natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
(7) Article 3(6) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 296/96 of 16 February 1996 (OJ L 39, 17.2.1996, p. 5) as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2761/1999. 
(7) Komisjoni 16. veebruari 1996. aasta mruse (E) nr 296/96 (ET L 39, 17.2.1996, lk 5) artikli 3 lige 6, muudetud komisjoni mrusega (E) nr 2761/1999.
(8) Under heading VII (Short-term assets) B. (Current assets) 2. (Advances owed by Member States) (a) (EAGGF Guarantee). 
(8) Rubriik VII (lhiajalised aktivad) B. (kibevarad) 2. (liikmesriikide debitoorne vlgnevus) A. (EAGGFi tagatisrahastu).
(9) Certifying bodies are appointed by Member States under the clearance-of-accounts procedures. They audit the CAP expenditure declared by Member StatesŐ paying agencies and certify (or qualify) the accounts of such expenditure. 
Nad auditeerivad liikmesriikide makseasutuste deklareeritud PP kulutusi ja sertifitseerivad (vi annavad mrkustega sertifikaadi) selliste kulutuste kontod.
The Commission takes account of these certificates in arriving at its annual financial decision to clear CAP expenditure. 
Komisjon arvestab neid sertifikaate, vttes vastu oma iga-aastase lpliku otsuse PP kulutuste kontrollimise ja heakskiitmise kohta.
C 269/14 EN Official Journal of the European Union 4.11.2004 off amounts as irrecoverable without a Commission Decision that the debt cannot be recovered and whether the budget or the Member States should bear the cost. 
C 269/14 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja 4.11.2004 aastat tekkinud vlgasid.
The information provided in Table 105 distinguishes between cases which are notifiable to the ECR and other cases (not arising from irregularity or amounting to less than 4 000 euro). 
Tabelis 105 esitatud andmed eristavad juhtumeid, mida tuleb komisjoni andmebaasi teatada, teistest juhtumitest (mis ei tulene eeskirjade eiramisest vi mis ei ole le 4 000 euro).
Although the reporting dates for the two sets of figures are different, it should be possible to reconcile, identify and correct the differences between them (the ECR showed a total of 2 349 million euro at 31 December 2002: the equivalent figure in Table 105 was 2 093 million euro at 15 October 2002). 
Kuigi neid kahte arvude kogumit kirjendatakse erinevatel kuupevadel, peaks olema vimalik nendevahelisi erinevusi vastavusse viia, kindlaks teha ja korrigeerida (komisjoni andmebaas nitas 31. detsembri 2002 seisuga kogusumma suuruseks 2 349 miljonit eurot; tabelis 105 oli vastav summa 15. oktoobri 2002 seisuga 2 093 miljonit eurot).
The Commission is unable to do so. 
Komisjon ei ole suuteline seda tegema.
OLAF and the Directorate-General for Agriculture are therefore working on the basis of different sets of data and have not reconciled them. 
Seetttu ttavad OLAF ja pllumajanduse peadirektoraat erinevate andmete alusel ega ole neid vastavusse viinud.
CONCLUSIONS 69. 
JRELDUSED 69.
The European UnionŐs arrangements for the notification, recovery and writing off of irregular payments provide for relevant information to be reported (type of irregularity, detection method, etc.) and encourage Member States to take recovery action by providing both an incentive (20 % retention of amounts recovered) and a sanction (amounts not recovered to be charged to Member States in cases of negligence). 
Euroopa Liidu eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud maksete teatamise, sissenudmise ja kustutamise kord neb ette asjakohase teabe esitamist (eeskirjade eiramise tp, avastamismeetod jne) ja julgustab liikmesriikidel neid summasid sisse nudma, stestades nii stiimuli (20 % tagasisaadud summast saab endale jtta) kui sanktsiooni (tagasisaamata summad kantakse hooletuse korral liikmesriikide kuludesse).
However, in practice, of the irregular payments made and notified to the Commission since 1971, totalling 3,1 billion euro, 537 million euro had been recovered from CAP beneficiaries by the end of 2002; 110 million euro had been written off against the Community budget and 142 million euro had been written off at the cost of Member States. 
