natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The investigation has shown that the increase in the price of silicon in the EU-10 or a switch to other alternative sources of supply is likely to have a minor effect on the production cost for the users in the EU-10.
Ta preiskava je pokazala, da bi lahko povečanje cene silicija v EU-10 ali preusmeritev k alternativnim virom preskrbe le neznatno vplivalo na proizvodne stroške za uporabnike v EU-10.
Increase in price of silicon from the PRC
Povečanje cene silicija iz LRK
In light of the abovementioned percentages of consumption of silicon in the production of secondary aluminium alloys and given that the anti-dumping duty on imports of silicon from the PRC is 49 %, the cost impact on secondary aluminium alloys producers would only range from 1,47 % to 6,6 % of the total cost of production of secondary aluminium alloys.
Glede na zgoraj omenjene odstotke potrošnje silicija pri proizvodnji sekundarnih aluminijevih zlitin in če znaša protidampinška dajatev na uvoz silicija iz LRK 49 %, bi se vpliv na stroške proizvajalcev sekundarnih aluminijevih zlitin gibal od 1,47 % do 6,6 % celotnih stroškov proizvodnje sekundarnih aluminijevih zlitin.
Switch to other alternative sources of supply
Preusmeritev k drugim alternativnim virom preskrbe
Some interested parties indicated that, by extending the anti-dumping measures to imports in the EU-10, alternative sources of supply of silicon had been sought but that such alternative sources had resulted in an increase of silicon prices of around 34 %.
Nekatere zainteresirane stranke so navedle, da so bili z razširitvijo protidampinških ukrepov na uvoz v EU-10 sicer najdeni alternativni viri preskrbe silicija, vendar so taki alternativni viri povzročili povečanje cene silicija za okoli 34 %.
In this regard, it was found that the cost impact for secondary aluminium alloys producers would be even less and would fall in the range of 1 % to 4,6 % of the total cost of secondary aluminium alloys production.
V zvezi s tem je bilo ugotovljeno, da bi bil vpliv na stroške za proizvajalce sekundarnih aluminijevih zlitin celo manjši in bi se gibal od 1 % do 4,6 % celotnih stroškov proizvodnje sekundarnih aluminijevih zlitin.
Comments received from the interested parties
Pripombe zainteresiranih strank
Several importers and users argued that there will be a lack of supply of silicon on the EU-10 market.
Več uvoznikov in uporabnikov je trdilo, da bo prišlo do pomanjkanja silicija na trgu EU-10.
However, as outlined in recitals 11, 19 and 20, after enlargement import volumes from the PRC into the EU-10 are progressively being replaced by silicon originating in the EU-15, Norway and Brazil.
Vendar, kakor je opisano v uvodnih izjavah (11), (19) in (20), se po širitvi obseg uvoza iz LRK v EU-10 postopoma nadomešča s silicijem s poreklom iz EU-15, Norveške in Brazilije.
There is therefore no reason to believe that there will be a shortage of silicon on the EU-10 market.
Zato ni razloga za domnevo, da bo prišlo do pomanjkanja silicija na trgu EU-10.
One of the users in the EU-10 as well as the Slovakian and Slovene authorities claimed that silicon from other sources is different in terms of quality to that of the PRC.
Eden od uporabnikov v EU-10 ter slovaški in slovenski organi so trdili, da se silicij iz drugih virov v kakovosti razlikuje od silicija iz LRK.
In this regard it is noted that Regulation (EC) No 398/2004 in concluding the expiry review of the anti-dumping measures imposed on imports of silicon originating in the PRC stated that the silicon produced in the PRC and exported to the Community, as well as the silicon produced in Norway and that manufactured in the Community by the Community producers had the same basic physical and chemical characteristics, and the same basic uses.
V zvezi s tem je treba poudariti, da Uredba (ES) št. 398/2004, s katero se je zaključil pregled zaradi izteka protidampinških ukrepov, uvedenih na uvoz silicija s poreklom iz LRK, navaja, da je imel silicij, proizveden v LRK in izvožen v Skupnost, kakor tudi silicij, proizveden na Norveškem, ter silicij, ki so ga proizvajalci Skupnosti proizvedli v Skupnosti, enake osnovne fizikalne in kemijske značilnosti ter enako osnovno uporabo.
