natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Commission sent a letter to the manufacturer on 11 April 2014 and the manufacturer provided its observations on 24 June 2014.
Proizvajalcu je 11. aprila 2014 poslala dopis, slednji pa je svoje pripombe predložil 24. junija 2014.
The Commission met the manufacturer on 24 September 2014 and 24 May 2016.
Komisija se je sestala s proizvajalcem 24. septembra 2014 in 24. maja 2016.
The manufacturer sent additional explanation to the Commission on 6 December 2016.
Proizvajalec je Komisiji poslal dodatno obrazložitev 6. decembra 2016.
The Commission had also several information exchanges with the Swedish authorities, the Swedish Work Environment Agency (exchange of e-mails, discussions in the Machinery Working Group meetings and the Machinery Market Surveillance Group).
Komisija je tudi večkrat izmenjala informacije s švedskimi organi, Švedsko agencijo za delovno okolje (izmenjava elektronske pošte, razprave na sestankih delovne skupine za stroje in skupino za nadzor trga strojev).
Sweden stated that before taking the safeguard measure, its authorities had been in contact with the manufacturer several times to explain them the deficiencies of the pinsetter machines and supplementary kits to be fixed in order to comply with Directive 2006/42/EC.
Švedska je navedla, da so bili njeni organi pred sprejetjem zaščitnega ukrepa večkrat v stiku s proizvajalcem, da bi jim pojasnil pomanjkljivosti naprav za postavljanje kegljev in dodatne opreme, ki jih je treba odpraviti za uskladitev z Direktivo 2006/42/ES.
However, given that after several years of discussion only half of the deficiencies were resolved, Sweden considered necessary to trigger the safeguard clause mechanism.
Ker je bilo po večletnih razpravah odpravljena le polovica pomanjkljivosti, je Švedska menila, da bi bilo treba uveljaviti mehanizem zaščitne klavzule.
Regarding the measures adopted, the Swedish authorities explained that they respected the principle of proportionality, laid down in Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
V zvezi s sprejetimi ukrepi so švedski organi pojasnili, da so spoštovali načelo sorazmernosti iz člena 18 Uredbe (ES) št. 765/2008 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta.
Based on that principle, considering the severity of the risks and the costs of the withdrawal, some of the actions required to address the deficiencies for the new pinsetter machines and supplementary kits, were not required in the case of the withdrawal of the existing pinsetter machines and supplementary kit.
Na osnovi tega načela in glede na resnost tveganj in stroške umika so bili nekateri ukrepi, potrebni za odpravo pomanjkljivosti pri novih napravah za postavljanje kegljev in dodatne opreme, nepotrebni, če je prišlo do umika obstoječih naprav za postavljanje kegljev in dodatne opreme.
Namely, those concerning the fitting of three separate lights that indicate different modes in the control panel, the enlargement of the access points between the machines also used as work platforms and the overview of the danger zone.
Zlasti so to bili ukrepi v zvezi z namestitvijo treh ločenih luči, ki označujejo različne načine na kontrolni plošči, razširitev točk dostopa med napravami, ki se uporabljajo tudi kot delovna ploščad in za pregled nad nevarnim območjem.
In 2015, Sweden informed the Commission that the manufacturer addressed the deficiencies set out in the safeguard measure regarding the pinsetter machine and the supplementary kit only in the bowling centre in Gustavsberg.
Švedska je leta 2015 Komisijo obvestila, da je proizvajalec odpravil pomanjkljivosti, določene v zaščitnem ukrepu v zvezi z napravo za postavljanje kegljev in pomožne opreme, le v kegljaškem centru v Gustavsbergu.
Apart from these consultations, the Commission conducted an independent study (the ‘study’) to assess whether or not the pinsetter machine and the supplementary kit complied with the EHSR set out in Annex I to Directive 2006/42/EC at the time when Sweden took the safeguard measure.
Poleg teh posvetovanj je Komisija opravila neodvisno študijo (v nadaljnjem besedilu: študija), da bi ocenila, ali sta bili naprava za postavljanje kegljev in dodatna oprema v skladu z bistvenimi zdravstvenimi in varnostnimi zahtevami iz Priloge I k Direktivi 2006/42/ES v času, ko je Švedska sprejela zaščitni ukrep.