Tegelikult ulatus alates 1971. aastast eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud ja komisjonile teatatud maksete kogusumma 3,1 miljardi euroni, millest 537 miljonit eurot oli PP abisaajatelt 2002. aasta lpuks sisse nutud; 110 miljonit eurot oli kustutatud henduse eelarve vahendite arvel ja 142 miljonit eurot oli kantud liikmesriikide kuludesse.
71. No system will achieve 100 % recovery of irregular payments; and some backlog of cases is inevitable. 
71. kski ssteem ei saavuta eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud maksete 100 % tagasisaamist ja lahendamata juhtumite mningane kogunemine on vltimatu.
But the CourtŐs audit revealed a number of weaknesses in the design of the arrangements for recording, recovering and writing off irregular payments under the CAP and, in particular, in how these arrangements are operated by the Commission and the Member States. (a) Member States interpret the definition of the point when they should report irregular payments in different ways (see paragraph 17). 
Siiski tuvastas kontrollikoja audit mitmeid puudusi PP raames eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud maksete kir-jendamise, sissenudmise ja kustutamise korras ning eelkige selles, kuidas komisjon ja liikmesriigid seda korda juhivad. a) Liikmesriikidel on erinev arusaam sellest, mis etapis peaksid nad eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud maksetest teatama (vt punkt 17).
Some of the data requirements for Member States are unclear (see paragraphs 56 and 57). (b) Member States have been slow, and some much slower than others, in reporting irregular payments (see paragraph 22). 
Ka ei ole alati selge, milliseid andmeid liikmesriikidelt nutakse (vt punktid 56 ja 57). b) Liikmesriigid on eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud maksetest teatamisel olnud aeglased ja mned riigid on eriti pikalt viivitanud (vt punkt 22).
There are also significant gaps and inconsistencies in the data which they supply (see paragraphs 24 to 27). 
Esitatud andmetes on olnud ka olulisi puudusi ja vasturkivusi (vt punktid 24Đ27).
(1) As Table 105 was introduced with effect from 2000, the amounts incorrectly written off from the debtorsŐ ledgers in previous years will have to be established by Member States. (c) There were significant weaknesses in Member StatesŐ arrangements for the recovery of irregular CAP payments (see paragraph 41). (d) Decisions on whether irregular payments should be written off and, if so, whether at Community or national expense must normally await a Member State proposal for write off. 
(1) Kuna tabel 105 on kasutusel alates 2000. aastast, peavad liikmesriigid tegema kindlaks varasematel aastatel vlgnike arvestusraamatutest valesti kustutatud summad. c) Eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud PP maksete sissenudmise korralduses liikmesriikides on olulisi puudusi (vt punkt 41). d) Otsused, kas eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud maksed tuleks kustutada ja kas kustutamisel tuleks need kanda henduse vi liikmesriikide kuludesse, peaksid ldiselt jrgnema liikmesriikide kustutamisettepanekutele.
The Commission has only limited powers to intervene in this procedure. 
Komisjoni pdevus sellesse menetlusse sekkuda on piiratud.
On the other hand European Court of Justice jurisprudence provides support for Commission action in the case of unreasonable delay by Member States. 
Teisalt neb Euroopa Kohtu praktika ette komisjoni tegevuse toetamise juhul, kui liikmesriigid venitavad phjendamatult.
This is the background to the creation of the Task Force discussed in paragraph 51. (e) The Commission did not have clear criteria for deciding whether irrecoverable irregular payments should be charged to the Member States concerned or to the Community budget (see paragraphs 43 to 51). (f) The involvement of both OLAF and the CommissionŐs Directorate-General for Agriculture in decisions of writing off is a source of confusion and inefficiency (see paragraphs 52 to 55). 
See on punktis 51 kirjeldatud eritrhma loomise taust. e) Komisjonil ei olnud selgeid kriteeriume otsustamaks, kas loo-tusetud eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud maksed tuleks kanda asjaomaste liikmesriikide kuludesse vi henduse eelarvesse (vt punktid 43Đ51). f) Nii OLAFi kui komisjoni pllumajanduse peadirektoraadi kaasamine kustutamisotsuste langetamisse phjustab segadust ja ebathusust (vt punktid 52Đ55).
