natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Poleg tega je dodatne skrbi držav članic v zvezi z zadrževanjem živali v živalskih vrtovih možno rešiti tudi z nacionalno zakonodajo v skladu s splošnimi določbami Pogodbe.
Moreover, specific additional concerns in Member States related to the keeping of animals in zoos can be addressed by national legislation in accordance with the general provisions of the Treaty.
Komisija zaenkrat ne načrtuje spremembe Direktive Sveta 1999/22/ES.
For the time being, the Commission is not considering a revision of Council Directive 1999/22/EC.
Vendar pa Komisija lahko oceni izvajanje in učinkovitost te direktive ob določenem trenutku, ko bo zbranih dovolj izkušenj o njenem izvajanju, vključno v novih državah članicah.
The Commission may, however, undertake an evaluation of the implementation and the effectiveness of this directive at some point once sufficient experience has been gathered on its implementation, including in the new Member States.
PISNO VPRAŠANJE E-4669/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4669/09
predložila Romana Jordan Cizelj (PPE)
by Romana Jordan Cizelj (PPE)
Zadeva: Izgradnja sprejemnih terminalov za utekočinjeni zemeljski plin v EU
Subject: Construction of liquefied natural gas receiving terminals in the EU
Znano je, da je Evropa uvozno odvisna od zemeljskega plina.
It is a well-known fact that, as far as imports are concerned, Europe is dependent on natural gas.
Alternativa obstoječim plinovodnim povezavam postajajo sprejemni terminali za utekočinjeni zemeljski plin (UZP), ki se gradijo na obalah EU.
One emerging alternative to the existing gas pipeline connections is receiving terminals for liquefied natural gas (LNG) erected on EU coasts.
Znano je tudi, da je obala v vsej EU zelo gosto poseljena, sploh v bližini pristanišč, ki so pogosto najprimernejše lokacije za izgradnjo sprejemnih terminalov za UZP.
It is also common knowledge that the coast is very densely populated throughout the EU and at any rate in the vicinity of ports, often the most suitable sites on which to build LNG receiving terminals.
Za področje samih objektov so izdelani zadostni tehnični normativni standardi, ki uzakonjajo dobro prakso.
As regards the installations proper, the technical standards laid down are serving to codify good practice.
Ni pa normativno obdelano področje ladijskega transporta in obravnavanje ladij v bližini pristanišča in na privezu, ki so zato možni objekti z varnostnim tveganjem.
Such standard setting does not, however, extend to tanker transportation or vessel handling adjacent to a port facility or at an arrival berth; to that extent, LNG installations might pose a safety risk.
Še posebej to velja, ker so ob umeščanju tovrstnih projektov v prostor pogosto prisotni nepoznavanje in normativno neurejeno stanje, odpor lokalne javnosti v bližini gradnje takih objektov in pomanjkanje racionalnih argumentov političnih odločevalcev za presojo o sprejemljivosti takih objektov s stališča varnosti.
This fact is especially relevant inasmuch as the location of projects involving such installations is frequently influenced by ignorance and the existence of a regulatory vacuum, the opposition of local residents in the neighbourhood of the proposed construction sites, and the failure of political decision-takers to make out a rational case to help determine whether the installations are acceptable from the safety point of view.
Stanje je posebej zaskrbljujoče v primerih projektov, kjer zelo verjetno pride do čezmejnih vplivov.
The situation is particularly thorny when projects are highly likely to cause transboundary impacts.
To zahteva poenotenje sosednjih držav na področju okoljskih in varnostnih vplivov.
This implies a need for neighbouring countries to harmonise their approach to environmental and safety effects.
Zato me zanima: 1.
That being the case: 1.
Ali namerava Evropska komisija izdelati specifične varnostne kriterije sprejemljivosti za potrjevanje lokacij sprejemnih terminalov UZP (ločeno za „on shore“ in „off shore“) v Evropi oz. ali obstajajo vsaj skupne smernice za to področje? 2.