Therefore they are considered to be like products within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation.
Zato se v smislu člena 1(4) osnovne uredbe štejejo za podobne izdelke.
It was noted that no adjustments in the terms of quality of the product had to be made.
Ugotovljeno je bilo, da glede kakovosti izdelka prilagoditve niso bile potrebne.
Therefore, there is no reason to believe that Chinese imports to the EU-10 replaced by the countries named above would differ in terms of quality.
Zato ni razloga za domnevo, da se kitajski uvoz v EU-10, ki so ga nadomestile zgoraj navedene države, razlikuje v kakovosti.
In addition, the increase of the imports from other countries, as outlined in recitals 11, 19 and 20 of this Regulation, indicates that the products are substitutable.
Iz povečanja uvoza iz drugih držav, kot je opisano v uvodnih izjavah (11), (19), in (20) te uredbe, je tudi razvidno, da so izdelki zamenljivi.
The same user also argued that the cost impact for secondary aluminium alloys producers is not negligible given the low profit margins of the same industry.
Isti uporabniki so tudi trdili, da vpliv na stroške proizvajalcev sekundarnih aluminijevih zlitin ni zanemarljiv glede na nizke stopnje dobička te industrije.
In this regard it is recalled that in recital 25 and 26 it was concluded that there will be a limited impact of the extension of anti-dumping measures on the users of silicon metal in the EU-10 with a maximum 6,6 % increase in the total cost of secondary aluminium alloys production.
V zvezi s tem je treba opozoriti, da je bilo v uvodnih izjavah (25) in (26) ugotovljeno, da bodo razširjeni protidampinški ukrepi le omejeno vplivali na uporabnike silicijeve kovine v EU-10 z največ 6,6 % povečanjem celotnih stroškov proizvodnje sekundarnih aluminijevih zlitin.
However, this was not a compelling reason to such extent as to modify the existing measures by introducing transitional arrangements.
To ni bil dovolj prepričljiv razlog za spremembo obstoječih ukrepov z uvedbo prehodnih ureditev.
Indeed, this impact was not materially different from the impact estimated in the EU-15 during the investigation leading to the imposition of the definitive measures in 2004, where it was concluded that the measures in force would not have a significant effect on users.
Vpliv se ni bistveno razlikoval od vpliva, ocenjenega med preiskavo za EU-15, ki je pripeljala do uvedbe dokončnih ukrepov v letu 2004 in ki je pokazala, da veljavni ukrepi ne bodo imeli pomembnega vpliva na uporabnike.
Given the limited impact of the duty on the cost of manufacturing of aluminium alloys in the EU-10 and the existence of alternative sources of supply to the EU-10, it is concluded that the extension of the existing measures from the EU-15 to the EU-10 would not likely cause a sudden and excessively negative effect on interested parties, including users, distributors and consumers.
Glede na omejen vpliv dajatve na stroške proizvodnje aluminijevih zlitin v EU-10 in obstoj alternativnih virov preskrbe EU-10 se ugotavlja, da razširitev sedanjih ukrepov z EU-15 na EU-10 ne bi imela nenadnega in prevelikega negativnega učinka na zainteresirane stranke, vključno z uporabniki, distributerji in potrošniki.
Therefore, no transitional arrangements are warranted,
Zato prehodni ukrepi niso upravičeni –
The partial interim review of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of silicon originating in the People’s Republic of China, initiated pursuant to Article 11(3) and 22(c) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96, is hereby terminated.
Delni vmesni pregled protidampinških ukrepov, ki se uporabljajo pri uvozu silicija s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske, začet v skladu s členoma 11(3) in 22(c) Uredbe (ES) št. 384/96, se zaključi.
OJ L 66, 4.3.2004, p. 15.