All Member States have set up debtorsŐ ledgers and have submitted the required data. 
Kik liikmesriigid on koostanud vlgnike arvestusraamatud ja esitanud nutud andmed.
The Commission also provided guidelines for certifying bodies to audit debtors. 
Komisjon koostas akrediteerimisasutustele ka vlgnike auditeerimise suunised.
The Court however noted a number of gaps and, in respect of debts arising from irregular payments, inaccuracies in these debtorsŐ ledgers (see paragraphs 63 to 68). 
Kontrollikoda mrkas nendes vlgnike arvestusraamatutes eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud maksetest tingitud vlgade osas siiski mitmeid puudusi ja ebatpsusi (vt punktid 63Đ68).
The ÔblacklistŐ has proved unworkable. Only six Member States have ever communicated names of individuals or companies and it has proved impossible to effectively implement the sanctions foreseen (see paragraphs 61 and 62). 
ŇMust nimekiriÓ ei toimi. ksikisikute vi ettevtjate nimesid on teatanud ldse vaid kuus liikmesriiki ja ettenhtud sanktsioonide thus rakendamine on osutunud vimatuks (vt punktid 61 ja 62).
RECOMMENDATIONS 74. 
SOOVITUSED 74.
The Court recommends the Commission to consider a number of possible changes in the arrangements discussed above, in order to: Ń improve the information available to the Commission about CAP irregular payments and debts, Ń improve recovery by Member States of sums irregularly paid, Ń clarify the basis on which the Commission decides whether irregular payments written off should be borne by Member States or by the Community, Ń clarify responsibilities within the Commission and improve communications, 
Kontrollikoda soovitab komisjonil kaaluda rea muudatuste tegemist eespool ksitletud korraldusse, et: Ń Ń Ń Ń parandada komisjoni ksutuses oleva eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud PP maksete ja vlgade teabe kvaliteeti, parandada eeskirjade vastaselt makstud summade sissenudmist liikmesriikide poolt, selgitada kriteeriumid, mille phjal otsustab komisjon, kas kustutatud eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud maksete kahjud kantakse liikmesriikide vi henduse kuludesse, selgitada kohustused komisjoni sees ja parandada teabevahetust,
4.11.2004 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 269/15 Ń make better use in managing the CAP of information obtained about irregular payments. 
4.11.2004 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja C 269/15 Ń paremini kasutada PP juhtimisel eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud maksete kohta saadud teavet.
To improve information and facilitate its use, the Commission should consider: Ń ensuring that Member States interpret the Ôprimary administrative or judicial findings of factsŐ in a consistent and harmonised manner when reporting irregular payments, Ń increasing the 4 000 euro threshold for reporting cases in the ECR, Ń simplifying and reducing the number of definitions of types of fraud and methods of detection in the arrangements for reporting irregular CAP payments, Ń improving its own checks of the data supplied by Member States, Ń taking action to reconcile the ECR figures and debtorsŐ ledgers. 
Teabe kvaliteedi parandamiseks ja selle kasutamise hlbustamiseks peaks komisjon: Ń tagama, et liikmesriigid tlgendaksid jrjepidevalt ja htlus-tatult Ňesmaseid haldus-vi kohtuotsuse asjaolusidÓ eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud maksetest teatamisel, Ń suurendama juhtumite komisjoni andmebaasi teatamise 4 000 euro suurust knnist, Ń lihtsustama pettuse tpide ja avastamismeetodite mratlusi ning vhendama nende arvu eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud PP maksete teatamise korralduses, Ń parandama liikmesriikide esitatud andmete komisjoni kontrollide kvaliteeti, Ń vtma meetmeid komisjoni andmebaasi ja vlgnike arvestusraamatute andmete vastavusse viimiseks.
To encourage recovery by Member States of irregular payments under the CAP, the Commission should consider: Ń charging to Member States irregular CAP payments which have been outstanding for longer than a specific period and in respect of which no proposal for writing off has been received, Ń ensuring that irregular payments are offset against other EU payments due to the recipient, Ń asking Member States to give at least the same priority to the recovery of CAP debts as to the recovery of national subsidies. 