Will the Commission draw up specific safety-related eligibility criteria for the approval of locations for LNG receiving terminals in Europe (listed separately for onshore and offshore installations), or are there at least joint guidelines on this subject? 2.
Ali namerava Evropska komisija izdelati podobne varnostne kriterije sprejemljivosti za ladje na plovni poti v pristanišče in za čas pretovarjanja tovora? 3.
Will it draw up similar safety-related acceptability criteria to be observed for vessels sailing into port and during cargo handling? 3.
Ali Evropska komisija razmišlja o tem, da bi oblikovala smernice za omejevanje posledic na sprejemljiv način v primerih, kadar so možni čezmejni vplivi?
Is it considering whether to devise guidelines for acceptable mitigation in cases where transboundary impacts might occur?
Na ravni Skupnosti ni posebnih kriterijev primernosti glede varnosti pristanišč, za odobritev lokacij za evropske terminale, ki sprejemajo utekočinjeni zemeljski plin (z ločenimi seznami za naprave na kopnem in tiste na morju), prav tako na tem področju ni enotnih smernic za pristanišča v Skupnosti.
There are no specific port safety-related eligibility criteria at Community level for the approval of locations for LNG receiving terminals in Europe (listed separately for onshore and offshore installations), nor are there Community port guidelines on this subject.
2009 . (direktiva o PVO).
(EIA Directive).
Direktiva je namenjena varstvu okolja ter hkrati zagotavlja približevanje nacionalnih zakonodaj glede presoje vplivov projektov na okolje.
This directive aims to protect the environment, while ensuring approximation of national laws with regard to the assessment of the environmental effects of projects.
V presoji je treba primerno, upoštevajoč posamezne primere in v skladu z načeli in zavezami iz direktive določiti, opisati in oceniti vpliv projekta na ljudi, živali, rastlinstvo, tla, vodo, zrak, podnebje in pokrajino, materialno lastnino in kulturno dediščino ter medsebojni vpliv med navedenimi dejavniki.
This assessment must identify, describe and assess in an appropriate manner, in the light of each individual case and in accordance with the principles and obligations laid down in the directive, the direct and indirect effects of a project on the human beings, fauna and flora, soil, water, air, climate and the landscape, material assets and the cultural heritage, the interaction between the abovementioned factors.
Po direktivi o PVO morajo nosilci projektov med drugim zagotoviti informacije, kot sta povzetek glavnih alternativ, ki jih je proučil nosilec projekta, in prikaz glavnih razlogov za njegovo odločitev.
According to the EIA Directive, the information to be provided by the developer includes, inter alia , an outline of the main alternatives studied by the developer and an indication of the main reasons for his choice.
Obenem direktiva o PVO zahteva, da v postopku odločanja sodelujejo javnost in pristojni organi.
In addition, the EIA Directive requires the participation of the public and the competent authorities in the decision-making process.
Kar zadeva varnostne vidike, je treba poudariti, da za terminale z utekočinjenim zemeljskim plinom veljajo zahteve iz Direktive Sveta 96/82/ES, kakor je bila spremenjena UL L 10, 14.1.1997 ; 1182/2003, UL L 284, 31.10.2003 ; 2003/105/ES, UL L 345, 31.12.2003 . , o obvladovanju nevarnosti večjih nesreč, v katere so vključene nevarne snovi (direktiva SEVESO).
Secondly, regarding safety aspects, it should be noted that LNG terminals fall in principle under the requirements of Council Directive 96/82/EC, as amended OJ L 10, 14.1.1997; 1182/2003, OJ L284, 31.10.2003; 2003/105/EC, OJ L345, 31.12.2003. , on the control of major accident hazards involving dangerous substances (SEVESO Directive).
Nekatere določbe te direktive se uporabljajo preden izvajalec začne gradnjo ali pred začetkom obratovanja.
Several provisions of this directive already apply before the operator commences construction or operation.
Določbe o načrtovanju rabe prostora iz člena 12 Direktive zahtevajo nadzor nad umestitvijo novih organizacij v prostor.
The land-use planning provisions of Article 12 of the directive require the control of sitting of new establishments.
Države članice zagotovijo, da ob sprejemanju odločitev vsi pristojni organi in urbanistični organi, ki so odgovorni za odločitve na tem območju, sprožijo primerne posvetovalne postopke, da bi zagotovili tehnično svetovanje o tveganju, ki izhaja iz tega obrata.
Member States shall ensure that all competent authorities and planning authorities responsible for decisions in this area set up appropriate consultation procedures to ensure that technical advice on the risks arising from the establishment is available when decisions are taken.
Člen 13(2) zavezuje države članice, da v zvezi z možnostjo večje nesreče s čezmejnimi učinki zagotovijo dovolj informacij državam članicam, ki bi jih učinki takih nesreč lahko prizadeli, o varnostnih ukrepih, načrtih za delovanje v sili in načrtovanju rabe prostora.
Article 13.2 obliges Member States, with respect to the possibility of a major accident with trans-boundary effects, to provide sufficient information on safety measures, emergency planning and land-use planning to potentially affected Member States.
Države članice morajo hkrati zagotoviti, da nacionalni organi pripravijo načrte ukrepov zunaj organizacije ob nesrečah z ureditvami za obveščanje služb drugih držav članic za ukrepanje ob nesrečah ob večji nesreči z možnimi čezmejnimi učinki (Priloga IV 2. g).
Member States shall also ensure that national authorities draw up external emergency plans containing arrangements for the provision of information to the emergency services of other Member States in the event of a major accident with possible trans-boundary consequences (Annex IV 2. g).
Nazadnje člen 13(5) zahteva, da lahko javnosti izrazi svoje mnenje pri načrtovanju novih organizacij, za katere velja Direktiva 96/82/ES.
Finally, Article 13 (5) requires that the public is able to give its opinion on the planning for new establishments that fall under the directive 96/82/EC.
Direktiva 2008/1/ES UL L 24, 29.1.2008 . o celovitem preprečevanju in nadzorovanju onesnaževanja (direktiva IPPC) lahko velja za terminale z utekočinjenim zemeljskim plinom, če so ti neposredno povezani z dejavnostjo celovitega preprečevanja in nadzorovanja onesnaževanja, kot pri rafinerijah mineralnih olj ali plinskih rafinerijah ter kurilnih napravah z nazivno vhodno toplotno močjo nad 50 MW.
Thirdly, Directive 2008/1/EC OJ L 24, 29.1.2008. concerning integrated pollution prevention and control (the IPPC Directive) may apply to LNG terminals where they are directly associated to an IPPC activity e.g. a mineral oil or gas refinery or a combustion plant with a rated thermal input greater than 50MW.
Direktiva IPPC zahteva, da obrati v njenem področju uporabe delujejo v skladu z dovoljenji, vključno z mejnimi vrednostmi emisij na podlagi uporabe najboljših razpoložljivih tehnologij (NRT) za preprečevanje, in če to ni izvedljivo, zmanjševanje emisij na splošno ter vpliva na okolje kot celoto.
The IPPC Directive requires installations falling under its scope to operate in accordance with permits including emission limit values based on the best available techniques (BAT), designed to prevent and, where that is not practicable, generally to reduce emissions and the impact to the environment as a whole.
Preprečevanje ali zmanjševanje izpustov v zrak, vodo ali tla je torej treba urejati z okoljskimi dovoljenji, izdanimi v skladu z direktivo IPPC.
The prevention or reduction of emissions to air, water and soil should therefore be dealt with in the environmental permits issued in accordance with the IPPC Directive.
Treba je sicer poudariti, da ta direktiva ne velja za samostojne terminale z utekočinjenim zemeljskim plinom, ki niso neposredno povezani z dejavnostjo celovitega preprečevanja in nadzorovanja onesnaževanja.
However, it should be noted that stand alone LNG terminals that are not directly associated to an IPPC activity are not covered by this directive.
Komisija ni podala predloga za kriterije primernosti, povezane z varnostjo pristanišč, ki naj bi se upoštevali pri ravnanju s tovorom.
There is no Commission proposal for port safety-related acceptability criteria to be observed during cargo handling.
Čeprav za tankerje za prevoz utekočinjenega zemeljskega plina ne veljajo posebna pravila Skupnosti, morajo ti spoštovati zahteve iz ustreznih instrumentov Mednarodne pomorske organizacije.
While there are no specific Community rules for LNG carriers, these must abide by the requirements contained in the relevant instruments of the International Maritime Organisation.
Mednarodni kodeks za gradnjo in opremo ladij za prevoz nevarnih utekočinjenih plinov, ki se prevažajo v razsutem stanju (kodeks IGC) velja za ladje za prevoz plina, ki so bile izdelane po 1. juliju 1986.
The International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk (IGC Code) applies to gas carriers constructed on or after 1 July 1986.
Ladje za prevoz plina, ki so bile zgrajene pred tem datumom, morajo ustrezati zahtevam Mednarodnega kodeksa za gradnjo in opremo ladij za prevoz nevarnih utekočinjenih plinov, ki se prevažajo v razsutem stanju ali Kodeksa za obstoječe ladje za prevoz utekočinjenih plinov, ki se prevažajo v razsutem stanju.
Gas carriers constructed before that date should comply with the requirements of the Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk or the Code for Existing Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk.
Komisija ne razmišlja, da bi za pristanišča v Skupnosti oblikovala smernice za sprejemljive ukrepe za ublažitev v primerih, ko bi lahko prišlo do čezmejnih vplivov.
The Commission is not considering to devise Community port guidelines for acceptable mitigation in cases where transboundary impacts might occur.
Ublažitev vplivov je del presoje vplivov na okolje in izpolnjevanja zahtev direktive SEVESO, omenjene v točki 1.
Mitigation of impacts is part of the environmental impact assessment and the implementation of the SEVESO Directive requirements, as referred to under point 1.
PISNO VPRAŠANJE E-5502/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-5502/09
predložili Roberto Gualtieri (S&D) , Hannes Swoboda (S&D) in Zoran Thaler (S&D)
by Roberto Gualtieri (S&D) , Hannes Swoboda (S&D) and Zoran Thaler (S&D)
Zadeva: Nadzorna misija Evropske unije v Gruziji
Subject: The EU Monitoring Mission in Georgia
Nadzorna misija EU v Gruziji je primer uspešne in hitre napotitve osebja in uporabe opreme ter ima pomembno vlogo pri zagotavljanju in izboljševanju stabilizacije te regije.
The EU Monitoring Mission in Georgia is an example of successful rapid deployment of personnel and equipment and is playing an important role in guaranteeing and improving the stabilisation of the region.
Kako lahko glede na nadzorne mehanizme, ki so bili vzpostavljeni med ženevskimi pogovori o preprečevanju nesreč, misija okrepi svojo vlogo, prepreči razpad države in spodbudi politično razrešitev krize?
As regards the control mechanisms established during the Geneva talks on incident prevention, how can the mission strengthen its role, avoid a break-up of the country and promote a political resolution of the crisis?
Kako bi bilo misijo – glede na to, da deluje na celotnem ozemlju Gruzije – mogoče učinkovito izvajati, če doslej ni imela možnosti, da bi patruljirala prek upravne meje?
As the mandate of the EU Monitoring Mission covers the entire territory of Georgia, how can it be effectively implemented if the opportunity to conduct patrols across the administrative boundary line has so far been denied?
Glede na to, da smo prejeli informacije o tem, da so bili nadzorniki EU med patruljiranjem tarča napadov, nas zanima, kateri ukrepi so bili sprejeti za zagotovitev varnosti osebja.
