannot be used for additional lending without reducing the regulatory ratios.

(c)   Additional fees

| (28) | In addition ING will pay a guarantee fee to the State amounting to 55 bp p.a. on the outstanding value of the portfolio. The guarantee fee will decline in line with the declining amounts outstanding on the portfolio, the declining RWA relief and the declining risk for the State. As an illustrative example in the first five years the expected guarantee fee will be: USD 170 million, (2009), USD 146 million (2010), USD 127 million (2011), USD 109 million (2012), USD 94 million (2013). |
| --- | --- |

(28)

In addition ING will pay a guarantee fee to the State amounting to 55 bp p.a. on the outstanding value of the portfolio. The guarantee fee will decline in line with the declining amounts outstanding on the portfolio, the declining RWA relief and the declining risk for the State. As an illustrative example in the first five years the expected guarantee fee will be: USD 170 million, (2009), USD 146 million (2010), USD 127 million (2011), USD 109 million (2012), USD 94 million (2013).

| (29) | Furthermore, the State has to pay to ING a management fee amounting to 0,25 bp p.a. of the outstanding portfolio, expected to amount in the first five years, for instance, to USD 77 million, USD 66 million, USD 58 million, USD 50 million, USD 43 million. |
| --- | --- |

(29)

Furthermore, the State has to pay to ING a management fee amounting to 0,25 bp p.a. of the outstanding portfolio, expected to amount in the first five years, for instance, to USD 77 million, USD 66 million, USD 58 million, USD 50 million, USD 43 million.

(d)   Remuneration of the measure

| (30) | Given the above description of the measure the expected discounted cash flows are in the following table. This would imply according to the Dutch authorities that the state would make a gain in both scenarios. |
| --- | --- |

(30)

Given the above description of the measure the expected discounted cash flows are in the following table. This would imply according to the Dutch authorities that the state would make a gain in both scenarios.

Table 1: Projected net present value flows (11), in million USD

| | Base case | Stress case |
| --- | --- | --- |
| P & I payments to State (12) | 30,376 | 27,728 |
| Guarantee fee to State | 1,011 | 1,011 |
| (Guaranteed value to ING) (12) | (28,844) | (28,844) |
| Expected gain (loss) to state | 2,867 | 219 |

Base case

Stress case

P & I payments to State (12)

30,376

27,728

Guarantee fee to State

1,011

1,011

(Guaranteed value to ING) (12)

(28,844)

(28,844)

Expected gain (loss) to state

2,867

219

| (31) | The Dutch authorities state, however, that the management fee is an integral part of the deal and this has to be taken into account when looking at remuneration. Table 2 recalculates therefore the calculations with the management fee included. Based on this calculation, the remuneration for the State amounts to slightly more than USD 2 billion in the base case, but the remuneration is negative in the stress case. |
| --- | --- |

(31)

The Dutch authorities state, however, that the management fee is an integral part of the deal and this has to be taken into account when looking at remuneration. Table 2 recalculates therefore the calculations with the management fee included. Based on this calculation, the remuneration for the State amounts to slightly more than USD 2 billion in the base case, but the remuneration is negative in the stress case.

Table 2: Projected net present value flows (14), in million USD

| | Base case | Stress case |
| --- | --- | --- |
| P & I payments to State (15) | 30,376 | 27,728 |
| Guarantee fee to State | 1,011 | 1,011 |
| (Guaranteed value to ING) (16) | (28,844) | (28,844) |
| (Management fee to ING) | (460) | (460) |
| Expected gain (loss) to state | 2,083 | (564) |

Base case

Stress case

P & I payments to State (15)

30,376

27,728

Guarantee fee to State

1,011

1,011

(Guaranteed value to ING) (16)

(28,844)

(28,844)

(Management fee to ING)

(460)

(460)

Expected gain (loss) to state

2,083

(564)

(e)   Duration and end of the measure

| (32) | The agreement between the State and ING provides for an exit mechanism whereby the State and ING will meet every year to discuss whether the entire facility should be terminated. If both parties wish to terminate the facility the value will be determined using an exit mechanism commonly used in major financial transactions: |
| --- | --- |

(32)

The agreement between the State and ING provides for an exit mechanism whereby the State and ING will meet every year to discuss whether the entire facility should be terminated. If both parties wish to terminate the facility the value will be determined using an exit mechanism commonly used in major financial transactions:

| (33) | Each party will appoint an independent advisor to evaluate the outstanding portfolio. If there is little difference between these valuations the average of the two will be used as the basis for the transaction. If the valuations differ widely, the parties will jointly appoint a third independent advisor. The value will then be established as the average of the value as calculated by the third advisor and the value of whichever of the earlier valuations is closest to the third advisor's estimates. |
| --- | --- |

(33)

Each party will appoint an independent advisor to evaluate the outstanding portfolio. If there is little difference between these valuations the average of the two will be used as the basis for the transaction. If the valuations differ widely, the parties will jointly appoint a third independent advisor. The value will then be established as the average of the value as calculated by the third advisor and the value of whichever of the earlier valuations is closest to the third advisor's estimates.

| (34) | As an exit mechanism the State is entitled to compel ING to sell the underlying securities once they are being traded on the market again at the price which ING paid when it purchased them. |
| --- | --- |

(34)

As an exit mechanism the State is entitled to compel ING to sell the underlying securities once they are being traded on the market again at the price which ING paid when it purchased them.

| (35) | If neither the exit mechanism nor the exit incentives lead to the portfolio being run down, or the State being bought out entirely, the facility can in theory remain in operation until the last mortgage has been repaid. This could mean that there will be cash flows between the State and ING resulting from this transaction up until 2047. However, the estimated cash flows are such that majority of the portfolio will be redeemed within a few years (the weighed average life of this portfolio is about 6 years). |
| --- | --- |

(35)

If neither the exit mechanism nor the exit incentives lead to the portfolio being run down, or the State being bought out entirely, the facility can in theory remain in operation until the last mortgage has been repaid. This could mean that there will be cash flows between the State and ING resulting from this transaction up until 2047. However, the estimated cash flows are such that majority of the portfolio will be redeemed within a few years (the weighed average life of this portfolio is about 6 years).

III.   THE POSITION OF THE NETHERLANDS

| (36) | The Dutch authorities informed the Commission on 17 March that in case the Alt-A Transaction does not close before 31 March 2009 and the risk transfer would not be effected, they would have serious concerns that this would result in a [...] financial markets and the Dutch economy. A delay in closing would mean that the Alt-A Transaction would not have the intended positive effects on revaluation reserves, IFRS equity and capital adequacy ratios. In view of the volatility of the financial markets this might lead to substantial increase in uncertainty about the position of ING. Another issue that could increase the uncertainty about the position of ING is the accounting notion [...] (17) [...]. Both issues, i.e. a delay in closing or a significant change [...], could, in the view of the authorities, have a material adverse effect on the stability of ING and hence the [...] financial markets and economy. This is confirmed in a letter by the supervisory authority. |
| --- | --- |

(36)

The Dutch authorities informed the Commission on 17 March that in case the Alt-A Transaction does not close before 31 March 2009 and the risk transfer would not be effected, they would have serious concerns that this would result in a [...] financial markets and the Dutch economy. A delay in closing would mean that the Alt-A Transaction would not have the intended positive effects on revaluation reserves, IFRS equity and capital adequacy ratios. In view of the volatility of the financial markets this might lead to substantial increase in uncertainty about the position of ING. Another issue that could increase the uncertainty about the position of ING is the accounting notion [...] (17) [...]. Both issues, i.e. a delay in closing or a significant change [...], could, in the view of the authorities, have a material adverse effect on the stability of ING and hence the [...] financial markets and economy. This is confirmed in a letter by the supervisory authority.

| (37) | In addition, they note that, without Commission approval, ING's [...] with all the possible consequences this might have for confidence in the banking sector in general and ING in particular, but also for the Dutch and European economy in these times of uncertainty and recession. The Dutch authorities point to the Commission decision on the recapitalisation N 528/2008, where the Commission had already recognised the importance of ING for the Dutch economy. |
| --- | --- |

(37)

In addition, they note that, without Commission approval, ING's [...] with all the possible consequences this might have for confidence in the banking sector in general and ING in particular, but also for the Dutch and European economy in these times of uncertainty and recession. The Dutch authorities point to the Commission decision on the recapitalisation N 528/2008, where the Commission had already recognised the importance of ING for the Dutch economy.

| (38) | The Dutch authorities underline that ING is a sound financial institution with sufficient liquidity and solvency, but it is suffering from exceptional conditions worldwide. ING would therefore certainly not qualify as a firm in difficulties, as defined in the Community guidelines on state aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty. |
| --- | --- |

(38)

The Dutch authorities underline that ING is a sound financial institution with sufficient liquidity and solvency, but it is suffering from exceptional conditions worldwide. ING would therefore certainly not qualify as a firm in difficulties, as defined in the Community guidelines on state aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty.

| (39) | The Dutch authorities acknowledge that the measure constitutes state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) EC, which is compatible with the Treaty pursuant to Article 87(3)(b) EC, for remedying a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State. In particular, the measure has been specially designed for the current exceptional circumstances in which, because of their illiquidity, certain assets have to be written down more than their economic value would warrant, for satisfying accounting requirements. They note that the measure was appropriate at such time for tackling the specific problems and at the same time is the least far-reaching and least risky way for the State to assist ING. |
| --- | --- |

(39)

The Dutch authorities acknowledge that the measure constitutes state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) EC, which is compatible with the Treaty pursuant to Article 87(3)(b) EC, for remedying a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State. In particular, the measure has been specially designed for the current exceptional circumstances in which, because of their illiquidity, certain assets have to be written down more than their economic value would warrant, for satisfying accounting requirements. They note that the measure was appropriate at such time for tackling the specific problems and at the same time is the least far-reaching and least risky way for the State to assist ING.

| (40) | The Dutch authorities confirmed that they have reviewed whether there has been a full prior transparency by ING having disclosed all impairments and there were no indications to believe that this was not the case. In addition, the Dutch authorities note that the valuation of the portfolio is performed by independent experts under an appropriate methodology. The Dutch authorities are of the view that the valuation of ING’s portfolio was particularly complex as there was no active markets for these assets. The Dutch authorities have instructed Dynamic Credit who have undertaken an alternative valuation which they considered the best approximation of the true value of the portfolio. The valuation has been affirmed by the Dutch supervisory authority. |
| --- | --- |

(40)

