natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Republic of Austria argues that such legislation is necessary in order for it to meet its obligations under the Kyoto Protocol, namely the reduction of 13 % of its total level of greenhouse gas emissions compared to the 1990 level by 2012, which arguably requires a concerted effort in tackling every source of greenhouse gas emissions.
Republika Avstrija trdi, da je taka zakonodaja zanjo nujno potrebna, da bi lahko izpolnila obveznosti iz Kjotskega protokola, namreč zmanjšanje skupnih emisij toplogrednih plinov za 13 % do leta 2012 v primerjavi z ravnijo iz leta 1990, kar utemeljeno zahteva usklajeno prizadevanje pri obravnavanju vsakega vira emisij toplogrednih plinov.
The compatibility is examined on the basis of Article 95(4) and 95(6) of the Treaty, taking Regulation 842/2006 into account.
Združljivost se preveri na podlagi člena 95(4) in (6) Pogodbe ob upoštevanju Uredbe št. 842/2006.
Article 95(4) requires that the notification be accompanied by a description of the grounds relating to one or more of the major needs referred to in Article 30 or to the protection of the environment or the working environment.
V členu 95(4) je zahtevano, da mora biti uradnemu obvestilu priložen opis razlogov, povezanih z eno ali več pomembnimi potrebami iz člena 30 ali varstvom okolja ali delovnega okolja.
In the light of the foregoing, the Commission considers that the application submitted by the Republic of Austria with a view to obtaining authorisation to maintain its national provisions on certain industrial greenhouse gases is admissible under Article 95(4) of the EC Treaty.
Glede na navedeno Komisija meni, da je zahteva, ki jo je Republika Avstrija predložila, da bi pridobila dovoljenje za ohranitev nacionalnih določb o nekaterih industrijskih toplogrednih plinih, dopustna v skladu s členom 95(4) Pogodbe ES.
In accordance with Article 95(4) and (6), first subparagraph, of the EC 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 prvim pododstavkom člena 95(6) Pogodbe ES mora Komisija ugotoviti, ali so izpolnjeni vsi pogoji iz navedenega člena, ki državi članici omogočajo, da ohrani nacionalne določbe, ki odstopajo od usklajevalnega ukrepa Skupnosti.
In particular, the national provisions have to be 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, must not be a means of arbitrary discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade between Member States and must not constitute an obstacle to the functioning of the internal market which would not be proportionate or necessary.
Nacionalne določbe je treba zlasti utemeljiti s pomembnimi potrebami iz člena 30 Pogodbe ali v zvezi z varstvom okolja ali delovnega okolja, ne smejo biti sredstvo samovoljne diskriminacije ali prikrite omejitve trgovine med državami članicami ter nesorazmerna in nepotrebna ovira za delovanje notranjega trga.
THE BURDEN OF PROOF
DOKAZNO BREME
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.
Komisija mora pri proučitvi, ali so nacionalni ukrepi, o katerih je bilo v skladu s členom 95(4) poslano uradno obvestilo, utemeljeni, za podlago vzeti „razloge“, ki jih je predložila zadevna država članica.
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 prosi za ohranitev nacionalnih ukrepov, dokazati, da so ti utemeljeni.
JUSTIFICATION ON GROUNDS OF MAJOR NEEDS REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 30 OR RELATING TO THE PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT OR THE WORKING ENVIRONMENT
UTEMELJENOST NA PODLAGI POMEMBNIH POTREB IZ ČLENA 30 ALI V ZVEZI Z VARSTVOM OKOLJA ALI DELOVNEGA OKOLJA
Austrian position
Stališče Avstrije
To justify the maintenance of their national provisions, the Austrian authorities refer to the commitment of the Republic of Austria under the Kyoto protocol.
Avstrijski organi se pri utemeljitvi ohranitve svojih nacionalnih določb sklicujejo na obveznost Republike Avstrije na podlagi Kjotskega protokola.
