natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The UK authorities argued that the level of aid to BE is structurally minimised by the sale of assets (Bruce Power and Amergen), the reduction of liabilities owed to creditors, continued contribution by BE to the funding of its nuclear liabilities, other internal measures to reduce costs, and the mechanism by which BE will contribute in the future by 65 % of its free cash flow to the funding of its nuclear liabilities.
Organi Združenega kraljestva so dokazovali, da stopnjo pomoči družbi BE strukturno zmanjšujejo prodaja premoženja (Bruce Power in Amergen), zmanjšanje obveznosti do upnikov, nadaljnje financiranje družbe BE jedrskih obveznosti, drugi notranji ukrepi za zmanjšanje stroškov ter mehanizem, s katerim bo družba BE v prihodnje prispevala 65 % svojega prostega denarnega toka za financiranje svojih jedrskih obveznosti.
Compensatory measures
Izravnalni ukrepi
The UK authorities recalled the arguments presented in the notification according to which the aid has no impact on the competition structure since it has no impact on BE’s short run marginal costs which determine the day-to-day operations of a station.
Organi Združenega kraljestva so opozorili na argumente iz obvestila, po katerih nima pomoč nobenega vpliva na strukturo konkurence, ker nima vpliva na kratkoročne mejne stroške družbe BE, ki določajo dnevne operacije postaje.
They recalled, based on updated data and comparisons with other Member States, that the market is not in structural overcapacity and claimed that, consequently, no compensatory measure should be imposed.
Na podlagi posodobljenih podatkov in primerjav z drugimi državami članicami so opozorili, da na trgu ni strukturnega presežka, in trdijo, da zato ni treba sprejeti nikakršnih izravnalnih ukrepov.
V. COMMENTS FROM THE UNITED KINGDOM ON COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES
V. PRIPOMBE IZ ZDRUŽENEGA KRALJESTVA V ZVEZI S PRIPOMBAMI ZAINTERESIRANIH STRANK
In their comments, the UK authorities concentrate on those observations which take issue with their position, while noting other observations which support their position.
V izjavah se organi Združenega kraljestva osredotočajo na tiste pripombe, ki so v nasprotju z njihovim stališčem, medtem ko upoštevajo druge pripombe, ki podpirajo njihovo stališče.
Powergen’s observations
Pripombe družbe Powergen
The UK authorities first recall their reasoning regarding BE’s SRMCs and their position according to which the aid package would have no effect on competitors.
Organi Združenega kraljestva najprej opozorijo na stališče v zvezi s KMS družbe BE in na mnenje, po katerem paket pomoči ne bi vplival na tekmece.
The argument is further supported by figures on BE’s offers on the DSB market, which show that BE has no incentive not to maximise its profit by pricing at marginal cost.
Argument nadalje podpirajo številke na ponudbah družbe BE na trgu neposredne dobave velikim strankam, ki kažejo, da namerava družba BE povečati svoj dobiček z oblikovanjem cen po mejnih stroških.
The UK authorities continue by noting that BE has no incentive to leave plants on the market that could not recover their avoidable costs.
Organi Združenega kraljestva nadaljujejo s trditvijo, da družba BE ne namerava na trgu pustiti elektrarn, ki ne bi mogle pokriti izogibnih stroškov.
In this respect, they present cost analysis aimed at proving that the Dungeness B plant does cover its avoidable costs with reasonable assumptions on electricity market prices.
V zvezi s tem predstavijo analizo stroškov, da bi dokazale, da elektrarna Dungeness B pokriva svoje izogibne stroške z ustreznimi predpostavkami o cenah na energetskem trgu.
The UK authorities go on to recall their view on the fact that there is no structural overcapacity on the market.
Organi Združenega kraljestva opozorijo na mnenje o dejstvu, da na trgu ni strukturnega presežka.
They indicate that Powergen had demothballed plants for winter 2003-2004, which would indicate that Powergen itself considers that there is no structural overcapacity on the market.
Navajajo, da je družba Powergen ponovno odprla elektrarne za zimo 2003–2004, kar pomeni, da družba Powergen sama meni, da na trgu ni strukturnega presežka.