The Dutch authorities confirmed that they have reviewed whether there has been a full prior transparency by ING having disclosed all impairments and there were no indications to believe that this was not the case. In addition, the Dutch authorities note that the valuation of the portfolio is performed by independent experts under an appropriate methodology. The Dutch authorities are of the view that the valuation of ING’s portfolio was particularly complex as there was no active markets for these assets. The Dutch authorities have instructed Dynamic Credit who have undertaken an alternative valuation which they considered the best approximation of the true value of the portfolio. The valuation has been affirmed by the Dutch supervisory authority.

| (41) | The authorities state that the total package provides an adequate remuneration for the risk taken over by the state. The authorities point to the more likely base case scenario which shows an overall gain for the Dutch State. The Dutch authorities state that the management fee is part of the overall remuneration package. The total package was considered appropriate at such time. There is also adequate burden sharing, due to the first loss already borne by the bank, and a future loss split in the relationship of 80 % for the State and 20 % for the bank. |
| --- | --- |

(41)

The authorities state that the total package provides an adequate remuneration for the risk taken over by the state. The authorities point to the more likely base case scenario which shows an overall gain for the Dutch State. The Dutch authorities state that the management fee is part of the overall remuneration package. The total package was considered appropriate at such time. There is also adequate burden sharing, due to the first loss already borne by the bank, and a future loss split in the relationship of 80 % for the State and 20 % for the bank.

| (42) | As regards to the management of the assets, the authorities explain that ING remains partly responsible for the portfolio, giving it the perfect incentive to continue to manage the portfolio as efficiently as possible. They underline with reference to point 46 IAC that the Securities are held solely by ING Support Holding and not by ING Groep and that for the duration of this agreement the State, ING Support Holding and ING Groep will establish an operating committee to discuss recent developments, market outlook, data and pricing in respect of the Securities. |
| --- | --- |

(42)

As regards to the management of the assets, the authorities explain that ING remains partly responsible for the portfolio, giving it the perfect incentive to continue to manage the portfolio as efficiently as possible. They underline with reference to point 46 IAC that the Securities are held solely by ING Support Holding and not by ING Groep and that for the duration of this agreement the State, ING Support Holding and ING Groep will establish an operating committee to discuss recent developments, market outlook, data and pricing in respect of the Securities.

| (43) | The Dutch authorities state that it would be admissible to use a single discount rate for all cash flows involved. The Dutch authorities state that a higher discount rate for cash flows from ING or for cash flows transiting from ING to the State, due to their higher perceived riskiness, would over-adjust for the flow's riskiness. They explain that the credit risk in the portfolio is more than offset by the positive net present value for the State under the swap transaction. |
| --- | --- |

(43)

The Dutch authorities state that it would be admissible to use a single discount rate for all cash flows involved. The Dutch authorities state that a higher discount rate for cash flows from ING or for cash flows transiting from ING to the State, due to their higher perceived riskiness, would over-adjust for the flow's riskiness. They explain that the credit risk in the portfolio is more than offset by the positive net present value for the State under the swap transaction.

| (44) | The Dutch government provides the following commitments: |
| --- | --- |

(44)

The Dutch government provides the following commitments:

| — | Presentation of a viability review in line with conditions set out in the IAC |
| --- | --- |

—

Presentation of a viability review in line with conditions set out in the IAC

| — | Presentation of a restructuring plan in line with conditions set out in the IAC |
| --- | --- |

—

Presentation of a restructuring plan in line with conditions set out in the IAC

| — | The Dutch State is willing to change the provisions of valuation and burden sharing by means of claw back, increase of the Guarantee fee under the illiquid assets back-up facilities or any other form of remuneration, without compensating ING via changes in the other cash flows ( i.e. the funding fee, the Alt A cash flows and management fee) if the Commission comes to the conclusion that the valuation at 26 January 2009 of the portfolio underlying the illiquid assets back-up facilities or its burden sharing proves to be materially in contradiction with EC State aid rules on impaired assets. |
| --- | --- |

—

The Dutch State is willing to change the provisions of valuation and burden sharing by means of claw back, increase of the Guarantee fee under the illiquid assets back-up facilities or any other form of remuneration, without compensating ING via changes in the other cash flows ( i.e. the funding fee, the Alt A cash flows and management fee) if the Commission comes to the conclusion that the valuation at 26 January 2009 of the portfolio underlying the illiquid assets back-up facilities or its burden sharing proves to be materially in contradiction with EC State aid rules on impaired assets.

IV.   CONSULTATION OF THE TECHNICAL EXPERTS FROM THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

| (45) | As explained in point 4, the Commission has been consulting the technical experts from the ECB for assistance in assessing the valuation of the portfolio. The experts of the ECB reviewed the provided documents and concluded that they did not have all the information needed to properly assess the valuation of the impaired assets portfolio of ING. |
| --- | --- |

(45)

As explained in point 4, the Commission has been consulting the technical experts from the ECB for assistance in assessing the valuation of the portfolio. The experts of the ECB reviewed the provided documents and concluded that they did not have all the information needed to properly assess the valuation of the impaired assets portfolio of ING.

V.   ASSESSMENT OF THE AID

1.   Existence of aid

| (46) | The Commission first assesses whether the measures constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 87 (1) EC. According to this provision state aid is any aid granted by a Member State or through state resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition, by favouring certain undertakings, in so far as it affects trade between Member States. |
| --- | --- |

(46)

The Commission first assesses whether the measures constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 87 (1) EC. According to this provision state aid is any aid granted by a Member State or through state resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition, by favouring certain undertakings, in so far as it affects trade between Member States.

| (47) | The Commission finds that the measure reduces the amount of capital ING has to hold against these assets. Given that the market value of the portfolio is less than the price paid it is evident that no market operator would provide such a facility under similar conditions. |
| --- | --- |

(47)

The Commission finds that the measure reduces the amount of capital ING has to hold against these assets. Given that the market value of the portfolio is less than the price paid it is evident that no market operator would provide such a facility under similar conditions.

| (48) | As the measure is favouring only ING it is selective and leads to a distortion of competition and affects intra-Community trade because the banking sector operates internationally. Thus, the Commission concludes that the measure constitutes state aid. |
| --- | --- |

(48)

As the measure is favouring only ING it is selective and leads to a distortion of competition and affects intra-Community trade because the banking sector operates internationally. Thus, the Commission concludes that the measure constitutes state aid.

| (49) | The IAC states that the aid amount corresponds to the difference between the transfer value of the assets (based on their real economic value) and the market price. To this end the assets should be valued on the basis of their current market value, whenever possible. Given that the market for the assets in the portfolio has mostly dried up, as claimed by the Dutch authorities, this implies that there is no market price in the absence of a market as defined by the IAC. Therefore the calculated aid amount as regards the portfolio is the full net present value of all the sums provided to ING by the Dutch government. |
| --- | --- |

(49)

The IAC states that the aid amount corresponds to the difference between the transfer value of the assets (based on their real economic value) and the market price. To this end the assets should be valued on the basis of their current market value, whenever possible. Given that the market for the assets in the portfolio has mostly dried up, as claimed by the Dutch authorities, this implies that there is no market price in the absence of a market as defined by the IAC. Therefore the calculated aid amount as regards the portfolio is the full net present value of all the sums provided to ING by the Dutch government.

2.   Compatibility of the financial support measures

| (50) | The Netherlands intends to provide impaired asset relief in favour of ING. Given the present circumstances in the financial market, the Commission considers that this measure may be examined directly under the Treaty rules and in particular under Article 87(3)(b) EC. |
| --- | --- |

(50)

The Netherlands intends to provide impaired asset relief in favour of ING. Given the present circumstances in the financial market, the Commission considers that this measure may be examined directly under the Treaty rules and in particular under Article 87(3)(b) EC.

| (51) | Article 87(3)(b) EC empowers the Commission to declare aid compatible with the common market if it is intended “to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State”. The Commission would point out that the Court of First Instance has expressly stated that Article 87(3)(b) EC is to be applied restrictively so that the aid may not benefit only one firm or one sector of the economy, but must serve to remedy a disturbance in the whole economy of a Member State. (18) |
| --- | --- |

(51)

Article 87(3)(b) EC empowers the Commission to declare aid compatible with the common market if it is intended “to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State”. The Commission would point out that the Court of First Instance has expressly stated that Article 87(3)(b) EC is to be applied restrictively so that the aid may not benefit only one firm or one sector of the economy, but must serve to remedy a disturbance in the whole economy of a Member State. (18)

| (52) | The Commission considers that market conditions deteriorated all over the world in the last quarter of 2008 and certain assets classes are no longer frequently traded. This is problematic for financial institutions because accounting provisions (IFRS accounting standards) might require them to write down these illiquid assets (on the basis of their fair value) to a greater extent than is warranted by their economic value. The uncertainty in the market about the scale of the write-downs, the market value of these assets and the high leverage ratios have also had an impact on the financial institutions′ overall risk perceptions. The present measure is designed to address these problems. Therefore it finds that the scheme aims at remedying a serious disturbance in the Dutch economy. |
| --- | --- |

(52)

The Commission considers that market conditions deteriorated all over the world in the last quarter of 2008 and certain assets classes are no longer frequently traded. This is problematic for financial institutions because accounting provisions (IFRS accounting standards) might require them to write down these illiquid assets (on the basis of their fair value) to a greater extent than is warranted by their economic value. The uncertainty in the market about the scale of the write-downs, the market value of these assets and the high leverage ratios have also had an impact on the financial institutions′ overall risk perceptions. The present measure is designed to address these problems. Therefore it finds that the scheme aims at remedying a serious disturbance in the Dutch economy.

| (53) | The Commission has provided guidance on the treatment of asset relief measures by Member States under Article 87(3)(b) EC through the IAC. Impaired assets correspond to categories of assets on which banks are likely to incur losses (e.g. US sub-prime mortgage backed securities, Alt-A loans). The IAC complements and refines the Banking Communication (19) where the Commission set out the principles governing the application of the State aid rules to any support measure for banks in the context of the global financial crisis. The IAC sets out principles that must be followed by any asset relief measure. It should be noted that the Commission emphasises that a common European approach is needed to deal with the treatment of impaired assets, to make sure that foreseeable losses are disclosed, valued and accompanied by an adequate level in terms of burden sharing and remuneration. |
| --- | --- |

(53)

