natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
MCE skal betragtes som en offentlig opgave, der udføres på vegne af Landkreis Emsland, og EEB har kun fået overdraget driften.
As described in recitals 39 and 40 the clearance account and EEB's accounts were checked annually by chartered accountants to ensure that revenues and expenditures match.
Som anført i betragtning 46 var finansieringen af MCE frem til år 2004 indeholdt i budgetposten i kolonne 5, og derefter foregik finansieringen over den nye budgetpost i kolonne 6.
With regards to columns 2, 3 and 4 the German authorities explained that these cover all school transport (integrated and non-integrated) carried out in the Emsland.
Ifølge de tyske myndigheder blev følgende tre opgaver udført af fire medarbejdere: Organisering af regionens offentlige transportydelser (inklusive udarbejdelse af NTP), skoletransport og drift af MCE.
For columns 2 and 3 the German authorities provided missing figures and explained that these funds were used to pay VGE-Süd a fixed sum for its services carried out in southern Emsland until 2005 (see also recitals 29 f.).
Kolonne 6 indeholder betalinger til Emsland mobilitetscentral og finansiering af køretøjer til tilkaldebussystemet som forklaret under betragtning 50 f. De tyske myndigheder henviser til, at betalingerne svarer til de faktiske omkostninger, som EEB har afholdt for varetagelsen af de offentlige funktioner.
In response to the Commission's questioning of the alleged lump-sum of EUR 3934481,47 for non-integrated transport in 1997 [25] the German authorities explained that an estimation was made at the beginning of each year on the basis of which monthly payments were made.
Med hensyn til tilkaldebussystemet forklarede de tyske myndigheder, at Landkreis Emsland i november 2005 havde opfordret busselskaberne til at fremsætte forslag til udvidelse af tilkaldebusordningen.
At the end of each year actual costs were established and corresponding settlements took place.
På opfordring fra Landkreis Emsland anskaffede EEB fire tilkaldebusser i foråret 2006.
EEB simply forwarded the payments from the Landkreis to the bus undertakings.
Busserne blev stillet til rådighed for alle selskaber på følgende betingelser:
Occasional overpayments were booked as debts (Verbindlichkeiten) towards the Landkreis Emsland and were deducted from the compensation the following year.
Landkreis Emsland bevarer rådighedsretten til busserne, mens EEB er køretøjernes ejer, som stiller dem til rådighed for busselskaberne på grundlag af en forpagtningskontrakt
The actual cost price established at the end of 1997 was EUR 3755618,14.
busselskaberne bærer de løbende udgifter til drift og vedligeholdelse af køretøjerne
The German authorities clarified that the payments described in column 4 also include payments for the acquisition of school tickets from Deutsche Bahn AG.
borgerne kan ringe til MCE og bestille en tilkaldebus.
The German authorities explained that the increasing amounts in column 4 are due to tariff increases by the bus undertakings themselves and the fact that the Landkreis granted a rise of 6 to 10 % for non-integrated school transport in 2000 to bus undertakings, including the Complainants.
De tyske myndigheder gjorde gældende, at EEB ikke kan generere overskud gennem tilkaldebussystemet, og sendte Kommissionen en kopi af en skrivelse af 16. februar 2007 til de aktive busselskaber i Emsland, hvoraf det fremgår, at alle selskaber havde adgang til busserne på samme vilkår.
The MCE provided information on schedules for all bus undertakings and the Deutsche Bahn AG.
PARTERNES BEMÆRKNINGER
It updated the schedules in the public information system and provided information to passengers in the information office from Monday to Saturday.
KLAGERNE
The German authorities argued that the MCE was not an economic activity as there would be no reason for an economic undertaking to set up a mobility centre providing information on behalf of bus undertakings and the Deutsche Bahn AG free of charge.
FINANSIEL STØTTE TIL SKOLETRANSPORT (KOLONNE 3 OG 4)
The MCE should be regarded as a public remit duty of the Landkreis Emsland and EEB had simply been charged with its operation.