In order to elaborate the study, the independent experts inspected the pinsetter machine with the supplementary kit installed in Gustavsberg and met the Swedish authorities and the Vice-President of Capital Marketing & Engineering of the manufacturer.
Za izdelavo študije so neodvisni strokovnjaki pregledali napravo za postavljanje kegljev in dodatno opremo, nameščeno v Gustavsbergu, ter se sestali s švedskimi organi in podpredsednikom oddelka za kapital, trženje in inženiring proizvajalca.
The parties concerned were consulted on the Commission's study.
Posvetovanje v zvezi s študijo Komisije je bilo opravljeno z zainteresiranimi stranmi.
The manufacturer's comments do not put the conclusions of the study into question because they refer to the compliance of the pinsetter machine and the supplementary kit installed in Gustavsberg after Sweden notified the safeguard measure to the Commission.
Pripombe proizvajalca k ugotovitvam niso postavile študije pod vprašaj, saj se sklicujejo na skladnost naprave za postavljanje kegljev in dodatne opreme, nameščenih v Gustavsbergu, po tem ko je Švedska uradno obvestila Komisijo o zaščitnem ukrepu.
As for the EHSRs invoked by Sweden, the EHSR 1.2.2 on control devices and 1.7.1 on information and warnings on the machinery, require that control devices are visible, placed in a way as to be safely operated and that the information and warnings on them are expressed in the Union language determined by the Member State in which the machinery is placed.
V zvezi z bistvenimi zdravstvenimi in varnostnimi zahtevami, na katere se sklicuje Švedska, in sicer 1.2.2 Krmilne naprave in 1.7.1 Informacije in opozorila na strojih zahtevajo, da so krmilne naprave vidne, nameščene tako, da se varno upravljajo, ter da so informacije in opozorila na teh napravah izraženi v jeziku Unije, ki ga določi država članica, v kateri je oprema nameščena.
In this regard, Sweden indicated that one of the buttons on the control panel of the machine was not marked and the text on the control panel was in English although the official language of the Member State in which the machinery is placed is Swedish.
Švedska je v zvezi s tem navedla, da eden od gumbov na nadzorni plošči naprave ni bil označen, besedilo na kontrolni plošči pa je bilo v angleščini, čeprav je uradni jezik države, v kateri je oprema nameščena, švedščina.
Furthermore, three separate lights indicated different modes.
Poleg tega so različne načine delovanja kazale tri ločene luči.
The colors of these three lights were placed differently on different machines and could therefore be misunderstood.
Barve teh treh luči so bile različne na različnih napravah, tako da bi lahko prišlo do napačnega razumevanja.
The emergency stop sign was mounted upside down.
Znak za zaustavitev v sili je bil nameščen tako, da je bil obrnjen na glavo.
The manufacturer stated that with respect to the lights on the control panels, there could be minor confusion.
Proizvajalec je navedel, da bi lahko prišlo do manjše zmede zaradi luči na kontrolni plošči.
Regarding the clear visibility and marking of the control devices, the manufacturer admitted some mismatches between the actual machines, the labels and the manuals.
Kar zadeva jasno vidljivost in označevanje krmilnih naprav, je proizvajalec priznal nekatera neskladja med dejanskimi napravami, oznakami in priročniki.
Furthermore, the manufacturer stated that the labels, having no impact to safety functions, did not have to be necessarily translated.
Poleg tega je proizvajalec navedel, da oznak, ki nimajo vpliva na varnostne funkcije, ni treba obvezno prevesti.
Furthermore, the EHSR 1.2.2 requires also that control devices must be designed to prevent its operation if there is someone in the danger zone.
Poleg tega oddelek 1.2.2 Krmilne naprave zahteva, da morajo biti krmilne naprave zasnovane tako, da je zagon onemogočen, dokler je kdor koli v nevarnem območju.
According to Sweden, the machine could be restarted even though the operator did not have an overview of the danger zone, which entailed the risk of someone being inside the risk area.