The Commission has provided guidance on the treatment of asset relief measures by Member States under Article 87(3)(b) EC through the IAC. Impaired assets correspond to categories of assets on which banks are likely to incur losses (e.g. US sub-prime mortgage backed securities, Alt-A loans). The IAC complements and refines the Banking Communication (19) where the Commission set out the principles governing the application of the State aid rules to any support measure for banks in the context of the global financial crisis. The IAC sets out principles that must be followed by any asset relief measure. It should be noted that the Commission emphasises that a common European approach is needed to deal with the treatment of impaired assets, to make sure that foreseeable losses are disclosed, valued and accompanied by an adequate level in terms of burden sharing and remuneration.

| (54) | The IAC leaves the methods and design for impaired asset relief measures to the Member Sates, but defines impaired asset relief as all measures whereby a bank is dispensed from the need for severe downward value adjustments of certain asset classes. This is also the case for the present measure. Therefore the present measure must fulfil the conditions for the compatibility of asset relieve as spelled out in the IAC. (20) |
| --- | --- |

(54)

The IAC leaves the methods and design for impaired asset relief measures to the Member Sates, but defines impaired asset relief as all measures whereby a bank is dispensed from the need for severe downward value adjustments of certain asset classes. This is also the case for the present measure. Therefore the present measure must fulfil the conditions for the compatibility of asset relieve as spelled out in the IAC. (20)

(a)   Eligibility of assets

| (55) | As regards the eligibility of the assets, the IAC indicates in section 5.4 that asset relief requires a clear identification of impaired assets (21) and that certain limits apply in relation to eligibility to ensure compatibility. US mortgage backed securities (i.e. RMBS) are mentioned as prime examples of impaired assets which can be included in relief operations without doubts as to their eligibility. The Commission notes in this respect that all assets in the portfolio are related to US RMBS. The impaired assets are therefore sufficiently identified and do not raise issues of eligibility. |
| --- | --- |

(55)

As regards the eligibility of the assets, the IAC indicates in section 5.4 that asset relief requires a clear identification of impaired assets (21) and that certain limits apply in relation to eligibility to ensure compatibility. US mortgage backed securities (i.e. RMBS) are mentioned as prime examples of impaired assets which can be included in relief operations without doubts as to their eligibility. The Commission notes in this respect that all assets in the portfolio are related to US RMBS. The impaired assets are therefore sufficiently identified and do not raise issues of eligibility.

(b)   Transparency and disclosure

| (56) | As regards transparency and disclosure the Commission notes that the IAC demands in section 5.1 full ex-ante transparency and disclosure of impairments by eligible banks on the assets which will be covered by the relief measures, based on adequate valuation, certified by recognised independent experts and validated by the relevant supervisory authority. In other word the IAC requires that disclosure and valuation should take place prior to government intervention. Moreover, transparency needs to be based on appropriate valuation certified by an independent expert and validated by a letter of the head of the supervisory authority. |
| --- | --- |

(56)

As regards transparency and disclosure the Commission notes that the IAC demands in section 5.1 full ex-ante transparency and disclosure of impairments by eligible banks on the assets which will be covered by the relief measures, based on adequate valuation, certified by recognised independent experts and validated by the relevant supervisory authority. In other word the IAC requires that disclosure and valuation should take place prior to government intervention. Moreover, transparency needs to be based on appropriate valuation certified by an independent expert and validated by a letter of the head of the supervisory authority.

| (57) | The Commission notes first that the Dutch authorities have engaged an independent expert. Second, as indicated above in point 42 the Dutch authorities have pursuant to point 20 IAC produced the necessary documents from the supervisory authorities. |
| --- | --- |

(57)

The Commission notes first that the Dutch authorities have engaged an independent expert. Second, as indicated above in point 42 the Dutch authorities have pursuant to point 20 IAC produced the necessary documents from the supervisory authorities.

| (58) | Finally, the Commission notes that the requirements concerning transparency and disclosure concerning the asset portfolio covered by the relief measure are met in principle, with the exception of the issue of proper valuation dealt with separately below. Full disclosure on the entirety of impaired assets on ING's balance sheet has not however been provided in the context of the notified measure and will have to be provided in the viability review. At this stage the provisions for transparency and disclosure are thus sufficiently complied with. |
| --- | --- |

(58)

Finally, the Commission notes that the requirements concerning transparency and disclosure concerning the asset portfolio covered by the relief measure are met in principle, with the exception of the issue of proper valuation dealt with separately below. Full disclosure on the entirety of impaired assets on ING's balance sheet has not however been provided in the context of the notified measure and will have to be provided in the viability review. At this stage the provisions for transparency and disclosure are thus sufficiently complied with.

(c)   Management of assets

| (59) | As regards the management of assets, the IAC in section 5.6 stipulates the necessity of ensuring a clear functional and organisational separation between the beneficiary bank and its assets, notably as to their management, staff and clientele. The Communication states in that respect that this should allow the bank to focus on the restoration of viability and to prevent possible conflicts of interest. |
| --- | --- |

(59)

As regards the management of assets, the IAC in section 5.6 stipulates the necessity of ensuring a clear functional and organisational separation between the beneficiary bank and its assets, notably as to their management, staff and clientele. The Communication states in that respect that this should allow the bank to focus on the restoration of viability and to prevent possible conflicts of interest.

| (60) | In that respect, the Commission notes that 80 % of the portfolio will be derecognised by ING. However ING remains the legal owner of all the assets. In order to achieve a functional and organisational separation, ING has appointed a special committee to deal with the portfolio as indicated above in point 42. In view of this arrangement the asset management is thus in line with the IAC. |
| --- | --- |

(60)

In that respect, the Commission notes that 80 % of the portfolio will be derecognised by ING. However ING remains the legal owner of all the assets. In order to achieve a functional and organisational separation, ING has appointed a special committee to deal with the portfolio as indicated above in point 42. In view of this arrangement the asset management is thus in line with the IAC.

(d)   Valuation

| (61) | The IAC notes in section 5.5 that a correct and consistent approach to valuation is of key importance to prevent undue distortions of competition. The valuation of impaired assets should follow a general methodology established at the Community level, which should be closely co-ordinated ex-ante by the Commission and Member States. |
| --- | --- |

(61)

The IAC notes in section 5.5 that a correct and consistent approach to valuation is of key importance to prevent undue distortions of competition. The valuation of impaired assets should follow a general methodology established at the Community level, which should be closely co-ordinated ex-ante by the Commission and Member States.

| (62) | The Commission has to carefully scrutinize the valuation and in particular the underlying general methodology in order to ensure a consistent approach at Community level. In this respect its assessment should build on the expertise of existing bodies organised at EU level in order to ensure the consistency of valuation methodologies. For that purpose the Commission has called on the technical assistance provided by the experts from the ECB. The Commission notes that the technical experts from the ECB consider more information is needed. |
| --- | --- |

(62)

The Commission has to carefully scrutinize the valuation and in particular the underlying general methodology in order to ensure a consistent approach at Community level. In this respect its assessment should build on the expertise of existing bodies organised at EU level in order to ensure the consistency of valuation methodologies. For that purpose the Commission has called on the technical assistance provided by the experts from the ECB. The Commission notes that the technical experts from the ECB consider more information is needed.

| (63) | Valuation implies the determination first of the market value and second of the real economic value, the latter being defined in point 40 of the IAC as the long-term economic value on the basis of underlying cash flows and broader time horizons. The main aim of valuation is to establish the real economic value, given that this value represents the benchmark level in that a transfer of impaired assets and at this value indicates compatibility of aid ensuring the relief effect by exceeding current market value but keeping the aid amount to the minimum necessary. |
| --- | --- |

(63)

Valuation implies the determination first of the market value and second of the real economic value, the latter being defined in point 40 of the IAC as the long-term economic value on the basis of underlying cash flows and broader time horizons. The main aim of valuation is to establish the real economic value, given that this value represents the benchmark level in that a transfer of impaired assets and at this value indicates compatibility of aid ensuring the relief effect by exceeding current market value but keeping the aid amount to the minimum necessary.

| (64) | The Commission notes that, based on an independent expert i.e. Dynamic Credit, the Dutch State has established a real economic value of 97 cents on the dollar under the base case which is above the value at which the portfolio has been transferred at (90 percent of the par). |
| --- | --- |

(64)

The Commission notes that, based on an independent expert i.e. Dynamic Credit, the Dutch State has established a real economic value of 97 cents on the dollar under the base case which is above the value at which the portfolio has been transferred at (90 percent of the par).

| (65) | Although the Commission does not question the qualification of the independent expert and its general approach it has some doubts on the conclusion reached on the establishment of this real economic value, given that it did not have all the information needed to properly assess the valuation of the impaired assets portfolio of ING (see confirmation by the technical experts from the ECB above in point (45)) and because the valuation is based on a number of assumptions as regards to which the Commission has significant doubts, in particular but not exclusively as regards (i) the choice of the discount rate, (ii) house price assumptions, (iii) the levels of credit enhancement, and (iv) other valuation issues. |
| --- | --- |

(65)

Although the Commission does not question the qualification of the independent expert and its general approach it has some doubts on the conclusion reached on the establishment of this real economic value, given that it did not have all the information needed to properly assess the valuation of the impaired assets portfolio of ING (see confirmation by the technical experts from the ECB above in point (45)) and because the valuation is based on a number of assumptions as regards to which the Commission has significant doubts, in particular but not exclusively as regards (i) the choice of the discount rate, (ii) house price assumptions, (iii) the levels of credit enhancement, and (iv) other valuation issues.

| (66) | The Commission is first concerned about the use of a 4,19 % discount rate to discount all the cash flows of the portfolio, which suggests a spread premium above the USD Dutch government risk-free rate of 119 bp only.






  — | Given the recent developments in the market and higher loss expectations and the significant drop in credit quality of these tranches as translated by the rating downgrades from triple A to an average of BBB/BB, the spread premium and the discount rate to be used should be significantly higher. |
| --- | --- | --- |

(66)

The Commission is first concerned about the use of a 4,19 % discount rate to discount all the cash flows of the portfolio, which suggests a spread premium above the USD Dutch government risk-free rate of 119 bp only.