Ergutamaks liikmesriike sisse nudma eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud PP makseid, peaks komisjon kaaluma: Ń nende eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud PP maksete kandmist liikmesriikide kuludesse, mille vlgnevus letab teatud thtaja ja mille osas ei ole saadud kustutamisettepanekut, Ń eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud maksete tasaarvestamist teiste abisaajale maksmisele kuuluvate ELi maksetega, Ń liikmesriikidelt nudmist, et nad peaksid PP vlgade sissenudmist vhemalt sama prioriteetseks kui riiklike subsiidiumide sissenudmist.
The Commission should establish clear criteria for deciding whether irregular payments written off should be charged to Member States or borne by the Community. 
Komisjon peaks kindlaks mrama selged kriteeriumid otsustamaks, kas eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud maksed tuleks kanda liikmesriikide vi henduse kuludesse.
The Commission should take action against Member States which have offset amounts to be recovered against flat-rate corrections. 
Komisjon peaks vtma meetmeid liikmesriikide vastu, kes on sissenudmisele kuuluvaid summasid tasaarvestanud kindlasummaliste korrektsioonidega.
The Commission should consider whether the present sharing of responsibilities for CAP irregularities between OLAF and the Directorate-General for Agriculture is appropriate. 
Komisjon peaks kaaluma, kas praegune kohustuste jaotus eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud PP maksete osas OLAFi ja pllumajanduse peadirektoraadi vahel on asjakohane.
The Commission should report each year on lessons learned from data on irregularites and the conclusions drawn for the management of the CAP. 
Komisjon peaks andma kord aastas aru eeskirjade eiramise juhtumite andmetest saadud ppetundide ja PP juhtimise huvides tehtud jrelduste kohta.
Such a report might be included in the annual report on the fight against fraud or in the Annual Report on the CAP. 
Sellise aruande viks lisada pettusevastase vitluse aruandesse vi PP aastaaruandesse.
In addition, the Commission should consult with Member States on the future of the ÔblacklistŐ. 
Lisaks peaks komisjon Ňmusta nimekirjaÓ tuleviku osas liikmesriikidega nu pidama.
This report was adopted by the Court of Auditors in Luxembourg at its meeting of 10 June 2004. 
Kontrollikoda vttis kesoleva aruande vastu 2004. aasta 10. juuni istungil LuxembourgŐis.
Unable to certify completeness of Table 105. 
Tabeli 105 tielikkust ei ole vimalik tendada.
Reasons for weaknesses Delays in the recovery of debts, no interest charged on the capital amount of debt. 
Puuduste phjused Viivitused vlgnevuste sissenudmisel, vla phisummalt ei arvestata intressi.
Problems concerning completeness and accuracy aspects of Table 105. 
Probleemid tabeli 105 tielikkuse ja tpsusega.
Long delays in the recording and recovery of debts, there was no consistent policy on charging interest. 
Pikad viivitused vlgnevuste kirjendamisel ja sissenudmisel, intressi arvestamise poliitika ei olnud jrjepidev.
Problems noted in the recovery of debts. 
Probleemid vlgnevuste sissenudmisel.
Long delays in the recording and recovery of debts, no reconciliation between the accounting records and debtorsŐ ledger. 
Pikad viivitused vlgnevuste kirjendamisel ja sissenudmisel, raamatupidamisandmed ja vlgnike arvestusraamatu andmed ei ole vastavuses.
Qualification was raised last year, recovery problems continued to be noted this year. 
Eelmisel aastal esitati mrkusi, kesoleval aastal probleemid sissenudmisega jtkusid.
Lengthy intervals between the notification of irregularities and their recording in the debtorsŐ ledger. 
Pikk intervall eeskirjade vastaselt tehtud maksetest teatamise ja nende vlgnike arvestusraamatusse kirjendamise vahel.
Debts understated by 3 %. Reasons for unsatisfactory work Scope of CBs debtorsŐ audit did not meet the requirements mentioned in the Commission guidelines. 
Vlgnevusi alahinnati 3 % vrra. Puuduliku t phjused Akrediteerimisasutuse teostatud vlgnike auditi ulatus ei vastanud komisjoni suunistes toodud nuetele.