Po mnenju Švedske bi se naprava lahko ponovno zagnala, tudi kadar upravljavec nima pregleda nad nevarnim območjem, kar je pomenilo nevarnost prisotnosti nekoga v nevarnem območju.
The manufacturer disagreed with Sweden on the operator's poor visibility from the control zone due to the absence of reported safety incidents and other Member States' conclusions that ‘the visibility, while perhaps not perfect, was indeed adequate given that the operator practiced reasonable and expected care while when starting the machines’.
Proizvajalec se ni strinjal s Švedsko glede slabe vidljivosti, ki jo ima upravljavec s svojega kontrolnega mesta, saj ni bilo sporočenih nobenih varnostnih incidentov, druge države članice pa so ugotovile, da vidljivost morda ni bila idealna, vendar je bila zadostna, pod pogojem, da pri zagonu naprave upravljavec ravna razumno in s pričakovano previdnostjo.
However, the Commission considers that relying on the expected care of the operator when starting the machine does not address the risk because the remaining lack of overview of the danger zone prevents the operator from checking if there is someone in the danger zone.
Vendar Komisija meni, da opiranje na pričakovano previdnost upravljavca pri zagonu stroja ne odpravi tega tveganja, saj nevarno območje za upravljavca ostaja nepregledno, kar mu preprečuje, da bi preveril ali je kdo v nevernem območju.
Thus, considering the above arguments and taking into account the study confirming those arguments, it can be concluded that the EHSRs set out in Section 1.2.2 and 1.7.1 of Annex I to Directive 2006/42/EC have not been fulfilled as regards the pinsetter machine and the supplementary kit.
Ob upoštevanju zgornjih argumentov in ob upoštevanju študije, ki potrjuje navedene argumente, je torej mogoče sklepati, da niso bile izpolnjene bistvene zdravstvene in varnostne zahteve iz oddelka 1.2.2 in 1.7.1 Priloge I k Direktivi 2006/42/ES v zvezi z napravo za postavljanje kegljev in dodatno opremo.
The EHSR 1.1.6 on ergonomics, 1.6.1 on machinery maintenance and 1.6.2 on access to operating positions and servicing points, require a design and construction of the machine that ease the operator's work, allowing him to work in a comfortable and safe way, outside danger zones.
Ukrepi iz oddelkov 1.1.6 Ergonomija, 1.6.1 Vzdrževanje strojev in 1.6.2 Dostop do upravljalnih mest in servisnih mest zahtevajo takšno zasnovo in konstrukcijo naprave, ki upravljavcu olajšata delo in mu zagotavljata udobno in varno delovno mesto zunaj nevarnih območij.
In this respect, Sweden highlighted that the access points and work platforms of the pinsetter machines at stake would not respect these EHSRs because the access route that doubles as a work platform between those machines was measured to be only 190 mm.
Švedska je v zvezi s tem poudarila, da točke dostopa in delovne ploščadi zadevnih naprav za postavljanje kegljev ne bi izpolnjevale teh bistvenih zdravstvenih in varnostnih zahtev, saj je dostopna pot, ki je tudi delovna ploščad med napravami, merila zgolj 190 mm.
In some cases, the operators were requested to balance on narrow metal edges.
V nekaterih primerih so morali upravljavci loviti ravnotežje na ozkih kovinskih robovih.
This work environment entailed an unnecessary risk of falling into the machine.
Takšno delovno okolje je pomenilo nepotrebno tveganje, da upravljavec pade v napravo.
In addition, the access route between these machines ended abruptly by the front where there is a risk of falling approximately from 1000 mm.
Poleg tega se dostopna pot med temi napravami nenadoma konča na sprednji strani, kar pomeni tveganje padca z višine približno 1000 mm.
In its EC declaration of conformity, the manufacturer referred to the harmonised standard EN ISO 14122-2:2001 but did not provide in the technical file a link between the references of the harmonised standards and the respective EHSR as required by Annex VII to Directive 2006/42/EC.
Proizvajalec se je v svoji izjavi ES o skladnosti skliceval na harmonizirani standard EN ISO 14122–2:2001, vendar v tehnični dokumentaciji ni navedel povezave med sklici na harmonizirane standarde in ustreznimi bistvenimi zdravstvenimi in varnostnimi zahtevami, kot je to zahtevano v Prilogi VII k Direktivi 2006/42/ES.
Despite this deficiency on the side of the manufacturer, Sweden identified the EHSR that the reference to that harmonised standard could have covered.
Kljub tej pomanjkljivosti na strani proizvajalca je Švedska odkrila bistveno zdravstveno in varnostno zahtevo, ki bi jo lahko zajemal sklic na navedeni harmonizirani standard.
Specifically, Sweden identified that the reference to the harmonised standard concerned the EHSR set out in Sections 1.1.6, 1.6.1 and 1.6.2 of Annex I to Directive 2006/42/EC.
Zlasti je ugotovila, da sklic na harmonizirani standard zadeva bistvene zdravstvene in varnostne zahteve iz oddelkov 1.1.6, 1.6.1 in 1.6.2 Priloge I k Direktivi 2006/42/ES.
Harmonised standard EN ISO 14122-2:2001 lays down safety technical requirements for permanent means of access to machinery and specifically for machinery working platforms and walkways.
Harmonizirani standard EN ISO 14122–2:2001 določa varnostne tehnične zahteve za stalne dostope do strojev in zlasti za delovne ploščadi in podeste.
Sweden stated that whilst the standard in question requires a 500 mm of width, the pinsetter machine walkway at stake was 190 mm wide.
Švedska je navedla, da zadevni standard sicer zahteva širino 500 mm, širina podesta pri zadevni napravi pa je bila 190 mm.
In this respect, the manufacturer stated that the narrow walkway of 190 mm was considered a safe and appropriate width bearing in mind the intended and expected use, the frequency of access and the state of the art for the ball return area even though it did not fully apply EN ISO 14122-2:2001.
V zvezi s tem je proizvajalec navedel, da le 190 mm širok podest velja za varnega in je ustrezne širine ob upoštevanju predvidene in pričakovane uporabe, pogostosti dostopanja in najsodobnejše tehnike za območje vračanja krogel, čeprav standarda EN ISO 14122–2:2001 ni uporabil dosledno.
Therefore, although the manufacturer had referred to that standard in the declaration of conformity, it did not apply it.
Čeprav je proizvajalec v izjavi o skladnosti navedel ta standard, ga ni uporabil.
Regarding the risk of falling associated with access in front of the pinsetter machine, the manufacturer estimated that the alternative platform for an easier access on and off to the front platform, requested by Sweden, was not necessary because the front access to the pinsetter machine is very infrequent considering the design of existing machines in the world, where access is provided primarily from the back.
Proizvajalec je ocenil, da drugačna ploščad za lažji dostop na sprednjo ploščad in izstop iz nje, ki jo je zahtevala Švedska zaradi nevarnosti padca pri dostopanju na sprednjo ploščad naprave za postavljanje kegljev, ni bila potrebna, ker je dostop do naprave za postavljanje kegljev od spredaj zelo redek, če se upošteva zasnova drugih obstoječih naprav po svetu, pri katerih je dostop zagotovljen predvsem od zadaj.
The Commission considers that the risk of injury when accessing the pinsetter machines (by falling or lacking balance) due to the narrow walkway between the machines or to an abrupt end of the front of the machine of 1000 mm cannot be neglected by arguing an infrequent access or the impossibility to do better.
Komisija meni, da tveganje poškodbe pri dostopu do naprave za postavljanje kegljev (zaradi padca ali izgube ravnotežja) zaradi ozkega podesta med napravami ali nenadnega zaključka podesta na sprednjem delu naprave v višini 1000 mm ni mogoče zanemariti z utemeljitvijo, da tak dostop ni pogost ali da izboljšave niso mogoče.
Thus, on the basis of the above arguments and taking into account the study confirming those arguments, it can be concluded that the EHSR set out in Sections 1.1.6, 1.6.1 and 1.6.2 of Annex I to Directive 2006/42/EC have not been fulfilled as regards the pinsetter machine.
Ob upoštevanju zgornjih argumentov in študije, ki potrjuje navedene argumente, je mogoče sklepati, da niso bile izpolnjene bistvene zdravstvene in varnostne zahteve iz oddelkov 1.1.6, 1.6.1 in 1.6.2 Priloge I k Direktivi 2006/42/ES v zvezi z napravo za postavljanje kegljev.
As regards the EHSR set out in Sections 1.3.8 and 1.4 of Annex I to Directive 2006/42/EC, Sweden indicated that the screens between the pinsetter machines must be high enough to prevent workers to be in contact with dangerous, moving parts of adjacent machines, which are in operation.
V zvezi z bistvenimi zdravstvenimi in varnostnimi zahtevami iz oddelkov 1.3.8 in 1.4 Priloge I k Direktivi 2006/42/ES je Švedska navedla, da morajo biti zasloni med napravami za postavljanje kegljev dovolj visoki, da delavci ne morejo priti v stik z nevarnimi, gibajočimi se deli sosednjih naprav.
The screen must cover the entire side of the machine i.e. right up to the front of the machine cage.
Zaslon mora pokrivati celotno stran stroja, tj. prav do sprednje strani kletke naprave.
However, the fence of the pinsetter that was mounted between the machines was only 500 mm high at some workstations and was completely missing at other places where people were working.
Vendar je bila ograja naprave za postavljanje kegljev, ki je bila nameščena med napravami, pri nekaterih delovnih mestih visoka samo 500 mm, na nekaterih delovnih mestih pa je sploh ni bilo.
This entailed a risk of falling down into the adjoining machine.
To je pomenilo tveganje padca v sosednjo napravo.
Therefore, that structure would not comply with the EHSR 1.3.8 on the choice of protection against risks arising from moving parts.
Zato ta konstrukcija ne bi bila v skladu z bistvenimi zdravstvenimi in varnostnimi zahtevami iz oddelka 1.3.8 Izbira zaščite pred tveganjem zaradi gibajočih se delov.
In its EC declaration of conformity, the manufacturer referred to the harmonised standard EN ISO 13857:2008 but did not provide in the technical file a link between the references of the harmonised standards and the respective EHSR as required by Annex VII to Directive 2006/42/EC.
Proizvajalec se je v svoji izjavi ES o skladnosti skliceval na harmonizirani standard EN ISO 13857:2008, vendar v tehnični dokumentaciji ni navedel povezave med sklici na harmonizirane standarde in ustreznimi bistvenimi zdravstvenimi in varnostnimi zahtevami, kot je to zahtevano v Prilogi VII k Direktivi 2006/42/ES.
Specifically, Sweden identified that the reference to the harmonised standard concerned the EHSR set out in Sections 1.3.8 of Annex I to Directive 2006/42/EC.
Švedska je zlasti ugotovila, da sklic na harmoniziran standard zadeva bistvene zdravstvene in varnostne zahteve iz oddelka 1.3.8 Priloge I k Direktivi 2006/42/ES.
Harmonised standard EN ISO 13857:2008 lays down technical requirements on machinery safety distances to prevent hazard zones being reached by upper and lower limbs.
Harmonizirani standard EN ISO 13857:2008 določa tehnične zahteve glede varnostnih razdalj, ki preprečujejo doseg nevarnih območij strojev z zgornjimi in spodnjimi udi.
Sweden refers to this standard to reinforce its justification on the manufacturer's lack of compliance with EHSRs 1.3.8.
Švedska se sklicuje na ta standard, da bi okrepila svojo utemeljitev glede proizvajalčeve neskladnosti z bistvenimi zdravstvenimi iz varnostnimi zahtevami iz oddelka 1.3.8.
Despite the standard being referred to in the declaration of conformity, the manufacturer did not rely on the standard to prove the conformity of the product with the Directive when providing explanations to the Swedish authorities.
Čeprav je bil standard naveden v izjavi o skladnosti, se proizvajalec pri zagotavljanju pojasnil švedskim organom ni skliceval na standard, da bi dokazal skladnost proizvoda z Direktivo.
Instead, the manufacturer specified that the 500 mm fence mounted between the machines was designed to provide maximum protection while still accommodating the height requirements of common ceiling heights throughout Europe.
Namesto tega je navedel, da je 500 mm visoka ograja, nameščena med napravami, zasnovana tako, da zagotavlja največjo možno zaščito, pri čemer še vedno izpolnjuje zahteve glede običajnih stropnih višin po vsej Evropi.
A higher guard would provide a measure of incremental safety but this incremental safety would be diminished if ceiling obstructions prevented installation of the guards or if the guards were incorrectly modified to accommodate ceiling obstructions.
Višja varnostna ograja bi zagotovila nekoliko več varnosti, vendar bi bila ta dodatna varnost manjša, če bi stropne ovire preprečevale namestitev varnostne ograje, ali če bi se morala varnostna ograja spremeniti zaradi prilagoditve stropnim oviram.
The Commission considers that to keep the fence of the pinsetter, mounted between the machines, at 500 mm high due to ceiling obstructions, does not explain why at some workstations the fences were completely missing and it does not tackle the risk of falling down into the adjoining machine.
Komisija meni, da odločitev, da se obdrži ograja na napravi za postavljanje kegljev, nameščena med napravami, na višini 500 mm zaradi stropnih ovir, ne pojasnjuje dejstva, da ograje na nekaterih delovnih mestih sploh ni bilo, ter ne odpravlja tveganja padca v sosednjo napravo.
Thus, on the basis of the above arguments and taking into account the study confirming those arguments it can be concluded that the EHSRs set out in Section 1.3.8 of Annex I to Directive 2006/42/EC have not been fulfilled as regards the pinsetter machine and the supplementary kit.
Na podlagi zgornjih argumentov in ob upoštevanju študije, ki potrjuje navedene argumente, je torej mogoče sklepati, da niso bile izpolnjene bistvene zdravstvene in varnostne zahteve iz oddelka 1.3.8 Priloge I k Direktivi 2006/42/ES v zvezi z napravo za postavljanje kegljev in dodatno opremo.
Furthermore, as regards the pinsetter machine Sweden explained that the machine cage contained small doors that could be opened but did not have a locking mechanism that stops the machine when the doors were opened.
V zvezi z napravo za postavljanje kegljev je Švedska pojasnila, da ima kletka naprave majhna vrata, ki jih je mogoče odpreti, vendar so brez zaklepnega mehanizma, ki bi pri odprtju vrat zaustavil napravo.
In its EC declaration of conformity, the manufacturer referred to the harmonised standard EN 953:1998 but did not provide in the technical file a link between the references of the harmonised standards and the respective EHSR as required by Annex VII to Directive 2006/42/EC.
Proizvajalec se je v svoji izjavi ES o skladnosti skliceval na harmonizirani standard EN 953:1998, vendar v tehnični dokumentaciji ni navedel povezave med sklici na harmonizirane standarde in ustreznimi bistvenimi zdravstvenimi in varnostnimi zahtevami, kot je to zahtevano v Prilogi VII k Direktivi 2006/42/ES.
Specifically, Sweden identified that the reference to the harmonised standard concerned the EHSR set out in Sections 1.3.8 and 1.4 of Annex I to Directive 2006/42/EC.
Švedska je zlasti ugotovila, da sklic na harmonizirani standard zadeva bistvene zdravstvene in varnostne zahteve iz oddelkov 1.3.8 in 1.4 Priloge I k Direktivi 2006/42/ES.
Harmonised standard EN 953:1997+A1:2009 lays down safety technical requirements on machinery guards and the general requirements for the design and construction of fixed and movable guards.
Harmonizirani standard EN 953:1997+A1:2009 določa varnostne tehnične zahteve za varovala strojev ter splošne zahteve za načrtovanje in konstruiranje pritrjenih in premičnih varoval.
Sweden refers to this standard to reinforce its justification on the manufacturer's lack of compliance with EHSRs 1.3.8 and 1.4.
Švedska se sklicuje na ta standard, da bi okrepila svojo utemeljitev glede proizvajalčeve neskladnosti z bistvenimi zdravstvenimi iz varnostnimi zahtevami iz oddelkov 1.3.8 in 1.4.