—

Given the recent developments in the market and higher loss expectations and the significant drop in credit quality of these tranches as translated by the rating downgrades from triple A to an average of BBB/BB, the spread premium and the discount rate to be used should be significantly higher.

| — | The 4,19 % rate does not capture the downside risk (unexpected losses) of deviating from the base case expected losses, as the Dutch State itself accepted a certain degree of probability of seeing the stress scenario materialising. |
| --- | --- |

—

The 4,19 % rate does not capture the downside risk (unexpected losses) of deviating from the base case expected losses, as the Dutch State itself accepted a certain degree of probability of seeing the stress scenario materialising.

| (67) | The Commission considers at this stage that it can not dispel its doubts that the approach taken by the independent expert appears to lead to an overvaluation of the portfolio and to an overestimation of the benefit to the Dutch State. |
| --- | --- |

(67)

The Commission considers at this stage that it can not dispel its doubts that the approach taken by the independent expert appears to lead to an overvaluation of the portfolio and to an overestimation of the benefit to the Dutch State.

| (68) | In addition, the Commission questions whether the house price assumptions applied in the valuations are prudent enough. In particular, it notes that, based on the documents received, the house prices are assumed to decrease only in 2009, then to remain stable in 2010, and then from 2010 onwards to increase by 5,8 % each year. The doubts on this point are highly relevant for assessing the real economic value of the portfolio given the important role played by house prices in the model for the calculation of the real economic value. |
| --- | --- |

(68)

In addition, the Commission questions whether the house price assumptions applied in the valuations are prudent enough. In particular, it notes that, based on the documents received, the house prices are assumed to decrease only in 2009, then to remain stable in 2010, and then from 2010 onwards to increase by 5,8 % each year. The doubts on this point are highly relevant for assessing the real economic value of the portfolio given the important role played by house prices in the model for the calculation of the real economic value.

| (69) | The Commission is also in doubt about the stated levels of subordination/credit enhancement. The levels described for the ING portfolio are significantly higher for both Alt-A and Option ARMs tranches than average levels calculated by assessments from other experts in the context of other cases as well as available subordination/credit enhancement figures for respective typical securities from various asset classes all related to the US housing market from the rating agency Moody’s. To this concern the Dutch State told the Commission that ING had only bought super senior AAA tranches, in structures with higher levels of subordination than other AAA tranches. However, when looking at another report provided by the Dutch authorities to the Commission (commissioned by ING), only 28,1 % of the tranches were qualified as “super senior”, with the remaining being “senior” and “senior support”. The Commission notes that this is relevant for assessing the real economic value of the portfolio as a lower level of subordination/credit enhancement would reduce the protection against losses if payments are not made. Also, the doubts of the Commission are deriving from the fact that a large part of the portfolio is based on mortgages originated during 2006 and 2007, vintages which have so far proven to be most vulnerable to default. |
| --- | --- |

(69)

The Commission is also in doubt about the stated levels of subordination/credit enhancement. The levels described for the ING portfolio are significantly higher for both Alt-A and Option ARMs tranches than average levels calculated by assessments from other experts in the context of other cases as well as available subordination/credit enhancement figures for respective typical securities from various asset classes all related to the US housing market from the rating agency Moody’s. To this concern the Dutch State told the Commission that ING had only bought super senior AAA tranches, in structures with higher levels of subordination than other AAA tranches. However, when looking at another report provided by the Dutch authorities to the Commission (commissioned by ING), only 28,1 % of the tranches were qualified as “super senior”, with the remaining being “senior” and “senior support”. The Commission notes that this is relevant for assessing the real economic value of the portfolio as a lower level of subordination/credit enhancement would reduce the protection against losses if payments are not made. Also, the doubts of the Commission are deriving from the fact that a large part of the portfolio is based on mortgages originated during 2006 and 2007, vintages which have so far proven to be most vulnerable to default.

| (70) | Further doubts as to the appropriateness of valuation cannot be excluded at this stage in view of the fact that the Commission has not yet received full information both on the valuation methodology and on its application to the individual assets covered. A fully-fledged assessment of the Commission can only be carried out once the Commission is in possession of this information. |
| --- | --- |

(70)

Further doubts as to the appropriateness of valuation cannot be excluded at this stage in view of the fact that the Commission has not yet received full information both on the valuation methodology and on its application to the individual assets covered. A fully-fledged assessment of the Commission can only be carried out once the Commission is in possession of this information.

| (71) | In sum, the Commission has doubts as to the valuation methodology and cannot exclude that the real economic value is lower than that calculated by the independent expert of the Dutch State and intends to assess this in-depth. |
| --- | --- |

(71)

In sum, the Commission has doubts as to the valuation methodology and cannot exclude that the real economic value is lower than that calculated by the independent expert of the Dutch State and intends to assess this in-depth.

(e)   Burden sharing

| (72) | As regards burden sharing, the IAC states in section 5.2 the general principle that banks ought to bear the losses associated with impaired assets to the maximum extent. That implies first that the bank should bear the difference between the nominal value and the real economic value of the impaired assets. In fact the Dutch authorities submit that the transaction has the effect that ING will transfer the portfolio at 90 % of par. |
| --- | --- |

(72)

As regards burden sharing, the IAC states in section 5.2 the general principle that banks ought to bear the losses associated with impaired assets to the maximum extent. That implies first that the bank should bear the difference between the nominal value and the real economic value of the impaired assets. In fact the Dutch authorities submit that the transaction has the effect that ING will transfer the portfolio at 90 % of par.

| (73) | However, given that the Commission has doubts as regards the correct valuation of the assets prior to government intervention of the State for the relief measure, there are also doubts as regards the necessary degree of burden sharing included in this measure. In other words should the real economic value be lower than assessed by the Dutch authorities, the theoretical losses absorbed by the beneficiary would be insufficient. |
| --- | --- |

(73)

However, given that the Commission has doubts as regards the correct valuation of the assets prior to government intervention of the State for the relief measure, there are also doubts as regards the necessary degree of burden sharing included in this measure. In other words should the real economic value be lower than assessed by the Dutch authorities, the theoretical losses absorbed by the beneficiary would be insufficient.

| (74) | In that regard, the Commission does not see that the beneficiary is making up for additional possible losses if the real economic value would be lower than currently reported with the envisaged 80/20 division of the portfolio as this is a division pari passu and not a first loss attribution to the beneficiary. In other words, if the real economic value would be 80 instead of 90, the beneficiary would only take the first 10 % of losses from 100 to 90 while for the second part between 90 and 80 he would only take 2 % out of 10 while 8 would remain with the State; proper burden sharing would however require that the beneficiary takes all the losses until the real economic value, i.e. the full 20 %. |
| --- | --- |

(74)

In that regard, the Commission does not see that the beneficiary is making up for additional possible losses if the real economic value would be lower than currently reported with the envisaged 80/20 division of the portfolio as this is a division pari passu and not a first loss attribution to the beneficiary. In other words, if the real economic value would be 80 instead of 90, the beneficiary would only take the first 10 % of losses from 100 to 90 while for the second part between 90 and 80 he would only take 2 % out of 10 while 8 would remain with the State; proper burden sharing would however require that the beneficiary takes all the losses until the real economic value, i.e. the full 20 %.

| (75) | Furthermore regarding the cash flow swap and its funding fee, the Commission doubts whether the respective assumptions as regards the net present value are acceptable. This concerns first the funding fee set at 3,5 % although the Dutch State’s own funding costs in USD are only an estimated 3 %. The Commission also doubts second whether the applied discount rate is appropriate. This is so because the applied discount rate is the same regardless whether cash flows are risky (coming from ING to the State) or are not risky (from the Dutch State to ING). In the view of the Commission, this approach attaches to a more uncertain dollar in the future the same value as to a certain dollar. It therefore leads to an overvaluation of the expected proceeds from the portfolio and to an overestimation of the benefit to the Dutch State. |
| --- | --- |

(75)

Furthermore regarding the cash flow swap and its funding fee, the Commission doubts whether the respective assumptions as regards the net present value are acceptable. This concerns first the funding fee set at 3,5 % although the Dutch State’s own funding costs in USD are only an estimated 3 %. The Commission also doubts second whether the applied discount rate is appropriate. This is so because the applied discount rate is the same regardless whether cash flows are risky (coming from ING to the State) or are not risky (from the Dutch State to ING). In the view of the Commission, this approach attaches to a more uncertain dollar in the future the same value as to a certain dollar. It therefore leads to an overvaluation of the expected proceeds from the portfolio and to an overestimation of the benefit to the Dutch State.

| (76) | In addition, the Commission has also doubt that the cash flow swap adequately compensates for the risk stemming from the difference between the base case of the real economic value and the stress test. This follows from the clear language in Annex 4 IAC that the “pricing of asset relief must include remuneration for the state that adequately takes account of the risk of future losses exceeding those that are projected in the determination of the real economic value”. Therefore the Commission also requires an additional ex ante coverage of the difference between the real economic value in the base case and the stress case scenario. This is particular the case where the tail risk is significant. In this context the Commission recalls that according to Annex 4 of the IAC the valuation process should be based on rigorous stress-testing against a scenario of protracted global recession and reiterates its doubts on the valuation as set out above. |
| --- | --- |

(76)

In addition, the Commission has also doubt that the cash flow swap adequately compensates for the risk stemming from the difference between the base case of the real economic value and the stress test. This follows from the clear language in Annex 4 IAC that the “pricing of asset relief must include remuneration for the state that adequately takes account of the risk of future losses exceeding those that are projected in the determination of the real economic value”. Therefore the Commission also requires an additional ex ante coverage of the difference between the real economic value in the base case and the stress case scenario. This is particular the case where the tail risk is significant. In this context the Commission recalls that according to Annex 4 of the IAC the valuation process should be based on rigorous stress-testing against a scenario of protracted global recession and reiterates its doubts on the valuation as set out above.

| (77) | Finally, the Commission has doubts about the appropriateness of the management fee charged by ING. It notes that such a fee is not contemplated by the IAC. The Commission acknowledges however the view of the Dutch authorities that the fee is essentially cost based but stresses that so far it has not obtained full information regarding the actual cost for ING to perform such services, such as costs and staff employed, cost for IT infrastructure, etc. The Commission observes moreover that the scope of work to be performed by ING is not clear given that an active management of an amortising portfolio appears unnecessary and because ING remains the legal owner of the entire portfolio and the economic owner of 20 %. To summarise, the Commission notes that if the fee is indeed covering the costs of ING, it would appear to the Commission that such a fee can be accepted on the condition of an adequate overall burden-sharing. |
| --- | --- |

(77)

Finally, the Commission has doubts about the appropriateness of the management fee charged by ING. It notes that such a fee is not contemplated by the IAC. The Commission acknowledges however the view of the Dutch authorities that the fee is essentially cost based but stresses that so far it has not obtained full information regarding the actual cost for ING to perform such services, such as costs and staff employed, cost for IT infrastructure, etc. The Commission observes moreover that the scope of work to be performed by ING is not clear given that an active management of an amortising portfolio appears unnecessary and because ING remains the legal owner of the entire portfolio and the economic owner of 20 %. To summarise, the Commission notes that if the fee is indeed covering the costs of ING, it would appear to the Commission that such a fee can be accepted on the condition of an adequate overall burden-sharing.

