natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Did BNFL act in conformity with the private creditor principle?
Je družba BNFL ravnala v skladu z načelom zasebnega upnika?
The first question the Commission has to consider is whether the new arrangements between BNFL and BE were negotiated at arm’s length.
Prvo vprašanje, ki ga Komisija mora preučiti, je, ali se je o novih pogodbah med družbama BNFL in BE pogajalo na poslovni podlagi.
It has to be recalled that BNFL is BE’s largest single creditor and that BE is BNFL’s biggest customer.
Opozoriti je treba na to, da je družba BNFL največji posamični upnik družbe BE in da je družba BE največja stranka družbe BNFL.
The Commission has therefore examined whether the conditions accepted by BNFL could have been accepted by a private operator put in a similar position.
Komisija je zato preverila, ali bi lahko pogoje, ki jih je sprejela družba BNFL, sprejel zasebni izvajalec v podobnem položaju.
Within the context of a supplier faced with the difficulties of its major customer, this consists in checking whether BNFL acted as a diligent private creditor trying to maximise the chances of recovering its claims [36].
V zvezi z dobaviteljem, soočenim s težavami svoje največje stranke, pomeni to preverjanje, ali je družba BNFL ravnala kot prizadeven zasebni upnik, ki si prizadeva povečati možnosti povračila svojih zahtevkov [36].
The Commission has examined the relevant reports of BNFL’s legal and financial advisers and extracts of BNFL’s board meetings, which were submitted by BNFL.
Komisija je preverila ustrezna poročila pravnih in finančnih svetovalcev družbe BNFL in povzetke sej odbora družbe BNFL, ki jih je predložila družba BNFL.
First, the Commission notes that BNFL already asked its advisers to consider its position vis-à-vis BE at the beginning of 2002, when BE first invoked the hardship clause of its agreements with BNFL.
Najprej Komisija ugotavlja, da je družba BNFL naročila svojim svetovalcem, da preučijo njen položaj v razmerju do družbe BE v začetku leta 2002, ko se je družba BE prvič sklicevala na klavzulo o finančnih težavah pri svojih dogovorih z družbo BNFL.
It was not possible to reach the definitive conclusion that the conditions of the hardship clause were indeed fulfilled, but its board instructed BNFL to consider the possible deals which would address BE’s difficulties, under the ex plicit condition that any deal must be commercially advantageous for BNFL.
Ni bilo mogoče z gotovostjo zatrditi, da so bili pogoji klavzule o finančnih težavah resnično izpolnjeni, vendar je odbor družbi BNFL naročil, da preuči mogoče dogovore, ki bi obravnavali težave družbe BE, v skladu z jasnim pogojem, da je vsakršen dogovor obvezno poslovno ugoden za družbo BNFL.
The reports submitted by BNFL, that were written at that time, illustrate the particular situation of BNFL as a creditor and supplier of BE and analyse the impact of BE’s insolvency on BNFL.
Poročila, ki jih je predložila družba BNFL, napisana v tistem času, prikazujejo poseben položaj družbe BNFL kot upnika in dobavitelja družbe BE ter analizirajo vpliv plačilne nesposobnosti družbe BE na družbo BNFL.
They conclude that in view of the great exposure of BNFL, a solvent restructuring would be in BNFL’s best interests, but not at any cost.
Zaključujejo, da bi glede na veliko izpostavljenost družbe BNFL prestrukturiranje plačilne sposobnosti najbolj ustrezalo njenim interesom, vendar ne za vsako ceno.
They therefore define a proposed package of concessions to BE, and follow the evolution of this package during the negotiations with BE.
Zato določijo družbi BE predlagan paket koncesij in sledijo razvoju tega paketa med pogajanji z družbo BE.
It is clear from these reports that during these negotiations, BNFL always kept its initial idea which was to try and best preserve its interest by avoiding that BE be put under administration, but not at all cost, and within a balanced deal.
Iz teh poročil je jasno, da je med temi pogajanji družba BNFL vedno ohranjala svojo osnovno idejo, ki je bila truditi se in kar najbolje ohraniti svoje interese ob izogibanju vključitve družbe BE pod upravo, vendar ne za vsako ceno, ter na podlagi uravnoteženega dogovora.