As we have received information about EU monitors coming under attack while patrolling, we would like to know what measures have been put in place to secure the safety of personnel.
Končno nas glede na to, da je bilo od avgusta 2008 dalje po ocenah notranje razseljenih ali pregnanih 30 000 oseb, zanima, kako napreduje njihovo vračanje in v kolikšni meri lahko nadzorna misija EU pri tem pomaga?
Finally, concerning the estimated 30 000 internally displaced persons and refugees since August 2008, how is their return progressing and to what extent can the EUMM assist in this respect?
PISNO VPRAŠANJE E-6096/09
WRITTEN QUESTION E-6096/09
vlaga Romana Jordan Cizelj (PPE)
by Romana Jordan Cizelj (PPE)
Zadeva: Črpanje sredstev programa LIFE+
Subject: Uptake of LIFE+ funding
Varovanje okolja je ena od prednostnih nalog Evropske unije.
Preserving the environment is one of the EU’s priorities.
V preteklem letu je bilo porabljenih več kot 208 milijonov EUR za projekte v programu LIFE+.
Last year more than EUR 208 million was spent on LIFE+ projects.
Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o finančnem instrumentu LIFE+ za sorazmerno razdelitev projektov po posameznih državah članicah določa okvirne nacionalne kvote, v okviru katerih se izberejo projekti in dodelijo sredstva, če projekti dosežejo vsaj minimalno število točk.
1 . , which calls for a proportionate breakdown of projects by Member State, lays down indicative national allocations forming the basis for project selection, whereby resources are allotted to projects equalling or exceeding a minimum points score.
Če je število izbranih projektov za sofinanciranje ene od držav članic manjše od njene okvirne letne kvote, se preostala sredstva dodelijo najboljšim projektom drugih držav članic.
If the number of projects submitted by a given Member State, and selected for co-financing, falls short of that country’s indicative annual allocation, the remaining funds are allotted to the best projects from other Member States.
Zaskrbljujoče je dejstvo, da je uspešnost držav članic pri pridobivanju teh sredstev zelo različna.
One worrying fact is that the Member States vary greatly in terms of their success in obtaining these resources.
V letu 2008 je bila najuspešnejša Belgija, ki je uspešno pridobila kar 206 % nacionalne kvote.
In 2008 the most successful country was Belgium, which managed to secure as much as 206 % of its national allocation.
Sledi ji Italija s 198 % nacionalne kvote, Grčija s 165 % nacionalne kvote.
Next on the list were Italy, with 198 % of its national allocation, and Greece (165 %).
Na repu razpredelnice so se znašle Malta, Luksemburg, Litva in Irska, ki niso pridobili niti enega projekta.
The countries that fared worst were Malta, Luxembourg, Lithuania, and Ireland, which were all left without one single project.
Slovenija je pridobila 19 % nacionalne kvote, čeprav ima največji delež ozemlja, uvrščenega v omrežje Natura 2000, ki je določeno po merilih, obvezujočih za države članice.
Slovenia received 19 % of its national allocation, even though it is the country with the highest proportion of territory classed within the Natura 2000 network, which is defined according to criteria that are binding on the Member States.
Namen programa LIFE+ je financiranje najboljših pobud ali perspektivnih projektov, povezanih z upravljanjem območij Natura 2000.
The purpose of the LIFE+ programme is to finance the best initiatives or promising projects connected with the management of Natura 2000 areas.
V evropskem interesu je, da se za naravo skrbi skladno in celovito v vsej Evropski uniji.
The European interest implies a need to look after the natural environment properly and comprehensively in the EU as a whole.
Kljub temu pa izkupiček posameznih držav članic ni sorazmeren.
In spite of this, uptake by the individual Member States is not in due proportion.
Ali je Evropska komisija naredila analizo črpanja finančnih sredstev iz programa LIFE+?
Has the Commission analysed the uptake of financial resources under the LIFE+ programme?