The UK authorities recall their view on the absence of necessity of compensatory measures and give their view on each of the measures proposed by Powergen.
Organi Združenega kraljestva opozorijo na mnenje o nepotrebnosti izravnalnih ukrepov ter predložijo mnenje o vsakem ukrepu, ki ga je predlagala družba Powergen.
The UK authorities then recall their position on Measures B and C and stress, in particular, that BNFL based itself on external advice.
Organi Združenega kraljestva potem opozorijo na mnenje o ukrepih B in C ter, še zlasti, poudarijo, da se je družba BNFL oprla na zunanje nasvete.
They claim that Powergen’s position on these measures are based on wrong assumptions on dates.
Trdijo, da stališče družbe Powergen o teh ukrepih temelji na napačnih predpostavkah o datumih.
On viability, the UK authorities contest Powergen’s opinion regarding BE’s plant’s reliability and have submitted to the Commission a report from external consultant for the purpose of checking viability hypothesis.
Organi Združenega kraljestva v zvezi s preživetjem družbe nasprotujejo mnenju družbe Powergen o zanesljivosti elektrarne družbe BE in so Komisiji predložili poročilo zunanjega svetovalca zaradi preverjanja hipoteze o preživetju.
Finally the UK authorities state, contrary to what is claimed by Powergen, that if electricity prices did recover, the clawback mechanism would ensure that no unnecessary aid wasgiven to BE.
Končno organi Združenega kraljestva trdijo, nasprotno od družbe Powergen, da bo mehanizem povrnitve sredstev zagotovil, da družba BE ne bo dobila nepotrebne pomoči, če se bodo cene električne energije dvignile.
Greenpeace’s observations
Pripombe organizacije Greenpeace
The UK authorities do not accept Greenpeace’s view that the aid should be examined as aid to shareholders.
Organi Združenega kraljestva ne sprejemajo mnenja organizacije Greenpeace, da bi bilo treba preveriti, ali to pomoč dobijo delničarji.
Such a theory would mean that any aid to a quoted company would be an aid to its shareholders.
Takšna teorija bi pomenila, da je kakršna koli pomoč družbi, ki kotira na borzi, pomoč njenim delničarjem.
The UK authorities note that BE’s shareholders give up 97,5 % of their interest in BE’s equity capital.
Organi Združenega kraljestva ugotavljajo, da se delničarji družbe BE odrekajo 97,5 % svojih obresti v lastniškem kapitalu družbe BE.
The UK authorities again state that they do not consider that BNFL acted under Government pressure when renegotiating its contracts with BE and note that BNFL’s own detailed accounts of events, which were sent to the Commission in parallel, would demonstrate the opposite.
Organi Združenega kraljestva ponovno trdijo, da po njihovem mnenju družba BNFL ni delovala pod pritiskom vlade, ko se je z družbo BE ponovno pogajala o svojih pogodbah, in ugotavljajo, da lastna natančna poročila družbe BNFL, poslana Komisiji, pričajo o nasprotnem.
The extract from BE’s 2002/2003 Report, and the article in ‘The Business’, referring to the collapse of talks between BNFL and BE in August/beginning September 2002 are wrongly interpreted by Greenpeace as a sign that BNFL acted later under pressure from the Government.
Organizacija Greenpeace si napačno razlaga povzetek iz poročila družbe BE za leto 2002/2003, in članek iz časopisa „The Business“, ki veljata za neuspela pogajanja med družbama BNFL in BE v avgustu/začetku septembra 2002, kot znak, da je družba BNFL pozneje delovala pod pritiskom vlade.
On the contrary they would show that BNFL was not ready to participate in BE’s plans without other creditors bringing similar contributions.
Nasprotno, kažeta, da družba BNFL ni bila pripravljena sodelovati v načrtih družbe BE, ne da bi tudi drugi upniki podobno prispevali.
The UK authorities note that BNFL had already submitted the internal documents that Greenpeace suggested the Commission require from it.
Organi Združenega kraljestva ugotavljajo, da je družba BNFL že predložila notranje dokumente, za katere je organizacija Greenpeace predlagala, da jih naj od nje zahteva Komisija.