The UK authorities have submitted that BNFL’s renegotiated agreements must be seen as a package, and compared with the position BNFL might have been in if BE had become insolvent, rather than picking out individual elements.
Organi Združenega kraljestva so trdili, da je treba dogovore družbe BNFL, o katerih se je ponovno pogajalo, videti kot paket in jih je treba primerjati s položajem, v kakršnem bi se lahko družba BNFL znašla, če bi družba BE postala plačilno nesposobna, ne pa se osredotočati na posamezne elemente.
The reports submitted by the UK authorities and by BNFL conclude that the Final Term Sheets are more advantageous to BNFL than any insolvency scenario.
Poročila, ki so jih predložili organi Združenega kraljestva in družba BNFL, zaključujejo, da so končni nezavezujoči dogovori za družbo BNFL bolj ugodni kot kateri koli scenarij v zvezi s plačilno nesposobnostjo.
In view of the above, the Commission has come to the first conclusion that, in case of insolvency of BE, BNFL would be put in a very uncertain and most likely disadvantaged situation.
Na tej podlagi je Komisija prišla do prvega zaključka, da bi bila družba BNFL, v primeru plačilne nesposobnosti družbe BE, v zelo negotovem in najverjetneje neugodnem položaju.
It is true that BE insolvency would not automatically mean that all its nuclears stations would be immediately closed nor would affect completely the need of decommissioning of existing stations and the management of historical spent fuel.
Drži, da plačilna nesposobnost družbe BE ne bi samodejno pomenila takojšnjega zaprtja njenih jedrskih elektrarn, niti ne bi v celoti vplivala na potrebo po razgradnji obstoječih postaj in na ravnanje s preteklim izrabljenim gorivom.
But in the case of an insolvency of BE, the Commission considers that BNFL would have been in a more difficult position to negotiate to whoever would be BE’s successor, either for running the stations or for decommissioning them.
Vendar v primeru plačilne nesposobnosti družbe BE Komisija meni, da bi bila družba BNFL v težjem položaju pri pogajanju s katerim koli naslednikom družbe BE, bodisi o vodenju obratov bodisi o njihovi razgradnji.
This would have implied a lot of risks and uncertainties, that a private investor has to take into account when considering the renegotiation of arrangements, in particular with its main client.
To bi pomenilo veliko tveganja in negotovosti, ki jih mora zasebni vlagatelj upoštevati, ko razmišlja o ponovnem pogajanju v zvezi z dogovori, še zlasti s svojo glavno stranko.
The fact that BNFL’s advisors studied carefully this alternative gives a clear indication that BNFL took due account of these facts.
Dejstvo, da so svetovalci družbe BNFL skrbno preučili to drugo možnost, jasno kaže na to, da je družba BNFL ustrezno upoštevala ta dejstva.
Trying and achieve a solvent restructuring of BE was therefore indeed the commercial interest of BNFL.
Prizadevanje za prestrukturiranje plačilne sposobnosti družbe BE in uresničitev tega je zato resnično bilo v poslovnem interesu družbe BNFL.
After having established this initial conclusion, the Commission considered the impact of the renegotiated agreements on BNFL revenues in view in particular of third parties’ comments, in order to check in more microeconomic terms whether these renegotiated agreements could have been accepted by a private company in a similar position.
Potem, ko je Komisija oblikovala svojo začetno ugotovitev, je preučila vpliv dogovorov, o katerih se je ponovno pogajalo, na dohodke družbe BNFL, še zlasti glede na izjave tretjih strank, da bi v bolj mikroekonomskih pogojih preverila, ali bi te ponovno dogovore, o katerih se je ponovno pogajalo, lahko sprejela zasebna družba v podobnem položaju.
As far as spent fuel management is concerned, spent fuel obligations are split between historic and future liabilities.
Kar zadeva ravnanje z izrabljenim gorivom, so obveznosti, povezane z izrabljenim gorivom, razdeljene na pretekle in prihodnje obveznosti.
As far as the historic spent fuel liabilities are concerned, under Measure A of the restructuring plan, the UK Government will take over all these liabilities from BE [37].