Source: DebtorsŐ section in Certifying Body reports for EAGGF year 2002. 
Allikas: Vlgnike osa akrediteerimisasutuse aruannetes FEOGA jaoks 2002. aastal.
C 269/18 EN Official Journal of the European Union 4.11.2004 SUMMARY I. For the protection of its financial interests, Community legislation lays down reporting requirements as regards Community fields of activity (1). The Member States must send regular reports of irregularities which have been the subject of primary administrative or judicial findings of fact. 
C 269/18 ET Euroopa Liidu Teataja 4.11.2004 KOKKUVÍTE I. henduse finantshuvide kaitsmiseks stestatakse henduse iguses henduse tegevusvaldkondadele aruandlusnuded.(1) Liikmesriigid peavad esitama korrapraselt aruanded kigist eeskirjade eiramistest, mille kohta on olemas haldusasutuse vi kohtu esialgne fakte tuvastav otsus.
Regulation (EEC) No 595/91 organises the system of communications of irregularities in the field of the expenditure by the EAGGF Ń Guarantee Section (European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund). 
Mruses (EM) nr 595/91 kehtestatakse eiramistest teatamise ssteem Euroopa Pllumajanduse Arendus-ja Tagatisfondi (EAGGF) tagatisrahastu kulude alal.
In order to facilitate exploitation of the information notified to the Commission, Community legislation contains a detailed list of the information to be provided, in particular the provision which has been infringed, the amounts in question, the practices used to commit the irregularity, and the natural or legal persons involved (2). 
Et lihtsustada komisjonile saadetud andmete kasutamist, sisaldab henduse seadusandlus esitatava teabe ksikasjalikku loetelu, mis hlmab eelkige rikutud stteid, asjaomaseid summasid, eiramise toimumise viisi ning sellega seotud fsilisi vi juriidilisi isikuid.
Member States have the obligation to prevent and deal with irregularities and to recover amounts lost as a result of irregularities or negligence (3). 
(2) Liikmesriikidel on kohustus eiramisi ra hoida ja nendega tegeleda ning sisse nuda eiramiste vi hooletuse tagajrjel kaotsili-nud summad.
Regulation (EEC) No 595/91 provides for the communication of all irregularities above EUR 4 000 to the Commission, meaning that all behaviour, intentional or not, that results in the infringement of a provision of Community law has to be communicated. 
(3) Mruses (EM) nr 595/91 stestatakse kohustus teatada komisjonile kigist le 4000 euro suurustest eiramistest, mis thendab, et igast kitumisest, sihilikust vi mitte, mille tulemuseks on henduse iguse stete rikkumine, tuleb teatada.
The Commission has taken different initiatives in order to ensure that cases should be identified as a fraud or an irregularity. 
Komisjon on astunud erinevaid samme, et kindlustada juhtumite tuvastamise kas pettuse vi eiramisena.
The mutual notification and information system thus established is the concrete expression of the mutual duties of sincere cooperation arising from Article 10 of the EC Treaty (4), on which the CommissionŐs antifraud strategy, defined in July 2000 (5), rests. 
Seega loodud hine teavitamise ja teabe ssteem on tiheda vastastikuse koost kohustuse konkreetne vljendus, mis tuleneb E asutamislepingu artiklist 10, (4) millele on rajatud 2000. aasta juulis mratletud komisjoni pettusevastane strateegia.
This partnership between the Commission and the Member States is also the guiding principle behind the provisions of secondary legislation. 
(5) See komisjoni ja liikmesriikide vaheline partnerlus on ka teiseste igusaktide stete juhtphimte.
(1) See in particular Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 595/91 (OJ L 67, 7.3.1997), Commission Regulation (EC) No 1681/94 and (EC) No 1831/94 of 26 July 1994 (OJ L 191, 27.7.1994) for expenditure, and Article 6(5) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/2000 for traditional own resources. 
(1) Vt eriti nukogu 4. mrtsi 1991. aasta mruse (EM) nr 595/91 artikli 3 liget 1 (ET L 67, 7.3.1997), komisjoni 11. juuli 1994. aasta mrust (E) nr 1681/94 ja 26. juuli 1994. aasta mrust (E) nr 1831/94 (ET L 191, 27.7.1994) kulude kohta ning nukogu mruse (E, Euratom) nr 1150/2000 artikli 6 liget 5 traditsionaalsete tavapraste kohta.
