natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Since the Netherlands was, in principle, also required by the concession agreement to compensate for the budget deficits up to and including 2006, the State had to negotiate with AVR on compensation for the additional costs of closing down the second RDF with effect from 1 January 2004, instead of the original date on which the agreement would have expired.
Ker je morala Nizozemska v skladu s koncesijsko pogodbo načeloma nadomestiti tudi proračunske primanjkljaje do leta 2006 in vključno s tem letom, se je morala država pogoditi s podjetjem AVR glede nadomestila za dodatne stroške zaprtja druge peči RDF z začetkom veljavnosti od 1. januarja 2004 namesto prvotnega datuma, ko naj bi se iztekla pogodba.
The compensation thus includes the following additional amounts:
Nadomestilo zato vključuje naslednje dodatne zneske:
€1,7 million to compensate for the negative impact in 2004 resulting from the fact that customers would need (gradually) to shift their waste streams to other facilities;
1,7 milijona EUR kot nadomestilo za negativen učinek v letu 2004, ker morajo stranke (postopoma) preusmeriti tokove odpadkov na druge naprave;
€5,843 million for recurrent fixed costs in the period 2005-06 (‘doorlopende vaste kosten’), i.e. costs related, for example, to ICT infrastructure, office space rental, security contracts, and costs of common facilities such as a canteen.
5,843 milijona EUR za ponavljajoče se stalne stroške v obdobju 2005–2006 („doorlopende vaste kosten“), to je stroške, povezane na primer z infrastrukturo ICT, najemom pisarniških prostorov, varnostnimi pogodbami ter stroški skupnih prostorov, kot je menza.
AVR had calculated a higher amount of €8,208 million;
Podjetje AVR je izračunalo višji znesek, in sicer 8,208 milijona EUR;
€7,868 million for the additional redundancy costs attributable to the early closure of the remaining RDF.
7,868 milijona EUR za dodatne stroške odpuščanja delavcev zaradi predčasnega zaprtja druge peči RDF.
This amount is calculated as the difference between the estimated redundancy costs in the event of immediate closure and those in the event of closure at the end of the aid contract, i.e. two years later.
Ta znesek je izračunan kot razlika med ocenjenimi stroški odpuščanja delavcev v primeru takojšnjega zaprtja in stroški odpuščanja delavcev v primeru zaprtja ob izteku pogodbe o pomoči, to je dve leti kasneje.
The accepted amount is based on a detailed estimate that concerns some 244 workers and takes account of the fact that most of them can be redeployed internally;
Sprejeti znesek temelji na podrobni oceni, ki zajema približno 244 delavcev in upošteva dejstvo, da jih je večino mogoče interno prerazporediti;
other costs, such as the remaining book value of certain assets of other AVR companies acquired in order to provide the services stipulated in the service contract, the costs of site management and the cost of forgoing the contributions (‘dekkingsbijdrage’) that AVR IW would have received if the contract had been extended into 2005 and 2006, the non-budgeted costs of closure, and the costs of buying out multiannual contracts.
druge stroške, kot so preostala knjigovodska vrednost določenih sredstev drugih podjetij AVR, pridobljenih za namene zagotavljanja storitev, določenih v pogodbi o izvajanju storitev, stroški nekoriščenja prispevkov („dekkingsbijdrage“), ki bi jih podjetje AVR IW prejelo, če bi pogodba bila podaljšana do let 2005 in 2006, stroški zaprtja, ki niso predvideni v proračunu, in stroški odkupa večletnih pogodb.
AVR had put these costs at €29,567 million in total, which included, for example, an amount of €11,716 million for the additional losses incurred by AVR Nuts in 2002 and 2003.
Podjetje AVR je izračunalo vrednost teh stroškov v skupni višini 29,567 milijona EUR, ki zajema na primer 11,716 milijona EUR za dodatne izgube, ki jih je imelo podjetje AVR Nuts v letih 2002 in 2003.
In their negotiations, the State and AVR agreed on an amount of only €1,238 million.
V pogajanjih sta se država in AVR dogovorila za znesek zgolj 1,238 milijona EUR.
In those negotiations, the Netherlands was assisted by an independent accountant whose report was made available to the Commission.
V teh pogajanjih je Nizozemski pomagal neodvisen računovodja, katerega poročilo je bilo na voljo Komisiji.