Kar zadeva pretekle obveznosti, povezane z izrabljenim gorivom, bo vlada Združenega kraljestva v skladu z ukrepom A načrta za prestrukturiranje prevzela te obveznosti družbe BE [37].
Concerning future spent fuel management, the existing arrangements were amended.
V zvezi s prihodnjim ravnanjem z izrabljenim gorivom so se obstoječi dogovori spremenili.
BNFL has submitted the following table concerning the new spent fuel management arrangements which shows that BE will pay BNFL on a sliding scale.
Družba BNFL je predložila naslednjo tabelo v zvezi z novimi dogovori o ravnanju z izrabljenim gorivom, ki prikazuje, da bo družba BE postopno plačevala družbi BNFL.
The data in italics have been added by the Commission:
Podatke v poševnem tisku je dodala Komisija:
New spent fuel management arrangement prices
Nove cene iz dogovora o ravnanju z izrabljenim gorivom
Outturn electricity price [39] in GBP/MWh real 2003 terms
Cena proizvedene električne energije [39] v GBP/MWh na podlagi realnih pogojev za leto 2003
Unit amount of (rebate)/surcharge in GBP/MWh real 2003 terms
Znesek na enoto (povračilo)/doplačilo v GBP/MWh na podlagi realnih pogojev za leto 2003
(in comparison with the original contracts)
(v primerjavi z izvirnimi pogodbami)
Net unit amount of spent fuel payment in GBP/MWh real 2003 Terms
Znesek na enoto plačila za izrabljeno gorivo v GBP/MWh na podlagi realnih pogojev za leto 2003
Payment in GBP/kgU [38]
Plačilo v GBP/kgU [38]
14,8 and below
14,8 in manj
21 and above
21 in več
It is important to note that the rebates and surcharge in Table 7 are in comparison with the arrangements for the management of spent fuel that were in place just before the restructuring, and not with older arrangements.
Pomembno je ugotoviti, da so povračila in doplačila iz tabele 7 v primerjavi z dogovori za ravnanje z izrabljenim gorivom začeli veljati tik pred prestrukturiranjem in ne s starejšimi sporazumi.
This is the right benchmark for the analysis of BNFL’s concessions to BE, since this represents what BNFL would have received from BE had BE not run into difficulties.
To je pravo merilo za analizo koncesij družbe BNFL družbi BE, ker predstavlja to, kar bi družba BNFL dobila od družbe BE, če se družba BE ne bi znašla v težavah.
In contrast, comparing the new arrangements with older contracts, like the initial, baseload, contracts to which the first anonymous third party refers, would make no sense in terms of analysing the actual concessions made by BNFL during the negotiation of the restructuring plan.
V nasprotju s tem, primerjanje novih dogovorov s starejšimi pogodbami, kot so izvirne pogodbe v zvezi z osnovno obremenitvijo, na katere se sklicuje prva anonimna tretja stranka, ne bi imelo nobenega smisla glede na analiziranje dejanskih koncesij s strani družbe BNFL med pogajanjem o načrtu za prestrukturiranje.
Table 7 shows that if the outturn electricity price is less than the strike price of GBP 16/MWh, BNFL will grant a rebate to BE in comparison with the pre-restructuring spent fuel management arrangements.
Kaže, da bo družba BNFL družbi BE odobrila povračilo v primerjavi z dogovori pred prestrukturiranjem o ravnanju z izrabljenim gorivom, če bo končna cena električne energije nižja od izvršilne cene, ki je 16 GBP/MWh.
If the electricity price is greater than the strike price, BNFL will be paid a surcharge in comparison with the payments it received under the original spent fuel management arrangements.
Če je cena električne energije višja od izvršilne cene, bo družba BNFL dobila doplačilo v primerjavi s plačili, ki jih je prejela po izvirnih dogovorih o ravnanju z izrabljenim gorivom.
As observed in recital (270), the income BNFL receives for the management and disposal of future spent fuel is dependent on wholesale UK electricity prices.
