natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
prediction of distribution and fate in the environment, and the time courses involved,
napoved porazdelitve in končnega stanja v okolju ter časovnih potekov;
identification of non-target species and populations at risk, and prediction of the extent of potential exposure,
opredelitev ogroženih neciljnih vrst in populacij ter napoved obsega možne izpostavljenosti;
Data generated from alternative time/temperature combinations (for example 8 weeks at 40 °C, 12 weeks at 35 °C or 18 weeks at 30 °C) may be submitted as alternative accelerated storage data.
Podatki, pridobljeni na podlagi drugih kombinacij obdobja/temperature (na primer 8 tednov pri temperaturi 40 °C, 12 tednov pri temperaturi 35 °C ali 18 tednov pri temperaturi 30 °C), se lahko predložijo kot podatki nadomestnega skladiščenja v posebnih pogojih.
Consideration shall be given to performing this test in packaging made of the same material as the commercial packaging.
Preuči se možnost izvedbe tega preskusa v embalaži, ki je iz istega materiala kot tržna embalaža.
A plant protection product shall be considered a suitable reference product if it fulfils the following requirements:
Fitofarmacevtsko sredstvo se šteje za ustrezno referenčno sredstvo, če izpolnjuje naslednje zahteve:
it is authorised and has proved a sufficient performance in practice under the conditions of the area of intended use (plant health, agricultural, horticultural, forestry, climatic, environmental, as appropriate).
je registrirano in je bilo v praksi dokazano njegovo zadovoljivo delovanje v razmerah predvidenega področja uporabe (razmere zdravstvenega varstva rastlin in kmetijske pridelave ter hortikulturne, gozdarske, podnebne in okoljske razmere, če je to primerno).
where possible the mode of toxic action; and
načina toksičnega delovanja, kadar je to mogoče, in
the study summaries included in the technical dossier submitted in accordance with Article 10(a)(vi) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006; and
povzetke študij iz tehnične dokumentacije, predložene v skladu s členom 10(a)(vi) Uredbe (ES) št. 1907/2006, in
For those guidelines which allow for study to be designed to determine an effective concentration (ECx), the study shall be conducted to determine an EC10 and EC20 along with corresponding 95 % confidence intervals.
V zvezi s smernicami, ki omogočajo načrtovanje študije za določitev učinkovite koncentracije (ECx), se izvede študija za določitev EC10 in EC20 skupaj z ustreznimi 95-odstotnimi intervali zaupanja.
If an ECx approach is used, a NOEC shall still be determined.
Kadar se uporabi pristop z ECx, se še vedno določi NOEC.
For solid formulations an assessment of the risk from dust drift on to non-target arthropods and plants shall be required.
Za formulacije v trdni obliki je treba zagotoviti oceno tveganja zaradi zanašanja prahu na neciljne členonožce in rastline.
Details on the likely exposure levels shall be presented in accordance with Section 9 of this Annex.
Podrobnosti o možnih stopnjah izpostavljenosti se navedejo v skladu z oddelkom 9 te priloge.
A summary of available data from tests used to assess biological activity and dose range finding studies, whether positive or negative, which may provide information with respect to possible impact on other non-target flora, shall be provided, together with an assessment as to the potential impact on non-target plant species.
Predloži se povzetek razpoložljivih podatkov iz preskusov za oceno biološke aktivnosti in študij za ugotavljanje odmerka, ne glede na to, ali so pozitivni ali negativni, s čimer se lahko zagotovijo informacije v zvezi z možnim vplivom na druge neciljne rastlinske vrste, pri čemer se predloži tudi ocena možnega vpliva na neciljne rastlinske vrste.
Data shall not be required, where exposure is not likely (such as in the case of rodenticides, active substances used for wound protection or seed treatment, or in the case of active substances used on stored products or in glasshouses where exposure is precluded).