Altogether, the agreed compensation for closure of the second RDF amounted to €27,850 million. This is significantly lower than the sum of AVR’s own estimates, viz. €58,544 million (or €46828 million when the additional losses incurred by AVR Nuts in 2002 and 2003 are excluded).
Dogovorjeno nadomestilo za zaprtje druge peči RDF je skupaj znašalo 27,850 milijona EUR. To je precej manj od zneska lastnih ocen podjetja AVR, in sicer 58,544 milijona EUR (ali 46828 milijona EUR, če odštejemo dodatne izgube podjetja AVR Nuts v letih 2002 in 2003).
The Netherlands explained that, if the remaining RDF had continued operating until the end of 2006, the sum of the estimated operating deficits for 2005 and 2006 and the compensation for the costs of closure at the end of 2006 would have amounted to €31 million. The agreement on early closure therefore reduced the cost to the State.
Nizozemska je razložila, da bi, če bi druga peč RDF še naprej delovala do konca leta 2006, znesek ocenjenih primanjkljajev iz rednega poslovanja za leti 2005 in 2006 ter nadomestila za stroške zaprtja ob koncu leta 2006 znašal 31 milijonov EUR. Dogovor o predčasnem zaprtju je zato znižal stroške za državo.
This compensation for closure brings the total amount of aid for the period 2002-04 to €49718108 (see overview in Table 2).
To nadomestilo za zaprtje poveča celotni znesek pomoči za obdobje 2002–2004 na 49718108 EUR (glej pregled v tabeli 2).
Overview of compensation paid to AVR
Pregled nadomestila, plačanega podjetju AVR
Predetermined budget deficit 2002
Vnaprej določen proračunski primanjkljaj za leto 2002
Predetermined budget deficit 2003
Vnaprej določen proračunski primanjkljaj za leto 2003
Predetermined budget deficit 2004
Vnaprej določen proračunski primanjkljaj za leto 2004
Compensation for remaining book value first RDF
Nadomestilo za preostalo knjigovodsko vrednost za prvo peč RDF
Compensation for remaining book value second RDF
Nadomestilo za preostalo knjigovodsko vrednost za drugo peč RDF
Compensation for additional closure costs
Nadomestilo za dodatne stroške zaprtja
additional operating costs 2004
dodatni stroški poslovanja v letu 2004
recurrent fixed costs 2005-06
ponavljajoči se stalni stroški v obdobju 2005–2006
additional redundancy costs
dodatni stroški odpuščanja delavcev
Total aid
Skupaj pomoč
The Netherlands acknowledged that aid totalling €19543608 had been paid to AVR. The compensation for the closure of the second RDF has been paid into a blocked account.
Nizozemska je potrdila, da je bila podjetju AVR plačana pomoč v skupnem znesku 19543608 EUR. Nadomestilo za zaprtje druge peči RDF je bilo izplačano na blokiran račun.
The guarantee for removal and follow-up costs
Jamstvo za stroške odstranitve in nadaljnjih ukrepov
The concession agreement also contains a guarantee by the State that, if AVR Chemie is wound up, the State will pay a maximum of 30 % of the removal and follow-up costs of dismantling and decontaminating the installations.
Koncesijska pogodba vsebuje tudi jamstvo države, da bo, če podjetje AVR Chemie preneha poslovati, plačala največ 30 % stroškov odstranitve in nadaljnjih ukrepov zaradi demontaže in dekontaminacije naprav.
This percentage corresponds to the State’s holding in AVR Chemie.
Ta odstotek ustreza deležu države v podjetju AVR Chemie.
Operational aspects
Vidiki poslovanja
Prior to the concession agreement, the gate fees charged by AVR Chemie had been increased to a level of NLG 700/tonne (€317,6).
Pred sklenitvijo koncesijske pogodbe so se pristojbine za odlaganje, ki jih je zaračunavalo podjetje AVR Chemie, povečale na raven 700 NLG /tono (317,6 EUR).
Increasing fees even further would, according to the Netherlands, lead to practices such as mixing hazardous waste with other waste streams and illegal landfill, and this would not be conducive to reducing the operating deficit.
Po mnenju Nizozemske bi nadaljnje višanje pristojbin povzročilo ravnanja, kot so mešanje nevarnih odpadkov z drugimi tokovi odpadkov in črna odlagališča, to pa ne bi prispevalo k zmanjšanju primanjkljaja iz rednega poslovanja.