Klagerne bestrider, at EEB blot har videregivet de beløb, som selskabet modtog fra Landkreis Emsland til skoletransport.
As explained under recital 46, the financing of the MCE was included in the budget line reflected by column 5 until 2004 and thereafter financed from the new budget line covered by column 6.
De var af den opfattelse, at EEB modtog et engangsbeløb og organiserede skoletransporten på en sådan måde, at selskabets egen fortjeneste blev maksimeret.
According to the German authorities, four staff members carried out the following three tasks: organisation of regional public transport (including the set-up of the NVP), school transport and running the MCE.
Klagerne bestred, at EEB varetager offentlige funktioner med organiseringen af skoletransporten, og fremførte, at EEB handlede på egne vegne og ikke på vegne af Landkreis Emsland.
A comparison with the standard salaries for the concerned salary grades (as provided by the Kommunale Gemeinschaftsstelle) showed that EEB could have requested EUR 169312,26 instead of EUR 138015,11 for the staff and material cost.
Hvis EEB anser bestemte funktioner for at være offentlige opgaver, så skal der føres særskilte regnskaber for disse funktioner.
The German authorities also claimed that only material and personnel costs were covered and that no profit margin was added.
De fremførte, at EEB blandede sine økonomiske og ikke-økonomiske aktiviteter sammen.
Column 6 includes payments to the Mobility Centre Emsland and the financing of rolling stock for the call-a-bus system as explained in recitals 50 f.
Med hensyn til skoletransporten i det sydlige Emsland gjorde klagerne gældende, at kontrakten mellem VGE-Süd og EEB altid været præstationsbaseret, og fremsendte en tabel, som indeholdt de beløb, som VGE-Süd har modtaget (se betragtning 29 f.)
The German authorities stressed that the payments correspond to real costs incurred by EEB in discharging public duties.
Klagerne fremførte, at hvis summen af kolonne 3 og 4 udgør de samlede betalinger til selskaber for skoletransport, så pegede den pludselige tilbagegang fra 2005 til 2006 på en tidligere overkompensation.
With regard to the call-a-bus system, the German authorities explained that the Landkreis Emsland had invited the bus undertakings in November 2005 to submit proposals for the enlargement of the call-a-bus system.
Klagerne fremførte, at der ikke havde fundet takstforhøjelser sted på mere end 10 % i perioden fra 1997 til 2006.
On the Landkreis' orders EEB acquired 4 call-busses in spring 2006.
UDARBEJDELSE AF NTP (KOLONNE 5)
These busses were made available to all undertakings on the basis of the following conditions:
Klagerne gjorde gældende, at EEB have udarbejdet NTP i sin egen interesse, og at EEB havde skaffet sig en fordel ved tildelingen af rutetransporttilladelserne.
the Landkreis Emsland maintains control over the busses because EEB is the owner of the vehicles and puts them at the disposal of the bus undertakings on the basis of a contract (Fahrzeugüberlassungsvertrag);
Desuden var deres holdninger ikke blevet taget i betragtning ved udarbejdelsen af NTP, selvom de var blevet hørt.
the bus undertakings support the current costs of the use and maintenance of the vehicles;
Klagerne bestred også Kommissionens konklusion i åbningsafgørelsen om, at udarbejdelsen af NTP ikke var en økonomisk aktivitet.
citizens call the MCE to request a call-bus and the MCE transfers the request to the relevant bus undertakings.
Den eneste offentlige beslutning, som efter deres mening var blevet truffet, var Landkreis Emslands vurdering og accept af NTP.
In autumn 2007, an additional bus was acquired which was put at the disposal of the bus undertaking Wessels from Geeste under the same conditions.
EEB's forberedelse af den udgør ifølge klagerne en økonomisk aktivitet, som også kunne være udført af et konsulentfirma.
The German authorities claimed that EEB cannot make any profits with the call-a-bus system and provided the Commission with a copy of a letter of 16 February 2007 to the bus undertakings operating in the Landkreis showing that all of them had access to the busses at the same conditions.
Klagerne hævdede, at de også rådede over den nødvendige ekspertise til at gennemføre disse opgaver.
COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES
EEB havde ifølge klagerne opnået en økonomisk fordel gennem den omkostningsfri anskaffelse af DIVA-softwaren.
FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR CARRYING-OUT SCHOOL TRANSPORT (COLUMNS 3 AND 4)
FINANSIERING AF KØRETØJER TIL ET TILKALDEBUSSYSTEM (KOLONNE 6)
The Complainants contested that EEB merely forwarded the amounts received from the Landkreis to the undertakings providing school transport.
Hvad angår tilkaldebusserne bestrider klagerne, at busserne er blevet tilbudt alle busselskaber i Emsland.
They believed that EEB received a lump-sum and organised school transport in a way as to maximize its own profit.
EEB har kun tilbudt busserne til de selskaber, som har tilmeldt deres kørsler til Emsland mobilcenter.
The Complainants contested that EEB fulfilled public duties when organising school transport and acted in its own name rather than in the name of the Landkreis Emsland.
Klagerne gjorde gældende, at busselskaberne på denne måde var tvunget til at videregive følsomme oplysninger om deres passagertransport til deres konkurrent EEB.
If certain activities of EEB were to be considered as public duties, then these should come from separate accounts.
Desuden har EEB ifølge klagerne ikke kun benyttet busserne på tilkaldestrækningerne, men også til rutetrafik (f.eks. på strækningen Haselünne-Meppen).
They claimed that EEB was mixing its economic and non-economic activities.
Klagerne hævdede, at ingen af dem havde modtaget en tilkaldebus.
Regarding school transport in southern Emsland the Complainants argued that the contracts between VGE-Süd and EEB were always performance based and they submitted a table showing the payments received by the VGE-Süd (see also recitals 29 f.).
Navnlig gjorde klagerne Albers og Elbert gældende, at de var blevet stillet ringere i godkendelsesprocessen, fordi de angiveligt ikke havde haft adgang til tilkaldebussystemet.
The Complainants claimed that if the sum of columns 3 and 4 represented the total payments to undertakings carrying out school transport, then the sudden reduction between 2005 and 2006 is an indication of previously existing overcompensation.
Nærtrafikrådgivningen Südwest bestrider Kommissionens konklusion i åbningsafgørelsen, ifølge hvilken betalingerne i henhold til § 45a, PBefG udgør en kompensation for offentlige forpligtelser og opfylder Altmark-kriterierne.
According to the Complainants, the costs for school transport by VGE-Süd varied only marginally (ca.
Nærtrafikrådgivningen Südwest gjorde gældende, at begrebet »forpligtelse til offentlig tjeneste ikke er defineret i § 45a, PBefG, at der ikke findes nogen kontrol, som forhindrer overkompensation, og at sammenligningen med en repræsentativ økonomisk og effektivt fungerende virksomhed var forkert.
6 %) between 1997 and 2007.
ANONYME BEMÆRKNINGER
They had no explanation for the doubling of the amounts listed in column 4 over the same time span.
En anonym part stillede spørgsmålstegn ved, om de ovenfor nævnte beløb i tabellens kolonne 3 stemte overens med betalingerne for skoletransporten.
They claimed that fare increases of no more than 10 % occurred between 1997 and 2006.
Den anonyme part fandt, at det drejede sig om direkte tilskud til busselskaber med henblik på at opnå andre fordele (indflydelse på køreplaner, EEB's deltagelse i VGE-Süd, bedre køreplaner for passagerer, som ikke er skoleelever, underleverancer til virksomheder, som oprindeligt var aktive inden for særskilt skoletransport).
DRAFTING OF THE NVP (COLUMN 5)
BEMÆRKNINGER FRA DE TYSKE MYNDIGHEDER TIL INTERESSEREDE PARTERS BEMÆRKNINGER
The Complainants argued that EEB drafted the NVP to suit its own interests and that this constituted an advantage for EEB with regard to the route authorizations (Liniengenehmigungsanträge).
De tyske myndigheder gjorde gældende, at faldet i betalingerne til skoletransport (kolonne 3 og 4) mellem 2005 og 2006 ikke pegede i retning af nogen overkompensation før 2006, sådan som det blev hævdet af klagerne.
They also claimed that even though they were consulted during the elaboration of the NVP, their views were not taken into account.
Myndighederne forklarede nedgangen som følger:
The Complainants also contested the Commission's conclusion in the opening decision that the establishment of the NVP is not an economic activity.
Den resterede særskilte skoletransport blev sendt i udbud.
The only public decision taken in this context in their view was the assessment and adoption of the NVP by the Landkreis.
Dette har ført til omkostningsreduktioner.
The preparatory work carried out by EEB constituted an economic activity that could have been carried out by any consultancy.
Kontrakten med VGE-Süd, som var baseret på et engangsbeløb, ophørte også med udgangen af 2005 (se betragtning 29 f.), og betalingerne til VGE-Süd er faldet fra 1840000 EUR i 2005 til 1719000 i 2006.
The Complainants argued that they also have the necessary know-how to execute these tasks.
Desuden er der i 2005 blevet udbetalt forskud, som viste sig at være for høje.
The Complainants claimed that the acquisition of DIVA-software was not specific to the establishment of the NVP, but that it can also be used for other purposes such as optimization of transport supply by a bus undertaking.
Dette har også bidraget til, at det anførte beløb i kolonne 4 er betydeligt lavere for 2006.
EEB would have received an advantage by receiving the DIVA-software for free.
Med hensyn til stigningerne i de samlede omkostninger i perioden fra 1997 til 2006 advarede de tyske myndigheder om, at kolonne 4 ikke giver et præcist billede af de faktiske omkostninger, da tallene for de enkelte år indeholder forskud for de efterfølgende år.
FINANCING OF ROLLING STOCK FOR THE CALL-A-BUS SYSTEM (INCLUDED IN COLUMN 6)
I 2007 steg omkostningerne som følge af betydelige takstforhøjelser for skoleelevernes billetter på VGE-Süds regulære busruter.
With regard to the call busses (Rufbusse), the Complainants contested that the busses were offered to all undertakings active in the Landkreis Emsland.
Myndighederne fremlagde tal for udviklingen i taksterne i området, der betjenes af VGE-Süd.
EEB only offered the busses to those undertakings which register their bus trips via the Mobility Centre Emsland.
Tal, som viser stigninger på op til 45 %.
The Complainants claimed that this forced the bus undertakings to provide economically sensitive data with regard to passenger transport to their competitor EEB.
På trods af denne stigning kan der faktisk konstateres en samlet nedgang i omkostningerne til skoletransport, hovedsageligt på grund af skoletransportens integration i rutebustrafikken.
The Complainants claimed that none of them obtained a call bus.
De tyske myndigheder har ikke bestridt, at EEB udøver økonomiske aktiviteter, men insisterede på, at EEB i forbindelse med betalingerne for skoletransport, som er opsummeret i kolonne 3 og 4, ikke handlende som en virksomhed, men udførte en offentlig funktion i henhold til § 3 i selskabets vedtægter (se betragtning 14).
In particular, the Complainants Albers and Elbert claimed that they suffered a disadvantage in the authorization procedures (Genehmigungswettbewerb) as allegedly they had no access to the call-a-bus system.
EEB har blot videregivet betalinger modtaget fra Landkreis Emsland til de busselskaber, som har udført skoletransporten.
Nahverkehrsberatung Südwest contested the Commission's conclusion in the opening decision that payments according to §45a PBefG were compensations for public service obligations and fulfil the Altmark criteria.
Der er blevet afregnet regelmæssigt for at sikre, at selskaberne ikke modtog for høj eller for lav godtgørelse.
It claims that §45a PBefG does not define public service obligations, that there is no control against over-compensation and that the comparison with a representative economically and efficiently operating undertaking is flawed.
Ifølge de tyske myndigheder er påstanden om, at klagerne ikke er blevet tilstrækkeligt hørt i forbindelse med udarbejdelsen af NTP, og at NTP er blevet tilpasset til fordel for EEB, ikke korrekt.
ANONYMOUS COMMENT
I 1996 blev busselskaberne inviteret til at deltage i en arbejdsgruppe for at drøfte NTP.
An anonymous commentator expressed doubts whether the amounts listed in column 3 of the above table correspond to payments for school transport.
Busselskaberne deltog i denne arbejdsgruppe.
He believed that they are direct subsidies to the bus undertakings in order to obtain other advantages (influence on schedules, membership of EEB in VGE-Süd, better schedules for non-pupil passengers, subcontracts for undertakings originally active in non-integrated school transport).
I 2002 afviste selskaberne Kalmer, Bittner, Elbert, Wessels, Fischer og Richers-Reisen imidlertid at deltage i en tilsvarende arbejdsgruppe og fremsendte skriftlige bemærkninger.
COMMENTS FROM GERMANY ON COMMENTS BY INTERESTED PARTIES
Disse bemærkninger blev opsummeret og drøftet i Landkreis Emslands organer.
The German authorities claimed the decrease in payments for school transport (columns 3 and 4) between 2005 and 2006 was not an indication of overcompensation prior to 2006, as alleged by the Complainants.
Kommissionen har modtaget relevante dokumenter vedrørende dette forhold.
They explained the decrease as follows:
De tyske myndigheder forklarede endvidere, at NTP ikke indeholdt konkrete oplysninger om de enkelte busruters frekvens eller om ruteforløb (en kopi af NTP er blevet fremsendt til Kommissionen).
As a result of complaints to the Commission by the same Complainants, all contracts for non-integrated school transport were cancelled on 31 December 2005.
Det stod ikke klart for de tyske myndigheder, hvorvidt udarbejdelsen af NTP kunne udgøre en konkurrencemæssig ulempe for busselskaberne.
Consequently school transport was reorganised and certain non-integrated routes were integrated into the regular bus services.
De tyske myndigheder bestred desuden klagerens påstand om, at en del af udarbejdelsen af NTP udgør en økonomisk aktivitet.
The remaining non-integrated school transport was tendered out.
Myndighederne bekræftede, at NTP indgår i Landkreis Emslands offentlige opgaver.
This led to cost reductions.
EEB's vedtægter pålægger udtrykkeligt selskabet at udarbejde NTP.
The lump-sum contract with VGE-Süd was also cancelled at the end of 2005 (see also recitals 29 f.) and the payments to VGE-Süd decreased from EUR 1840000 in 2005 to EUR 1719000 in 2006.
Hvad angår tilkaldebussystemet, henviste de tyske myndigheder til, at busserne var blevet tilbudt alle busselskaber i Emsland på samme betingelser, sådan som det fremgår af yderligere skrivelse af 16. februar 2007 til busselskaberne.
In addition advances paid in 2005 turned out to be high which contributed to the fact that the amount listed in column 4 was considerably lower in 2006.
Det var uforståeligt for de tyske myndigheder, hvorledes det obligatoriske opkald til mobilitetscenter Emsland kunne medføre videregivelse af kommercielt følsomme oplysninger.
With regard to the overall cost increases between 1997 and 2006, the German authorities caveated that column 4 does not give a precise picture of the real cost evolution as figures for individual years also contain advances for following years.
Myndighederne bestred, at selskaberne Albers og Elbert ikke havde haft adgang til disse busser.
In 2007, costs went up considerably following important tariff increases for the school bus tickets on the regular bus lines of VGE-Süd.
Man gjorde gældende, at det under møder med selskabet Elbert havde vist sig, at selskabet ikke var enigt i betingelserne for brugen af busserne.