Kot piše v uvodni izjavi (270), je dohodek, ki ga prejme družba BNFL za ravnanje z izrabljenim gorivom in njegovo odstranitev, odvisen od veleprodajnih cen električne energije v Veliki Britaniji.
Such a disposition cannot be construed by itself as non-commercial.
Takšna ureditev se ne more sama po sebi razumeti kot neposlovna.
It is rather usual in the sector, where actors want to share the risks linked to the large potential fluctuations in prices.
V sektorju, v katerem želijo vsi udeleženci deliti tveganja, povezana z velikimi možnimi nihanji cen, je to običajno.
In order to check whether these price levels could have been accepted by a private company, the Commission checked to which extent they would allow BNFL to cover its avoidable costs in view of the foreseen evolution of electricity prices.
Da se preveri, ali bi lahko zasebna družba sprejela takšne cene, je Komisija preverila, do katerega obsega bi dovolili družbi BNFL pokriti izogibne stroške glede na predviden razvoj cen električne energije.
Indeed, where faced with the likelihood of losing such a crucial customer as BE is for BNFL, a private company would be ready to go as far as decreasing its prices down to those costs that it could avoid by closing its operations.
Res bi zasebna družba, ki bi ji grozila verjetna izguba takšne pomembne stranke, kot je družba BE za družbo BNFL, bila pripravljena iti tako daleč, da bi znižala cene na stroške, ki bi se jim lahko izognila z zaprtjem svojih obratov.
These costs are precisely the avoidable costs.
Ti stroški so ravno izogibni stroški.
In this case, under the new spent fuel management arrangements, BNFL will receive title to the spent fuel when it is delivered by BE.
V tem primeru bo družba BNFL, v skladu z novimi dogovori o ravnanju z izrabljenim gorivom, dobila pravico do lastništva za izrabljeno gorivo, ko ga družba BE dobavi.
This means that final disposal of this fuel will have to be handled by BNFL, which was not the case under the previous arrangements [40].
To pomeni, da bo za končno odstranitev tega goriva morala poskrbeti družba BNFL, kar pa ni veljalo v prejšnjih dogovorih [40].
Since this is an additional charge for BNFL as compared to previous arrangements, one cannot simply rely on the comparison between previous payments and new payments and conclude that BNFL recovers its avoidable costs as soon as electricity wholesale price exceeds GBP […]/MWh.
Ker je to za družbo BNFL dodatna obremenitev v primerjavi s prejšnjimi dogovori, se ni mogoče preprosto zanašati na primerjavo med prejšnjimi plačili in novimi plačili ter ni mogoče zaključiti, da bo družba BNFL povrnila svoje izogibne stroške, takoj ko veleprodajna cena električne energije preseže […] GBP/MWh.
On the other hand, the new spent fuel arrangements do not prescribe the way BNFL must handle the spent fuel to which it has title.
Po drugi strani novi dogovori o izrabljenem gorivu ne predpisujejo, kako mora družba BNFL ravnati z izrabljenim gorivom, do katerega je upravičena.
BNFL can choose whether it wishes to reprocess the fuel before final disposal or not.
Družba BNFL se lahko odloči, ali bo predelala gorivo pred končno odstranitvijo ali ne.
A further analysis is necessary, based on the actual avoidable costs for BNFL, including charges for final spent fuel disposal.
Potrebna je nadaljnja analiza na podlagi dejanskih izogibnih stroškov za družbo BNFL, vključno s stroški za končno odstranitev izrabljenega goriva.
The Commission asked the UK authorities to provide it with a detailed description of these costs.
Komisija je naročila oblastem Združenega kraljestva, da priskrbijo natančen opis teh stroškov.
Documentation provided by the UK authorities in this respect indicates that BNFL will cover its avoidable costs as soon as electricity prices are above a GBP […]/MWh to GBP […]/MWh range, depending on whether BNFL allows for risk provisions.
Dokumentacija, ki so jo v zvezi s tem priskrbele organi Združenega kraljestva, navaja, da bo družba BNFL pokrila izogibne stroške, takoj ko bodo cene električne energije presegle znesek v obsegu […] GBP/MWh do […] GBP/MWh, odvisno od tega, ali bo družba BNFL dovolila določbe, ki bi preprečile tveganje.
In order to cross-check this evaluation, the Commission has compared avoidable costs as computed by the UK authorities with costs reported by another source.
Da bi Komisija navzkrižno preverila to vrednotenje, je primerjala izogibne stroške, kot so jih izračunali organi Združenega kraljestva, s stroški, ki jih je sporočil drug vir.
Greenpeace has published on its web site a report by Gordon MacKerron of National Economic Research Associates [41].
Organizacija Greenpeace je na svoji spletni strani objavil poročilo Gordona MacKerrona iz družbe National Economic Research Associates [41].
This report quotes figures of USD 200/kgU (GBP 110/kgU [42]) for the temporary storage of spent fuel, and USD 400/kgU (GBP 220/kgU)for its final storage.
To poročilo navaja stroške v številkah: 200 USD/kgU (110 GBP/kgU [42]) za začasno shranjevanje izrabljenega goriva in 400 USD/kgU (220 GBP/kgU) za končno shranjevanje.
According to the author of the report, they were extracted from an American study [43].
Avtor poročila meni, da so bili podatki povzeti iz ameriške raziskave [43].
There are many differences between the American types of reactors (primary LWR ones) and BE’s ones.
Med ameriškimi vrstami reaktorjev (predvsem lahkovodni reaktorji – LWR) in reaktorji družbe BE je veliko razlik.
Furthermore, it is not clear from the report whether the costs to which it refers are avoidable costs or include fixed costs elements, which would be out of the scope of the following analysis.
Ob tem iz poročila ni jasno, ali so stroški, na katere se sklicuje poročilo, izogibni stroški ali vključujejo elemente fiksnih stroškov, ki ne bi spadali v obseg naslednje analize.
They are also very dependent on discount rates since most ultimate disposal costs will be incurred far in the future.
So tudi zelo odvisni od diskontnih stopenj, ker bo večina stroškov za končno odstranitev nastala daleč v prihodnosti.
The Commission has used these figures nonetheless because it considered that figures published by a third party were a relevant source for the cross checking of figures sent by the UK authorities.
Komisija je kljub temu uporabila te številke, ker je menila, da so številke, ki jih je objavila tretja stranka, pomemben vir za navzkrižno preverjanje številk, ki so jih poslali organi Združenega kraljestva.
In view of the figures stated in recital (279), the electricity price above which BNFL could recover its costs would be GBP […]/MWh.
Glede na številke, navedene v uvodni izjavi (277), bo cena električne energije, s katero bi si družba BNFL lahko povrnila stroške, […] GBP/MWh.
These figures must now be compared with the anticipated evolution of electricity prices.
Te številke je treba zdaj primerjati s pričakovanim razvojem cen električne energije.
The proper benchmark for this comparison is the development of electricity prices now and in the future as expected by BNFL when the new arrangements between BNFL and BE were negotiated.
Primerno merilo za to primerjavo je sedanji razvoj cen električne energije in razvoj v prihodnosti, kakršnega pričakuje družba BNFL v skladu z novim dogovorom med družbama BNFL in BE.
It is indeed against that potential background that BNFL assessed the value of its concessions to BE.
Družba BNFL je na tej možni podlagi res ocenila vrednost svojih koncesij družbi BE.
From the documents provided by BNFL, it appears that the general expectations were that prices would stay in the range of GBP 16/MWh to GBP 19/MWh in the near future, and then raise to higher, more sustainable values.
Glede na dokumente, ki jih je priskrbela družba BNFL, se zdi, da so bila splošna pričakovanja, da se bodo cene gibale med 16 GBP/MWh in 19 GBP/MWh v bližnji prihodnosti in potem dosegle višje, bolj trajno uravnotežene vrednosti.
In its assessment of the final terms of the plan, BNFL used four possible scenarios.
Družba BNFL je pri oceni finančnih pogojev načrta uporabljala štiri možne scenarije.
Only the most pessimistic of them featured electricity price values staying consistently below GBP 17/MWh, reaching only values of around GBP 16,5/MWh in the medium term.
