natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Nejpozději do dvou let po (vstupu této směrnice v platnost) předloží Komise (1) všeobecně použitelný, průhledný a souhrnný model pro vyhodnocení všech nákladů spojených s životním prostředím, dopravními zácpami a zdravotními náklady, které poslouží jako základ pro budoucí výpočet nákladů spojených s infrastrukturou.
No later than 2 years after [entry into force of this Directive], the Commission shall present (1) a generally applicable, transparent, and comprehensible model for the assessment of all external environment-, congestion-, and health-related costs to serve as the basis for future calculations of infrastructure charges.
K tomuto modelu bude přiložena (2) analýza dopadů internalizace externích nákladů pro všechny způsoby dopravy a strategie postupného provádění tohoto modelu pro všechny způsoby dopravy.
This model will be accompanied by (2) an impact analysis on the internalisation of external costs for all modes of transport and a strategy for a stepwise implementation of this model for all modes of transport.
Ke zprávě se případně připojí návrhy Evropskému parlamentu a Radě na další revizi této směrnice.
The report shall be accompanied , if appropriate, by proposals to the European Parliament and the Council for further revision of the Directive.
Ke zprávě a k modelu se připojí návrhy Evropskému parlamentu a Radě na další revizi této směrnice.
The report and the model shall be accompanied by proposals to the European Parliament and the Council for further revision of the Directive.
V případě, že tato revize směrnice týkající se internalizace externích nákladů nebude do třech let po představení modelu přijata, mohou členské státy přidat nejvíce 60 % nákladů na infrastrukturu s cílem zohlednit minimální externí náklady.
In case such a revision of the directive regarding the Internalisation of external costs is not adopted within 3 years after the presentation of the model, Member States may add not more than 60% of the infrastructure costs to reflect a minimum of external costs.
Členské státy zašlou Komisi nezbytné údaje nejpozději do ….“
Member states shall forward the necessary information to the Commission no later than ....";
Členské státy zašlou Komisi nezbytné údaje nejpozději do …“
Member states shall forward the necessary information to the Commission no later than ....";
The request for a model is in conformity with EP first reading.
The request for a model is in conformity with EP first reading.
It is needed to ensure the future application of the polluter pays principle for all modes of transport.
It is needed to ensure the future application of the polluter pays principle for all modes of transport.
Příloha II (směrnice 1999/62/ES)
Annex II (Directive/1999/62/EC)
Nejvyšší Nejnižší
Maximum Minimum
tři nápravy čtyři nápravy
three axles four axles
NON-EURO a 1020 1648
EURO and 1 020 1 648
EURO 0 1332 2223
EURO 0 1 332 2 223
EURO I 1158 1933
EURO I 1 158 1 933
EURO II a 904 1488
EURO II and 904 1 488
EURO II 1008 1681
EURO II 1 008 1 681
EURO III 876 1461
EURO III 876 1 461
EURO IV a 797 1329
EURO IV and 797 1 329
EURO IV a
EURO IV and
EURO V a EEV
EURO V and EEV
méně znečišťující 797 1 329
less polluting 797 1 329
Pokud se v celé transevropské silniční síti (TEN) nepoužije jediný režim mýtného, upřesní členský stát, která část nebo části sítě mají podléhat režimu mýtného, jakož i systém používaný k třídění vozidel za účely rozlišení sazeb mýtného.
Where a single tolling regime is not to be applied to the whole TEN road network, a Member State shall specify precisely the part or parts of the network which are to be subject to a tolling regime as well as the system its uses to classify vehicles for the purposes of toll variation.
Členské státy rovněž uvedou, zda rozšiřují rozsah vozidel, na něž se vztahuje jejich režim mýtného, pod prahovou hodnotu 12 tun.
Member States shall also specify whether they are extending the scope of the vehicles covered by their tolling regime below the 12 ‑tonne threshold.
Since tolls are to be levied anyway from upwards of 3.5 tonnes, this stipulation is not required.
Since tolls are to be levied anyway from upwards of 3.5 tonnes, this stipulation is not required.