The fees are high in comparison with those in neighbouring Member States, this being possible thanks to the Dutch policy of prohibiting exports of waste for disposal.
V primerjavi s sosednjimi državami članicami so pristojbine visoke, kar je omogočila nizozemska politika prepovedi izvoza odpadkov za odstranjevanje.
The objective of the aid measures was to maintain the fees unchanged, not to reduce them.
Cilj ukrepov pomoči ni bil zmanjšati pristojbine, temveč jih ohraniti nespremenjene.
To this end, the concession agreement contains an annex laying down the structure and coverage of the fees and the method of calculating them.
V ta namen koncesijska pogodba vsebuje prilogo, ki določa strukturo in področje pristojbin ter metodo njihovega izračunavanja.
The Dutch authorities have control over the level of the fees as the predetermined budget deficit requires their approval beforehand and the fees are, of course, a crucial element in the calculation.
Nizozemski organi nadzorujejo raven pristojbin, saj vnaprej določen proračunski primanjkljaj zahteva njihovo vnaprejšnjo odobritev, pristojbine pa so seveda ključni element za izračun.
Gate fees for high-calorific hazardous waste used as fuel are much lower than those for RDF waste.
Pristojbine za odlaganje nevarnih odpadkov z visoko kalorično vrednostjo, ki se uporabljajo kot gorivo, so mnogo nižje kot za odpadke RDF.
AVR Nuts ‘buys’ the former at market rates, i.e. fees that would be charged in the event of treatment, say, in foreign RDFs or in the cement industry.
AVR Nuts „kupuje“ slednje po tržnih stopnjah, to je pristojbinah, ki bi se zaračunavale v primeru obdelave v na primer tujih pečeh RDF ali v proizvodnji cementa.
Fixed costs are very high compared with variable costs so, in order to minimise its losses, AVR Nuts seeks to maximise capacity utilisation.
Stalni stroški so zelo visoki v primerjavi s spremenljivimi stroški, zato podjetje AVR Nuts poskuša doseči čim večjo izkoriščenost zmogljivosti, da bi zmanjšalo izgube.
Therefore, the gate fees charged to suppliers of hazardous waste are reduced when the annual volume supplied increases.
Pristojbine za odlaganje, ki se zaračunavajo dobaviteljem nevarnih odpadkov, se zato zmanjšajo, ko se poveča letni obseg dobave.
These ‘staggered rebates’ are fixed in advance and apply when RDF waste is offered together with at least 75 % of the same volume of high-calorific waste.
Ti „postopni rabati“ so določeni vnaprej in veljajo, kadar se odpadki RDF ponudijo skupaj z odpadki visoke kalorične vrednosti, ki zajemajo najmanj 75 % iste količine.
All fees are fixed in advance for the entire concession period [13] and apply equally to AVR’s competitors and AVR IW.
Vse pristojbine so vnaprej določene za celotno koncesijsko obdobje [13] in veljajo enako za konkurente podjetja AVR in za podjetje AVR IW.
As from the start of the concession agreement, the fees for C2 and RDF waste were publicly available to any supplier.
Od začetka veljavnosti koncesijske pogodbe so pristojbine za odpadke C2 in RDF javno dostopne vsem dobaviteljem.
As from early 2004, this was also the case for high-calorific hazardous waste.
Od začetka leta 2004 je bilo tako tudi pri nevarnih odpadkih z visoko kalorično vrednostjo.
In order to be able to plan capacity utilisation, AVR IW asks suppliers each year to indicate how much waste they plan to supply and gate fees are calculated during the year on the basis of the corresponding staggered rebate.
Da bi podjetje AVR IW lahko načrtovalo izkoriščenost zmogljivosti, vsako leto prosi dobavitelje, da navedejo, koliko odpadkov načrtujejo dostaviti, pristojbine za odlaganje pa se izračunajo v zadevnem letu na podlagi ustreznega postopnega rabata.
If the actual volume supplied at the end of year is higher or lower than indicated, a repayment is made or an additional charge calculated to take account of the appropriate staggered rebate based on actual supply.
Če je dejanski obseg dobavljenih odpadkov ob koncu leta višji ali nižji od navedenega obsega, se opravi povračilo ali izračuna dodatna bremenitev, pri čemer se upošteva ustrezen postopni rabat, ki temelji na dejanski dobavi.
The agreements generally did not contain an obligation to supply the quantity indicated in advance.