Le po najbolj pesimističnem scenariju prikazane cene električne energije stalno ostajajo pod 17 GBP/MWh, v srednjeročnem obdobju pa dosežejo vrednosti le okrog 16,5 GBP/MWh.
The three others assumed that these prices would reach values around GBP 18/MWh as soon as 2007, and then gradually reach prices ranging from around GBP 19,5/MWh to GBP 23/MWh.
Drugi trije so predpostavljali, da bodo te cene že leta 2007 dosegle vrednosti okrog 18 GBP/MWh in se potem postopno zvišale na 19,5 GBP/MWh do 23 GBP/MWh.
BNFL’s assessment of the renegotiation of its arrangements with BE was therefore done against a background of price evolution forecasts that were such that, even in the most pessimistic assumptions, prices would enable it to recover its avoidable costs as valued internally, and that in all but the most pessimistic scenario, prices would enable it to recover its avoidable costs as valued by Gordon MacKerron.
Družba BNFL je zato izvedla oceno ponovnega pogajanja o dogovorih z družbo BE na podlagi napovedi razvoja cen, ki so bile takšne, da bi tudi ob najbolj pesimističnih predpostavkah lahko pokrile izogibne stroške, po oceni družbe same, in takšne, da bi po vseh scenarijih, razen po najbolj pesimističnem, cene omogočile družbi BNFL pokritje izogibnih stroškov, po oceni Gordona MacKerrona.
The actual evolution of electricity prices was finally higher than even the most optimistic of all four scenarios used by BNFL.
Dejanski razvoj cen električne energije je bil končno večji, kot v najbolj optimističnem od vseh štirih scenarijev, ki jih je uporabila družba BNFL.
Indeed, various price reporting agencies have reported values above GBP 20/MWh for winter baseload prices in the near future, even reaching figures as high as GBP 27/MWh [44].
Res so razne agencije za opazovanje cen poročale o vrednostih zimskih cen pri osnovni obremenitvi, višjih od 20 GBP/MWh v bližnji prihodnosti, ki lahko dosežejo celo 27 GBP/MWh [44].
As far as summer prices are concerned a value of around GBP 20/MWh has been reported by the same agencies.
Po poročanju istih agencij se vrednosti poletnih cen gibljejo okrog 20 GBP/MWh.
The scenarios used by BNFL were therefore globally rather pessimistic.
Scenariji, ki jih je uporabila družba BNFL, so bili zato z globalnega vidika dokaj pesimistični.
One can conclude from this that BNFL expected to be able to cover its avoidable costs under the new arrangements, despite the fact that it would bear the costs of final disposal of spent fuel.
Iz tega se da zaključiti, da je družba BNFL pričakovala, da bo po novih dogovorih lahko pokrila svoje izogibne stroške, čeprav bi morala kriti stroške za končno odstranitev izrabljenega goriva.
Similarly, the analysis of the new fuel supply arrangements, which are much simpler since they contain a variable charge that is not indexed on electricity prices, show that BNFL will cover its avoidable costs for fuel supply in all cases.
Podobno analiza novih dogovorov o dobavi goriva, ki so veliko preprostejši, saj vsebujejo spremenljiv strošek, ki se ne spreminja glede na indeks gibanja cen električne energije, kaže, da bo družba BNFL v vseh primerih pokrila izogibne stroške za dobavo goriva.
An in depth examination of avoidable costs therefore reveals nothing to suggest that BNFL acted uncommercially.
Poglobljena raziskava izogibnih stroškov zato ne razkriva ničesar, kar bi kazalo na to, da je družba BNFL ravnala neposlovno.
To the contrary, the actual evolution of electricity prices suggests that BNFL may very well improve its position as compared to the previous situation, while at the same time having shown enough flexibility to allow its main customer to remain in the market.
Nasprotno, dejanski razvoj cen električne energije kaže, da si lahko družba BNFL zelo izboljša svoj položaj v primerjavi s prejšnjo situacijo, medtem ko je istočasno pokazala dovolj prožnosti, da svoji glavni stranki omogoči ostati na trgu.
Was BNFL treated on an equal footing with private creditors?
Je bila družba BNFL obravnavana enako kot zasebni upniki?