(2) Except for Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/2000 implementing Decision 94/728/EC, Euratom on the system of the CommunitiesŐ own resources (OJ L 130, 31.5.2000), where this information is optional only. 
(2) V.a nukogu mrus (E, Euratom) nr 1150/2000, millega rakendatakse henduste omavahendite ssteemi ksitlev otsus 94/728/E, Euratom (ET L 130, 31.5.2000), kus need andmed on vabatahtlikud.
(3) See Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 2988/95 (OJ L 312, 23.12.1995) and Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 1258/1999 (OJ L 160, 26.6.1999). 
(3) Vt mruse (E, Euratom) nr 2988/95 (ET L 312, 23.12.1995) artiklit 8 ja mruse (E) nr 1258/1999 (ET L 160, 26.6.1999) artiklit 8.
(4) As confirmed by the Court in the Zwartfeld and Yugoslav maize cases. 
(4) Nagu Euroopa Kohus on kinnitatud Zwartveld ja Yugoslav maize juhtumite puhul.
Case C-2/88 [1990] ECR I-3365, 13.7.1990; Case C-68/88 Commission v Greece [1989] ECR 2965. 
Juhtum C-2/88 [1990] ECR I-3365, 13.7.1990; juhtum C-68/88 komisjon v Kreeka [1989] ECR 2965.
(5) COM(2000) 358 final of 28 June 2000 and Action Plan 2001-2003 (COM(2001) 254 final of 15 May 2001). 
(5) KOM (2000) 358 lplik, 28. juuni 2000 ning 2001Đ2003 tegevuskava (KOM(2001) 254 lplik, 15. mai 2001).
As the Council has stressed on a number of occasions, it is essential that the information supplied be consistent and of high quality if the Commission is to make the best use of it in stepping up the fight against fraud and ensuring that cases are properly followed up (6), at both national and Community level. 
Nagu nukogu on mitmel korral rhutanud, on antud teabe ht-sus ja krge kvaliteet olulised, et komisjonil oleks vimalik thustada selle abil pettustevastast vitlust ja tagada juhtumite nuetekohane jlgimine (6) nii riiklikul kui henduse tasandil.
The experience gained and the improvements realised will contribute to increasing the efficiency of the notification system and the reliability of the data. 
Saadud kogemus ja elluviidud parandused aitavad kaasa teavitus-ssteemi efektiivsuse tstmisele ja andmete usaldatavusele.
According to the Commission Report on the Protection of the Financial Interests of the Community and Fight Against Fraud Ń Annual Report 2002 hereafter referred to as ÔCommission Report 2002 on the fight against fraudŐ, the highest amounts affected by the irregularities were reported in the fruit and vegetable sector. 
Vastavalt komisjoni 2002. aasta aruandele henduse finantshuvide kaitsmise ja pettustevastase vitluse kohta (edaspidi Ňkomisjoni 2002. aasta aruanne pettustevastase vitluse kohtaÓ) teatati suurimatest eeskirjade vastaselt makstud summadest puu-ja juurviljasektoris.
Member States were also informed of this trend in several meetings as Article 280 Working Group, Cocolaf and the Working Group ÔIrregularities and Mutual Assistance Ń Agricultural ProductsŐ. 
Ka liikmesriike teavitati sellest suundumusest mitmel artikli 280 tgrupi, COCOLAFi ning pllumajandustoodete puhul esinevaid eiramisi ja vastastikust abi ksitleva tgrupi kohtumisel.
The electronic data base storing the bulk of communications of irregularities transmitted by Member States has been subjected to a thorough quality check in 2003 by the Commission with the participation of Member States, which resulted in an improved internal consistency of the data while at the same time the figures were updated. 
Elektrooniline andmebaas, kus silitatakse suuremat osa liikmesriikide vljastatud eiramisteateid, lbis 2003. aastal phjaliku komisjonipoolse kvaliteedikontrolli, milles osalesid ka liikmesriigid ja tnu millele paranes andmete htlus, kusjuures samal ajal ajakohastati andmeid.