natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
During its second meeting from 6 to 10 November 2006, the POP Review Committee concluded that SCCPs meet the screening criteria listed in Annex D to the Convention as reported in Decision POPRC-2/8 [12].
Na svojem drugem sestanku od 6. do 10. novembra 2006 je odbor za pregled POP sklenil, da SCCP izpolnjujejo merila za pregled iz Priloge D konvencije, kot je zapisano v poročilu iz Sklepa POPRC-2/8 [12].
This Decision also recommended that a draft risk profile should be prepared in accordance with Annex E to the Convention.
Navedeni sklep je tudi priporočil, da se pripravi osnutek profila tveganja v skladu s Prilogo E konvencije.
In case SCCPs will eventually be included in the Stockholm Convention under one of the relevant Annexes, the European Commission will propose corresponding measures either under Directive 76/769/EEC or under Regulation (EC) No 850/2004 that would lead to a tightening of the existing restrictions.
Če bodo SCCP vključeni v eno od ustreznih prilog Stockholmske konvencije, bo Evropska komisija predlagala ustrezne ukrepe v okviru Direktive 76/769/EGS ali Uredbe (ES) št. 850/2004, ki bi še zaostrili sedanje omejitve.
The procedural steps linked to the first notification by the Kingdom of The Netherlands of 17 January 2003, in accordance with Article 95(4) of the Treaty are described in Section II of Decision 2004/1/EC.
Postopek v zvezi s prvim uradnim obvestilom Kraljevine Nizozemske z dne 17. januarja 2003 v skladu s členom 95(4) Pogodbe je opisan v oddelku II Odločbe Komisije 2004/1/ES.
On 16 December 2003, pursuant to 95(6), the Commission notified the Kingdom of the Netherlands of its Decision 2004/1/EC of the same date, whereby the Commission approved the national provisions on SCCPs notified by the Netherlands on 21 January 2003 in so far as they do not apply to the use of SCCPs as constituents of other substances and preparations in concentrations lower than 1 % intended for use as plasticisers in paints, coatings, or sealants, and flame retardants in rubbers or textiles.
Komisija je 16. decembra 2003 v skladu s členom 95(6) Kraljevino Nizozemsko uradno obvestila o Odločbi 2004/1/ES sprejeti istega dne, s katero je Komisija odobrila nacionalne določbe o SCCP, o katerih je Nizozemska 21. januarja 2003 poslala uradno obvestilo v delu, ki se ne nanaša na uporabo SCCP kot sestavin drugih snovi in pripravkov s koncentracijo manj kot 1 %, namenjenih uporabi kot plastifikatorji v barvah, premazih, tesnilnih masah in zaviralcih gorenja v gumi ali tekstilu.
This derogation was valid until 31 December 2006.
To odstopanje je veljalo do 31. decembra 2006.
After the adoption of Decision 2004/1/EC authorising the Netherlands to partially maintain their national provisions, the Netherlands has not amended the national measures in order to comply with the provisions of that Decision.
Po sprejetju Odločbe 2004/1/ES, ki je Nizozemski odobrila delno ohranitev nacionalnih določb, Nizozemska ni spremenila nacionalnih predpisov, da bi jih uskladila z določbami navedene odločbe.
Instead, the Netherlands have requested before the European Court of Justice the annulment of Decision 2004/1/EC on the basis of Article 230 of the Treaty (reference T-234/04, ex-case C-103/04) and this case is still pending before the Court of First Instance.
Namesto tega je Nizozemska pri Evropskem sodišču zahtevala razveljavitev Odločbe 2004/1/ES na podlagi člena 230 Pogodbe (referenca T-234/04, prej C-103/04), ta primer pa je še v obravnavi na Sodišču prve stopnje.
In their request, the Netherlands contest the fact that an authorisation is necessary for the implementation of the national measures concerning applications of SCCPs which are not referred to in Directive 2002/45/EC.
V svoji zahtevi Nizozemska spodbija določbo, da je za izvajanje nacionalnih ukrepov o uporabi SCCP, ki niso navedeni v Direktivi 2002/45/ES, potrebna odobritev.