| (78) | In sum, the Commission reserves its final view on the issue of burden sharing until it has come to a conclusion on valuation and recalls that shortcomings in the valuation leading to an inadequate burden-sharing can be counterbalanced by higher remuneration. (22) |
| --- | --- |

(78)

In sum, the Commission reserves its final view on the issue of burden sharing until it has come to a conclusion on valuation and recalls that shortcomings in the valuation leading to an inadequate burden-sharing can be counterbalanced by higher remuneration. (22)

(f)   Guarantee fee

| (79) | Another element of a proper burden sharing is pursuant to point 21 IAC remuneration. It shall, as noted in Annex 4, ensure that “any pricing of asset relief must include remuneration for the State that adequately takes account of the risks of future losses exceeding those that are projected in the determination of the “real economic value””. |
| --- | --- |

(79)

Another element of a proper burden sharing is pursuant to point 21 IAC remuneration. It shall, as noted in Annex 4, ensure that “any pricing of asset relief must include remuneration for the State that adequately takes account of the risks of future losses exceeding those that are projected in the determination of the “real economic value””.

| (80) | In order to assess the guarantee fee charged by the Dutch authorities it must be recalled that pursuant to the IAC the remuneration should be ‘inspired’ by the remuneration that would have been required for recapitalisation measures to the extent of the capital effect of the proposed asset relief. In principle such remuneration should amount to at least 10 %, in line with the first ING decision of November 2008. (23) |
| --- | --- |

(80)

In order to assess the guarantee fee charged by the Dutch authorities it must be recalled that pursuant to the IAC the remuneration should be ‘inspired’ by the remuneration that would have been required for recapitalisation measures to the extent of the capital effect of the proposed asset relief. In principle such remuneration should amount to at least 10 %, in line with the first ING decision of November 2008. (23)

| (81) | Therefore, the adequate capital effect of the measure needs to be identified. This effect comprises the regulatory capital that was freed due to the transaction (around EUR 1,26 billion = 8 % (24) of 13 billion RWA). A 10 % yield on EUR 1,26 billion would amount to 55 bp on the outstanding value of the portfolio. The current guarantee fee appears to reflect this calculation. Therefore the Commission finds the guarantee fee compatible at this stage. |
| --- | --- |

(81)

Therefore, the adequate capital effect of the measure needs to be identified. This effect comprises the regulatory capital that was freed due to the transaction (around EUR 1,26 billion = 8 % (24) of 13 billion RWA). A 10 % yield on EUR 1,26 billion would amount to 55 bp on the outstanding value of the portfolio. The current guarantee fee appears to reflect this calculation. Therefore the Commission finds the guarantee fee compatible at this stage.

(g)   Viability review and restructuring plan

| (82) | As regards the need for an assessment of the banks balance sheet and activities the IAC states that an application for aid by an individual bank should be followed by a full review of that bank's activities and balance sheet, with a view of assessing the bank's capital adequacy and its prospects for future viability (viability review). The Commission considers it therefore necessary that such a viability review is performed. It notes positively a commitment in that respect. |
| --- | --- |

(82)

As regards the need for an assessment of the banks balance sheet and activities the IAC states that an application for aid by an individual bank should be followed by a full review of that bank's activities and balance sheet, with a view of assessing the bank's capital adequacy and its prospects for future viability (viability review). The Commission considers it therefore necessary that such a viability review is performed. It notes positively a commitment in that respect.

| (83) | Furthermore, the Commission notes that the Dutch authorities commit to present a Restructuring plan complying with the conditions set out in the IAC. Such a plan is in any event required under the first recapitalisation decision and is due by 12 May 2009. The Commission notes that this plan will also cover the present measure and be made on the basis of the IAC. Therefore, the Commission’s assessment of the restructuring plan will assess all aid measures granted to ING including the present one. The Dutch authorities have provided the necessary commitment in this respect. |
| --- | --- |

(83)

Furthermore, the Commission notes that the Dutch authorities commit to present a Restructuring plan complying with the conditions set out in the IAC. Such a plan is in any event required under the first recapitalisation decision and is due by 12 May 2009. The Commission notes that this plan will also cover the present measure and be made on the basis of the IAC. Therefore, the Commission’s assessment of the restructuring plan will assess all aid measures granted to ING including the present one. The Dutch authorities have provided the necessary commitment in this respect.

(h)   Conclusion

| (84) | The Commission finds that the measure complies with the conditions on eligibility of assets, asset management arrangement, transparency and disclosure and a guarantee fee as stipulated in the IAC but cannot at present conclude that it complies with the conditions relating to valuation and burden sharing. |
| --- | --- |

(84)

The Commission finds that the measure complies with the conditions on eligibility of assets, asset management arrangement, transparency and disclosure and a guarantee fee as stipulated in the IAC but cannot at present conclude that it complies with the conditions relating to valuation and burden sharing.

3.   Temporary authorisation of the measure for six months

| (85) | The Commission observes that if the transaction is not booked in the first quarter 2009 altering the level of valuation and remuneration would have as a likely consequence for ING [...] an additional loss of [...] in the 2008 annual result. This is due to the [...] accounting rules [...] (see above point 36). The Commission takes into consideration, as confirmed by the supervisory authority that the announcement effect would seriously threaten ING's reputation and thus financial stability. |
| --- | --- |

(85)

The Commission observes that if the transaction is not booked in the first quarter 2009 altering the level of valuation and remuneration would have as a likely consequence for ING [...] an additional loss of [...] in the 2008 annual result. This is due to the [...] accounting rules [...] (see above point 36). The Commission takes into consideration, as confirmed by the supervisory authority that the announcement effect would seriously threaten ING's reputation and thus financial stability.

| (86) | In view of the fact that the measure complies with the criteria for eligibility of assets, asset management arrangements, transparency and disclosure and the guarantee fee, the Commission can consider approving the asset relief measure as a temporary measure for six months. (25) The Commission considers that any approval should in any event be limited to six months on the basis of Annex 5 of the IAC. |
| --- | --- |

(86)

In view of the fact that the measure complies with the criteria for eligibility of assets, asset management arrangements, transparency and disclosure and the guarantee fee, the Commission can consider approving the asset relief measure as a temporary measure for six months. (25) The Commission considers that any approval should in any event be limited to six months on the basis of Annex 5 of the IAC.

| (87) | But according to Annex 5 this would normally require that all the conditions for compatibility as set out above are met. In the present case, the Commission finds that at this stage the conditions of the IAC on valuation and burden sharing are not fulfilled, and an in-depth investigation is needed. |
| --- | --- |

(87)

But according to Annex 5 this would normally require that all the conditions for compatibility as set out above are met. In the present case, the Commission finds that at this stage the conditions of the IAC on valuation and burden sharing are not fulfilled, and an in-depth investigation is needed.

| (88) | However, the Commission notes that the specific circumstances of this case require a decision before the end of the first quarter of 2009, in order to avoid that legal uncertainty about the operation obliges important losses to be incurred on the Alt-A portfolio, and that it is not possible to complete the assessment of the portfolio valuation in the necessary time frame. The Commission further notes that financial stability may be at risk, would ING have to [...]. Finally, it can not be excluded that the valuation of the portfolio will be confirmed after a detailed assessment, even though doubts are present at this stage. |
| --- | --- |

(88)

However, the Commission notes that the specific circumstances of this case require a decision before the end of the first quarter of 2009, in order to avoid that legal uncertainty about the operation obliges important losses to be incurred on the Alt-A portfolio, and that it is not possible to complete the assessment of the portfolio valuation in the necessary time frame. The Commission further notes that financial stability may be at risk, would ING have to [...]. Finally, it can not be excluded that the valuation of the portfolio will be confirmed after a detailed assessment, even though doubts are present at this stage.

| (89) | The Commission accepts the cash flow swap arrangement between the State and ING and its affiliates and will not request changes regarding the transfer of risk from ING to the state and the State's payment obligations in the context of the cash flow swap. This does not preclude the Commission from requesting changes in its final decision to the burden sharing of the measure by way of claw back, increase of the Guarantee fee under the illiquid assets back-up facilities or any other form of remuneration without compensating ING for it, if such change results from the Commission coming to the conclusion that the valuation at 26 January 2009 of the portfolio underlying the illiquid assets back-up facilities or its burden sharing proves to be materially in contradiction with the EC State aid rules on impaired assets. |
| --- | --- |

(89)

The Commission accepts the cash flow swap arrangement between the State and ING and its affiliates and will not request changes regarding the transfer of risk from ING to the state and the State's payment obligations in the context of the cash flow swap. This does not preclude the Commission from requesting changes in its final decision to the burden sharing of the measure by way of claw back, increase of the Guarantee fee under the illiquid assets back-up facilities or any other form of remuneration without compensating ING for it, if such change results from the Commission coming to the conclusion that the valuation at 26 January 2009 of the portfolio underlying the illiquid assets back-up facilities or its burden sharing proves to be materially in contradiction with the EC State aid rules on impaired assets.

V.   CONCLUSION

| (90) | The measure in favour of ING constitutes State aid. The Commission finds that the measure complies with the conditions on eligibility of assets, asset management arrangement, transparency and disclosure and a guarantee fee as stipulated in the IAC and in view of the serious threat to financial stability approves the measure for six months. At the same time, the Commission doubts at this stage that the measure complies with the conditions relating to valuation and burden sharing and opens a detailed investigation. |
| --- | --- |

(90)

The measure in favour of ING constitutes State aid. The Commission finds that the measure complies with the conditions on eligibility of assets, asset management arrangement, transparency and disclosure and a guarantee fee as stipulated in the IAC and in view of the serious threat to financial stability approves the measure for six months. At the same time, the Commission doubts at this stage that the measure complies with the conditions relating to valuation and burden sharing and opens a detailed investigation.

VI.   DECISION

As it complies with a number of conditions of the IAC, and with due considerations for need to preserve financial stability, the Commission has decided to approve the measure for six months. In the light of the foregoing considerations, the Commission has also decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88 (2) of the EC Treaty to verify the conditions of the IAC regarding valuation (including the valuation methodology) and burden sharing of the measure.

The Commission requires the Netherlands to provide in addition to all documents already received, information and data needed for the assessment of the compatibility of the aid, and in particular as regards the individual tranches of the portfolio, an updated schedule of all cash flows on a monthly basis, the justification of the discount rate used to value the portfolio, a certified letter from the consultant on valuation on a stand alone basis and a written methodology report.

The Netherlands are requested to forward a copy of this letter to the potential recipient of the aid immediately.