Přidělení nákladů těžkým nákladním vozidlům se provádí objektivním a transparentním způsobem, s přihlédnutím k podílu těžkých nákladních vozidel na provozu v silniční síti a souvisejícím nákladům.
Costs shall be apportioned to heavy goods vehicles ( HGVs ) on an objective and transparent basis taking account of the proportion of HGV traffic to be carried on the network and the associated costs.
Kilometry ujeté těžkými nákladními vozidly lze za tímto účelem upravit podle objektivně odůvodněných „koeficientů ekvivalence“ jako jsou koeficienty uvedené v bodě 4 .
The vehicle kilometres travelled by HGVs may for this purpose be adjusted by objectively justified "equivalence factors" such as those set out in point 4.
Přidělení nákladů nákladním vozidlům se provádí objektivním a transparentním způsobem, s přihlédnutím k podílu těžkých nákladních vozidel na provozu v silniční síti a souvisejícím nákladům.
Costs shall be apportioned to goods vehicles on an objective and transparent basis taking account of the proportion of heavy goods traffic to be carried on the network and the associated costs.
Kilometry ujeté nákladními vozidly lze za tímto účelem upravit podle objektivně odůvodněných „koeficientů ekvivalence“ jako jsou koeficienty uvedené v bodě 4 .
The vehicle kilometres travelled by goods vehicles may for this purpose be adjusted by objectively justified "equivalence factors" such as those set out in point 4
Příloha III bod 4 úvodní část (směrnice 1999/62/ES)
Annexe III, N° 4, introductory part (Directive 1999/62/EC)
Podíl těžkých nákladních vozidel na provozu, koeficienty ekvivalence a opravný mechanismus
HGV share of traffic, equivalence factors and correction mechanism
Podíl nákladních vozidel na provozu, koeficienty ekvivalence a opravný mechanismus
Share of goods traffic, equivalence factors and correction mechanism
Příloha III bod 4 odrážka 1 (směrnice 1999/62/ES)
Annexe III, N° 4, indent 1 (Directive 1999/62/EC)
Výpočet mýtného se zakládá na skutečném nebo předpokládaném podílu těžkých nákladních vozidel na ujetých kilometrech, v případě potřeby upravených s použitím koeficientů ekvivalence, aby se řádně zohlednily zvýšené náklady na výstavbu a opravu pozemních komunikací pro použití těžkými nákladními vozidly.
- The calculation of tolls shall be based on actual or forecast HGV shares of vehicle kilometres adjusted, if desired, by equivalence factors, to make due allowance for the increased costs of constructing and repairing infrastructure for use by heavy goods vehicles.
Výpočet mýtného se zakládá na skutečném nebo předpokládaném podílu nákladních vozidel na ujetých kilometrech, v případě potřeby upravených s použitím koeficientů ekvivalence, aby se řádně zohlednily zvýšené náklady na výstavbu a opravu pozemních komunikací pro použití těžkými nákladními vozidly.
- The calculation of tolls shall be based on actual or forecast HGV shares of vehicle kilometres adjusted, if desired, by equivalence factors, to make due allowance for the increased costs of constructing and repairing infrastructure for use by goods vehicles.
The revision of the Directive on charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructure (1999/62/EC) is one of the key priorities of the current European Transport policy.
The revision of the Directive on charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructure (1999/62/EC) is one of the key priorities of the current European Transport policy.
In the White Paper on European Transport policy until the year 2010 the European Commission has stated that one of the main reasons for the existing imbalance in the transport system is that the transport modes do not always pay the costs for which they are responsible.
In the White Paper on European Transport policy until the year 2010 the European Commission has stated that one of the main reasons for the existing imbalance in the transport system is that the transport modes do not always pay the costs for which they are responsible.
On the occasion of the adoption of the resolution concerning the White Paper (COM (2001) 370) on February 12 th 2003 the European Parliament confirmed to be in favour of charging for the use of infrastructure and charging the connected external costs .
On the occasion of the adoption of the resolution concerning the White Paper (COM (2001) 370) on February 12 th 2003 the European Parliament confirmed to be in favour of charging for the use of infrastructure and charging the connected external costs .
The conclusions of the European Council of Göteborg in June 2001 are of similar purport.
The conclusions of the European Council of Göteborg in June 2001 are of similar purport.
General aims are:
General aims are:
· harmonisation of the transport tariffs in all Member States in order to strengthen the internal market
· harmonisation of the transport tariffs in all Member States in order to strengthen the internal market
· a fair system of charging for the use of infrastructure based on the ‘user pays’ and the ‘polluter pays’ principles, accompanied by the internalisation of both the costs of infrastructure and the external costs for all transport modes
· a fair system of charging for the use of infrastructure based on the ‘user pays’ and the ‘polluter pays’ principles, accompanied by the internalisation of both the costs of infrastructure and the external costs for all transport modes
· homogeneous methods for the calculation of the costs of the transport modes
· homogeneous methods for the calculation of the costs of the transport modes
· Transport policy instruments for governments, based on the costs of infrastructure, and aimed at promoting the use of transportation with the least environmental impact and stimulating new investments in transport infrastructure
· Transport policy instruments for governments, based on the costs of infrastructure, and aimed at promoting the use of transportation with the least environmental impact and stimulating new investments in transport infrastructure
In this context the Commission has proposed in July 2003 a revision of the Eurovignette Directive (1999/62/EG), in order to elaborate this approach for road transport.
In this context the Commission has proposed in July 2003 a revision of the Eurovignette Directive (1999/62/EG), in order to elaborate this approach for road transport.
Reaching an agreement about the revision of this Directive is urgent, as an increasing number of Member States contemplates implementing tolling and/or road charging.
Reaching an agreement about the revision of this Directive is urgent, as an increasing number of Member States contemplates implementing tolling and/or road charging.
On the one hand because of investments which are necessary to satisfy the growing demand for transport infrastructure.
On the one hand because of investments which are necessary to satisfy the growing demand for transport infrastructure.
Because of budget restrictions the appeal to private funds, several forms of public-private partnership and mainly concessions increases.
Because of budget restrictions the appeal to private funds, several forms of public-private partnership and mainly concessions increases.
On the other hand instruments and investments are needed to fight congestion, air pollution, noise and also to improve road safety and sustainable transport.
On the other hand instruments and investments are needed to fight congestion, air pollution, noise and also to improve road safety and sustainable transport.
The European Parliament decided in first reading on 20 April 2004 and formulated some important wishes: the Parliament introduced a definition for external costs and requested that the Commission should develop uniform calculation principles, based on scientifically recognised data, which will clear the way for future internalisation of external costs.
The European Parliament decided in first reading on 20 April 2004 and formulated some important wishes: the Parliament introduced a definition for external costs and requested that the Commission should develop uniform calculation principles, based on scientifically recognised data, which will clear the way for future internalisation of external costs.
The Parliament also expressed the wish for more possibilities for toll variation and agreed with the Commission proposal regarding the scope of the Directive.
The Parliament also expressed the wish for more possibilities for toll variation and agreed with the Commission proposal regarding the scope of the Directive.
These wishes are not covered in the common position approved by Council.
These wishes are not covered in the common position approved by Council.
- The scope of the Directive
- The scope of the Directive
The geographical scope : In first reading the European Parliament expresses the wish, in line with the Commissions proposal, to have tolls and user charges applied to the whole of the trans-European road network .
The geographical scope : In first reading the European Parliament expresses the wish, in line with the Commissions proposal, to have tolls and user charges applied to the whole of the trans-European road network .
If Member States introduce tolls on the main road network, these should also be in accordance with the Eurovignette Directive.
If Member States introduce tolls on the main road network, these should also be in accordance with the Eurovignette Directive.
However, in the Council’s opinion, tolls or user charges should only be applied to the TEN-network or “ parts of it" (art.
However, in the Council’s opinion, tolls or user charges should only be applied to the TEN-network or “ parts of it" (art.
For all other roads, including the ‘main road network’, the Member States have the freedom to introduce other tolling arrangements as the possible extension of the Directive to the main road network has been cancelled from the Parliament’s first reading.
For all other roads, including the ‘main road network’, the Member States have the freedom to introduce other tolling arrangements as the possible extension of the Directive to the main road network has been cancelled from the Parliament’s first reading.
This means Member States will have the freedom to pick and choose where they want to apply tolls, even on the trans-European road network.
This means Member States will have the freedom to pick and choose where they want to apply tolls, even on the trans-European road network.
Parliament agreed with the Commission that Member States may maintain or introduce tolls and/or user charges applicable to vehicles with a maximum permissible laden weight of over 3.5 tonnes.
Parliament agreed with the Commission that Member States may maintain or introduce tolls and/or user charges applicable to vehicles with a maximum permissible laden weight of over 3.5 tonnes.
The Council, contrary to both the European Parliament's first reading and the Commission proposal, gives Member States the choice to maintain or introduce tolls and/or user charges from 12 tonnes upwards (art.
The Council, contrary to both the European Parliament's first reading and the Commission proposal, gives Member States the choice to maintain or introduce tolls and/or user charges from 12 tonnes upwards (art.
7.1 a).
7.1 a).
This might work out as an incentive to the use of smaller (and thus more) vehicles, which will have a negative impact on the environment and on congestion.
This might work out as an incentive to the use of smaller (and thus more) vehicles, which will have a negative impact on the environment and on congestion.
- The definition of ‘construction’ costs and ‘weighted average toll’
- The definition of ‘construction’ costs and ‘weighted average toll’
The common position contains an elaborate definition of construction costs (art 2).
The common position contains an elaborate definition of construction costs (art 2).
The Council added elements out of art.
The Council added elements out of art.
7.9 regarding the weighted average toll, as well as wishes of some Member States.
7.9 regarding the weighted average toll, as well as wishes of some Member States.
The Council’s definition explicitly includes the finance costs which are defined as interest on borrowed money and return (dividend + capital gains) on equity.
The Council’s definition explicitly includes the finance costs which are defined as interest on borrowed money and return (dividend + capital gains) on equity.
With this, Council accepts Parliament's approach in first reading.
With this, Council accepts Parliament's approach in first reading.
This is an important element to attract private capital for concessions and other PPP’s.
This is an important element to attract private capital for concessions and other PPP’s.
The Commission proposed to allow Member States to recover costs which are not older than 15 years and the EP proposed in its amendment 21 to limit the possibilities to recover only costs not yet amortised at the moment of entry into force of this Directive.
The Commission proposed to allow Member States to recover costs which are not older than 15 years and the EP proposed in its amendment 21 to limit the possibilities to recover only costs not yet amortised at the moment of entry into force of this Directive.
The Council, however, proposes to widen the period of recovery to 30 years, unless the design lifetime of an infrastructure project is longer than 30 years but it should not be less than 20 years.This of course creates more possibilities for Member States to"calculate back in time" to recover their costs.
The Council, however, proposes to widen the period of recovery to 30 years, unless the design lifetime of an infrastructure project is longer than 30 years but it should not be less than 20 years.This of course creates more possibilities for Member States to"calculate back in time" to recover their costs.
The Commission included in the weighted average toll (art.
The Commission included in the weighted average toll (art.
7.9) the infrastructure costs designed to reduce nuisance related to noise and costs of actual payment made by infrastructure operators corresponding to objective environmental elements such as soil contamination.
7.9) the infrastructure costs designed to reduce nuisance related to noise and costs of actual payment made by infrastructure operators corresponding to objective environmental elements such as soil contamination.
The Parliament’s amendment 28 also mentioned investments for prevention of accidents.
The Parliament’s amendment 28 also mentioned investments for prevention of accidents.
Council included these types of costs in the construction costs (art 2).
Council included these types of costs in the construction costs (art 2).
In addition to the Commission’s proposal, the Parliament’s amendment 28 states that the weighted average toll shall also be related to: “the costs corresponding to objective environmental elements such as for example atmospheric pollution, including congestion costs where these can be objectively quantified by a methodology duly adopted at European level for the purpose of such calculations.”