Podatki niso potrebni, kadar izpostavljenost ni verjetna (na primer pri rodenticidih, aktivnih snoveh, ki se uporabljajo za zaščito poškodb ali tretiranje semen, ali pri aktivnih snoveh, ki se uporabljajo za shranjene proizvode ali v steklenjakih, kjer izpostavljenost ni možna).
The test substance used shall be the plant protection product concerned or another relevant formulation, containing the active substance, and other relevant co-formulants.
Uporabljena preskusna snov je zadevno fitofarmacevtsko sredstvo ali druga ustrezna formulacija, ki vsebuje aktivno snov, in drugi relevantni dodatki.
For plant protection products that exhibit herbicidal or plant growth regulator activity, vegetative vigour and seedling emergence concentration/response tests shall be required for at least six species, representing families for which herbicidal/plant growth regulatory action has been found.
Za fitofarmacevtska sredstva, ki delujejo kot herbicid ali regulator rasti rastlin, je treba izvesti preskuse koncentracije/odziva glede rastne moči in kalitve za najmanj šest vrst, ki predstavljajo družine, v zvezi s katerimi je bilo ugotovljeno herbicidno delovanje/delovanje regulacije rasti rastlin.
USEPA Microbial Pesticide Test Guidelines, OPPTS Series 885, February 1996(http://www.epa.gov/oppbppd1/biopesticides/guidelines/series885.htm).
Smernice USEPA za izvajanje testov mikrobnih pesticidov, serija OPPTS 885, februar 1996 (http://www.epa.gov/oppbppd1/biopesticides/guidelines/series885.htm).
Timing, levels and routes of exposure shall reflect those of the proposed use of the plant protection product. Key effect end-points include:
Pri trajanju, stopnjah in načinih izpostavljenosti se upoštevajo trajanje, stopnje in načini izpostavljenosti pri predlagani uporabi fitofarmacevtskega sredstva.
species diversity; number and biomass of key species/groups.
spremembe strukture skupnosti in populacij mikro- in makroorganizmov, raznolikosti vrst, števila in biomase ključnih vrst/skupin.
Recommended methods and precautions concerning: handling, storage, transport or fire
Priporočene metode in varnostni ukrepi v zvezi z ravnanjem, skladiščenjem, prevozom ali požarom
Screening data shall be required for plant protection products other than those exhibiting herbicidal or plant growth regulator activity, and if the toxicity cannot be established from data on the active substance (point 8.6.1 of Part A of the Annex to Regulation (EU) No 283/2013). The data shall include testing from at least six plant species from six different families including both mono- and dicotyledons. The tested concentrations/rates shall be equal or higher than the maximum recommended application rate.
Podatki v zvezi s presejalnimi pregledi so potrebni za fitofarmacevtska sredstva, ki ne delujejo kot herbicid ali regulator rasti rastlin, in če toksičnosti ni mogoče predvideti na podlagi podatkov o aktivni snovi (točka 8.6.1 dela A Priloge k Uredbi (EU) št. 283/2013. Podatki zajemajo preskuse na najmanj šestih rastlinskih vrstah iz šestih različnih družin, vključno z enokaličnicami in dvokaličnicami. Preskušene koncentracije/odmerki so enaki ali višji od največjega priporočenega odmerka. Če presejalne študije ne zajemajo določenega razpona vrst ali potrebnih koncentracij/odmerkov, se izvedejo preskusi v skladu s točko 10.6.2.
If screening studies do not cover the specified range of species or the concentrations/rates necessary, then tests in accordance with point 10.6.2 shall be carried out. Data are not required, where exposure is negligible, for example in the case of rodenticides, active substances used for wound protection or seed treatment, or in the case of active substances used on stored products or in glasshouses where exposure is precluded.
Podatki niso potrebni, kadar je izpostavljenost zanemarljiva, na primer pri rodenticidih, aktivnih snoveh, ki se uporabljajo za zaščito poškodb ali tretiranje semen, ali pri aktivnih snoveh, ki se uporabljajo za shranjene proizvode ali v steklenjakih, kjer izpostavljenost ni možna.