The Commission informs the Netherlands that it will inform interested parties by publishing this letter and a meaningful summary of it in the Official Journal of the European Communities. It will also inform interested parties in the EFTA countries which are signatories to the EEA Agreement, by publishing a notice in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Communities, and will inform the EFTA Surveillance Authority by sending a copy of this letter. All such interested parties will be invited to submit their comments within one month of the date of such publication.“

---

(1)  State aid N 528/2008 — The Netherlands Aid to ING Groep N.V., 13 November 2008.

1

(2)  Confidential information.

2

(3)  Exchange rate about EUR/USD 1,3 assumed at the time of the deal announcement in January.

3

(4)  Commission Decision of 13.11.2008 in case State aid N 528/2008 — Aid to ING, point 8.

4

(5)  Where the borrower has the option to repay a very low amount in the first few years and these payments reset at a higher level thereafter.

5

(6)  At the time of purchase, Banks have to put their assets in four different baskets, with different consequences for accounting, the trading book, the available for sale category, the loans & receivables and hold-to-maturity. Following a legal change last October, it became easier to reclassify assets into the hold-to-maturity category.

6

(7)  IFRS accounting rules require to value assets booked in “available for sale” at fair value (i.e. profits and losses are directly affecting equity capital). For “fair valued”: banks can chose three categories based on the availability of valuation input data: “marked to market”, “marked to models with observable inputs” and “market to model with unobservable inputs”.

7

(8)  Under both IFRS and US GAAP a debt security is considered impaired if, based on currently available evidence, there is a reasonable expectation that not all due interest and principal will be recovered.

8

(9)  This is because a dollar today has not the same value as a dollar paid in the future.

9

(10)  This relates to 26 January 2009 as risk weights of the portfolio fluctuate.

10

(11)  3 % discount rate;

11

(12)  Principal and Interest payments (including pre-payments);

12

(13)  net present value of flows from the state to ING.

13

(14)  3 % discount rate;

14

(15)  Principal and Interest payments (including pre-payments);

15

(16)  net present value of flows from the state to ING.

16

(17)  [...]

17

(18)  See in principle Joined Cases T-132/96 and T-143/96 Freistaat Sachsen and Volkswagen AG v Commission [1999] ECR II-3663, paragraph 167. Confirmed in the Commission’s decisions in Case C 47/1996 Crédit Lyonnais (OJ L 221, 8.8.1998, p. 28, point 10.1), Case C 28/2002 Bankgesellschaft Berlin (OJ L 116, 4.5.2005, p. 1, paragraphs 153 et seq.) and Case C 50/2006 BAWAG, not yet published, paragraph 166. See Commission decision of 5 December 2007 in Case NN 70/2007 Northern Rock (OJ C 43, 16.2.2008, p. 1), Commission decision of 30 April 2008 in Case NN 25/2008 Rescue aid for WestLB (OJ C 189, 26.7.2008, p. 3), and Commission decision of 4 June 2008 in Case C 9/2008 Sachsen LB, not yet published.

18

Freistaat Sachsen and Volkswagen AG

Commission

Crédit Lyonnais

Bankgesellschaft Berlin

et seq

BAWAG

Northern Rock

Rescue aid for WestLB

Sachsen LB

(19)  Commission Communication on The application of State aid rules to measures taken in relation to financial institutions in the context of the current global financial crisis, OJ C 270 of 25.10.2008, p. 8.

19

(20)  For a first application: Cf Commission Decision of 13 March 2009 in case C 9/09 Dexia, not yet published.

20

Dexia

(21)  To be categorized in baskets in line with Annex 3 of the IAC.

21

(22)  Footnote 15 of the IAC.

22

(23)  IAC, Footnote 11.

23

(24)  8 % is equal to the minimum own capital requirements.

24

(25)  The Commission has taken similar decisions. For instance in Commission Decision of 13 March 2009 in case C 9/09 point 77, Dexia, not yet published, where it approved only some elements of compatibility. Similarly in Decision of 24.4.2007 in case NN 15/2006 (C13/2007), New Interline, OJ 2007 C 120/12, the Commission approved a rescue aid for six months and opened on the same rescuer aid thereafter.

25

Dexia

New Interline

---

DRUGI AKTI

Komisija

| 11.7.2009 | SL | Uradni list Evropske unije | C 158/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2009

SL

Uradni list Evropske unije

C 158/24

---

Objava vloge na podlagi člena 8(2) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 509/2006 o zajamčenih tradicionalnih posebnostih kmetijskih proizvodov in živil

2009/C 158/07

Ta objava daje pravico do ugovora zoper vlogo na podlagi člena 9 Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 509/2006. Izjavo o ugovoru mora Komisija prejeti v šestih mesecih po dnevu te objave.

VLOGA ZA REGISTRACIJO ZTP

UREDBA SVETA (ES) št. 509/2006

„KIEŁBASA JAŁOWCOWA“

ES št.: PL-TSG-007-0047-05.12.2006

1.   Naziv in naslov skupine vlagateljev:

Naziv: Związek „Polskie Mięso“

Naslov:

| ul. Chałubińskiego 8 |
| --- |
| 00-613 Warszawa |
| POLSKA/POLAND |

ul. Chałubińskiego 8

00-613 Warszawa

POLSKA/POLAND

Telefon +48 228302657

Telefaks +48 228301648

E-naslov: info@polskie-mieso.pl

2.   Država članica ali tretja država:

Poljska

3.   Specifikacija proizvoda;

3.1   Ime(-na) za registracijo (člen 2 Uredbe (ES) št. 1216/2007)

„Kiełbasa jałowcowa“

3.2   Gre za ime, ki

 je specifično samo po sebi

Image

Ime „kiełbasa jałowcowa“ izraža posebne lastnosti proizvoda, ki so povezane predvsem z izjemnim okusom in aromo proizvoda. Te lastnosti kažejo uporabo brinovih jagod v proizvodnem postopku, ki se sesekljajo na drobno, potem pa se takoj dodajo mesu, in uporabo brinovih vej med prekajevanjem.

3.3   Ali se zahteva pridržanje imena na podlagi člena 13(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 509/2006:

 Registracija s pridržanjem imena

Image

3.4   Vrsta proizvoda:

| Skupina 1.2 – | Mesni proizvodi (kuhani, soljeni, dimljeni itd.) |
| --- | --- |

Skupina 1.2 –

Mesni proizvodi (kuhani, soljeni, dimljeni itd.)

3.5   Opis kmetijskega proizvoda ali živila, za katerega se uporablja ime iz točke 3.1 (člen 3(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 1216/2007):

Proizvod „Kiełbasa jałowcowa“ je enakomerno nagubana klobasa v obliki venca. Ima značilno zavito obliko brez zunanjih vzdolžnih gub. Obstajata dve velikosti te klobase v obliki venca:

| — | majhna, v naravnih črevih s premerom več kot 32 mm in težo približno 0,5 kg; |
| --- | --- |

—

majhna, v naravnih črevih s premerom več kot 32 mm in težo približno 0,5 kg;

| — | velika, v beljakovinskih črevih s premerom 36 mm in težo približno 0,8 kg. |
| --- | --- |

—

velika, v beljakovinskih črevih s premerom 36 mm in težo približno 0,8 kg.

Barva proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“ je temno rjava in enakomerna na celotni površini proizvoda, kot je značilno za močno dimljene klobase.

Površina klobase je na otip suha, gladka in enakomerno nagubana, medtem ko je njena čvrstost takšna, da se črevo tesno prilega nadevu.

Značilen okus in mehkost proizvoda izhajata iz izbora surovin, začimb (zlasti brina) in naravnega prekajevanja, ki je del proizvodnega postopka.

Kemična sestava:

| — | vsebnost beljakovin – najmanj 15,0 % |
| --- | --- |

—

vsebnost beljakovin – najmanj 15,0 %

| — | vsebnost vode – največ 60,0 % |
| --- | --- |

—

vsebnost vode – največ 60,0 %

| — | vsebnost maščob – največ 35,0 % |
| --- | --- |

—

vsebnost maščob – največ 35,0 %

| — | vsebnost soli – največ 3,5 % |
| --- | --- |

—

vsebnost soli – največ 3,5 %

| — | vsebnost nitrata (III) in nitrata (V), izražena kot NaNO2 – največ 0,0125 % |
| --- | --- |

—

vsebnost nitrata (III) in nitrata (V), izražena kot NaNO2 – največ 0,0125 %

Navedene vrednosti kemične sestave zagotavljajo tradicionalno kakovost proizvoda. Donos končnega proizvoda glede na meso, uporabljeno kot surovina, je 75 % (+/– 3 %).

3.6   Opis metode pridobivanja kmetijskega proizvoda ali živila, za katerega se uporablja ime iz točke 3.1 (člen 3(2) Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 1216/2007):

Sestavine

| | Meso (100 kg surovin):






  — | svinjina razreda I z vsebnostjo maščob do 15 % – 20 kg, |
| --- | --- | --- |

Meso (100 kg surovin):

—

svinjina razreda I z vsebnostjo maščob do 15 % – 20 kg,

| — | svinjina razreda IIA z vsebnostjo maščob do 20 % – 50 kg, |
| --- | --- |

—

svinjina razreda IIA z vsebnostjo maščob do 20 % – 50 kg,

| — | svinjina razreda III z vsebnostjo maščob do 25 % – 20 kg, |
| --- | --- |

—

svinjina razreda III z vsebnostjo maščob do 25 % – 20 kg,

| — | koščki maščobe – 10 kg. |
| --- | --- |

—

koščki maščobe – 10 kg.

Do 50 % svinjine razreda IIA ali razreda III se lahko nadomesti z govedino.

| | Začimbe (na 100 kg mesa):






  — | poper – 0,17 kg, |
| --- | --- | --- |

Začimbe (na 100 kg mesa):

—

poper – 0,17 kg,

| — | brin – 0,12 kg, |
| --- | --- |

—

brin – 0,12 kg,

| — | sladkor – 0,20 kg. |
| --- | --- |

—

sladkor – 0,20 kg.

| | Drugi dodatki:






  — | mešanica za soljenje (na podlagi mešanice jedilne soli (NaCl) in natrijevega nitrita (NaNO2)) – približno 2 kg. |
| --- | --- | --- |

Drugi dodatki:

—

mešanica za soljenje (na podlagi mešanice jedilne soli (NaCl) in natrijevega nitrita (NaNO2)) – približno 2 kg.