UL L 66, 4.3.2004, str. 15.
The product under consideration is the same as in the investigation which led to the imposition of the existing measures, i.e. silicon metal originating in the PRC, classifiable within CN code 28046900 (silicon content less than 99,99 % by weight). Purely by reason of the current classification set out in the Customs nomenclature, it should read ‘silicon’.
Obravnavani izdelek je isti kakor v preiskavi, ki je privedla do uvedbe obstoječih ukrepov, tj. silicijeva kovina s poreklom iz LRK, ki se uvršča pod oznako KN 28046900 (vsebnost silicija manj kot 99,99 mas. %), in se mora zgolj zaradi sedanje razvrstitve v carinski nomenklaturi imenovati „silicij“.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 786/2005
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 786/2005
This Regulation shall enter into force on 26 May 2005.
Ta uredba začne veljati 26. maja 2005.
to Commission Regulation of 25 May 2005 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
k Uredbi Komisije z dne 25. maja 2005 o določitvi pavšalnih uvoznih vrednosti za določanje vhodne cene nekaterega sadja in zelenjave
Commission Regulation (EC) No 787/2005
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 787/2005
In the week of 16 to 20 May 2005 applications were presented to the competent authorities in line with Article 5(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1159/2003 for import licences for a total quantity exceeding a country's delivery obligation quantity of ACP-India preferential sugar determined pursuant to Article 9 of that Regulation.
Zahtevki so bili predloženi zadevnim organom v tednu od 16. do 20. maja 2005, v skladu s členom 5(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 1159/2003, za izdajo uvoznih dovoljenj za celotno količino, ki presega obvezno količino za dostavo za zadevno državo, določeno v skladu s členom 9 Uredbe (ES) št. 1159/2003 za preferenčni sladkor AKP-Indija.
In the case of import licence applications presented from 16 to 20 May 2005 in line with Article 5(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1159/2003 licences shall be issued for the quantities indicated in the Annex to this Regulation.
Na podlagi zahtevkov za uvozna dovoljenja, vloženih od 16. do 20. maja 2005 v okviru člena 5(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 1159/2003, se dovoljenja izdajo v mejah količin, določenih v Prilogi k tej uredbi.
Week of 16.-20.5.2005: percentage of requested quantity to be granted
% za dostavo zahtevanih količin v tednu od 16.–20.5.2005
2005/06 marketing year
Tržno leto 2005/2006
Commission Regulation (EC) No 788/2005
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 788/2005
Commission Regulation (EC) No 291/2005 [3] fixed the indicative quantities for the issue of B system export licences.
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 291/2005 [3] je določila okvirne količine za izdajo izvoznih dovoljenj sistema B.
The definitive rate of refund for tomatoes, oranges, lemons and apples covered by licences applied for under system B between 16 March 2005 to 13 May 2005, should be fixed at the indicative rate, and the percentage of licences to be issued for the quantities applied for should be laid down,
Treba je določiti končno stopnjo nadomestila za paradižnike, pomaranče, limone in jabolka, zajete v dovoljenjih, zaprošenih v okviru sistema B med 16. marcem 2005 in 13. majem 2005, v višini okvirne stopnje in odstotka dovoljenj za zaprošene količine –
For applications for system B export licences submitted pursuant to Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 291/2005 between 16 March 2005 and 13 May 2005, the percentages of licences to be issued and the rates of refund applicable are fixed in the Annex hereto.
Za zahtevke za izvozna dovoljenja sistema B, vložene v skladu s členom 1 Uredbe (ES) št. 291/2005 med 16. marcem 2005 in 13. majem 2005, so odstotki izdaje dovoljenj in stopnje veljavnega nadomestila določeni v Prilogi k Uredbi.
Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 386/2005 (OJ L 62, 9.3.2005, p. 3).
Uredba, kakor je bila nazadnje spremenjena z Uredbo (ES) št. 386/2005 (UL L 62, 9.3.2005, str. 3).
OJ L 49, 22.2.2005, p. 4.
UL L 49, 22.2.2005, str. 4.
