L 31722 Official Journal of the European Union 3.12.2010 COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 1122/2010 of 2 December 2010 entering a designation in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Gouda Holland (PGI)] THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION, Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 7(5) thereof, Whereas: (") ¢ In accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, and pursuant to Article 17(2) of the same Regulation, the application of the Netherlands to enter the designation ‘Gouda Holland’ in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). The Czech Republic, Germany, France, Austria, the governments of Australia, New Zealand and the United States of America, as well as Dairy Australia, Dairy Companies Association of New Zealand and the National Milk Producers Federation together with the US Dairy Export Council submitted objections to the registration under Article 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006. These objections were deemed admissible under Article 7(3) of that Regulation. Statements of objection concerned non-compliance with the conditions laid down in Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, in particular the name and its use, specificity and reputation of the product, delimitation of geographical area as well as restrictions on the origin of raw materials. The objections also claimed that registration would be contrary to Article 3(3) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, would jeopardise the existence of names, trademarks or products which had 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12. oJ L 0J C 61, 6.3.2008 p. 15. been legally on the market for at least five years preceding the date of the publication provided for in Article 6(2), and that the name proposed for registration was generic. By letters dated 4 November 2008, the Commission asked the Netherlands and the objectors to seek agreement among themselves in accordance with their internal procedures. Given that no agreement with the objectors was reached within the designated time limit, with the exception of an agreement reached between the Netherlands and France, the Commission should adopt a decision in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 15(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006. Concerning the alleged failure of compliance with Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 in respect of the name, geographical area, specificity of the product, link between the product characteristics and the geographical area, reputation and restrictions concerning the origin of raw material, the national authorities responsible provided confirmation that these elements were present and in addition no manifest error was identified. It should be pointed out that Holland is not the name of the Member State concerned and that ‘Gouda Holland’ is considered a traditional geographical name encompassed by Article 2(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006. The requirements of Article 2(1) point (b) of the said Regulation are in this connection fulfilled since the related geographical area is delimited according to the link and the main elements of the product specificity. The specificity of Gouda Holland is due to a combination of factors linked to the geographical area such as the quality of milk (high fat level and protein content), amino acids originating from (-CN and y-glutamyl peptide, prevalence of grazing on meadows, use of calf rennet, natural ripening, as well as the skills of the farmers and cheese producers. As regards objections based on non compliance with Article 3(3) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, the Netherlands ~ submitted —information regarding the distinction between the product bearing the registered name ‘Noord-Hollandse Gouda’ and that for which the name ‘Gouda Holland’ is applied. No evidence was provided in the statement of objections that consumers would be liable to be misled or that the producers would be treated in an inequitable manner.