By letter of 8 December 2006 of the Permanent Representation of the Kingdom of The Netherlands to the European Union, the Dutch Government, referring to Article 95(4) of the Treaty, notified for the second time to the Commission its national provisions on the use of SCCPs that it intends to maintain after the adoption of Directive 2002/45/EC.
Z dopisom z dne 8. decembra 2006 je nizozemska vlada prek Stalnega predstavništva Kraljevine Nizozemske pri Evropski uniji v skladu s členom 95(4) Pogodbe drugič uradno obvestila Komisijo o svojih nacionalnih določbah o uporabi SCCP, ki jih namerava ohraniti po sprejetju Direktive 2002/45/ES.
The notification of 8 December 2006 has the same object as the notification of 17 January 2003, which is the approval of the provisions of the Chlorinated Paraffins Decision of the Dangerous Substances Act.
Uradno obvestilo z dne 8. decembra 2006 obravnava isti predmet kot uradno obvestilo z dne 17. januarja 2003, torej odobritev določb sklepa o kloriranih parafinih iz zakona o nevarnih snoveh.
As the Netherlands have not submitted new national provisions in their notification, the Commission assumes that the national measures notified are those notified in January 2003: the Decision of 3 November 1999, laying down rules prohibiting certain uses of short-chain chlorinated paraffins.
Ker Nizozemska v svojem uradnem obvestilu ni navedla novih nacionalnih določb, Komisija domneva, da gre za iste nacionalne predpise kot januarja 2003: Sklep z dne 3. novembra 1999 o prepovedi nekaterih načinov uporabe kloriranih parafinov s kratkimi verigami (sklep o kloriranih parafinih, zakon o kemičnih snoveh (WMS)) (Staatsblad van het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden, Jaargang 1999, 478).
By letters of 15 December 2006 and 20 December 2006, the Commission informed the Dutch Government that it had received the notification under Article 95(4) of the Treaty and that the six-month period for its examination under Article 95(6) started on 9 December 2006, the day following the day on which the notification was received.
Z dopisoma z dne 15. decembra 2006 in z dne 20. decembra 2006 je Komisija nizozemsko vlado obvestila, da je prejela uradno obvestilo v skladu s členom 95(4) Pogodbe in da je šestmesečni rok za pregled obvestila v skladu s členom 95(6) začel teči 9. decembra 2006, dan po prejetju uradnega obvestila.
By letter of 30 January 2007, the Commission informed the other Member States of the notification received from the Netherlands.
Z dopisom z dne 30. januarja 2007 je Komisija druge države članice obvestila o uradnem obvestilu, ki ga je prejela od Nizozemske.
The Commission also published a notice regarding the notification in the Official Journal of the European Union [13] in order to inform other interested parties of the national provisions that the Netherlands intends to maintain as well as of the grounds invoked to that effect.
Komisija je v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [13] objavila tudi obvestilo o uradnem obvestilu, s katerim je drugim zainteresiranim stranem posredovala informacije o nacionalnih določbah, ki jih namerava ohraniti Nizozemska, in o razlogih, na katere se sklicuje.
At the end of the commenting period (30 days after publication) no Member State or other stakeholder had submitted comments.
Do konca obdobja za predložitev pripomb (30 dni po objavi) nobena država članica ali druga zainteresirana stran ni predložila pripomb.
Consideration of Admissibility
Obravnava dopustnosti
In Recitals 38 and 39 of Decision 2004/1/EC, the Commission concluded that the application submitted by the Kingdom of the Netherlands was admissible.
V uvodnih izjavah 38 in 39 Odločbe 2004/1/ES je Komisija navedla, da je bila zahteva Kraljevine Nizozemske sprejemljiva.
Reference is made to that Decision for the purposes of the present Decision.
Odločba je navedena za namene te odločbe.
It is nonetheless useful to recall the aspects in which the notified national provisions are incompatible with the requirements of Directive 2002/45/EC.