Percentages for the issuing of licences and rates of refund applicable to system B licences applied for between 16 March 2005 to 13 May 2005 (tomatoes, oranges, lemons and apples)
Odstotki za izdajo dovoljenj in stopnje nadomestila, ki se uporabljajo za dovoljenja sistema B, zaprošena med 16. marcem 2005 in 13. majem 2005 (paradižniki, pomaranče, limone in jabolka)
Commission Regulation (EC) No 789/2005
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 789/2005
amending Regulation (EEC) No 1858/93 laying down detailed rules for applying Council Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 as regards the aid scheme to compensate for loss of income from marketing in the banana sector
o spremembi Uredbe (EGS) št. 1858/93 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za uporabo Uredbe Sveta (EGS) št. 404/93 v zvezi s programi pomoči za nadomestitev izpada dohodka od prodaje v sektorju banan
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 of 13 February 1993 on the common organisation of the market in bananas [1], and in particular Article 14 thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Sveta (EGS) št. 404/93 z dne 13. februarja 1993 o skupni ureditvi trga za banane [1] in zlasti člena 14 Uredbe,
Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1858/93 [2] lays down the detailed rules for applying Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 as regards the submission of applications for advances and payment of the balance of the compensatory aid for loss of income from marketing in the banana sector, as provided for by Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 404/93.
Člen 7 Uredbe Komisije (EGS) št. 1858/93 [2] določa podrobna pravila za uporabo Uredbe (EGS) št. 404/93 glede vlaganja zahtevkov za predplačilo kot tudi zahtevkov za plačilo razlike pomoči za nadomestitev izpada dohodka od prodaje v sektorju banan, kot določa člen 12 Uredbe (EGS) št. 404/93.
With a view to sound management and to obtaining by year-end all the data and information needed to fix the aid in particular, penalties should be provided for where there is a delay in the submission of applications for payment of the balance.
S ciljem dobrega upravljanja in da bi v najkrajšem možnem času, do konca leta, razpolagali z vsemi podatki in informacijami, potrebnimi predvsem za določitev pomoči, morajo biti predvidene sankcije za primer prepozne vložitve zahtevka za plačilo razlike pomoči.
The supporting documents that must accompany the payment applications should also be specified and these documents must include proof of the goods’ actual sale, in particular their acceptance by the buyer.
Prav tako je treba natančno določiti, kateri dokazilni dokumenti morajo spremljati zahtevke za plačilo, in navesti, da morajo ti dokumenti vsebovati dokazilo o prodaji blaga, še posebej o prejemu s strani kupca.
Regulation (EEC) No 1858/93 should therefore be amended accordingly.
Uredbo (EGS) št. 1858/93 je zato treba ustrezno spremeniti.
Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 1858/93 is hereby amended as follows:
Člen 7 Uredbe (EGS) št. 1858/93 se spremeni:
The third subparagraph of paragraph 2(b) is replaced by the following:
V odstavku 2(b) se tretja alinea nadomesti z naslednjim:
‘Where applications for payment of the balance are submitted after the date referred to in point (b) of the first subparagraph, a 1 % reduction per working day shall be applied to the amount of the balance to which the producer would have been entitled had the application been submitted in time.
„Vložitev zahtevka za plačilo razlike pomoči po datumu iz točke (b) prve alinee povzroči, da se znesek razlike, do katere bi bil proizvajalec ob vlogi v predpisanem roku upravičen, zmanjša za 1 % na delovni dan.
Where the delay exceeds 15 days, the application shall be inadmissible.
Če je zamuda daljša od petnajstih dni, zahtevek ni sprejemljiv.
In duly justified exceptional cases, the competent authority may accept applications for payment of the balance after the date referred to in point (b) of the first subparagraph, if this delay does not prevent the checks under Article 10(1) from going ahead.
V izjemnih in ustrezno utemeljenih primerih lahko pristojni organ sprejme zahtevke za plačilo razlike, vložene po datumu iz točke (b) prve alinee, če zakasnitev ne predstavlja ovire za izvedbo preverjanja iz člena 10(1).