The authorities provided figures on the evolution of tariffs in the area served by VGE-Süd which show increases of up to 45 %.
Med hensyn til tilkaldebusserne er de tyske myndigheder af den opfattelse, at EEB har udført offentlige opgaver.
They also explained that the number of eligible pupils increased by roughly 20 % from 1997 to 2003 (15429 to 18454).
I tilslutning til beslutningen af 8. februar 2006 pålagde kredsrådet i Landkreis Emsland EEB at anskaffe busserne og opbygge tilkaldebussystemet.
Considering this increase the authorities stated that overall the cost of school transport per pupil actually decreased, mainly due to the integration of school transport into regular bus services.
Da busserne var EEB's ejendom, ønskede Landkreis Emsland at sikre sig rådighedsretten til busserne.
The German authorities did not dispute that EEB carried out economic activities, but insisted that when it comes to the payments for school transport summarised in columns 3 and 4, EEB did not act as an undertaking but carried out public duties in accordance with paragraph 3 of its articles of association (see also recital 14).
De tyske myndigheder forklarede, at andre interesserede selskaber var blevet tilbudt driften af en tilkaldebus, når et selskab ikke længere var interesseret heri.
EEB merely forwarded the payments received from the Landkreis Emsland to the bus undertakings carrying out the school transport and settlements took place regularly to ensure that there was no over or under-compensation.
Hvis der ikke blev mødt interesse, traf Landkreis Emsland afgørelse om brugen af busserne.
According to the German authorities, the claim that the Complainants were not sufficiently consulted in the elaboration of the NVP and that the NVP was adjusted to EEB's advantage is not correct.
I august 2012 blev driften af en af disse fem tilkaldebusser indstillet, og de tyske myndigheder forklarede, at denne bus var blevet solgt og beløbet fra salget overført til Landkreis Emsland.
In 1996 the bus undertakings were invited to participate in a working group to discuss the NVP, which they did.
Dette viser, at Emsland havde beholdt retten til rådighed over busserne.
However, in 2002, the undertakings Kalmer, Bittner, Elbert, Wessels, Fischer and Richers-Reisen refused to participate in a similar working group and sent written submissions.
Det samme ville ske, hvis driften af andre busser skulle blive indstillet.
These comments were summarised and discussed in the decision making bodies (Gremien) of the Landkreis Emsland.
De tyske myndigheder har bekræftet, at busserne ud over at blive anvendt i tilkaldebussystemet også var blevet anvendt til skoletransport.
Supporting documents were provided to the Commission.
Dette var ifølge de tyske myndigheder sket i samråd med Landkreis Emsland.
The German authorities further explained that the NVP did not contain any concrete information on the frequency of individual lines or on the trajectory of the lines (a copy of the NVP has been provided to the Commission).
EEB's datterselskaber og tredjeparter anvendte tilkaldebusserne til skoletransport i mellem 3,9 % og 24,1 % af tiden.
It was unclear to the German authorities in how far the drafting of the NVP could cause a competitive disadvantage to the bus undertakings.
VURDERING AF FORANSTALTNINGEN
The German authorities also contested the Complainants' claim that part of the drafting of the NVP is an economic activity.
DENNE AFGØRELSES BESLUTNINGS GENSTAND
They affirmed that the NVP is part of the public duties of the Landkreis Emsland.
GENSTAND IFØLGE ÅBNINGSAFGØRELSEN
The articles of association (Gesellschaftervertrag) explicitly imposed the duty of drafting the NVP onto EEB.
I åbningsafgørelsen blev det fundet, at EEB i tidsrummet 1997 til 2007 muligvis havde modtaget forskellige former for statsstøtte, som er sammenfattet i kolonne 1-6 i tabel 1 i denne afgørelse.
With regard to the call-a-bus system, the German authorities stressed that the busses were offered to all undertakings in the Emsland at the same conditions as an additional letter of 16 February 2007 to the bus undertakings shows.