Ali Evropska komisija pozna vzroke, zaradi katerih devetnajst držav članic programa LIFE+ načrpa manj sredstev, kot je predvideno z nacionalnimi kvotami?
Does the Commission know the reasons why, as far as the LIFE+ programme is concerned, 19 Member States are failing to use up the resources provided for by means of the national allocations?
Kako bo Evropska komisija ukrepala, da bo zagotovila večjo uspešnost pri črpanju finančnih sredstev v vseh državah članicah ter s tem zagotovila skladen trajnostni razvoj v vsej EU?
What will the Commission do to make for a more successful uptake of financial resources in all the Member States and hence for sustainable development in the EU as a whole?
Odgovor komisarja Dimasa v imenu Komisije
Answer given by Mr Dimas on behalf of the Commission
Na podlagi Uredbe (ES) št. 614/2007 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta o finančnem instrumentu za okolje (LIFE+) UL L 149, 9.6.2007 . so bili objavljeni trije razpisi za zbiranje predlogov.
Three calls for proposals have been published under Regulation (EC) No 614/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Financial Instrument for the Environment (LIFE+) OJ L 149, 9.6.2007. .
V okviru prvih dveh, ki sta bila objavljena leta 2007 in 2008, je bilo za sofinanciranje izbrano več projektov.
The first two, published in 2007 and 2008, have led to the selection of a number of projects to be co-financed.
Treba je poudariti, da je Komisija pri tem odvisna od tega, kako dobre predloge predložijo vlagatelji v državah članicah, in ne more popolnoma zagotoviti okvirnih nacionalnih kvot, če iz ene ali več držav članic ne prejme dovolj predlogov.
It should be noted that the Commission must rely on applicants in the Member States to submit good quality proposals and cannot ensure full respect for the indicative national allocations when an insufficient number of proposals is received from one or more Member States.
Komisija je glede na določbe iz člena 6 uredbe za vsak razpis ocenila, v kolikšni meri sredstva, ki so bila dodeljena posameznim državam članicam, ustrezajo okvirnim nacionalnim kvotam.
However, in view of the provisions included in Article 6 of the regulation, the Commission has, for each call, assessed the extent to which the amounts allocated to each Member State correspond to the indicative national allocations.
Z analizo naj bi opredelila tudi problematična področja in možne načine za odpravo težav.
The objective of that analysis is to identify problematic areas and possible ways to address the problems.
V priloženih prilogah Priloge se pošljejo častnemu članu in sekretariatu Parlamenta. so grafično povzeti rezultati analize za razpisa za leti 2007 in 2008.
The enclosed annexes Annexes are sent directly to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat. show graphically the summary results of this analysis for the 2007 and 2008 calls for proposals.
Eden od pomembnih vidikov teh rezultatov je, da se odstotek okvirne nacionalne kvote za posamezno državo članico med letoma bistveno razlikuje.
One important aspect of those results is that the rate of absorption of the indicative national allocation by a given Member State changes significantly from one year to the next.
Zato je treba pri vsaki analizi, pri kateri se poskuša ugotoviti, ali je z okvirnimi nacionalnimi kvotami izpolnjen cilj o sorazmerni razdelitvi razpoložljivih sredstev med državami članicami, upoštevati program LIFE+ kot celoto in ne zgolj posamezna leta.
Any analysis of the way in which the indicative national allocations are fulfilling the objective of ensuring a proportionate distribution of the available budget among the Member States needs, therefore, to take into account the LIFE+ Programme as a whole and not individual years.
Ker okvirne nacionalne kvote veljajo šele od leta 20007, Komisija v tem trenutku še ne more predložiti dokončnih ugotovitev.
Since the indicative national allocations have been in place only since 2007, the Commission cannot, at this point, draw any definitive conclusions.
Vendar pa je iz rezultatov za prva leta razvidno, da zlasti nove države članice ne črpajo dovolj sredstev.
However, the results from the first years suggested that the problem of under-absorption of funds was particularly relevant in the newest Member States.