natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Formal errors are errors in the handling of a specific transaction, but where the correct amount was paid to the beneficiary and declared to the Commission. 
Formella fel r fel i hanterandet av en specifik transaktion, men dr korrekt belopp har betalats till mottagaren och deklarerats till kommissionen.
In terms of the certification of accounts, the Commission is only concerned with substantive errors. 
Vad gller attestering av rkenskaperna beaktar kommissionen endast vsentliga fel.
Within this category, it distinguishes between systematic and random (one-off) errors. 
Inom denna kategori skiljer kommissionen p systematiska och slumpmssiga (enstaka) fel.
Systematic errors should be investigated to determine the actual extent of the error in the population and should not be extrapolated. 
Systematiska fel br underskas s att felets faktiska omfattning i populationen kan faststllas och br inte extrapoleras.
Random errors found in the sample should be extrapolated. 
Slumpmssiga fel som ptrffas i stickprovet br extrapoleras.
The Court considers that the error evaluations, as presented in the Certifying BodiesŐ reports, are, in some cases incomplete or inconsistent. 
Revisionsrtten anser att utvrderingarna av fel, ssom de redovisas i rapporterna frn de attesterande organen, i vissa fall r ofullstndiga eller ofrenliga.
More specifically: (a) whereas some Member States have included all errors found, regardless of their value (Germany), others have a built-in tolerance level, whereby minor errors were not included in the extrapolation (Italy); (b) the Certifying Body has not treated national deductions from payments to beneficiaries as errors (Greece); (c) systematicerrors,althoughdescribedinthereportoftheCer-tifying Body, were not quantified and were not included in the error evaluation summary and were charged to the national budget (United Kingdom); (d) errors have been reclassified from random to systematic and are thereby not extrapolated (Germany, Sweden) and, in Italy, an irregular payment found in the sample examined by the Certifying Body was not treated as an error on the grounds that recovery action had been taken, but this occurred after the closure of the accounts. 
Detta innebr mer konkret fljande: a) Vissa medlemsstater inkluderade alla upptckta fel oavsett vrde (Tyskland) medan andra har en inbygd toleransniv som gr att mindre fel inte ingr i extrapoleringen (Italien). b) Det attesterande organet behandlade inte nationella avdrag frn betalningar till mottagarna som fel (Grekland). c) Systematiska fel kvantifierades inte trots att de beskrivits i det attesterande organets rapport.
For the 37 paying agencies (covering 36 % of expenditure), for which the Certifying Bodies calculated the MLE, the total error amounts to 43,4 million euro equivalent to an error rate of 0,2 %. 
Fr de 37 utbetalningsstllen (som tcker 36 % av utgifterna) fr vilka de attesterande organen berknade mest sannolika fel uppgr de totala felbeloppen till 43,4 miljoner euro, vilket motsvarar en felprocent p 0,2 %.
For 17 other paying agencies (covering 33 % of expenditure), the Certifying BodyŐs reports explicitly state that no errors were found. 
Fr 17 andra utbetalningsstllen (som tcker 33 % av utgifterna) fastsls uttryckligen i de attesterande organens rapporter att inga fel ptrffats.
For the remaining 37 paying agencies (31 % of expenditure) it is either not clear whether errors were found or they were not extrapolated. 
Fr de terstende 37 utbetalningsstllena (31 % av utgifterna) r det antingen oklart om fel ptrffades eller ocks extrapolerades de inte.
When the Commission recalculated the error evaluations for Germany three Certifying Bodies, (Bavaria, Baden-Wrttemberg, Lower Saxony), were found to have incorrectly approved the paying agenciesŐ accounts. 
Nr kommissionen rknade om utvrderingarna av fel fr Tyskland fann man att tre attesterande organ (Bayern, Baden-Wrttemberg, Niedersachsen) felaktigt hade godknt utbetalnings stllenas rkenskaper.
Subsequently, two of the Certifying Bodies (Bavaria and Baden-Wrttemberg), by reclassifying some random errors as systematic errors convinced the Commission that their accounts were correct. 
Drefter vertygade tv av de attesterande organen (Bayern och Baden-Wrttemberg) kommissionen om att deras rkenskaper var korrekta, genom att omklassificera ngra slumpmssiga fel som systematiska fel.
Similarly, in Sweden the Certifying Body found two errors which should have led it to qualify the accounts but decided to classify the larger of the two errors as systematic and carry out further work. 
P liknande stt fann det attesterande organet i Sverige tv fel som borde ha franlett det att uttala reservationer angende rkenskaperna, men man beslutade att klassificera det strsta av de tv felen som systematiskt och utfra ytterligare arbete.
This option is foreseen under the new guideline issued in July 1998 and effectively allows the Member States to avoid qualification by investing in extra audit work. 
Detta alternativ ingr i de nya riktlinjerna som gavs ut i juli 1998 och innebr i praktiken att medlemsstaterna kan undvika reservation genom att investera i ytterligare revisionsarbete.
In the CourtŐs view, this is only acceptable if carried out before the submission of the certificate. 
Enligt revisionsrttens uppfattning r detta acceptabelt endast om det sker innan intyget skickas in.
The Certifying Bodies visited do not follow up errors detected in the course of their work on the previous yearŐs certification. Moreover, the Commission does not monitor error rates. 
De beskta attesterande organen fljer inte upp de fel de upptcker under sitt arbete avseende fregende rs attestering. Kommissionen fljer heller inte upp felprocenten.
In order to determine whether the situation is improving or deteriorating at a particular paying agency, or to identify any apparent anomalies amongst the error rates reported by the Certifying Bodies for different paying agencies within the same Member State the Commission should start to compile a database. 
I syfte att faststlla huruvida situationen frbttras eller frsmras vid ett specifikt utbetalningsstlle eller fr att faststlla uppenbara anomalier i den felprocent som de attesterande organen rapporterat fr olika utbetalningsstllen inom samma medlemsstat br kommissionen brja sammanstlla en databas.
Local offices and on-the-spot controls 48. 
Lokalkontor och kontroller p platsen 48.
Some Certifying Bodies have not adequately covered local offices. 
Vissa attesterande organ har inte p ett tillfredsstllande stt tckt de lokala kontoren.
In Spain for example, within the autonomous communities there are a number of regional offices and a far larger number of local offices involved in the handling of claims, but few are visited by the Certifying Body (1). 
I Spanien finns det exempelvis inom de sjlvstyrande enheterna ett antal regionala kontor och ett mycket strre antal lokala kontor som r inblandade i hanteringen av anskningar, men det attesterande organet besker f av dem (1).
Regulation (EC) No 1663/95 does not preclude the Certifying Bodies from carrying out on the spot visits at final beneficiary level. 
Frordning (EG) nr 1663/95 hindrar inte de attesterande organen frn att genomfra besk p platsen p slutmottagarniv.
They are required to certify that the paying agency is able to ensure that claims comply with Community rules before they are paid (see paragraph 5). 
De skall intyga att utbetalningsstllet kan skerstlla att bidragsanskningar fljer gemenskapsbestmmelser innan utbetalning sker (se punkt 5).
In practice, for most schemes, this means whether the IACS has been properly implemented and the required level of on farm inspection has been carried out. 
I praktiken handlar detta fr de flesta program om huruvida det integrerade systemet fr administration och kontroll (IACS) har infrts korrekt och grdsinspektioner utfrts i erforderlig utstrckning.
Most Certifying Bodies have limited their scope to confirmation that the required number of inspections has been carried out and have neither re-performed nor accompanied IACS inspections. 
De flesta attesterande organ har begrnsat rckvidden av sitt arbete till att bekrfta att erforderligt antal inspektioner har utfrts och har varken upprepat eller deltagit vid IACS-inspektioner.
With regard to the error rates and penalties applied in the context of IACS, the Certifying Bodies do not generally have or make use of this information when certifying compliance with Community rules. 
Nr det gller felprocenten och de pfljder som tillmpas i IACS-sammanhang har eller anvnder de attesterande organen i allmnhet inte denna information nr de intygar efterlevnad av gemenskapsregler.
The CommissionŐs failure to require the paying agencies to clearly present their findings in terms of random and risk-based samples (1) For the three autonomous communities visited by the Court, seven of the 18 regional offices and three of the 169 local offices were controlled by the Certifying Bodies. 
Det faktum att kommissionen inte lyckats f utbetalningsstllena att tydligt presentera sina resultat i form av slumpmssiga urval baserade p riskanalys (1) I de tre sjlvstyrande enheter som revisionsrtten beskt granskade de attesterande organen 7 av de 18 regionala kontoren och 3 av de 169 lokala kontoren.
2.3.2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 69/17 and to quantify the sanctions applied means that a fundamental measurement of the actual value of error in the IACS population is not calculated. 
2.3.2001 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning C 69/17 ochkvantifiera tillmpade sanktioner medfr att ett grundlggande mtt p det faktiska vrdet av felen i IACS-populationen inte berknas.
The Commission should insist that this data is provided and is verified by the Certifying Body. 
Kommissionen br insistera p att dessa uppgifter tillhandahlls och kontrolleras av det attesterande organet.
In Sweden, the Certifying Body does not have the legal right to carry out on-the-spot visits at final beneficiary level. 
I Sverige har det attesterande organet inte laglig rtt att utfra besk p platsen p slutmottagarniv.
The situation in other Member States is more flexible. 
Situationen i de andra medlemsstaterna r mer flexibel.
For example, in Austria, the Certifying Body has accompanied IACS inspectors on 29 visits. 
I sterrike har exempelvis det attesterande organet fljt med IACS-inspektrer vid 29 besk.
In Spain, in one of the three autonomous communities visited by the Court, the Certifying Body attended three re-inspections out of the 10 performed by the paying agencyŐs technical services. 
I Spanien, i en av de tre sjlvstyrande enheterna som revisionsrtten beskte, deltog det attesterande organet vid tre frnyade inspektioner av de tio som utbetalningsstllets tekniska avdelning hade genomfrt.
In the Netherlands, the Certifying Body did not attend any inspections. 
I Nederlnderna deltog inte det attesterande organet vid ngra inspektioner.
In the CourtŐs opinion the Certifying Bodies should give greater emphasis to their assessment of the effectiveness of IACS and should obtain first-hand knowledge by accompanying inspectors on both standard and reperformance inspections. 
Enligt revisionsrttens uppfattning br de attesterande organen lgga strre vikt vid sin bedmning av IACS:s ndamlsenlighet och br inhmta frstahandsinformation genom att flja med inspektrer vid bde vanliga inspektioner och upprepade inspektioner.
The same is true of customs controls. 
Samma sak gller tullkontroller.
Qualification of accounts 51. 
Rkenskaper med reservation 51.
Table 3 shows that the number of accounts qualified by the Certifying Bodies has decreased by 40 % (21 to 13) over the 1996 to 1998 period. 
Tabell 3 visar att antalet rkenskaper fr vilka de attesterande organen har lmnat reservationer har minskat med 40 % (21 till 13) under perioden 1996Đ1998.
However, the expenditure included in the accounts that have been qualified in 1998 remains unacceptably high at 11 700 million euro (30 %). 
De utgifter som ingr i de rkenskaper som har gett upphov till reservation 1998 r fortfarande oacceptabelt hga d de uppgr till 11 700 miljoner euro (30 %).
Seven paying agencies had their accounts qualified for 1996 and 1997 but have subsequently been given clear certificates. 
Fr sju utbetalningsstllen blev rkenskaperna fr 1996 och 1997 freml fr reservationer men de har senare ftt intyg utan reservationer.
Three paying agencies give continuing cause for concern because they were qualified in 1997 and 1998, and among them is Greece, which is the third largest paying agency. 
Tre utbetalningsstllen ger stndig orsak till oro eftersom de blev freml fr reservationer 1997 och 1998, och bland dessa finns Grekland som r det tredje strsta utbetalningsstllet.
Only the accounts for FEGA (Spain) have been qualified for three consecutive years. 
Det r endast rkenskaperna fr FEGA (Spanien) som har blivit freml fr reservation tre r i rad.
The common reasons for qualification are scope limitation (the Certifying Body was not able to obtain all the information it required) and the failure to meet accreditation criteria Ń accounting for stocks and debtors, control over delegated bodies, performance of technical services (IACS), accounting and internal control systems. 
De vanligaste orsakerna till reservation r begrnsningar i det attesterande organets arbete (det kunde inte f alla uppgifter det behvde) och underltenhet att uppfylla ackrediteringsvillkoren Đ bokfring av lager och fordringar, kontroll ver delegerade organ, de tekniska avdelningarnas arbete (IACS), redovisnings-och internkontrollsystem.
A qualified account may result in the expenditure declared by the paying agency being disjoined from the April financial decision pending further clarification/enquiries. 
Rkenskaper med reservation kan medfra att den utgift som utbetalningsstllet deklarerat avskiljs frn det finansiella beslutet i april, i avvaktan p ytterligare klargranden/utredningar.
The account is subsequently cleared by the Commission in a second decision, with or without corrections. 
Rkenskaperna godknns senare av kommissionen vid ett andra beslut, med eller utan rttelser.
Some qualified accounts are accepted by the Commission because the qualification has no financial importance to the year in question. 
Vissa rkenskaper med reservation accepteras av kommissionen fr att reservationen inte har ngon ekonomisk betydelse fr ret i frga.
CONFORMITY DECISIONS 53. 
BESLUT OM VERENSSTMMELSE MED GEMENSKAPSREGLERNA 53.
The financial clearance decision taken in respect of a given EAGGF year does not prevent the Commission from later disallowing expenditure that it considers has not been effected in accordance with Community rules. 
Det finansiella beslutet om godknnande av rkenskaperna fr ett visst EUGFJ-r hindrar inte kommissionen frn att senare avst frn att tillta utgifter som den anser inte har verkstllts i enlighet med gemenskapsreglerna.
Whilst the Certifying Bodies are not required to certify the legality and regularity of the expenditure declared by the paying agencies, their reports often contain observations of this nature. 
De attesterande organen behver visserligen inte intyga lagligheten och korrektheten fr de utgifter som utbetalningsstllena deklarerat men deras rapporter innehller ofta iakttagelser av detta slag.
The reports thus provide an input to the work of the unit in DG ÔAgricultureŐ which is responsible for conformity investigations. 
Rapporterna ger drmed underlag till arbetet i den enhet inom GD Jordbruk som ansvarar fr underskningar om verensstmmelse med gemenskapsreglerna.
This unit has a substantial ongoing programme to check that the Community provisions have been properly implemented and that the payments to final beneficiaries were correct. 
Denna enhet har ett omfattande fortgende program fr att kontrollera att gemenskapens anslag har anvnts p ett riktigt stt och att betalningar till slutmottagare varit korrekta.
Where these inspections show that the operation of agricultural subsidies has been unsatisfactory, the Commission can impose corrections, either on a flat-rate basis (2 %, 5 %, 10 %, 25 %) of the expenditure in question, or where possible, on the basis of specific quantifications of erroneous payments to beneficiaries. 
Nr dessa inspektioner visar att frvaltningen av jordbruksbidragen inte varit tillfredsstllande kan kommissionen genomfra rttelser, antingen med fasta procentsatser (2 %, 5 %, 10 %, 25 %) av de aktuella utgifterna eller Đ om s r mjligt Đ med specifika kvantifieringar av de felaktiga betalningarna till mottagarna.
Any such corrections proposed by the Commission, either as a result of investigating such observations, or stemming from its own enquiries, must be notified to the Member States who have the right to invoke the conciliation procedure. 
Alla sdana rttelser som kommissionen freslr, antingen som ett resultat av att den underskt sdana iakttagelser eller utifrn sina egna underskningar, skall meddelas medlemsstaterna, som d har rtt att inleda frlikningsfrfarandet.
Only when this procedure has run its course is the Commission in a position to take a conformity decision. 
Frst nr detta frfarande har avslutats fr kommissionen fatta ett beslut om verensstmmelse med gemenskapsreglerna.
The first conformity decision was not taken until February 1999 (see Table 1) and consisted for the most part of corrections for repeated weaknesses. 
Det frsta beslutet om verensstmmelse med gemenskapsreglerna fattades inte frrn i februari 1999 (se tabell 1) och innebar till strsta delen rttelser p grund av upprepade svagheter.
The second related to weaknesses in the application of the Over Thirty Months Scheme in the United Kingdom (1) and the third conformity decision concerned late payments and other bookkeeping adjustments. 
Det andra beslutet handlade om svagheter i tillmpningen av Frenade kungarikets tgrd fr slakt av ntkreatur som r ldre n 30 mnader (the Over Thirty Months Scheme) (1) och det tredje beslutet om verensstmmelse avsg sena betalningar och andra bokfringsjusteringar.
The combined value of these three conformity decisions taken during 1999 is relatively modest (207 million euro) and they cover the 1996 to 1998 EAGGF years (Table 6). 
Det sammanlagda vrdet av dessa tre beslut om verensstmmelse med gemenskapsreglerna som fattades under 1999 r relativt lgt (207 miljoner euro) och de omfattar EUGFJ-ren 1996 till 1998 (tabell 6).
Since later conformity decisions may also cover 1996 expenditure it is too early to draw conclusions concerning the total value of corrections for even the first year (1996) under the reformed clearance system. 
Eftersom senare beslut om verensstmmelse ven kan omfatta utgifter fr 1996 r det fr tidigt att dra slutsatser om det totala vrdet p rttelserna ens fr det frsta ret (1996) med det reformerade systemet fr avslutande av rkenskaperna.
(1) See Special Report No 19/98 concerning the Community financing of certain measures taken as a result of the BSE crisis (OJ C 383, 9.12.1998). 
(1) Se srskild rapport nr 19/98 om gemenskapsfinansiering av vissa tgrder som vidtagits p grund av BSE-krisen (EGT C 383, 9.12.1998).
These expenses are cleared during a second financial decision after more work is done on the accounts of the paying agencies. 
Dessa utgifter avslutas under ett andra finansiellt beslut om godknnande av rkenskaperna sedan ytterligare arbete utfrts avseende utbetalningsstllenas rkenskaper.
(2) In 1991, most of the corrections were related to milk super levies in Spain, 452,4 mio ECU, and Italy, 526,8 mio ECU (total of 979,2 mio Ecu). 
(2) Fr 1991 avsg de flesta rttelserna tillggsavgifter fr mjlk i Spanien, 452,4 miljoner ecu, och Italien, 526,8 miljoner ecu (totalt 979,2 miljoner ecu).
(3) From 1996 on, the total amount of corrections is provisory, there are still conformity decisions to be taken. 
(3) Fr.o.m. 1996 r det totala beloppet fr rttelserna fortfarande preliminrt, det terstr fortfarande att fatta vissa beslut om verensstmmelse.
(4) Automatic amount for late payments (in mio ECU / EUR): Ń 1994: 661,3 Ń 1995: 391,7 Ń 1996: 271,7 Ń 1997: 129,1 Ń 1998: 70,4 NB: The amounts in italics are provisory. 
(4) Automatiskt berknat belopp fr frsenade betalningar (miljoner ecu eller miljoner euro): Ń 1994: 661,3 Ń 1995: 391,7 Ń 1996: 271,7 Ń 1997: 129,1 Ń 1998: 70,4 Anm.: Observera att beloppen i kursiv fortfarande r preliminra.
Exchange rates: 1991: exchange rate used in the 24th financial report in Annex 23 ÔFinancial results of 1991 clearance of accounts decisionŐ. 
Valutakurser 1991: den valutakurs som anvnts i den tjugofjrde finansiella rapporten i bilaga 23 om de finansiella resultaten av 1991 rs beslut om avslutande av rkenskaperna.
1992 and 1993: exchange rates used for the Court of Auditors Special Reports No 1/97 and No 2/98 for corrections and disjunctions as well as the expenses declared. 
1992, 1993: de valutakurser som anvnts fr revisionsrttens srskilda rapporter nr 1/97 och 2/98 fr svl rttelser och avskiljande som deklarerade utgifter.
From 1994 on: exchange rates used by the Commission in its summary reports. 
1994: de valutakurser kommissionen anvnt i sina sammanfattande rapporter.
2.3.2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 69/19 THE CONCILIATION PROCEDURE Background 55. 
2.3.2001 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning C 69/19 F RLIKNINGSF RFARANDET Bakgrund 55.
The conciliation procedure begins after the Commission has sent its observations to the Member State. 
Frlikningsfrfarandet brjar efter det att kommissionen har skickat sina iakttagelser till medlemsstaterna.
Member States must reply in writing and then have an opportunity to discuss the proposed correction during bilateral meetings with the Commission. 
Medlemsstaterna skall svara skriftligen och har d mjlighet att diskutera den freslagna rttelsen under bilaterala mten med kommissionen.
After such meetings the Commission communicates to the Member State the value of the correction it intends to apply. 
Efter dessa mten meddelar kommissionen medlemsstaten vrdet p den rttelse den avser att gra.
The Member State has 30 days in which to decide whether to take its case to the Conciliation Body. 
Medlemsstaten har 30 dagar p sig att besluta huruvida den skall hnskjuta rendet till frlikningsorganet.
A period of four months is foreseen for conciliation, without prejudice to the Member StateŐs right to appeal to the European Court of Justice. 
Frlikning skall ske inom fyra mnader, utan att det pverkar medlemsstatens rtt att verklaga till EG-domstolen.
Member States may go straight to the European Court of Justice rather than take their case to the Conciliation Body. 
Medlemsstaten fr g direkt till EG-domstolen i stllet fr att hnskjuta rendet till frlikningsorganet.
The Conciliation Body was established in 1994 (1) (operational from September 1994) as part of the Belle reform and is an integral part of the clearance procedure. 
Frlikningsorganet inrttades 1994 (1) (r verksamt sedan september 1994) som en del av ÓBelle-reformenÓ och r en del av frfarandet vid avslutande av rkenskaperna.
The opinions of the Body are not binding on the CommissionŐs final decision on the clearance of accounts. 
Frlikningsorganets yttranden r inte bindande fr kommissionens slutliga beslut om avslutande av rkenskaperna.
The Conciliation Body is composed of five Members who are nominated by the Commission after consulting the EAGGF Committee. 
Frlikningsorganet bestr av fem medlemmar som utses av kommissionen efter att den hrt EUGFJ-kommittn.
The procedure was applied for the first time with regard to the 1992 clearance of accounts, and as such it pre-dated the introduction of the separate financial clearance decision in 1996. 
Frfarandet tillmpades frsta gngen avseende avslutandet av rkenskaperna fr 1992, och fregick drmed infrandet av separata finansiella beslut om godknnande av rkenskaperna 1996.