In addition to the Commission’s proposal, the Parliament’s amendment 28 states that the weighted average toll shall also be related to: “the costs corresponding to objective environmental elements such as for example atmospheric pollution, including congestion costs where these can be objectively quantified by a methodology duly adopted at European level for the purpose of such calculations.”
This has been removed in the Council’s text, and must be judged in relation to Council’s rejection of introducing external costs in this Directive.
This has been removed in the Council’s text, and must be judged in relation to Council’s rejection of introducing external costs in this Directive.
- The external costs
- The external costs
The European Parliament added to the Commission’s proposal a definition of external costs . (art.
The European Parliament added to the Commission’s proposal a definition of external costs . (art.
2 f).
2 f).
The Parliament also added a recital which stated that the Commission should develop uniform calculation principles, based on scientifically recognised data, which will clear the way in the future for the internalisation of external costs.
The Parliament also added a recital which stated that the Commission should develop uniform calculation principles, based on scientifically recognised data, which will clear the way in the future for the internalisation of external costs.
The Council excluded this article and recital from the text.
The Council excluded this article and recital from the text.
This is not consistent with the Commission’s White Paper and the European Council’s conclusions of its meeting in Göteborg in 2001.
This is not consistent with the Commission’s White Paper and the European Council’s conclusions of its meeting in Göteborg in 2001.
- Toll variation and mark-up
- Toll variation and mark-up
In addition to the European Parliament’s first reading, the Council added (art 7.10) a number of explicit conditions which have to be fulfilled when applying the toll variations (proportionality, transparency, no discrimination, not designed to generate additional revenue, linear).
In addition to the European Parliament’s first reading, the Council added (art 7.10) a number of explicit conditions which have to be fulfilled when applying the toll variations (proportionality, transparency, no discrimination, not designed to generate additional revenue, linear).
In this the Council accepted Parliament’s wish, expressed in amendment 12, that the variation of tolls may not lead to a rise of the weighted average tolls.
In this the Council accepted Parliament’s wish, expressed in amendment 12, that the variation of tolls may not lead to a rise of the weighted average tolls.
The Council strengthened the toll variation in such a way that, for (1) EURO emission classes and/or for (2) time of day, type of day or season, the toll rates may vary 100%.
The Council strengthened the toll variation in such a way that, for (1) EURO emission classes and/or for (2) time of day, type of day or season, the toll rates may vary 100%.
This means that Council increases the total maximum variety of the rates to 200 %.
This means that Council increases the total maximum variety of the rates to 200 %.
With this, the Council shows awareness of the importance of aims such as combating environmental damage, tackling congestion and promoting road safety.
With this, the Council shows awareness of the importance of aims such as combating environmental damage, tackling congestion and promoting road safety.
However, Council did not agree with EP wishes to include other elements such as variation according to the vehicle type based on its road damage class, the environmental sensitivity of the area and the level of PM10 and NOx level.
However, Council did not agree with EP wishes to include other elements such as variation according to the vehicle type based on its road damage class, the environmental sensitivity of the area and the level of PM10 and NOx level.
The possibility to add a mark up to the tolls for mountainous areas (art.
The possibility to add a mark up to the tolls for mountainous areas (art.
7.10, 7.11) has been maintained.
7.10, 7.11) has been maintained.
Together with the Commission the Council is not in favour of the Parliament’s amendment 30 to ad a mark up for urban areas.
Together with the Commission the Council is not in favour of the Parliament’s amendment 30 to ad a mark up for urban areas.
Furthermore, a difference with both the Commission's proposal and the European Parliament's first reading (where the mark up was 25 % as a general rule) is that the "normal" mark up is 15 %.
Furthermore, a difference with both the Commission's proposal and the European Parliament's first reading (where the mark up was 25 % as a general rule) is that the "normal" mark up is 15 %.
However, for frontier sections of the priority projects of the TEN's, the mark up can be 25 %.
However, for frontier sections of the priority projects of the TEN's, the mark up can be 25 %.