The adoption of the Ordinance was a contribution to fulfilling the commitment to reduce its emissions by 13 % below its 1990 level by 2012, which corresponds to a maximum emission of 67 million tonnes of CO2 equivalents.
Sprejetje Odredbe je prispevalo k izpolnjevanju obveznosti zmanjšanja emisij za 13 % do leta 2012 v primerjavi z ravnijo iz leta 1990, kar ustreza največji emisiji 67 milijonov ton ekvivalentov CO2.
Austria submitted a review study ‘Examination of the state-of-art in selected areas of application of fluorinated gases with global-warming potential’ of May 2006.
Avstrija je predložila pregledno študijo „Preiskava o najnovejšem razvoju na izbranih področjih uporabe fluoriranih plinov s potencialom globalnega segrevanja“, ki jo je pripravila maja 2006.
The study states that F-gases covered by the Ordinance made up for over 2 % of Austria’s greenhouse gas emission as of 2003, and that a doubling was expected by around 2010.
V študiji je navedeno, da so F-plini, zajeti v Odredbi, leta 2003 predstavljali več kot 2 % emisij toplogrednih plinov v Avstriji in da se bo ta vrednost po pričakovanjih do leta 2010 podvojila.
Therefore the Ordinance was an integral part of the national climate strategy.
Odredba je bila zato sestavni del nacionalne strategije za podnebje.
The Austrian Government takes the view that the purpose of the Ordinance is to protect the environment and that it is necessary and proportionate in terms of preventing and reducing emissions of fluorinated gases.
Avstrijska vlada meni, da je namen Odredbe varovati okolje ter da je potrebna in sorazmerna za preprečevanje in zmanjšanje emisij fluoriranih plinov.
Evaluation of the position of Austria
Ocena stališča Avstrije
After having examined the information submitted by Austria, the Commission considers that the request to maintain more stringent measures than those contained in Regulation (EC) 842/2006, notably after those measures have been brought closer in line with the said Regulation, can be considered compatible with the Treaty for the following reasons.
Komisija po proučitvi podatkov, ki jih je predložila Avstrija, meni, da se lahko zahteva za ohranitev ukrepov, ki so strožji od ukrepov iz Uredbe (ES) št. 842/2006, zlasti po večji uskladitvi ukrepov z navedeno Uredbo, šteje kot združljiva s Pogodbo, in sicer iz spodaj navedenih razlogov.
Ordinance No 447/2002 was object of an infringement procedure launched by the Commission in 2004, i.e. before Regulation (EC) No 842/2006 came into force.
V zvezi z Odredbo št. 447/2002 je bil izveden postopek za ugotavljanje kršitev, ki ga je Komisija začela leta 2004, tj. pred začetkom veljavnosti Uredbe (ES) št. 842/2006.
In the letter of formal notice to Austria the Commission pointed out that the ban of HFCs in refrigerating and air-conditioning systems could be considered disproportionate, because these systems are closed systems and as long as proper functioning, maintenance and recycling can be guaranteed, the release of HFCs can be kept to a minimum.
Komisija je v uradnem opominu Avstrijo opozorila, da se lahko prepoved za HFC v sistemih za hlajenje in klimatskih sistemih obravnava kot nesorazmerna, ker so ti sistemi zaprti in se lahko izpuščanje HFC ohranja na najnižji ravni, dokler je mogoče zagotoviti pravilno delovanje, vzdrževanje in recikliranje.
This procedure was based on Articles 28 to 30 of the EC-Treaty.
Ta postopek je temeljil na členih 28–30 Pogodbe ES.
Following the adoption of Regulation (EC) No 842/2006 and the notification of stricter national measures under its Article 9(3) by Austria, the infringement procedure was closed.
Po sprejetju Uredbe (ES) št. 842/2006 in obvestilu Avstrije o strožjih nacionalnih ukrepih v okviru člena 9(3) se je postopek za ugotavljanje kršitev zaključil.