In such cases the provisions of the preceding subparagraph shall not apply.’
V takem primeru se določbe iz prejšnje alinee ne uporabijo.“
Paragraph (4) is replaced by the following:
Odstavek 4 se nadomesti z naslednjim:
Applications shall be accompanied by the following:
Zahtevku se priložijo naslednji dokumenti:
the certificates of conformity or, if appropriate, the certificate of exemption referred to in Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2898/95,sales invoices,
potrdila o ustreznosti ali, kadar je to primerno, potrdilo o oprostitvi iz člena 7 Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 2898/95,računi,
the transport documents, in the case of bananas marketed outside the production region.
transportni dokumenti za banane, ki se prodajajo izven proizvodnega območja.
The documents submitted must prove that the goods have been accepted by the buyer.
Predloženi dokumenti morajo dokazovati prejem blaga s strani kupca.
The following paragraph 4a is inserted:
Doda se naslednji odstavek 4a:
Applications without the information referred to in paragraph 3 and not accompanied by the supporting documents and proofs mentioned in paragraph 4 shall be inadmissible.’
Zahtevki, ki ne vsebujejo navedb iz odstavka 3 in niso opremljeni s spremnimi dokumenti in dokazili iz odstavka 4, niso sprejemljivi.“
However, Article 1(2) and (3) shall apply for the first time to applications for advances relating to the quantities marketed in May and June 2005.
Vendar pa se člen 1(2) in (3) prvič uporabi pri zahtevkih za predplačilo za količine, prodane v maju in juniju 2005.
OJ L 304, 16.12.1995, p. 17.’
UL L 304, 16.12.1995, str. 17.“
Commission Regulation (EC) No 790/2005
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 790/2005
amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2406/96 laying down common marketing standards for certain fishery products
o spremembi Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 2406/96 o določitvi skupnih tržnih standardov za nekatere ribiške proizvode
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 104/2000 of 17 December 1999 on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products [1], and in particular Article 2(3) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 104/2000 z dne 17. decembra 1999 o skupni tržni ureditvi za ribiške proizvode in proizvode iz ribogojstva [1] in zlasti člena 2(3) Uredbe,
Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 104/2000 provides that common marketing standards may be determined for the products or groups of these products listed in Article 1 of that Regulation.
Člen 2(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 104/2000 določa, da se za proizvode iz člena 1 navedene uredbe ali skupine teh proizvodov lahko določijo skupni tržni standardi.
Annex IV to Regulation (EC) No 104/2000 lists certain species which are subject to intervention mechanisms.
Priloga IV k Uredbi (ES) št. 104/2000 našteva nekatere vrste, za katere veljajo intervencijski mehanizmi.
The 2003 Act of Accession provided for sprat to be added to that Annex.
Akt o pristopu iz leta 2003 določa, da se papalina doda k navedeni prilogi.
The setting of common marketing standards, harmonised throughout the Community, is of particular importance for the proper operation of the intervention mechanisms laid down in Regulation (EC) No 104/2000.
Vzpostavitev skupnih tržnih standardov, usklajenih po vsej Skupnosti, je zlasti pomembna za pravilno delovanje intervencijskih mehanizmov, določenih z Uredbo (ES) št. 104/2000.
Council Regulation (EC) No 2406/96 of 26 November 1996 laying down common marketing standards for certain fishery products [2], does not fix standards for sprat.
O spremembi Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 2406/96 z dne 26. novembra 1996 o določitvi skupnih tržnih standardov za nekatere ribiške proizvode [2] določa, da se papalina doda k navedeni prilogi.
That Regulation should be amended in order to cover sprat.
Navedeno uredbo je treba spremeniti tako, da bo zajemala tudi papalino.