Vseeno pa je koristno opozoriti na vidike, v katerih so priglašene nacionalne določbe nezdružljive z zahtevami Direktive 2002/45/ES.
In summary, the notified national provisions departs from the requirements of Directive 2002/45/EC in the following respects:
Na kratko, priglašene nacionalne določbe se z zahtevami Direktive 2002/45/ES razhajajo v naslednjih točkah:
the use of SCCPs with a chlorination degree of not less than 48 % as plasticising substances in paints, coatings or sealants and as flame-retardant substances in rubber, plastics or textiles, which is not subject to restrictions on marketing and use under the Directive, is prohibited in the Netherlands,
uporaba SCCP s stopnjo kloriranja vsaj 48 % kot plastifikatorjev v barvah, premazih ali tesnilnih masah in kot zaviralcev gorenja v gumi, plastičnih masah ali tekstilu, za katere v skladu z Direktivo ne veljajo omejitve za trženje in uporabo, je na Nizozemskem prepovedana,
the use in metal working fluids of substances and preparations in which SCCPs with a chlorination degree of not less than 48 % are present as constituents, which is not subject to restrictions on marketing and use under the Directive if SCCPs are present in a concentration below 1 %, is prohibited in the Netherlands.
uporaba snovi in pripravkov v tekočinah za obdelovanje kovin, v katerih so kot sestavina prisotni SCCP s stopnjo kloriranja vsaj 48 %, za katere v skladu z Direktivo ne veljajo omejitve za trženje in uporabo, če so SCCP prisotni v koncentraciji nižji kot 1 %, je na Nizozemskem prepovedana.
Merits
Glavna dejstva
In accordance with Article 95(4) and (6), first subparagraph, of the Treaty, the Commission must ascertain that all the conditions enabling a Member State to maintain its national provisions derogating from a Community harmonisation measure provided for in that Article are fulfilled.
V skladu s členom 95(4) in prvega pododstavka člena 95(6) Pogodbe mora Komisija zagotoviti, da so izpolnjene vse zahteve iz navedenega člena, ki državi članici omogočajo ohraniti njene nacionalne določbe, ki odstopajo od usklajevalnega ukrepa Skupnosti.
In particular, the Commission has to assess whether or not the national provisions are justified by the major needs referred to in Article 30 of the Treaty or relating to the protection of the environment or the working environment and do not exceed what is necessary to attain the legitimate objective pursued.
Komisija mora zlasti oceniti, ali so nacionalne določbe utemeljene na podlagi pomembnih potreb iz člena 30 Pogodbe oziroma ali so povezane z varstvom okolja ali delovnega okolja ter ne presegajo potrebnega, da se doseže zastavljeni legitimni cilj.
In addition, when the Commission considers that the national provisions fulfil the above conditions, it must verify, pursuant to Article 95(6), whether or not the national provisions are a means of arbitrary discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade between Member States and whether or not they constitute an obstacle to the functioning of the internal market.
Poleg tega mora Komisija v skladu s členom 95(6), kadar meni, da nacionalne določbe izpolnjujejo zgoraj navedene zahteve, preveriti, ali so nacionalne določbe sredstvo samovoljne diskriminacije ali prikrita omejitev trgovine med državami članicami in ali ovirajo delovanje notranjega trga.
It has to be noted that, in the light of the time frame established by Article 95(6) of the EC Treaty, the Commission, when examining whether the national measures notified under Article 95(4) are justified, has to take as a basis ‘the grounds’ put forward by the notifying Member State.
Treba je opozoriti, da mora Komisija v okviru časovnega roka iz člena 95(6) Pogodbe ES pri preučevanju, ali so priglašeni nacionalni ukrepi na podlagi člena 95(4) utemeljeni, upoštevati „razloge“, ki jih je predložila država članica, ki je poslala uradno obvestilo.
This means that, according to the provisions of the EC Treaty, the responsibility of proving that the national measures are justified lies with the requesting Member State which seeks to maintain them.