In the letter of formal notice the Commission took the view that the Austrian measures could be contrary to Article 28 of the EC Treaty for the following reasons: firstly, the ban on using HFCs as cooling and refrigerating agents did not seem to be necessary and proportionate with a view to guaranteeing the adequate reduction, by reasonable and effective means, of the releases of greenhouse gases in the interests of environmental protection.
V uradnem opominu je Komisija zavzela stališče, da bi lahko bili avstrijski ukrepi v nasprotju s členom 28 Pogodbe ES zaradi naslednjih razlogov: Prvič: prepoved uporabe HFC kot sredstev za ohlajanje in hlajenje se ni štela za potrebno in sorazmerno za zagotavljanje primernega zmanjšanja izpustov toplogrednih plinov v interesu varstva okolja z ustreznimi in učinkovitimi sredstvi.
Secondly, as far as using HFCs as fire extinguishing agents were concerned, the Commission considered that the GWP threshold as foreseen in the Ordinance might have constituted an arbitrary discrimination against products from other Member States.
Drugič: v zvezi z uporabo HFC kot sredstev za gašenje je Komisija menila, da bi lahko mejna vrednost potenciala globalnega segrevanja, kot jo določa Odredba, pomenila samovoljno diskriminacijo izdelkov iz drugih držav članic.
These concerns have been addressed by the amending Ordinance No 139/2007.
To obravnava Odredba št. 139/2007 o spremembi.
The modification of the Ordinance in 2007 resulted in the lifting and relaxation of some of the bans and thus the notified measures shall not constitute an obstacle to the functioning of the internal market as required by Article 95(6) of the EC Treaty.
Zaradi spremembe Odredbe leta 2007 so bile nekatere prepovedi odpravljene in omiljene, zato prijavljeni ukrepi niso predstavljali ovire za delovanje notranjega trga, kot je navedeno v členu 95(6) Pogodbe ES.
As regards the use of HFCs in refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment and uses, the revised prohibition does no longer apply to equipment used for cooling computers, irrespective of charge size, to equipment containing between 150 g and not more than 20 kg, to stand alone units with refrigerant charges up to 20 kg, for compact units with charges of 0,5 kg per kw and for large interconnected stationary units with charges up to 100 kg.
Spremenjena prepoved v zvezi z uporabo HFC v opremi za hlajenje in klimatiziranje ter z načini uporabe ne velja več za opremo, ki se uporablja za hlajenje računalnikov, ne glede na količino hladilnega plina; za opremo s hladilnim plinom od 150 g do največ 20 kg; za samostojne naprave z 20 kg hladilnega plina ali manj, za kompaktne enote z 0,5 kg hladilnega plina na kilovat in za velike med seboj povezane nepremične enote s 100 kg hladilnega plina ali manj.
Thus the ban does not apply to most refrigeration and air-conditioning systems.
Prepoved torej ne velja za večino sistemov za hlajenje in klimatiziranje.
These amendments take account of the review study of May 2006, which was submitted to the Commission.
Pri teh spremembah je upoštevana pregledna študija iz maja 2006, ki je bila predložena Komisiji.
The ban on the use of HFCs as fire extinguishing agents was lifted by the revision.
Prepoved uporabe HFC kot sredstev za gašenje je bila z revizijo odpravljena.
The environmental justification
Okoljska utemeljitev:
Under the Kyoto Protocol, the EC committed to reducing its collective emissions of greenhouse gases from Member States by at least 8 % below the level in 1990 in the 2008-2012 period.
ES se je na podlagi Kjotskega protokola obvezala, da bo v obdobju 2008–2012 skupne emisije toplogrednih plinov iz držav članic zmanjšala za vsaj 8 % pod raven iz leta 1990.
During the subsequent discussions within the EC, the Republic of Austria committed to reduce its overall level of greenhouse gases emissions by 13 % during this period [3].
Republika Avstrija se je med nadaljnjimi razpravami v ES obvezala, da bo v tem obdobju svojo skupno raven emisij toplogrednih plinov zmanjšala za 13 % [3].