Regulation (EC) No 2406/96 is amended as follows:
Uredba (ES) št. 2406/96 se spremeni na naslednji način:
in Article 3(1)(a), the following indent is added:
V členu 3(1) se doda naslednja alinea:
Sprat (Sprattus sprattus)’;
Papalina (Sprattus sprattus)“;
Annexes I and II are amended as follows:
Prilogi I in II se spremenita:
in Annex I, point B (Bluefish), the word ‘sprat’ is added;
V točki B (modra riba) Priloge I se doda beseda „papalina“.
in Annex II, the entry set out in the text in the Annex to this Regulation is added.
V Prilogi II se doda vnos, določen v Prilogi k tej uredbi.
OJ L 334, 23.12.1996, p. 1.
UL L 334, 23.12.1996, str. 1.
Scale of weights
Lestvica tež
Minimum sizes to be observed in the conditions laid down in the Regulations referred to in Article 7
Najmanjše velikosti, ki naj se opazujejo pod pogoji, predpisanimi v uredbah iz člena 7
Kg/fish
Kg/ribo
No of fish/kg
Število rib/kg
0,004 and over
0,004 in več
250 or less
250 ali manj
Commission Regulation (EC) No 791/2005
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 791/2005
This Regulation shall enter into force on 27 May 2005.
Ta uredba začne veljati 27. maja 2005.
Done at Brussels, 26 May 2005.
V Bruslju, 26. maja 2005
to Commission Regulation of 26 May 2005 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
k Uredbi Komisije z dne 26. maja 2005 o določitvi pavšalnih uvoznih vrednosti za določanje vhodne cene nekaterega sadja in zelenjave
Commission Regulation (EC) No 792/2005
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 792/2005
modifying Regulation (EC) No 348/2005 derogating from Regulation (EC) No 174/1999 as regards the term of validity of export licences in the milk and milk products sector
o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 348/2005 o odstopanju od Uredbe (ES) št. 174/1999 glede roka veljavnosti izvoznih dovoljenj za sektor mleka in mlečnih izdelkov
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products [1], and in particular Article 31(14) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1255/1999 z dne 17. maja 1999 o skupni ureditvi trga za mleko in mlečne izdelke [1] in zlasti člena 31(14) Uredbe,
Article 6 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 174/1999 of 26 January 1999 laying down special detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 as regards export licences and export refunds in the case of milk and milk products [2] lays down the term of validity of export licences.
Člen 6 Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 174/1999 z dne 26. januarja 1999 o posebnih podrobnih pravilih za uporabo Uredbe Sveta (EGS) št. 804/68 glede izvoznih dovoljenj in izvoznih nadomestil za mleko in mlečne izdelke [2] določa rok veljavnosti izvoznih dovoljenj.
As a precautionary measure, with a view to protect the Community budget from unnecessary expenditures and to avoid a speculative application of the export refund regime in the dairy sector, Commission Regulation (EC) No 348/2005 [3] provided for that, by way of derogation from Regulation (EC) No 174/1999, the term of validity of export licences for milk products for which an application has been lodged from 2 March 2005 on should be limited to 30 June 2005.
Za zaščito proračuna Skupnosti pred nepotrebnimi odhodki in da bi se izognili špekulativni uporabi režima izvoznih nadomestil v sektorju mleka in mlečnih izdelkov, Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 348/2005 [3] z odstopanjem od Uredbe (ES) št. 174/1999 kot previdnostni ukrep določa, da mora biti rok veljavnosti izvoznih dovoljenj za mlečne izdelke, za katere je bila vložena prošnja po 2. marcu 2005, omejen na 30. junij 2005.
A close monitoring of both the internal and the world market has shown a longer validity period of the licences may be progressively re-established without any risk of destabilisation of the proper functioning of the common market organisation.
Natančno spremljanje tako notranjega kot svetovnega trga je pokazalo, da bi se postopno lahko znova uvedla daljša veljavnost dovoljenj brez vpliva na stabilnost delovanja skupne tržne ureditve.
It is therefore appropriate to modify Regulation (EC) No 348/2005.
Uredbo (ES) št. 348/2005 je zato treba ustrezno spremeniti.
Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 348/2005 is replaced by the following:
Člen 1 Uredbe (ES) št. 348/2005 se nadomesti z naslednjim: