natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
An effective verification of the accuracy and reliability of the information is necessary so that the results reported by the AAs in the ACRs can be used by the Commission as one of the main sources of assurance. 
Uspešno preverjanje točnosti in zanesljivosti informacij je nujno, da lahko Komisija kot enega glavnih virov zagotovila uporabi rezultate, o katerih poročajo revizijski organi v letnih poročilih o nadzoru.
In 2011, a total of 204 ACRs and annual opinions (24) for ERDF and CF and 117 ACRs and annual opinions for ESF were submitted to the Commission. _____________ (21) The AAs replaced the control authorities in charge of ‘Article 10 checks’ and ‘Article 15 winding-up declarations’. 
V letu 2011 je Komisija prejela skupaj 204 letna poročila o nadzoru in letna mnenja (24) za ESRR in KS ter 117 letnih poročil o nadzoru in letnih mnenj za ESS. O D G O V O R I K O M I S I J E 5.35 Revizijski organi imajo vse od začetka programskega obdobja in vzpostavitve sistemov resnično ključno vlogo v postopku oblikovanja zagotovila.
See Article 10 and 15 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 438/2001 (OJ L 63, 3.3.2001, p. 
Glej člena 10 in 15 Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 438/2001 (UL L 63, 3.3.2001, str.
(22) 63 of these AAs are common for all three funds. 
(22) 63 od teh revizijskih organov je skupnih za vse tri sklade.
18 AAs are only for ERDF/CF OPs and 31 AAs are only for ESF OPs. 
18 revizijskih organov je odgovornih samo za operativne programe ESRR in KS, 31 revizijskih organov pa za operativne programe ESS.
(23) Each AA may produce one or more ACRs which in turn may relate to one or more OPs. 
(23) Vsak revizijski organ lahko pripravi enega ali več letnih poročil o nadzoru, ki se lahko nanašajo na enega ali več operativnih progra­ mov.
(24) The ACRs and annual opinions are based on the findings of the AAs’ audits relating to expenditure certified to the Commission in the previous EU financial year (see Article 62(1)(d) of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006). 5.37. 
(24) Letna poročila o nadzoru in letna mnenja temeljijo na ugotovitvah revizij, ki jih opravijo revizijski organi, v zvezi z odhodki, potrje­ nimi Komisiji v prejšnjem proračunskem letu EU (glej člen 62(1)(d) Uredbe (ES) št.
The Court’s examination of seven AAs 5.39. Annex 5.2 contains the results of the individual key requirements tested and the overall assessment of the AAs examined. 
Sodišče je pregledalo sedem revizijskih organov 5.39 V Prilogi 5.2 so rezultati preizkušanja posameznih ključnih zahtev in skupna ocena pregledanih revizijskih orga­ nov. Sodišče je pri oblikovanju skupnega zaključka namenilo posebno pozornost letnim poročilom o nadzoru in letnim mnenjem ter tistim področjem dela revizijskih organov, ki so neposredno in pomembno vplivala na zaključke v teh doku­ mentih (26).
5.40. For each of the seven AAs sampled the Court reviewed: (a) their organisational arrangements and audit methodology; (b) their working documents for up to four system audits; (c) their working documents for a sample of up to 25 audits of operations, including a re-performance of at least five of those 25 audits; and (d) their 2011 annual control reports and annual opinions, together with the related working papers. 
5.40 Sodišče je za vsakega od sedmih revizijskih organov v vzorcu pregledalo: (a) njegovo organizacijsko ureditev in revizijsko metodologijo; (b) njegove delovne dokumente za največ štiri revizije siste­ mov; (c) njegove delovne dokumente za vzorec največ 25 revizij operacij, vključno s ponovitvijo vsaj petih od teh 25 revizij, in (d) njegova letna poročila o nadzoru in letna mnenja za leto 2011 ter z njimi povezane delovne dokumente.
5.41. Of the seven AAs examined, the Court assessed four to be ‘effective’. 
5.41 Sodišče je štiri od sedmih pregledanih revizijskih organov ocenilo kot „uspešne“.
For these four AAs, the annual control report and annual opinion is considered to be reliable and all or most of the key requirements were fulfilled. 
Za te štiri revizijske organe meni, da sta letno poročilo o nadzoru in letno mnenje zane­ sljiva, ključne zahteve pa so bile v celoti ali večinoma izpol­ njene.
5.42. ForthethreeotherAAs: (a) two AAs were assessed as ‘partially effective’ because problems were observed with some key requirements and the error rate reported in the annual control report was understated; and _____________ (25) The Commission’s assessment is based on an internal risk scoring and the total amount of EU co-financing for the OPs audited by the AA. 
5.42 Gledepreostalihtrehrevizijskihorganov: (a) dva revizijska organa sta bila ocenjena kot „delno uspešna“, ker so bile pri nekaterih ključnih zahtevah opažene težave, v letnem poročilu o nadzoru pa je bila navedena prenizka stopnja napake; _____________ (25) Ocena Komisije temelji na interni lestvici za ocenjevanje tveganja in skupnem znesku sofinanciranja EU za operativne programe, ki jih revidira revizijski organ.
In 2010, eight AAs were subject to detailed assessment by the Court. 
V letu 2010 je Sodišče podrobno ocenilo osem revizijskih organov.
See the 2010 Annual Report, paragraphs 4.37 to 4.44. 
Glej letno poročilo za prora­ čunsko leto 2010, odstavke 4.37 do 4.44.
(26) In particular, as indicated in Annex 5.2, AAs were assessed to be ‘not effective’ if the Court identified significant shortcomings in the ACR and/or the annual opinion or if there were pervasive weak­ nesses in essential elements of the AAs’ work which undermined the reliability of the ACRs and annual opinions. of the European Union 12.11.2012 T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S 5.38. 
(26) Kot je navedeno v Prilogi 5.2, so bili revizijski organi ocenjeni kot „neuspešni“, če je Sodišče ugotovilo precejšnje pomanjkljivosti v letnih poročilih o nadzoru in/ali letnem mnenju ali če so obstajale velike slabosti v bistvenih elementih dela revizijskih organov, ki so ogrožale zanesljivost letnih poročil o nadzoru in letnih mnenj.
In the area of regional policy, the Commission carried out audits fully or partially to review the work of 34 audit authorities by end of 2011 (29 AA completed, 5 on-going) following a 2009 risk analysis that is updated every year. 5.39. 
Komisija je na področju regionalne politike do konca leta 2011 izvedla popolne ali delne revizije, s katerimi je pregledala delo 34 revizijskih organov (29 revizijskih organov, ki so revizije zaključili, in 5 s tekočimi revizijami), pri čemer je sledila analizi tveganja za leto 2009, ki se vsako leto posodobi.
The Commission takes the Court's findings into account for its assessment of the national audit authorities, with a view to encourage improvements, where still necessary and in order to ensure conditions for single auditing in the coming years. 5.40. 
O D G O V O R I K O M I S I J E 5.38 5.39 Komisija ugotovitve Sodišča upošteva pri oceni nacionalnih revizijskih organov, da bi spodbudila izboljšave, kadar so te še vedno potrebne, in zagotovila pogoje za eno samo revizijo v prihodnjih letih.
The Commission notes that its audit methodology to review the work of the audit authorities is consistent with that of the Court. 5.41. 
5.40 Komisija ugotavlja, da je revizijska metodologija, s katero pregleduje delo revizijskih organov, skladna z revizijsko metodologijo Sodišča.
The Commission shares the Court's assessment for these four audit authorities and reached similar conclusions through its own audits. 5.42. 
5.41 Komisija se strinja z oceno, ki jo je za te štiri revizijske organe podalo Sodišče, in je z lastnimi revizijami prišla do podobnih zaključkov.
The Commission agrees with the Court’s assessment and is taking corrective and preventive actions. (a) For the two AAs assessed as partially effective, the Commission accepted in one case the reported audit opinion for its own assurance as it was qualified. 
5.42 Komisija se strinja z oceno Sodišča in sprejema preventivne ter popravne ukrepe. (a) Pri dveh revizijskih organih, ki sta bila ocenjena kot delno uspeš­ na, je Komisija za lastno zagotovilo v enem primeru sprejela navedeno revizijsko mnenje, saj je vsebovalo pridržke.
In the other case the Commission identified and corrected the incorrect extrapolation of errors for its assurance process, as indicated in the Annual Activity Reports. 
V drugem primeru je Komisija odkrila in popravila nepravilno ekstrapolacijo napak pri svojem postopku dajanja zagotovil, kot je navedeno v letnih poročilih o dejavnostih.
EN 12.11.2012 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion C344/133 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S (b) one AA was assessed as ‘not effective’ because important problems were observed for nearly all the key requirements and, as a result, the error rate reported in the annual control report is considered to be unreliable. 
SL 12.11.2012 UradnilistEvropskeunije C344/133 U G O T OV I T V E S O D I Š Č A (b) en revizijski organ je bil ocenjen kot „neuspešen“, ker so bile pri skoraj vseh ključnih zahtevah opažene pomembne težave, zato stopnja napake, navedena v letnem poročilu o nadzoru, ni zanesljiva.
The Commission has observed the same problems for this AA as well as other aspects of the management and control systems for the operational programmes covered by the AA (see paragraph 5.49(b)). 5.43. 
Enake težave pri tem revizijskem organu ter pri drugih vidikih upravljavskih in kontrolnih sistemov za operativne programe, ki jih pokriva ta revi­ zijski organ, je opazila tudi Komisija (glej odstavek 5.49(b)).
TheCourtidentifiedthefollowingareasforimprove­ 5.43. ment: T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S (a) for four AAs, the audit checklists used did not sufficiently cover the main risks to the regularity of expenditure. 
5.43 Sodišče je opredelilo naslednja področja za izboljšanje: (a) v štirih revizijskih organih uporabljeni revizijski kontrolni seznami niso dovolj pokrivali glavnih tveganj za pravilnost odhodkov.
This concerns in particular the scope of verifications and the extent of checks with regard to public procurement, state aid rules, revenue generating projects and project selection procedures. 
To se nanaša predvsem na obseg preverjanj in pregledov glede javnega naročanja, pravil o državni pomoči, projektov, ki ustvarjajo prihodke, in postopkov za izbiranje projektov.
For financial engineering instruments, guidance issued by the Commission had not yet been incorporated into the AAs’ audit checklists; (b) for two AAs, the quality control of audits of systems and/or operations was not in line with their own audit manual and for another two AAs it was not documented; and (c) for two AAs, the methodology used to sample projects to be audited was not appropriate in view of the guidance specified by the Coordination Committee of the Funds (27) (COCOF) or the sampling methodology had been incor­ rectly applied by the AA, which meant that the results of their audits could not be extrapolated as required. (a) The Commission also identified as a result of its extensive review of audit authorities during 2009-2011 the need to reinforce, in some cases and on particular issues, the existing checklists used by national audit authorities for the audit of operations. 
Smernice za instrumente finančnega inženiringa, ki jih je izdala Komisija, še niso vključene v revizijske kontrolne sezname, ki jih uporabljajo revizijski organi; (b) v dveh revizijskih organih obvladovanje kakovosti pri revi­ zijah sistemov in/ali operacij ni bilo v skladu z njihovim lastnim revizijskim priročnikom, v drugih dveh revizijskih organih pa ni bilo dokumentirano in (c) v dveh revizijskih organih metodologija, uporabljena za izbiro vzorca projektov za revizijo, ni bila ustrezna glede na navodila odbora za usklajevanje skladov (27) (COCOF), ali pa jo je revizijski organ napačno uporabljal, kar je pomenilo, da rezultatov njegovih revizij ni bilo mogoče ekstrapolirati v skladu z zahtevami. O D G O V O R I K O M I S I J E _____________ (27) COCOF je stalni odbor Evropske komisije. Njegova naloga je razpravljanje o temah, povezanih z izvajanjem uredb o ESRR, ESS in KS.
As a follow-up, the Commission shared its own checklist for audits on operations with the Member States audit authorities in October 2011. 
Komisija je pri nadaljnjem spremljanju svoj kontrolni seznam za revizije operacij oktobra 2011 razdelila revizijskim organom držav članic.
These check lists cover the issues raised by the Court: public procurement, state aid rules, revenue generating projects and project selection procedures. 
Ti revizijski seznami vsebujejo vprašanja, ki jih je navedlo Sodišče: javno naročanje, pravila o državni pomoči, projekte, ki ustvarjajo prihodke, in postopke za izbiranje projektov.
As far as public procurement is concerned, the Commission has shared with Member States an analysis of the types of errors detected in cohesion by EU audits in the previous years and has launched an exercise to collect best practices and possible answers by Member States to remedy such errors and reduce their occurrence (see also paragraph 6.29(a)). (c) The Commission has found similar weaknesses during its audits and is intensifying its efforts to provide guidance on sampling. _____________ (27) The COCOF is a standing committee of the European Commission. 
Glede javnega naročanja je skupaj z državami članicami naredila analizo vrst napak, ki so bile v preteklih letih odkrite med revizijo EU na področju kohezijske politike, ter začela zbirati najboljše prakse in možne odzive držav članic za odpravo takih napak in zmanjšanje njihove pojavnosti (glej tudi odstavek 6.29(a)). (c) Komisija je pri svojih revizijah odkrila podobne slabosti in si še močneje prizadeva zagotoviti navodila glede vzorčenja.
5.46. TheCommissionfoundsimilarweaknessestothose observed by the Court in its own audits of AAs (see para­ graphs 5.42 and 5.43). 
5.46 Komisijajemedrevizijamiugotovilapodobneslabosti, kot jih je opazilo Sodišče pri svojih revizijah revizijskih organov (glej odstavka 5.42 in 5.43).
5.47. The Court found that in all cases where the Commission identified specific weaknesses the Member States were notified about the corrective action to be taken. 
5.47 Sodišče je ugotovilo, da so bile države članice v vseh primerih, ko je Komisija ugotovila specifične slabosti, obveš­ čene o popravnih ukrepih, ki jih je treba sprejeti.
5.46. The Commission shares the Court’s assessment on the compliance and effectiveness of the work of audit authorities. 
5.46 Komisija se strinja z oceno Sodišča o skladnosti in uspeš­ nosti dela revizijskih organov.
In the course of its extensive review of audit authorities, the Commission indeed notified targeted recommendations to audit auth­ orities to remedy the identified weaknesses, when needed. 
5.47 Med svojim obsežnim pregledom revizijskih organov je Komisija s ciljanimi priporočili opozorila revizijske organe, naj odpra­ vijo ugotovljene slabosti, kjer je to potrebno.
This contributed to an extensive capacity building exercise that allowed to improve the work and to raise the quality of audit results overall for the audited audit authorities, thus allowing in some cases the Commission to enter into Article 73 agreements and to draw further lessons and disseminate good practices for all audit authorities. _____________ (28) In 2011, DG Regional Policy completed enquiries for 14 AAs with regard to ERDF and CF. 
To je prispevalo k obsežni nalogi krepitve zmogljivosti, s čimer sta se izboljšala celotno delovanje revidiranih revizijskih organov in kakovost rezultatov revizij; Komisija pa je s tem v nekaterih primerih lahko vstopila v sporazume na podlagi člena 73 in pridobila nadaljnje izkušnje in med vse revizijske organe razširila dobro prakso. _____________ (28) GD za regionalno politiko je v letu 2011 dokončal poizvedbe za 14 revizijskih organov v zvezi z ESRR in KS.
DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion undertook specific examinations of 42 OPs for the ESF. 
GD za zaposlovanje, socialne zadeve in vključevanje je opravil posebne preglede 42 operativnih programov za ESS.
This also included a review of the AAs in charge of the OPs examined. 
To je zajemalo tudi pregled revizij­ skih organov, odgovornih za pregledane operativne programe.
(29) These 14 AAs for DG Regional Policy and seven AAs for DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion are additional to those reviewed by the Court in 2010 (see the 2010 Annual Report, paragraph 4.42). 
(29) Teh 14 revizijskih organov za GD za regionalno politiko in 7 revizijskih organov za GD za zaposlovanje, socialne zadeve in vključevanje je bilo pregledanih poleg tistih, ki jih je pregledalo Sodišče v letu 2010 (glej letno poročilo za proračunsko leto 2010, odstavek 4.42).
EN 12.11.2012 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion C344/135 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S A s s e s s m e n t o f t h e Co m m i s s i on ’s d e s k r e v i e w s of A C R s 5.48. 
SL 12.11.2012 UradnilistEvropskeunije C344/135 U G O T OV I T V E S O D I Š Č A O c e n a d o k u m e n t a c i j s k i h pr e g l e d o v l e t n i h p o r o č i l o n a d z o r u , k i j i h j e i z v e d l a K o m is i j a 5.4 Komisijajeprivseh112revizijskihorganihpreverila, ali so letna poročila o nadzoru in letna mnenja vsebinsko in oblikovno pripravljena v skladu z zahtevami iz uredbe.
It did this by analysing relevant information reported by the AAs on the functioning of the management and control systems and by checking the calculation of the reported error rate. 
To je storila z analiziranjem zadevnih informacij o delovanju upra­ vljavskih in kontrolnih sistemov, o katerih so poročali revi­ zijski organi, ter s preverjanjem izračuna sporočene stopnje napake.
This review also took account of other information regarding the super­ visory and control systems for OPs which was available to the Commission. 
Pri pregledu so bile upoštevane tudi druge informacije o nadzornih in kontrolnih sistemih za operativne programe, ki so bile Komisiji na voljo.
5.49. For 2011, the Commission considered that the error rates reported in the ACRs by the AAs are: (a) reliable for 363 of the 434 OPs (84 %). 
5.49 Komisijajezaleto2011menila,dasobilestopnje napake, o katerih so revizijski organi poročali v letnih poro­ čilih o nadzoru: (a) zanesljive za 363 od 434 operativnih programov (84 %).
These 363 OPs account for 67 % of the estimated expenditure under the 2007-2013 programming period; (b) not reliable for 71 OPs (16 %). 
Teh 363 operativnih programov predstavlja 67 % ocenjenih odhodkov v programskem obdobju 2007–2013; (b) nezanesljive za 71 operativnih programov (16 %).
These 71 OPs account for 33 % of the estimated expenditure under the 2007-2013 programming period. 
Teh 71 operativnih programov predstavlja 33% ocenjenih odhodkov v programskem obdobju 2007–2013.
For these OPs, on the basis of its own assessment of the functioning of the management and control systems, the Commission recalculated the error rate or applied a fixed error rate. 
Komisija je zanje na podlagi svoje ocene delovanja upravljavskih in kontrolnih sistemov ponovno izračunala stopnjo napake ali pa uporabila fiksno stopnjo napake.
These adjusted error rates were then used for the estimation of the amount of ‘payment at risk’ disclosed by DG Regional Policy and DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion in their AARs (30) (see paragraphs 5.66 and 6.24). 5.50. 
Nato so bile te prilagojene stopnje napake uporabljene za oceno zneska „tveganega plačila“, ki sta ga GD za regionalno politiko in GD za zaposlovanje, socialne zadeve in vključevanje razkrila v svojih letnih poročilih o dejavnostih (30) (glej odstavka 5.66 in 6.24).
Overall,theCourtconsidersthattheapproachapplied by the Commission is in principle appropriate. 
5.50 Sodišče na splošno meni, da je pristop, ki ga je upora­ bila Komisija, načeloma ustrezen.
The possibility for the Commission to validate and, where necessary, adjust the error rates disclosed by national AAs in their ACRs is however limited since the AAs are not required by the regu­ lations to provide information about their audits of operations to the Commission. 
Vendar je možnost Komisije, da potrdi in po potrebi prilagodi stopnje napake, ki so jih nacionalni revizijski organi razkrili v svojih letnih poročilih o nadzoru, omejena, ker uredbe ne določajo, da bi morali revi­ zijski organi Komisiji zagotavljati informacije o svojih revizijah operacij.
For the 2011 ACRs, DG Regional Policy therefore organised fact-finding missions to 12 AAs in 11 Member States to clarify how the error rate reported in the ACR was calculated. 
Zato je GD za regionalno politiko za letna poročila o nadzoru za leto 2011 organiziral obiske za ugotavljanje dejstev v 12 revizijskih organih v 11 državah članicah, da bi pojasnili, kako je bila izračunana stopnja napake, o kateri so poročali v letnih poročilih o nadzoru.
T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S 5.48. The analysis of annual control reports (ACR) and audit opinions is an extensive exercise at the beginning of each year. 
76. O D G O V O R I K O M I S I J E 5.48 Analiza letnih poročil o nadzoru in revizijskih mnenj je obsežna naloga, ki poteka na začetku vsakega leta.
It takes indeed into account all national audit results received by audit authorities during the year, as well as other Commission and ECA audit results. 
Zajema zares vse rezultate nacionalnih revizij, ki jih med letom prejmejo revizijski organi, in druge rezultate revizij Komisije ter Evropskega računskega sodišča.
In addition, in 2012 the Commission services carried out fact finding missions on the spot in 11 Member States, to collect further evidence/obtain clarifications on the submitted ACR and in particular on the methodology for calculating the error rates. 
V letu 2012 so službe Komisije poleg tega v 11 državah članicah izvedle obiske za ugotavljanje dejstev na kraju samem, s katerimi so zbrale dodatne dokaze in pridobile pojasnila o predloženih letnih poročilih o nadzoru ter še posebej o metodologiji izračunavanja stopenj napak.
The results of this analysis is a main source of the assurance building process, as explained in the AAR. 
Rezultati te analize so glavni vir v postopku obliko­ vanja zagotovila, kot je pojasnjeno v letnem poročilu o dejavnostih.
5.49. (b) When the Commission could recalculate the error rate, it means that it obtained additional, reliable information either in the text of the ACR itself or after communicating with the audit auth­ ority. 
5.49 (b) Če je Komisija lahko preračunala stopnjo napake, to pomeni, da je pridobila dodatne, zanesljive informacije v besedilu letnega poročila o nadzoru ali pa prek komunikacije z revizijskim orga­ nom.
The Commission communicated these recalculated rates to the concerned audit authorities that will thus be able to provide more reliable information in the next exercise. 
Komisija je te preračunane stopnje sporočila zadevnim revizijskim organom, ki bodo tako ob naslednji nalogi lahko zagotovili zanesljivejše informacije.
Only for these unreliable error rates the risk was estimated based on flat rates, This represented 9 % and 7 % of payments made in 2011 in total respectively for DG Regional Policy and DG Employ­ ment. 
Tveganje je bilo ocenjeno na osnovi pavšalnih popravkov le za te nezanesljive stopnje napak.
5.50. The Commission welcomes the Court's assessment for the second consecutive year, since the analysis of ACR and audit opinions constitute a key part of the assurance building process in the Annual Activity Reports. 
5.50 Komisija že drugo leto zapored izraža zadovoljstvo nad oceno Sodišča, saj so analiza letnih poročil o nadzoru in revizijska mnenja ključni del postopka oblikovanja zagotovila v letnih poročilih o dejavnostih.
The fact-finding missions organised by DG Regional Policy and DG Employment, on the basis of doubts or risks identified, allowed to improve reliance on error rates reported, or in some cases to provide a sound basis for a recalculation of the error rates jointly agreed with the Audit Authority. _____________ (30) See AAR for DG Regional Policy, table on ‘Shared management: assessment of national control systems’, p. 
Obiski za ugotavljanje dejstev, ki sta jih na osnovi dvomov ali ugotovljenih tveganj organizirala GD za regionalno poli­ tiko in GD za zaposlovanje, so omogočili izboljšanje zanesljivosti navedenih stopenj napak, v nekaterih primerih pa so zagotovili tehtno osnovo za preračunavanje stopenj napak v skupnem dogovoru z revi­ zijskim organom.