Concerning the contracts between BE and BNFL which according to Greenpeace are designed to provide BNFL with a guaranteed income stream, the UK authorities note that most of these contracts were signed or renegotiated after BE was privatised and that therefore these contracts could not have been imposed on BE by the Government.
V zvezi s pogodbami med družbama BE in BNFL, ki so po mnenju organizacije Greenpeace oblikovane tako, da je družbi BNFL zagotovljen tok prihodkov, ugotavljajo organi Združenega kraljestva, da je večina teh pogodb bila podpisana ali so se o njih ponovno pogajali po privatizaciji družbe BE in da zato teh pogodb družbi BE ni mogla naložiti vlada.
Finally, the UK authorities indicate that the link between BNFL’s concession and electricity prices is proof that BNFL behaved commercially, by requiring BE to share some of the possible benefits with it and not the opposite.
Končno organi Združenega kraljestva navajajo, da je povezava med koncesijo družbe BNFL in cenami električne energije dokaz, da je družba BNFL ravnala poslovno, ko je zahtevala od družbe BE, da z njo deli nekatere mogoče koristi, in ne obratno.
The UK authorities recall their view on the application of the polluter pays principle to this case.
Organi Združenega kraljestva opozorijo na mnenje o uporabi načela onesnaževalec plača v tem primeru.
They consider that Greenpeace did not add any new fact or argument in this respect.
Menijo, da organizacija Greenpeace ni v zvezi s tem dodala nobenega novega dejstva ali argumenta.
Regarding the impact of the aid on competition, the UK authorities first object to Greenpeace’s view that the effect of the aid package is to maintain an inefficient producer in the market.
V zvezi z vplivom pomoči na konkurenco ugovarjajo organi Združenega kraljestva najprej mnenju organizacije Greenpeace, da je učinek paketa pomoči ohraniti neučinkovitega proizvajalca na trgu.
BE cannot be considered as an inefficient generator since its avoidable costs are among the lowest on the market.
Družba BE se ne more šteti za neučinkovitega proizvajalca, ker so njeni izogibni stroški med najnižjimi na trgu.
Its problems are only linked to historical liabilities.
Njene težave so povezane le s preteklimi obveznostmi.
Furthermore, the UK authorities recall their view that the aid does not distort competition, and therefore does not deter any entry to the market.
Ob tem organi Združenega kraljestva opozorijo na mnenje, da pomoč ne izkrivlja konkurence in zato nikogar ne odvrača od vstopa na trg.
The UK authorities state that Greenpeace’s comments on overcapacity on the market were flawed because they were based on outdated forecasts, they wrongly interpreted NGTransco’s benchmark for capacity margin, they used wrong figures for present capacity margin, they envisaged only the more optimistic of the three possible scenarios for the future, and they ignored the difficulties in returning certain mothballed plants to the market.
Organi Združenega kraljestva trdijo, da so bile izjave organizacije Greenpeace o presežku na trgu nenatančne, ker so temeljile na zastarelih napovedih, napačno razlagale primerjalno analizo s strani družbe NGTransco za mejo zmogljivosti, uporabljale napačne številke za sedanjo mejo zmogljivosti, za prihodnost predvidele le bolj optimistični scenarij od treh mogočih scenarijev in zanemarile težave pri vračanju nekaterih elektrarn v mirovanju na trg.
The UK authorities go on to question the economics of Greenpeace’s arguments on the impact on the taxpayer of the possible closure of BE’s plants.
Organi Združenega kraljestva še naprej dvomijo v tehtnost argumentov organizacije Greenpeace o vplivu na davkoplačevalca ob morebitnem zaprtju elektrarn družbe BE.
They explain that Greenpeace itself acknowledged that this closure would increase electricity prices.
Pojasnijo, da je organizacija Greenpeace sama priznala, da bi to zaprtje povzročilo zvišanje cen električne energije.
Furthermore, a study by Deloitte and Touche showed that the early closure of a single nuclear power plant could incur additional costs.
Ob tem je raziskava, izvedena s strani revizorske hiše Deloitte in Touche, pokazala, da bi lahko zaradi zgodnjega zaprtja ene same jedrske elektrarne nastali dodatni stroški.