To pomeni, da mora v skladu z določbami Pogodbe ES država članica, ki je predložila zahtevo in želi nacionalne ukrepe ohraniti, dokazati, da so ti utemeljeni.
Given the procedural framework established by Article 95 paragraph 4 and 6 of the EC Treaty, including in particular a strict deadline for a decision to be adopted, the Commission normally has to limit itself to examining the relevance of the elements which are submitted by the requesting Member State, without having to seek itself possible reasons of justifications.
Ob upoštevanju postopkovnega okvira, ki ga določa člen 95(4) in (6) Pogodbe ES, vključno zlasti s strogim rokom za sprejetje odločbe, bi se Komisija morala omejiti na preučitev ustreznosti elementov, ki jih ob vlogi zahteve predložijo države članice, ne da bi ji bilo treba sami iskati možne utemeljitve.
However, where the Commission is in the possession of information in the light of which the Community harmonisation measure from which the notified national provisions derogate may need to be reviewed, it can take such information into consideration in the assessment of the notified national provisions.
Če pa Komisija razpolaga z informacijami, v luči katerih bi bilo treba usklajevalni ukrep Skupnosti, od katerega predložene nacionalne določbe odstopajo, pregledati, lahko take informacije upošteva pri ocenjevanju priglašenih nacionalnih določb.
The justification of the national provisions on grounds of major needs have been examined at great length in section III.2 of Decision 2004/1/EC.
Utemeljitev nacionalnih določb na podlagi pomembnih potreb obsežno obravnava oddelek III.2 Odločbe 2004/1/ES.
According to the findings in that Decision (Recitals 55 and 56), the national provisions, in so far as they prohibit the use of SCCPs as a constituent of other substances and preparations in metal-working can be justified by the need to protect the environment.
V skladu z ugotovitvami v navedeni odločbi (uvodni izjavi 55 in 56) se lahko nacionalne odločbe glede prepovedi uporabe SCCP kot sestavine drugih snovi in pripravkov za obdelavo kovin utemeljijo s potrebo po varstvu okolja.
In the absence of any further information suggesting the legitimate objective pursued can be attained by less restrictive measures, such as, in particular, a lower concentration limit for SCCPs as constituents of other substances and preparations, it was concluded that the national provisions do not appear to exceed what is necessary to attain that objective.
Ob odsotnosti nadaljnjih informacij, ki bi kazale na to, da bi bilo možno zastavljeni legitimni cilj doseči z manj omejevalnimi ukrepi, kot je zlasti nižja omejitev koncentracije za SCCP kot sestavin drugih snovi in pripravkov, je bilo sklenjeno, da nacionalne določbe naj ne bi presegale, kar je potrebno za dosego navedenega cilja.
Furthermore, Decision 2004/1/EC concluded in Recital 66 concerning the remaining uses of SCCPs as substances that taking into account the precautionary principle, the national provisions, in so far as they prohibit the remaining uses of SCCPs, could remain in place for a limited period of time in order not to interrupt existing measures that may appear justified in the light of a forthcoming risk assessment.
Odločba 2004/1/ES je v uvodni izjavi 66 o preostalih načinih uporabe SCCP ugotovila, da se lahko nacionalne določbe ob upoštevanju previdnostnega načela v delu, ki prepoveduje preostale načine uporabe SCCP, ohranijo za omejen čas, da se obstoječi ukrepi, ki so v luči predvidene nove ocene tveganja morda utemeljeni, ne prekinejo.
Decision 2004/1/EC concluded in Recital 68 concerning the prohibition of use of SCCPs as constituents of other substances and preparations based on the opinion of the SCTEE of 3 October 2003, that the national provisions are not justified, except in plastics, where possible problems might occur.
Odločba 2004/1/ES je v uvodni izjavi 68 o prepovedi uporabe SCCP kot sestavine v drugih snoveh in pripravkih na osnovi mnenja SCTEE z dne 3. oktobra 2003 ugotovila, da nacionalne določbe niso utemeljene, razen za uporabo v plastičnih masah, kadar lahko pride do težav.
In summary, Decision 2004/1/EC authorised the national provisions in so far as they did not apply to the use of SCCPs as constituents of other substances and preparations in concentrations lower than 1 % intended for use as plasticisers in paints, coatings or sealants, and flame retardants in rubber or textiles.
Skratka, Odločba 2004/1/ES je odobrila nacionalne določbe v delu, ki se ne nanaša na uporabo SCCP kot sestavin drugih snovi in pripravkov s koncentracijo manj kot 1 %, namenjenih uporabi kot plastifikatorji v barvah, premazih ali tesnilnih masah in kot zaviralci gorenja v gumi ali tekstilu.
The Decision was based on the scientific evidence available at the time and the precautionary principle.
Odločba je temeljila na znanstvenih dokazih, ki so bili takrat na razpolago, in na previdnostnem načelu.
In their new request, the Netherlands do not submit any new information compared to the request of 2003.
V novi zahtevi Nizozemska ni predložila nobenih novih informacij v primerjavi z zahtevo iz leta 2003.
On the other hand, there have been further developments at European level that have increased the available knowledge base.
Po drugi strani pa je prišlo do nadaljnjega razvoja na evropski ravni, na podlagi katerega se je povečalo razpoložljivo znanje.
The results of the biodegradation testing required under Regulation (EC) No 642/2005 seem to suggest that the mineralisation rate is slow so that the persistence criterion of PBT substances will be met.
Zdi se, da rezultati testiranja biorazgradnje, ki ga določa Uredba (ES) št. 642/2005, kažejo, da je mineralizacija počasna, tako da bo merilo obstojnosti snovi PBT izpolnjeno.
The updated draft risk assessment presented by the UK authorities during the TCNES III meeting in 2005 indicated that for certain applications new risks were identified and also based on the most recent consumption data of SCCP.
Novi osnutek ocene tveganja, ki so ga na sestanku predstavili organi Združenega kraljestva TCNES III leta 2005, je nakazal, da so bila za določene načine uporabe ugotovljena nova tveganja, tudi na podlagi zadnjih podatkov o porabi SCCP.
The UK Rapporteur has in particular identified new risks from the use of SCCPs in textile back-coating application and rubber compounding/conversion.
Poročevalec Združenega kraljestva je zlasti ugotovil nova tveganja pri uporabi SCCP v premazih za zunanjo stran tekstilov ter pri mešanju in predelavi gume.
The updated risk assessment was agreed by written procedure and will be published soon by the Commission.
Dogovor o novi oceni tveganja je bil sprejet s pisnim postopkom, Komisija pa bo oceno kmalu objavila.
It will be sent to the SCHER for review, if appropriate.
Po potrebi bo poslana v pregled SCHER.
If the new risks identified require additional risk management measures for some uses of SCCPs other than metal working and fat liquoring of leather, the Commission will adopt other risk reduction measures in addition to those already adopted in Directive 2002/45/EC.
Če ugotovljena nova tveganja zahtevajo dodatne ukrepe za obvladovanje tveganja za nekatere načine uporabe SCCP, razen za obdelavo kovin in mastitev usnja, bo Komisija poleg že sprejetih ukrepov v Direktivi 2002/45/ES sprejela nadaljnje ukrepe za zmanjšanje tveganja.
The precise scope of any such further restrictions is currently unclear.
Natančen obseg nadaljnjih omejitev je še nejasen.
Furthermore, the ongoing evaluations of the Community notifications of SCCPs as candidates under the UNECE POPs Protocol and the Stockholm Convention on POPs, respectively, and the possible inclusion of the substances into one or both international agreements might lead to further restrictions in the framework of Regulation (EC) No 850/2004.
Poleg tega lahko vrednotenja uradnih obvestil Skupnosti o SCCP kot kandidatih v okviru protokola UNECE o POP oziroma Stockholmske konvencije o POP, ki trenutno potekajo, in možna vključitev teh snovi v enega ali oba mednarodna sporazuma vodijo v sprejetje nadaljnjih omejitev v okviru Uredbe (ES) št. 850/2004.
In any case, it is possible that such further restrictions would concern applications that are currently still allowed under Community legislation but are already prohibited under the Dutch national legislation.
V vsakem primeru je možno, da bodo navedene nadaljnje omejitve zadevale načine uporabe, ki so v skladu z zakonodajo Skupnosti trenutno še dovoljeni, nizozemska nacionalna zakonodaja pa jih že prepoveduje.
In these circumstances and taking into account the precautionary principle, the national provisions applied by Netherlands can be considered justified in their entirety until such time that Community measures, taking full account of the latest scientific data, will be adopted under Directive 76/769/EEC, or under Regulation (EC) No 850/2004.
V teh okoliščinah in ob upoštevanju previdnostnega načela se lahko nacionalne določbe, ki se uporabljajo na Nizozemskem, v celoti štejejo kot utemeljene, dokler ne bodo v skladu z Direktivo 76/769/EGS ali z Uredbo (ES) št. 850/2004 sprejeti ukrepi Skupnosti, ki bodo v celoti upoštevali zadnje znanstvene ugotovitve.
Absence of arbitrary discrimination or of any disguised restriction on trade between Member States and of any obstacle to the functioning of the internal market
Odsotnost samovoljne diskriminacije ali prikrite omejitve trgovine med državami članicami in oviranja delovanja notranjega trga
Article 95(6) obliges the Commission to verify that the envisaged measures are not a means of arbitrary discrimination.
Na podlagi člena 95(6) mora Komisija preveriti, ali so predlagani ukrepi sredstvo samovoljne diskriminacije.
According to the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice, in order for there to be no discrimination, similar situations must not be treated in different ways and different situations must not be treated in the same way.
Da ne pride do kakršne koli diskriminacije, se v skladu s sodno prakso Sodišča podobne situacije ne smejo obravnavati na različne načine, različne situacije pa ne na isti način.
The national provisions are general and apply to the uses of SCCPs regardless of whether the substances are manufactured in the Netherlands or are imported from other Member States.
Nacionalne določbe so splošne in se uporabljajo za načine uporabe SCCP ne glede na to, ali so snovi proizvedene na Nizozemskem ali uvožene iz drugih držav članic.
In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, it can be concluded that the national provisions are not a means of arbitrary discrimination.
Ob odsotnosti kakršnih koli nasprotnih dokazov, se lahko sklepa, da nacionalne določbe niso sredstvo samovoljne diskriminacije.
National measures which restrict the use of products to a greater extent than a Community Directive would normally constitute a barrier to trade, in so far as products that are legally placed on the market and used in the rest of the Community are not expected, as a result of the prohibition on use, to be placed on the market in the Member State concerned.
Nacionalni ukrepi, ki uporabo proizvodov omejujejo v večji meri kot Direktiva Skupnosti, bi navadno predstavljali oviro trgovanju, v kolikor se ne pričakuje, da bodo proizvodi, ki so zakonito dani v promet in se uporabljajo v preostalem delu Skupnosti, kot rezultat prepovedi uporabe dani v promet v zadevni državi članici.
The pre-conditions laid down in paragraph 6 of Article 95 are intended to prevent restrictions based on the criteria set out in paragraphs 4 and 5 thereof from being applied for inappropriate reasons, and constituting in effect economic measures to impede the importation of products from other Member States, that is to say, a means of indirectly protecting national production.
Predpogoji iz člena 95(6) so namenjeni preprečevanju, da bi se omejitve, ki temeljijo na merilih iz člena 95(4) in (5), uporabljale v neprimerne namene in bi s tem prevzele vlogo ekonomskih ukrepov, namenjenih oviranju uvoza proizvodov iz drugih držav članic, torej bi postale sredstvo posredne zaščite nacionalne proizvodnje.
As previously established, the true aim of the national provisions is the protection of the environment from the risks associated with the uses of SCCPs.
Kot je bilo že prej ugotovljeno, je resnični cilj nacionalnih določb varstvo okolja pred tveganji, povezanimi z uporabo SCCP.