The Ordinance forms part of a broader strategy put in place by Austria in order to meet its emission reduction target under the Kyoto Protocol and the subsequent burden sharing agreement adopted at Community level.
Odredba je del širše strategije, ki jo je uvedla Avstrija, da bi izpolnila svoj cilj za zmanjšanje emisij v skladu s Kjotskim protokolom in posledičnim sporazumom o delitvi bremena, ki je bil sprejet na ravni Skupnosti.
This strategy covers every source of greenhouse gas emissions covered by the Kyoto Protocol.
Ta strategija zajema vsak vir emisij toplogrednih plinov, zajetih v Kjotskem protokolu.
Measures on F-gases are therefore part of its overall effort to fulfil its obligations.
Ukrepi v zvezi s F-plini so torej del njenega skupnega prizadevanja za izpolnitev obveznosti.
Emissions of these F-gases are estimated to double by 2010 in the absence of further regulation with increasing use of refrigeration and also as a result of the ongoing phase out of HCFCs from refrigeration under Regulation (EC) No 2037/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 June 2000 on substances that deplete the ozone layer [4].
Emisije F-plinov se bodo do leta 2010 brez nadaljnjega urejanja s predpisi predvidoma podvojile, in sicer zaradi vse večje uporabe hlajenja in stalnega opuščanja HCFC pri hlajenju v skladu z Uredbo (ES) št. 2037/2000 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 29. junija 2000 o snoveh, ki tanjšajo ozonski plašč [4].
Considering the above, the Commission considers that the environmental justification given by the Republic of Austria, namely the reduction and prevention of fluorinated gases emissions, is reasonable and valid.
Komisija zaradi navedenega meni, da je okoljska utemeljitev, ki jo je predložila Republika Avstrija, tj. zmanjšanje in preprečevanje emisij fluoriranih plinov, ustrezna in veljavna.
Relevance and proportionality of the Austrian Ordinance in relation to the objective of achieving further reduction of fluorinated greenhouse gases
Ustreznost in sorazmernost avstrijske odredbe glede na cilj nadaljnjega zmanjšanja emisij fluoriranih toplogrednih plinov:
In order to further reduce and prevent F-gases emissions, Austria has decided already in 2002 to opt for selective placing on the market bans of new equipment.
Avstrija se je že leta 2002 odločila za selektivno prepoved dajanja v promet nove opreme, da bi še dodatno zmanjšala in preprečila emisije F-plinov.
This decision was based on investigations into the existence and availability of F-gas-free alternatives.
Ta odločitev je temeljila na preiskavah o obstoju in razpoložljivosti nadomestnih snovi brez F-plinov.
The measures have been subsequently reviewed in 2006 to take account of new scientific and technological evidence and developments, and to address Commission’s concerns with regard to their proportionality.
Ukrepi so bili nato pregledani leta 2006, da so se upoštevali novi znanstveni in tehnološki dokazi in razvoj ter so se obravnavala vprašanja Komisije glede njihove sorazmernosti.
It is also recalled that Article 9.3(a) of Regulation (EC) No 842/2006 allows national measures to be maintained only until 31 December 2012, therefore, and considering that the notification made by the Republic of Austria referred to this Article of the Regulation, it follows that the Ordinance would apply for a limited period.
Opozoriti je treba, da člen 9(3)(a) Uredbe (ES) št. 842/2006 določa, da se nacionalni ukrepi ohranijo le do 31. decembra 2012; ker se uradno obvestilo, ki ga je predložila Republika Avstrija, sklicuje na ta člen Uredbe, sledi, da bi Odredba veljala samo za omejeno obdobje.
The Ordinance allows for exemptions to be possibly granted where it turns out that alternatives for the use of HFCs in foams and foam containing products are not available.
Odredba določa, da se lahko odobri izvzetje, če se ugotovi, da nadomestne snovi za uporabo HFC v penah in izdelkih, ki vsebujejo peno, niso na voljo.
Furthermore, exemptions for the use of HFCs for novelty aerosols intended for export have been extended.