The early closure of more than one plant would bring even more costs because of constraints in the Sellafield plant that is used for the treatment of radioactive material.
Zgodnje zaprtje več kot ene elektrarne bi povzročilo še več stroškov zaradi omejitev pri obratu Sellafield, ki se uporablja za obdelavo radioaktivnega materiala.
Finally, the UK authorities mention that both reports attached to Greenpeace’s comments (by Large & Associates and ILEX) are based on outdated capacity figures from NGTransco and overoptimistic hypotheses.
Končno organi Združenega kraljestva omenjajo, da obe poročili, povezani z izjavama organizacije Greenpeace (s strani družb Large & Associates in ILEX) temeljita na zastarelih podatkih o zmogljivosti, dobljenih od družbe NGTransco, in preveč optimističnih hipotezah.
They attach to their comments a counter expertise on the reports, by George Yarrow and Tim Keyworth of DKY Limited.
Izjavam priložijo nasprotno strokovno mnenje o poročilih, ki jih predložita George Yarrow in Tim Keyworth iz družbe DKY Limited.
Finally, on the basis of the foregoing, the UK authorities challenge Greenpeace’s view that the aid is not proportionate.
Končno organi Združenega kraljestva na podlagi zgoraj navedenega ugovarjajo mnenju organizacije Greenpeace, da pomoč ni sorazmerna.
Drax’s observations
Pripombe družbe Drax
Firstly, the UK authorities challenge Drax’s view that the aid package shows that the UK Government will never allow BE to fail.
Prvič, organi Združenega kraljestva ugovarjajo mnenju družbe Drax, da paket pomoči kaže, da vlada Združenega kraljestva ne bo nikoli dopustila propada družbe BE.
They recall that the package is subject to the approval by the Government of BE’s prospects for viability.
Opozarjajo, da mora paket za sposobnost preživetja družbe BE odobriti vlada.
Concerning Measure A, the UK authorities recall that the UK Government will not assume all BE’s decommissioning liabilities but will only make up the shortfall in the NLF.
V zvezi z ukrepom A organi Združenega kraljestva opozarjajo, da vlada Združenega kraljestva ne bo prevzela vseh obveznosti družbe BE za razgradnjo, ampak bo poravnala le tiste, povezane s skladom za jedrske obveznosti.
On the issue of the estimate of the costs in Measure A, the United Kingdom notes that requiring that there be absolutely no uncertainty in their computation would make it impossible to grant relief for such long term liabilities, which would lead to a perverse application of State aid rules and go against the objectives of the Euratom Treaty.
V zvezi z ocenitvijo stroškov pri ukrepu A ugotavlja Združeno kraljestvo, da bi zahteva po popolnoma natančnem izračunu onemogočila odobritev pomoči za takšne dolgoročne obveznosti, kar bi pripeljalo do obratne uporabe pravil o državni pomoči in bi nasprotovalo ciljem Pogodbe Euratom.
The UK authorities also dismiss Drax’s claim that the fact that the UK Government bears ultimate responsibility for nuclear safety under international agreements constitutes a State guarantee, and recall that the National Audit Office’s ultimate involvement in this respect is irrelevant since it is independent from the Government.
Organi Združenega kraljestva tudi zavračajo zahtevo družbe Drax, da dejstvo, da vlada Združenega kraljestva nosi končno odgovornost za jedrsko varnost po mednarodnih sporazumih, sestavlja jamstvo države, in opozarjajo, da končna vpletenost Državnega urada za revizijo v zvezi s tem ni pomembna, ker je neodvisen od vlade.
Concerning Measure B, the UK authorities note that BNFL’s observations contradict Drax’s opinion that BNFL would fare as well if BE was insolvent.
V zvezi z ukrepom B organi Združenega kraljestva ugotavljajo, da pripombe družbe BNFL nasprotujejo mnenju družbe Drax, da bi družba BNFL uspevala, tudi če bi družba BE bila plačilno nesposobna.
They also recall that the renegotiation of BNFL’s agreements with BE was done at arm’s length.
Opozarjajo tudi, da je ponovno pogajanje o dogovorih družbe BNFL z družbo BE bilo izvedeno na čisto poslovni podlagi.
Concerning Measure C, the UK authorities indicate that the absence of payment of interest by BE to BNFL during the standstill is to be analysed as a part of the whole involvement of BNFL in the restructuring plan rather than a single element, since the whole package was negotiated together.
V zvezi z ukrepom C navajajo organi Združenega kraljestva, da se mora neplačevanje obresti družbe BE družbi BNFL v obdobju odloga analizirati kot del celotne vpletenosti družbe BNFL v načrt za prestrukturiranje, ne pa kot en sam element, ker se je pogajalo o paketu kot o celoti.
As a whole, the package does not disfavour BNFL as compared to other BE creditors.
Paket kot celota ne izraža nenaklonjenosti družbi BNFL v primerjavi z drugimi upniki družbe BE.
Concerning Measure G, the UK authorities recall that they had previously put forward proof that business rates had been finally paid by BE, with due interest.
V zvezi z ukrepom G organi Združenega kraljestva opozarjajo, da so pred tem predložile dokaz, da je družba BE končno poravnala poslovne davke, v skladu z obrestno mero.
On the compatibility of the restructuring plan with the guidelines, the UK authorities challenge Drax’s view that the plan will not restore BE’s viability because BE will not cover all its present avoidable and non avoidable costs.
V zvezi z združljivostjo načrta za prestrukturiranje s Smernicami organi Združenega kraljestva ugovarjajo mnenju družbe Drax, da načrt ne bo vzpostavil sposobnosti družbe BE za preživetje, ker družba BE ne bo pokrila vseh svojih sedanjih izogibnih in neizogibnih stroškov.
The United Kingdom recall that for BE to survive, it is necessary that part of the burden of the past, the unavoidable costs, be lifted from it.
Združeno kraljestvo opozarja, da je treba družbi BE za njeno preživetje nujno oprostiti ta del bremen iz preteklosti – neizogibne stroške.
But as soon as it is, BE will become viable again since it will not only be able to repay all its ongoing costs but also to bring a significant contribution to its unavoidable costs of the past.
Kakor hitro pa bo družba BE spet postala sposobna za preživetje, bo zmožna poplačati vse svoje stalne stroške ter pomembno prispevati tudi k svojim neizogibnim stroškom iz preteklosti.
It is therefore economically more efficient to run BE’s nuclear plants in order to get some contribution to the payment of unavoidable costs of the past.
Zato je gospodarsko bolj učinkovito, da jedrske elektrarne družbe BE obratujejo, zato da prispevajo k plačilu neizogibnih stroškov iz preteklosti.
Advancing the closure of BE’s plants would actually bring more costs.
Spodbujanje zaprtja elektrarn družbe BE bi dejansko ustvarilo več stroškov.
The UK authorities reject Drax’ argument that the aid will induce BE to sell into the market at any price.
Organi Združenega kraljestva zavračajo argument družbe Drax, da bo pomoč vplivala na družbo BE, da bo prodajala na trgu po kakršni koli ceni.
They claim that, as a baseload generator, BE has no generation in reserve that it could sell in addition by cutting price.
Zahtevajo, da družba BE, kot proizvajalka pri osnovni obremenitvi, v proizvodnji nima rezerve, ki bi jo lahko dodatno prodajala po znižani ceni.
On the contrary, its interest is to sell its generation at maximum price.
Nasprotno, njen interes je prodajati proizvodnjo po najvišji ceni.
BE’s bondholders and shareholders will also ensure that BE does maximise its profit, since they will benefit from part of it.
Imetniki obveznic in delničarji družbe BE bodo tudi zagotovili, da družba BE poveča dobiček, ker bodo imeli korist od dela dobička.
The UK authorities also reject Drax’ argument that the restructuring plan is too long in duration.
Organi Združenega kraljestva tudi zavračajo argument družbe Drax, da je načrt za prestrukturiranje preveč dolgotrajen.
They explain that the actual requirement stemming from the guidelines is that BE’s viability be restored within a reasonable timescale.
Pojasnijo, da izhaja iz Smernic dejanska zahteva po vzpostavitvi sposobnosti preživetja družbe BE v razumnem roku.
According to them, the effect of Measure A, which they claim is the only one that constitutes State aid, will appear immediately in BE’s balance sheet.
Menijo, da se bo učinek ukrepa A, za katerega trdijo, da je edini, ki sestavlja državno pomoč, takoj pokazal v bilanci stanja družbe BE.
Regarding the existence of overcapacity on the market, the UK authorities indicate that Drax’s assessment is based on outdated figures and on an error on the benchmark NGTransco applies for capacity margin.
V zvezi z obstojem presežka na trgu organi Združenega kraljestva navajajo, da temelji ocena družbe Drax na zastarelih številkah in na napaki v primerjalni analizi, ki jo družba NGTransco uporabi za mejo zmogljivosti.
Drax’s suggestion to close nuclear plants in summer would be economically dubious and could also raise nuclear safety or security of supply concerns.
Predlog družbe Drax, da se jedrske elektrarne poleti zaprejo, bi bil gospodarsko vprašljiv in bi lahko vzbudil skrbi v zvezi z jedrsko varnostjo ali zanesljivostjo oskrbe.
The UK authorities then examine each of the four compensatory measures and conclude that putting them in place would either endanger the balance of the restructuring plan or affect BE’s viability prospects.
Organi Združenega kraljestva potem preverijo vsakega od štirih izravnalnih ukrepov in zaključijo, da bi uvedba teh ukrepov bodisi ogrozila ravnovesje načrta za prestrukturiranje bodisi negativno vplivala na možnosti preživetja družbe BE.
Observations of the first anonymous third party
Pripombe prve anonimne tretje stranke
The UK authorities explain that the price referred to by the third party (around GBP 1000/kgU) refers to prices for baseload spent fuel management contracts.
Organi Združenega kraljestva pojasnijo, da velja cena, na katero se sklicuje tretja stranka (okrog 1000 GBP/kg), za cene iz pogodb o ravnanju z izrabljenim gorivom, ki ga elektrarna porabi pri osnovni obremenitvi.
Baseload contracts were the first batch of contracts signed by BNFL with BE or companies that now are a part of BE.
Pogodbe v zvezi z osnovno obremenitvijo so bile prvi niz pogodb, podpisan med družbama BNFL in BE ali družbami, ki so zdaj del družbe BE.
These contracts were supposed to cover largely fixed costs associated to BNFL’s spent fuel management facilities.
Te pogodbe naj bi pokrile večino fiksnih stroškov, povezanih z napravami družbe BNFL za ravnanje z izrabljenim gorivom.
Later on, BNFL signed with BE, or companies that now belong to BE, incremental, post baseload contracts that no longer had to include a costs element linked to the repayment of fixed costs.
Pozneje je družba BNFL podpisala z družbo BE ali družbami, ki zdaj spadajo k družbi BE, obsežnejše pogodbe za čas po osnovni obremenitvi, ki jim ni treba več vključevati stroškovnega elementa, povezanega s povračilom fiksnih stroškov.
These new contracts were priced […], and therefore at a much lower price than the one quoted by the third party.
Te nove pogodbe so bile ocenjene na […], in so zato cenovno veliko ugodnejše od ponudbe, ki jo je dala tretja stranka.
Any meaningful comparison of prices charged by BNFL to BE before and after the renegotiation of their arrangements would have to be based on post baseload contract prices, which were the ones prevailing at the time just before the renegotiation, rather than on baseload contracts prices.
Kakršna koli primerjava cen, ki jih je družba BNFL zaračunala družbi BE pred ponovnimi pogajanji o njunih dogovorih in po njih, bi morala temeljiti na cenah pogodb v zvezi z osnovno obremenitvijo, ki so takšne, kot so prevladovale malo pred ponovnimi pogajanji, in ne takšne kot v pogodbah v zvezi z osnovno obremenitvijo.
Concerning observations of Enfield Energy Centre Limited (EECL)
Zadevne pripombe družbe Enfield Energy Centre Limited (EECL).