The study shall provide the inhalation toxicity to rats of the plant protection product or of the smoke it generates. Circumstances in which required
S študijo se ugotovi inhalacijska toksičnost fitofarmacevtskega sredstva ali dima, ki ga sredstvo proizvede, za podgane.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 285/2013
Izvedbena uredba Sveta (EU) št. 285/2013
terminating the partial reopening of anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of ethanolamines originating in the United States of America and terminating the expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) and the partial interim review pursuant to Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009
o zaključku delne obnove protidampinške preiskave v zvezi z uvozom etanolaminov s poreklom iz Združenih držav Amerike ter zaključku pregleda zaradi izteka ukrepov v skladu s členom 11(2) in delnega vmesnega pregleda v skladu s členom 11(3) Uredbe (ES) št. 1225/2009
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community [1] (‘the basic Regulation’), and in particular Article 9(2) and Article 11(2) and (3) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1225/2009 z dne 30. novembra 2009 o zaščiti proti dampinškemu uvozu iz držav, ki niso članice Evropske skupnosti [1] („osnovna uredba“) in zlasti člena 9(2) ter člena 11(2) in 11(3) Uredbe,
On 2 February 1994, the Council imposed, by Regulation (EC) No 229/94 [2] (‘the original Regulation’), definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of ethanolamines (‘product concerned’) originating in the United States of America (‘USA’).
Svet je 2. februarja 1994 z Uredbo (ES) št. 229/94 [2] („osnovna uredba“) uvedel dokončne protidampinške dajatve na uvoz etanolaminov („zadevni izdelek“) s poreklom iz Združenih držav Amerike („ZDA“).
On 20 July 2000 and following an expiry review investigation, these measures were extended for five years by Council Regulation (EC) No 1603/2000 [3] (the ‘first expiry review Regulation’).
Ti ukrepi so bili 20. julija 2000 na podlagi preiskave v zvezi s pregledom zaradi izteka ukrepov z Uredbo Sveta (ES) št. 1603/2000 [3] („uredba o prvem pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepov“) podaljšani za pet let.
On 23 October 2006, following the second expiry review investigation, the measures were extended for five more years by Council Regulation (EC) No 1583/2006 [4] (the ‘second expiry review Regulation’).
Na podlagi druge preiskave v zvezi s pregledom zaradi izteka ukrepov so bili ukrepi 23. oktobra 2006 z Uredbo Sveta (ES) št. 1583/2006 [4] („uredba o drugem pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepov“) podaljšani za nadaljnjih pet let.
On 19 January 2010 and following a third expiry review investigation, the anti-dumping duties on imports of ethanolamines originating in the USA were imposed for two more years by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 54/2010 [5] (the ‘third expiry review Regulation’).
Na podlagi preiskave v zvezi s tretjim pregledom zaradi izteka ukrepov so bile protidampinške dajatve na uvoz etanolaminov s poreklom iz ZDA 19. januarja 2010 z Izvedbeno uredbo Sveta (EU) št. 54/2010 [5] („uredba o tretjem pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepov“) podaljšane za nadaljnji dve leti.
On 9 April 2010, The Dow Chemical Company (‘Dow Chemical’) filed an application for partial annulment of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 54/2010.
Družba The Dow Chemical Company („družba Dow Chemical“) je 9. aprila 2010 vložila zahtevek za razglasitev delne ničnosti Izvedbene uredbe (EU) št. 54/2010.
On 12 March 2011, the European Commission (the ‘Commission’) published a Notice of impending expiry in the Official Journal [6].
Evropska komisija („Komisija“) je 12. marca 2011 v Uradnem listu objavila obvestilo o bližnjem izteku ukrepov [6].
Following a request lodged by BASF AG, Ineos Europe AG, and Sasol Germany GmbH (the ‘Union industry’), the Commission initiated an expiry review on 21 January 2012 (the ‘fourth expiry review’) [7].