Poleg tega so bila izvzetja za uporabo HFC za nove aerosole, ki so namenjeni za izvoz, razširjena.
While noting that the Ordinance has certain implications on the free circulation of goods within the EC, the Commission nevertheless draws the conclusion from the above analysis that the Ordinance is justified from an environmental point of view and takes into consideration the implications of the envisaged bans on the internal market, in particular since it is based on an analysis of the existence and availability of alternatives in the specific circumstances in Austria, reinforced by the possibility to grant individual exemptions.
Komisija opaža, da Odredba vpliva na prost pretok blaga v ES, vendar na podlagi navedene analize ugotavlja, da je z okoljskega vidika utemeljena in da so v njej upoštevani vplivi predvidenih prepovedi na notranji trg, zlasti ker temelji na analizi obstoja in razpoložljivosti nadomestnih snovi v posebnih okoliščinah v Avstriji, podprtih z možnostjo posameznih izvzetij.
ABSENCE OF ANY ARBITRARY DISCRIMINATION OR ANY DISGUISED RESTRICTION OF TRADE BETWEEN MEMBER STATES
ODSOTNOST KAKRŠNE KOLI SAMOVOLJNE DISKRIMINACIJE IN KAKRŠNEGA KOLI PRIKRITEGA OMEJEVANJA TRGOVINE MED DRŽAVAMI ČLANICAMI
Pursuant to Article 95(6) of the EC Treaty, the Commission shall approve or reject the national provisions involved after having verified whether or not they are a means of arbitrary discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade between Member States.
Komisija v skladu s členom 95(6) Pogodbe ES odobri ali zavrne zadevne nacionalne določbe, potem ko preveri, ali so morda sredstvo samovoljne diskriminacije ali prikrita omejitev trgovine med državami članicami.
It should be recalled that an application under Article 95(4) of the EC Treaty must be assessed in the light of the conditions laid down in both that paragraph and paragraph 6 of that Article.
Opozoriti je treba, da je treba zahtevo v skladu s členom 95(4) Pogodbe ES presoditi glede na pogoje iz navedenega odstavka in odstavka 6 navedenega člena.
If any one of those conditions is not met, the application must be rejected without there being a need to examine the others.
Če kateri od teh pogojev ni izpolnjen, se zahteva zavrne, ne da bi bilo treba preveriti druge pogoje.
After bringing the rules concerning the use of HFCs in line with Regulation (EC) No 842/2006, there is no evidence that the notified national provisions can be used as a means of arbitrary discrimination between economic operators in the Community.
Po uskladitvi predpisov o uporabi HFC z Uredbo (ES) št. 842/2006 ni dokazov, da je nacionalne določbe, o katerih je bilo poslano uradno obvestilo, mogoče uporabiti kot sredstvo samovoljne diskriminacije med gospodarskimi subjekti v Skupnosti.
With regard to the limitations of purchases from other EEA States, including the Member States of the European Union, it is understood that these provisions are intended to ensure, within the scope of the measures, equal treatment of all substances or products, irrespective of their origin, that means domestically manufactured, imported or purchased on the internal market.
Ob upoštevanju omejitev za nakupe iz drugih držav članic EGP, vključno držav članic Evropske unije, se razume, da je namen teh določb znotraj področja uporabe ukrepov zagotoviti enako obravnavo vseh snovi ali izdelkov, ne glede na njihovo poreklo, naj bodo proizvedeni na domačem trgu, uvoženi ali kupljeni na svetovnem trgu.
Goods imported from outside the EEA are covered by the provisions on the placing on the market.
Blago, uvoženo iz držav, ki niso članice EGP, je zajeto v določbah o dajanju v promet.
This is also the case for goods purchased from an EEA State which is not Member State of the EU, whereby for these goods the measures are based on two different elements of the provision, as the transaction represents in the same time placing on the market and purchase from an EEA state.
To velja tudi za blago, kupljeno od države članice EGP, ki ni članica EU, pri čemer ukrepi za to blago temeljijo na dveh različnih elementih določbe, saj transakcija hkrati pomeni dajanje v promet in nakup od države članice EGP.