Krmljenje pri proizvodnji svinjine za izdelavo proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“

Krmljenje pomeni pitanje za mastno meso. Cilj je vzreja prašičev s težo do 120 kg, za katere je značilna višja vsebnost medmišične maščobe (več kot 3 %).

| — | Pitanje temelji na pasmah, ki odrastejo pozno, z ustreznim načinom pitanja pa se doseže želena vsebnost medmišične maščobe. Pasme za pitanje nimajo gena RN, pri čemer je gen RYR 1T prisoten pri 20 % populacije. |
| --- | --- |

—

Pitanje temelji na pasmah, ki odrastejo pozno, z ustreznim načinom pitanja pa se doseže želena vsebnost medmišične maščobe. Pasme za pitanje nimajo gena RN, pri čemer je gen RYR 1T prisoten pri 20 % populacije.

| — | Pitanje je treba izvajati v treh fazah – faza I do približno 60 kg, faza II do približno 90 kg in faza III do 120 kg. |
| --- | --- |

—

Pitanje je treba izvajati v treh fazah – faza I do približno 60 kg, faza II do približno 90 kg in faza III do 120 kg.

| — | Za pitanje živali do teže približno 90 kg se uporabljata dve vrsti krmnih mešanic. Krmne mešanice (odmerki) vsebujejo: |
| --- | --- |

—

Za pitanje živali do teže približno 90 kg se uporabljata dve vrsti krmnih mešanic. Krmne mešanice (odmerki) vsebujejo:

| — | energijske sestavine: žitni zdrob – pšenica, ječmen, rž, oves, tritikala ali koruza; koruzni zdrob in zdrob vrst golega ovsa, ki predstavljata do 30 % mešanice; |
| --- | --- |

—

energijske sestavine: žitni zdrob – pšenica, ječmen, rž, oves, tritikala ali koruza; koruzni zdrob in zdrob vrst golega ovsa, ki predstavljata do 30 % mešanice;

| — | beljakovinske sestavine: zdrob iz volčjega boba, krmnega boba in graha, moka iz ekstrahirane soje, moka iz ekstrahirane oljne ogrščice, tropine oljne ogrščice, kvašena krma ali posušena zelena krma. |
| --- | --- |

—

beljakovinske sestavine: zdrob iz volčjega boba, krmnega boba in graha, moka iz ekstrahirane soje, moka iz ekstrahirane oljne ogrščice, tropine oljne ogrščice, kvašena krma ali posušena zelena krma.

| — | Krmne mešanice (odmerki) za živali od 90 do 120 kg vsebujejo: |
| --- | --- |

—

Krmne mešanice (odmerki) za živali od 90 do 120 kg vsebujejo:

| — | energijske sestavine: zdrob iz pšenice, ječmena, rži in tritikale. V mešanicah (odmerkih) se ne smeta uporabljati koruzni zdrob in zdrob vrst golega ovsa; |
| --- | --- |

—

energijske sestavine: zdrob iz pšenice, ječmena, rži in tritikale. V mešanicah (odmerkih) se ne smeta uporabljati koruzni zdrob in zdrob vrst golega ovsa;

| — | beljakovinske sestavine: zdrob iz stročnic (volčji bob, krmni bob in grah), moka iz ekstrahirane soje, tropine oljne ogrščice ali moka iz ekstrahirane oljne ogrščice ter posušena zelena krma. |
| --- | --- |

—

beljakovinske sestavine: zdrob iz stročnic (volčji bob, krmni bob in grah), moka iz ekstrahirane soje, tropine oljne ogrščice ali moka iz ekstrahirane oljne ogrščice ter posušena zelena krma.

| — | V ciklu krmljenja se nikoli ne smejo uporabljati: rastlinska olja, krma živalskega izvora, npr. mleko v prahu, posušena sirotka, ribja moka. |
| --- | --- |

—

V ciklu krmljenja se nikoli ne smejo uporabljati: rastlinska olja, krma živalskega izvora, npr. mleko v prahu, posušena sirotka, ribja moka.

| — | Vrednost metabolne energije v mešanicah v vseh fazah pitanja je 12–13 MJ ME/kg mešanice. Vsebnost beljakovin v mešanicah mora znašati 16–18 % v prvi fazi pitanja, 15–16 % v drugi fazi in približno 14 % v zadnji fazi pitanja. |
| --- | --- |

—

Vrednost metabolne energije v mešanicah v vseh fazah pitanja je 12–13 MJ ME/kg mešanice. Vsebnost beljakovin v mešanicah mora znašati 16–18 % v prvi fazi pitanja, 15–16 % v drugi fazi in približno 14 % v zadnji fazi pitanja.

| — | Odmerki za pitanje lahko temeljijo samo na hranilnih mešanicah ali na hranilnih mešanicah in razsuti krmi, npr. krompirju in zeleni krmi. |
| --- | --- |

—

Odmerki za pitanje lahko temeljijo samo na hranilnih mešanicah ali na hranilnih mešanicah in razsuti krmi, npr. krompirju in zeleni krmi.

Faze v proizvodnji proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“

| Faza 1 | predhodno rezanje vseh mesnih sestavin. Pri tem se zagotovi, da so koščki mesa enake velikosti (s premerom približno 5 cm). |
| --- | --- |

Faza 1

predhodno rezanje vseh mesnih sestavin. Pri tem se zagotovi, da so koščki mesa enake velikosti (s premerom približno 5 cm).

| Faza 2 | tradicionalno soljenje (suha metoda) za približno 48 ur, pri čemer se uporabi mešanica za soljenje. |
| --- | --- |

Faza 2

tradicionalno soljenje (suha metoda) za približno 48 ur, pri čemer se uporabi mešanica za soljenje.

| Faza 3 | mehanska obdelava: meso razreda I se zmelje na približno 20 mm, meso razreda IIA na približno 8 mm in meso razreda III na približno 3 mm, nato pa se zmelje skupaj s 5 kg ledu. |
| --- | --- |

Faza 3

mehanska obdelava: meso razreda I se zmelje na približno 20 mm, meso razreda IIA na približno 8 mm in meso razreda III na približno 3 mm, nato pa se zmelje skupaj s 5 kg ledu.

| Faza 4 | mešanje vseh mesnih sestavin in začimb: poper, sladkor in brin, ki se zmeljejo, potem pa se takoj dodajo mešanici. |
| --- | --- |

Faza 4

mešanje vseh mesnih sestavin in začimb: poper, sladkor in brin, ki se zmeljejo, potem pa se takoj dodajo mešanici.

| Faza 5 | nadevanje v naravno prašičje črevo s premerom več kot 32 mm ali beljakovinsko črevo s premerom 36 mm, ki se zavije in oblikuje v venec. Pri izdelavi klobas se lahko uporabita dve vrsti črev:






  — | manjši venci v tankem prašičjem črevu s težo 0,5 kg, |
| --- | --- | --- |

Faza 5

nadevanje v naravno prašičje črevo s premerom več kot 32 mm ali beljakovinsko črevo s premerom 36 mm, ki se zavije in oblikuje v venec. Pri izdelavi klobas se lahko uporabita dve vrsti črev:

—

manjši venci v tankem prašičjem črevu s težo 0,5 kg,

| — | večji venci v beljakovinskem črevu s težo 0,8 kg. |
| --- | --- |

—

večji venci v beljakovinskem črevu s težo 0,8 kg.

| Faza 6 | postavitev na temperaturo, ki ne presega 30 °C, za dve uri. Predhodno sušenje površine, tako da se sestavine znotraj proizvoda „uležejo“. |
| --- | --- |

Faza 6

postavitev na temperaturo, ki ne presega 30 °C, za dve uri. Predhodno sušenje površine, tako da se sestavine znotraj proizvoda „uležejo“.

| Faza 7 | sušenje površine, kateremu sledi tradicionalno vroče prekajevanje (za približno 120 minut) in pečenje toliko časa, dokler v notranjosti proizvoda ni dosežena temperatura najmanj 70 °C. |
| --- | --- |

Faza 7

sušenje površine, kateremu sledi tradicionalno vroče prekajevanje (za približno 120 minut) in pečenje toliko časa, dokler v notranjosti proizvoda ni dosežena temperatura najmanj 70 °C.

| Faza 8 | 24-urno hlajenje. |
| --- | --- |

Faza 8

24-urno hlajenje.

| Faza 9 | hladno prekajevanje z uporabo bukovih trsk in brinovih vej (približno 120 minut), ki mu sledi sušenje pri temperaturi 14–18 °C za 3–5 dni, dokler se ne doseže 75 %-odstotni donos (+/– 3 %). |
| --- | --- |

Faza 9

hladno prekajevanje z uporabo bukovih trsk in brinovih vej (približno 120 minut), ki mu sledi sušenje pri temperaturi 14–18 °C za 3–5 dni, dokler se ne doseže 75 %-odstotni donos (+/– 3 %).

3.7   Posebnosti kmetijskega proizvoda ali živila (člen 3(3) Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 1216/2007):

Posebnost proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“ je več lastnosti, ki so značilne za proizvod:

| — | mehkost in posebne značilnosti mesa; |
| --- | --- |

—

mehkost in posebne značilnosti mesa;

| — | izjemen okus in aroma; |
| --- | --- |

—

izjemen okus in aroma;

| — | enotna oblika. |
| --- | --- |

—

enotna oblika.

Mehkost, sočnost in posebne značilnosti mesa

Svinjina prašičev pasem, ki odrastejo pozno, so pitani do teže približno 120 kg in imajo genske značilnosti, opisane v točki 3.6., je bistvena sestavina proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“, ki vpliva na posebne značilnosti klobase. Izpolnjevanje teh zahtev omogoča, da se doseže vsebnost medmišične maščobe več kot 3 %, kar zagotavlja, da ima meso ustrezen okus in tehnološke značilnosti, ki so bistvene za proizvodnjo proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“. Uporaba takih surovin in upoštevanje tradicionalne metode pridobivanja s posebnim poudarkom na fazah mletja, soljenja in prekajevanja zagotavljata izjemno mehkost in sočnost proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“.

Izjemen okus in aroma

Posebne lastnosti proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“ so povezane predvsem z edinstvenim okusom in aromo zaradi uporabe brinovih jagod v proizvodnem postopku. Mletje brinovih jagod neposredno pred začetkom proizvodnega postopka okrepi značilen okus klobase in prispeva k njenim posebnim lastnostim, medtem ko se njen okus zaradi uporabe brina pri prekajevanju izboljša in izjemna aroma okrepi.