Na zahtevo družb BASF AG, Ineos Europe AG in Sasol Germany GmbH („industrija Unije“) je Komisija 21. januarja 2012 začela pregled zaradi izteka ukrepov (četrti pregled zaradi izteka ukrepov) [7].
A partial interim review limited to dumping as regards Dow Chemical was initiated on 11 April 2012 [8].
11. aprila 2012 se je začel delni vmesni pregled protidampinških ukrepov, ki je bil omejen na damping družbe Dow Chemical [8].
Following an application lodged [9] on 9 April 2010, the General Court annulled by its judgment of 8 May 2012 in Case T-158/10 [10] (the ‘Judgment’), the third expiry review Regulation in so far as it concerns Dow Chemical.
Na podlagi tožbe [9], vložene 9. aprila 2010, je Splošno sodišče je v sodbi T-158/10 [10] z dne 8. maja 2012 („sodba“) razveljavilo uredbo o tretjem pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepov v delu, v katerem se nanaša na družbo Dow Chemical.
Partial reopening
Delna obnova preiskave
Following the Judgment, a notice [11] was published concerning the partial reopening of the third expiry review investigation concerning imports of ethanolamines originating in the USA.
Po sodbi je bilo objavljeno obvestilo [11] o delni obnovi preiskave v zvezi s tretjim pregledom zaradi izteka ukrepov glede uvoza etanolaminov s poreklom iz ZDA.
The reopening was limited in scope to the implementation of the Judgment as far as the determination of a likelihood of a continuation or recurrence of dumping during the review investigation period (the ‘RIP’), including the spare production capacity of ethanolamines in the USA, is concerned.
Obnova preiskave je bila po obsegu omejena na izvrševanje sodbe Splošnega sodišča, kar zadeva ugotavljanje verjetnosti nadaljevanja ali ponovitve dampinga v obdobju preiskave v zvezi s pregledom, vključno z neizkoriščenimi zmogljivostmi za proizvodnjo etanolaminov v ZDA.
In that notice, parties were informed that, in view of the Judgment, imports into the European Union of ethanolamines manufactured by Dow Chemical are no longer subject to the anti-dumping duties imposed by the third expiry review Regulation and that definitive anti-dumping duties paid pursuant to that Regulation on imports of ethanolamines should be repaid or remitted in accordance with the applicable customs regulation.
V navedenem obvestilu so bile strani obveščene, da glede na sodbo za uvoz etanolaminov, ki jih proizvaja družba Dow Chemical, v Evropsko unijo ne veljajo več protidampinške dajatve, ki jih nalaga uredba o tretjem pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepov, in da bi bilo treba dokončne protidampinške dajatve, plačane v skladu z navedeno uredbo za uvoz etanolaminov, na podlagi veljavnih carinskih predpisov povrniti ali oprostiti.
The Commission officially advised the exporting producers, the importers and users known to be concerned and the Union industry of the partial reopening of the investigation.
Komisija je o delni obnovi preiskave uradno obvestila proizvajalce izvoznike, uvoznike in uporabnike, za katere je bilo znano, da jih to zadeva, in industrijo Unije.
Interested parties were given the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing within the time limit set out in the notice.
Zainteresirane strani so imele možnost, da pisno izrazijo svoja stališča in Komisijo zaprosijo za zaslišanje v roku iz obvestila.
All parties who so requested within that time limit, and who demonstrated that there were particular reasons why they should be heard, were granted the opportunity to be heard.
Vsem zainteresiranim stranem, ki so v navedenem roku zahtevale zaslišanje in dokazale, da zanj obstajajo posebni razlogi, je bilo zaslišanje odobreno.
Representations were received from two exporting producers, three Union producers and a user of the product concerned.
Pripombe sta predložila dva proizvajalca izvoznika, trije proizvajalci iz Unije in uporabnik zadevnega izdelka.
It is recalled that the reason for the annulment of the contested Regulation was the General Court’s finding that the third expiry review Regulation contained two errors of assessment:
Spomniti je treba, da je Splošno sodišče izpodbijano uredbo razveljavilo zato, ker je ugotovilo, da je vsebovala dve napačni presoji:
The Union industry acknowledged that the Judgment questioned the methodologies employed by the Institutions to quantify the spare capacity production in the USA.
Industrija Unije je potrdila, da je sodba postavila pod vprašaj metodologijo, ki so jo institucije uporabile za količinsko opredelitev neizkoriščenih proizvodnih zmogljivosti v ZDA.
However, the Union industry maintained its position that basing the actual production capacity on 90 % of the nameplate capacity, as the institutions had done, is overly conservative as it is common and accepted for companies to exceed the nameplate capacity.
Vendar pa je vztrajala pri svojem stališču, da je določitev dejanskih proizvodnih zmogljivosti na 90 % nominalnih zmogljivosti, kot so to storile institucije, preveč konzervativna, saj je za družbe običajno in sprejemljivo, da presežejo nominalne zmogljivosti.
Basing themselves on published market data allegedly sourced from PCI Xylenes & Polyesters (‘PCI’), they concluded that there was indeed spare capacity in 2008 and onwards.
Na podlagi objavljenih tržnih podatkov, ki naj bi temeljili na podatkih družbe PCI Xylenes & Polyesters („družba PCI“), je sklenila, da so od leta 2008 dalje dejansko obstajale neizkoriščene zmogljivosti.
Moreover, the Union industry considered that market conditions had not changed materially since the publication of the third expiry review Regulation and found several reasons to conclude that there is a likelihood of a recurrence of dumping. In this respect, it invoked the continuation of the US production capacity over domestic demand since the RIP;
Poleg tega je industrija Unije menila, da se tržni pogoji od objave uredbe o tretjem pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepov niso bistveno spremenili, ter našla več razlogov za ugotovitev, da se bo damping verjetno ponovil.
the material capacity expansions in third countries after 2009 which would have made US export markets increasingly self-sufficient; the existence of anti-dumping measures imposed or likely to be imposed soon in third countries; the increase of MEG (monoethylene glycol) capacity production from 2009 onwards; and the proposal in the USA to include some of the ethanolamines in the list of products with potential harmful effects to health which could ultimately have an impact in domestic consumption.
V zvezi s tem je navedla, da ameriške proizvodne zmogljivosti od obdobja preiskave še vedno presegajo domače povpraševanje, da bi zaradi občutnega povečanja zmogljivosti v tretjih državah po letu 2009 izvozni trgi ZDA postali vedno bolj samozadostni, da so bili za tretje države uvedeni protidampinški ukrepi ali je verjetno, da se bodo uvedli, da so se od leta 2009 povečale zmogljivosti za proizvodnjo monoetilenglikola ter da so ZDA predlagale vključitev nekaterih etanolaminov na seznam izdelkov s potencialno škodljivim učinkom za zdravje, kar bi lahko vplivalo na domačo potrošnjo.
Dow Chemical expressed its doubts about the legality of the re-opening of the investigation, arguing that there is no specific provision in the basic Regulation allowing for that.
Družba Dow Chemical je izrazila dvome glede zakonitosti obnove preiskave, pri čemer je trdila, da v osnovni uredbi ni posebne določbe, ki bi to dovoljevala.
This exporting producer also alleged that the re-opening would be in conflict with the 15-month statutory deadline set out in Article 11(5) of the basic Regulation for the completion of review investigations.
Ta prodajalec izvoznik je tudi trdil, da bi bila obnova preiskave v nasprotju z zakonskim 15-mesečnim rokom za zaključek preiskav v zvezi s pregledom iz člena 11(5) osnovne uredbe.
Dow Chemical further claimed that the Judgment would not require any implementing measure and that the Commission could not legally remedy the aspects of the contested Regulation since each of the substantive grounds that led to the adoption of the Regulation was either annulled by the General Court or contested.