However, this should not lead to a discriminatory treatment of those goods.
Vendar to ne sme povzročiti diskriminacijske obravnave tega blaga.
The objective behind the Ordinance is the protection of the environment; there is no indication that the Ordinance, in its intention or implementation, would result in any arbitrary discrimination or disguised barriers to trade.
Cilj Odredbe je varstvo okolja in nič ne kaže na to, da bi namen ali izvajanje Odredbe pomenilo kakršno koli samovoljno diskriminacijo ali prikrito omejevanje trgovine.
The Commission considers that there is no evidence indicating that the national provisions notified by the Austrian authorities do constitute a disproportionate obstacle to the functioning of the internal market in relation to the pursued objectives.
Komisija meni, da ni dokazov za to, da nacionalne določbe, o katerih so avstrijski organi poslali uradno obvestilo, pomenijo nesorazmerno omejitev za delovanje notranjega trga v primerjavi s postavljenimi cilji.
In the light of the above considerations, the Commission is of the opinion that the request by the Republic of Austria, submitted on 29 June 2007, for maintaining until 31 December 2012 its national legislation more stringent than Regulation (EC) No 842/2006 with respect to the placing on the market of products and equipment containing, or whose functioning relies upon, F-gases, is admissible.
Komisija glede na navedene ugotovitve meni, da je zahteva Republike Avstrije z dne 29. junija 2007, da se do 31. decembra 2012 ohrani nacionalna zakonodaja, ki je strožja od Uredbe (ES) št. 842/2006, v zvezi z dajanjem v promet izdelkov in opreme, ki vsebujejo F-pline ali katerih delovanje je od njih odvisno, dopustna.
Moreover, the Commission finds that the national provisions adopted in 2002, as amended in 2007:
Poleg tega Komisija ugotavlja, da nacionalne določbe, sprejete leta 2002 in spremenjene leta 2007:
meet needs on grounds of the protection of the environment,
ustrezajo potrebam glede varstva okolja,
take into account the existence and technical and economic availability of alternatives to the banned applications in Austria, and are likely to result in limited economic impact,
upoštevajo obstoj ter tehnično in gospodarsko razpoložljivost nadomestnih snovi za prepovedane aplikacije v Avstriji in bodo imele verjetno omejen gospodarski vpliv,
do not constitute a disguised restriction on trade between Member States, and
ne pomenijo prikritega omejevanja trgovine med državami članicami in
are thus compatible with the Treaty.
so zato združljive s Pogodbo.
The Commission therefore considers that they can be maintained.
Komisija torej meni, da se lahko ohranijo.
However, it should be noted that the exemptions provided for in paragraph 8(2) of the Ordinance cannot be granted after the 4 July 2008 in relation to one component foams as referred to in Article 9(1) and Annex II of Regulation (EC) No 842/2006 unless required to meet national safety standards,
Treba pa je opozoriti, da se izvzetja iz odstavka 8(2) Odredbe po 4. juliju 2008 ne morejo odobriti za enokomponentne pene iz člena 9(1) in Priloge II k Uredbi (ES) št. 842/2006, razen če je to potrebno za izpolnjevanje nacionalnih varnostnih standardov –
The national provisions on certain fluorinated greenhouse gases, which the Republic of Austria notified to the Commission by letter, dated 29 June 2007, and which are more stringent than Regulation (EC) No 842/2006 with respect to the placing on the market of products and equipment containing, or whose functioning relies upon, F-gases, are hereby approved.
Nacionalne določbe o nekaterih fluoriranih toplogrednih plinih, o katerih je Republika Avstrija uradno obvestila Komisijo z dopisom z dne 29. junija 2007 in ki so strožje od določb Uredbe (ES) št. 842/2006 v zvezi z dajanjem v promet izdelkov in opreme, ki vsebujejo F-pline ali katerih delovanje je od njih odvisno, se odobrijo.