Enotna oblika

Proizvod „kiełbasa jałowcowa“ se od drugih klobas razlikuje po svoji obliki. Klobasa se prodaja le v dveh zelo podobnih oblikah, zaradi česar jo potrošniki hitro prepoznajo. Proizvod „kiełbasa jałowcowa“ je enakomerno nagubana klobasa v obliki venca. Ima značilno zavito obliko brez zunanjih vzdolžnih gub.

3.8.   Tradicionalne lastnosti kmetijskega proizvoda ali živila (člen 3(4) Uredbe (ES) št. 1216/2007)

Tradicionalne surovine

| 1. | Brin
  Velika ilustrirana splošna enciklopedija (Wielka Encyklopedia Powszechna Ilustrowana) iz leta 1903 navaja, da je ena od uporabnih lastnosti tega grmičevja, ki je na Poljskem dobro znana že več stoletij, sproščanje prijetne arome med sežiganjem brina. V enciklopediji je prav tako navedeno, da se lahko brinove veje, ostružki in jagode uporabijo pri prekajevanju, da se dosežeta izjemen okus in aroma mesa. Dokumenti iz druge polovice 19. stoletja dokazujejo, da se je brin že uporabljal kot začimba ali sestavina mesnih jedi in proizvodov. Splošna enciklopedija, ki je izšla v Varšavi leta 1863, navaja, da imajo brinove jagode pekoč, sladkokisel okus in prijetno aromo ter se splošno uporabljajo kot začimba. Standardna metoda proizvodnje klobase z uporabo brinovih jagod in brinovo aromo dima se je na Poljskem uvedla že konec štiridesetih let 20. stoletja (glej članek v publikaciji mesne industrije „Gospodarka Mięsna“ (1954, tretja izdaja) z naslovom „Regulacja asortymentów wędlin na zaopatrzenie rynku“). |
| --- | --- |

1.

Brin

Velika ilustrirana splošna enciklopedija (Wielka Encyklopedia Powszechna Ilustrowana) iz leta 1903 navaja, da je ena od uporabnih lastnosti tega grmičevja, ki je na Poljskem dobro znana že več stoletij, sproščanje prijetne arome med sežiganjem brina. V enciklopediji je prav tako navedeno, da se lahko brinove veje, ostružki in jagode uporabijo pri prekajevanju, da se dosežeta izjemen okus in aroma mesa. Dokumenti iz druge polovice 19. stoletja dokazujejo, da se je brin že uporabljal kot začimba ali sestavina mesnih jedi in proizvodov. Splošna enciklopedija, ki je izšla v Varšavi leta 1863, navaja, da imajo brinove jagode pekoč, sladkokisel okus in prijetno aromo ter se splošno uporabljajo kot začimba. Standardna metoda proizvodnje klobase z uporabo brinovih jagod in brinovo aromo dima se je na Poljskem uvedla že konec štiridesetih let 20. stoletja (glej članek v publikaciji mesne industrije „Gospodarka Mięsna“ (1954, tretja izdaja) z naslovom „Regulacja asortymentów wędlin na zaopatrzenie rynku“).

| 2. | Svinjina
  Meso prašičev, rejenih za proizvodnjo proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“, mora vsebovati več kot 3 % medmišične maščobe; taka struktura mesa daje proizvodu želeno mehkost, sočnost in odličen okus. Uporaba takega mesa odločilno vpliva na kakovost končnega proizvoda in njegove posebne lastnosti ter je v skladu s tradicionalno metodo pridobivanja. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Svinjina

Meso prašičev, rejenih za proizvodnjo proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“, mora vsebovati več kot 3 % medmišične maščobe; taka struktura mesa daje proizvodu želeno mehkost, sočnost in odličen okus. Uporaba takega mesa odločilno vpliva na kakovost končnega proizvoda in njegove posebne lastnosti ter je v skladu s tradicionalno metodo pridobivanja.

Tradicionalna metoda pridobivanja in sestava

Prekajevanje je način konzerviranja mesa, pri čemer je bila najbolj razširjena metoda prekajevanja sežiganje brina. To je zabeleženo v starih poljskih rokopisih, na primer v zapiskih neznanega upravitelja podeželskega posestva iz osemdesetih let 18. stoletja, ki vključujejo recepte za predelavo mesa (Centralni arhiv zgodovinskih dokumentov (AGAD) v Varšavi, „Zbiór z Muzeum Narodowego“, ref. št. 1249). Poljski nacionalni pesnik Adam Mickiewicz navaja priljubljenost prekajevanja mesa z brinom v opisu zajtrka na podeželskem posestvu v svoji epski pesnitvi Gospod Tadej iz leta 1834: „Narezana jezik in šunka – oboje precej okusno in pridelano doma, prekajeno na brinu in žgano v kaminu.“

Tradicija začinjanja in prekajevanja mesa z uporabo brina se je razvila v lokalne in regionalne različice, v katerih so se uporabljale različne tehnologije in včasih tudi različne vrste mesa. Kot navaja W. Łęg v eseju „Z doświadczeń przy produkcji wędlin“, v publikaciji Gospodarka Mięsna (1953, šesta izdaja), so se v zvezi s proizvodom „kiełbasa jałowcowa“ iz divjačine izvajali različni poskusi (zajec ali divji prašič z dodatkom svinjine). Te klobase so imele drugačen okus, vendar se je dejansko vedno uporabljal isti recept (začinjanje in prekajevanje z brinom). Strokovnjak na področju mesne industrije, ki je potoval skozi regijo Kurpie, je v članku o regionalnih specialitetah iz predelanega mesa, objavljenem v publikaciji Gospodarka Mięsna (1950, sedma in osma izdaja), o lokalni različici proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“ zapisal: „Klobasa iz kraja Myszyniec v regiji Kurpie, ki je prekajena na brinu in vsebuje brinove jagode. Suha, odlična značilna aroma in okus.“

V skladu z doktrino centralnega načrtovanja je bila po letu 1945 sprejeta odločitev o vzpostavitvi mesne industrije, ki temelji na velikih predelovalnih obratih. Uvedla se je standardizacija proizvodov in tehnologije, ki temeljijo na tradicionalnih receptih, da bi se izboljšala kakovost in okus. Ime „Kiełbasa jałowcowa“ se je kot ime proizvoda prvič uporabilo v standardih za trgovanje z živili v letih 1947 in 1948. Usklajen standard za proizvod „kiełbasa jałowcowa“ je bil oblikovan leta 1954, pozneje pa je bila izdana njegova razširjena različica, tj. standard Centralnega urada za mesno industrijo iz leta 1964 (Wydawnictwo Przemysłu Lekkiego i Spożywczego, Varšava 1964), na katerem temelji ta vloga.

Ti standardi so bili oblikovani, da bi se dosegla čim večja kakovost proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“. Čeprav standard, na katerem temelji ta vloga, ni več zavezujoč, je še vedno najvišji proizvodni standard za proizvod „kiełbasa jałowcowa“.

3.9.   Minimalne zahteve in postopek nadzora posebnih lastnosti (člen 4 Uredbe (ES) št. 1216/2007)

Ob upoštevanju posebnih lastnosti proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“ je treba nadzorovati zlasti:

| 1. | Kakovost surovin, uporabljenih pri proizvodnji (svinjina, začimbe), vključno s:






  — | tehnološko ustreznostjo mesa, |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

Kakovost surovin, uporabljenih pri proizvodnji (svinjina, začimbe), vključno s:

—

tehnološko ustreznostjo mesa,

| — | načinom pitanja, |
| --- | --- |

—

načinom pitanja,

| — | časom soljenja, |
| --- | --- |

—

časom soljenja,

| — | začimbami, uporabljenimi pri proizvodnji proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“, in razmerji, v katerih so začimbe uporabljene. |
| --- | --- |

—

začimbami, uporabljenimi pri proizvodnji proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“, in razmerji, v katerih so začimbe uporabljene.

| 2. | Postopek prekajevanja proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“
  Med inšpekcijskim pregledom je treba preveriti:






  — | ohranjanje temperature, ki je potrebna za tradicionalno prekajevanje na vročem dimu, in temperature segrevanja, |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

Postopek prekajevanja proizvoda „kiełbasa jałowcowa“

Med inšpekcijskim pregledom je treba preveriti:

—

ohranjanje temperature, ki je potrebna za tradicionalno prekajevanje na vročem dimu, in temperature segrevanja,

| — | ohranjanje trajanja in temperature ponavljajočega se prekajevanja na hladnem dimu, |
| --- | --- |

—

ohranjanje trajanja in temperature ponavljajočega se prekajevanja na hladnem dimu,

| — | uporabo bukovih trsk in brinovih vej za hladno prekajevanje. |
| --- | --- |

—

uporabo bukovih trsk in brinovih vej za hladno prekajevanje.

| 3. | Kakovost končnega proizvoda:






  — | vsebnost beljakovin, |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.

Kakovost končnega proizvoda:

—

vsebnost beljakovin,

| — | vsebnost vode, |
| --- | --- |

—

vsebnost vode,

| — | vsebnost maščob, |
| --- | --- |

—

vsebnost maščob,

| — | vsebnost natrijevega klorida, |
| --- | --- |

—

vsebnost natrijevega klorida,

| — | vsebnost nitrata (III) in nitrata (V), |
| --- | --- |

—

vsebnost nitrata (III) in nitrata (V),

| — | okus in aroma. |
| --- | --- |

—

okus in aroma.

| 4. | Oblika proizvoda |
| --- | --- |

4.

Oblika proizvoda

Pogostost izvajanja pregledov

Preglede v navedenih fazah je treba izvesti enkrat na dva meseca. Če vse te faze potekajo pravilno, se lahko pogostost pregledov zmanjša na dva pregleda na leto.

Če se v kateri koli fazi pojavijo nepravilnosti, je treba preglede v zadevni fazi izvajati bolj pogosto (enkrat na dva meseca). Pregledi v drugih fazah se lahko izvajajo enkrat na šest mesecev.

4.   Organi ali telesa, ki preverjajo skladnost s specifikacijo proizvoda:

4.1   Naziv in naslov:

Naziv: Główny Inspektorat Jakości Handlowej Artykułów Rolno-Spożywczych

Naslov:

| ul. Wspólna 30 |
| --- |
| 00-930 Warsaw |
| POLSKA/POLAND |

ul. Wspólna 30

00-930 Warsaw

POLSKA/POLAND

Telefon +48 226232901

Telefaks +48 226232099

E-naslov: —

ImageJavni  Zasebni

4.2   Posebne naloge organa ali telesa:

Zgoraj navedeni nadzorni organ je odgovoren za preglede celotne specifikacije.

---