Družba Dow Chemical je trdila tudi, da sodba ne bi zahtevala izvedbenih ukrepov in da Komisija ne bi mogla zakonito popraviti vidikov izpodbijane uredbe, saj je vse vsebinske razloge, ki so bili temelj za sprejetje Uredbe, Splošno sodišče razveljavilo ali pa so bili izpodbijani.
Dow Chemical therefore considered that the only legal way to remedy those aspects of the third expiry review Regulation would be to repeal the existing measures.
Družba Dow Chemical je zato menila, da je edini zakoniti način za spremembo teh vidikov uredbe o tretjem pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepov preklic obstoječih ukrepov.
A user in the Union, Stepan Europe (‘Stepan’), submitted that the legal consequence of the judgment could only be that the measures imposed by the third expiry review Regulation should be withdrawn as they had been imposed on the basis of an erroneous analysis.
Uporabnik iz Unije, družba Stepan Europe („družba Stepan“), je trdil, da so edine možne pravne posledice sodbe, da se ukrepi, ki jih je naložila uredba o tretjem pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepov, umaknejo, saj so bili naloženi na podlagi napačne analize.
Similar views were expressed by the exporting producer Huntsman Petrochemical Corporation LLC (‘Huntsman’).
Podobno stališče je izrazil proizvajalec izvoznik Huntsman Petrochemical Corporation LLC („družba Huntsman“).
Indeed, Stepan and Huntsman argued that the Court held that, during the RIP, the country-wide dumping margin was negative and therefore no continuation of dumping could be established.
Družbi Stepan in Huntsman sta trdili, da je bila po mnenju Sodišča stopnja dampinga na nacionalni ravni v obdobju preiskave v zvezi s pregledom negativna, tako da ni mogoče trditi, da se je damping nadaljeval.
Moreover, Stepan stressed that, would the notion of continuation of dumping be interpreted on an individual company basis, the institutions should have concluded that there was no continuation of dumping for Dow Chemical as, according to the Court, the company represented more than 85 % of all imports from the USA, and therefore they should have considered whether dumping by Dow Chemical was likely to recur.
Poleg tega je družba Stepan poudarila, da bi morale institucije v primeru, da bi se pojem nadaljevanja damping razlagal v povezavi s posamezno družbo, zaključiti, da se damping ni nadaljeval, kar zadeva družbo Dow Chemical, saj je po trditvah Sodišča družba predstavljala več kot 85 % celotnega uvoza iz ZDA. Zato bi morale institucije proučiti, ali je bilo verjetno, da se bo damping s strani družbe Dow Chemical ponovil.
For the other exporting companies, it was established that there had been dumping and therefore the institutions should have established whether dumping was likely to continue.
Pri drugih izvoznih družbah je bil damping potrjen, zato bi institucije morale ugotoviti, ali je bilo verjetno, da se bo damping nadaljeval.
The likelihood of continuation of dumping analysis was mainly based, according to Stepan, on a country–wide spare capacity in the USA of 60000 tonnes.
Analiza verjetnosti nadaljevanja dampinga je po trditvah družbe Stepan temeljila predvsem na neizkoriščenih zmogljivostih v ZDA na nacionalni ravni v višini 60000 ton.
Given the Court’s finding that the institutions erred in assessing the spare capacity in the USA and given that, according to Stepan, the spare capacity was closer to at the most 8000 tonnes, it was no longer possible to sustain that the other exporting companies were likely to continue dumping.
Glede na ugotovitev Sodišča, da so se institucije zmotile pri oceni neizkoriščenih zmogljivosti v ZDA in da so po trditvah družbe Stepan neizkoriščene zmogljivosti znašale največ 8000 ton, ni bilo več mogoče trditi, da bodo druge izvozne družbe nadaljevale z dampingom.
The institutions would have needed to also analyse and establish the likelihood of recurrence of dumping.
Institucije bi morale analizirati in ugotoviti tudi verjetnost ponovitve dampinga.