Pogodbe na splošno niso vsebovale določbe, da je treba dobaviti vnaprej navedene količine.
REASONS FOR INITIATING THE ARTICLE 88(2) PROCEDURE
RAZLOGI ZA SPROŽITEV POSTOPKA IZ ČLENA 88(2)
In its decision to initiate the Article 88(2) procedure, the Commission expressed the following doubts.
V svojem sklepu o sprožitvi postopka iz člena 88(2) je Komisija izrazila naslednje pomisleke:
First, the Commission doubted whether AVR Nuts’ activities could properly be regarded as an SGEI within the meaning of Article 86(2) of the Treaty as it was not clear, for example, whether AVR would be the only company capable of offering such services on the same or similar conditions.
Prvič, Komisija ni prepričana, ali se lahko dejavnosti podjetja AVR Nuts z gotovostjo imenujejo storitve splošnega gospodarskega pomena v smislu člena 86(2) Pogodbe, saj na primer ni jasno, ali bi bilo AVR edino podjetje, ki lahko ponuja take storitve po enakih ali podobnih pogojih.
It also doubted whether the Netherlands had followed the appropriate procedure in selecting AVR Nuts.
Prav tako ni prepričana, ali je Nizozemska pri izbiri podjetja AVR Nuts ravnala v skladu z ustreznim postopkom.
Furthermore, it doubted whether infringement of the ‘polluter pays’ principle was avoided under all circumstances as producers of the waste concerned must pay gate fees at a level that can be considered as a normal cost.
Poleg tega ni prepričana, ali so se v vseh okoliščinah izogibali kršitvi načela „onesnaževalec plača“, saj morajo proizvajalci zadevnih odpadkov plačati pristojbine za odlaganje, za katere bi se lahko reklo, da so običajni strošek.
Second, the Commission expressed doubts regarding possible overcompensation that could spill over into other segments of the waste market.
Drugič, Komisija je izrazila dvom glede možnega prekomernega nadomestila, ki bi se lahko prelilo v druge segmente trga odpadkov.
It was concerned that overcompensation may also stem from the fact that the aid was based on an ex ante calculation, allowing AVR Nuts to keep part of any positive difference between actual and predetermined profits or losses.
Skrbelo jo je, da bi lahko prekomerno nadomestilo izhajajo iz dejstva, da je pomoč temeljila na predhodnem izračunu, kar je podjetju AVR Nuts omogočilo, da zadrži del morebitne pozitivne razlike med dejanskimi in vnaprej določenimi dobički ali izgubami.
Third, if the measure were to be assessed under Article 87, the Commission doubted whether the Community guidelines on state aid for environmental protection [14] (the ‘guidelines on environmental aid’) would provide justification for finding the aid compatible with the common market.
Tretjič, če naj bi se ukrep presodil v skladu s členom 87, Komisija ni bila prepričana, ali bi smernice Skupnosti o državni pomoči za varstvo okolja [14] („smernice o okoljski pomoči“) utemeljile skladnost pomoči s skupnim trgom.
In its decision to extend the Article 88(2) procedure, the Commission explained that it had similar doubts as regards the much higher amount of aid for 2004 and the compensation for the untimely closure of the RDFs.
Komisija je v svojem sklepu o podaljšanju postopka iz člena 88(2) razložila, da je imela podobne pomisleke glede mnogo višjega zneska pomoči za leto 2004 in nadomestila za predčasno zaprtje peči RDF.
Four interested parties sent in their comments following the Commission’s decision to initiate the Article 88(2) procedure.
Štiri zainteresirane stranke so predložile svoje pripombe po tem, ko je Komisija sprejela sklep o sprožitvi postopka iz člena 88(2).
The first of them argued that the measure would distort competition on the Irish market as it would enable AVR to charge prices below cost and significantly below normal market prices on the Irish market through its 50 % shareholding in a joint venture with the Irish company Safeway Warehousing/South Coast Transport.
Prva je trdila, da bi ukrep izkrivil konkurenco na irskem trgu, saj bi podjetju AVR omogočil, da na podlagi svojega 50-odstotnega deleža v mešani družbi, ki jo ima v lasti skupaj z irskim podjetjem Safeway Warehousing/South Coast Transport, zaračunava cene, ki so nižje od stroškov in znatno nižje od običajnih tržnih cen na irskem trgu.
The second interested party also pointed to the unfair competitive advantage enjoyed by the AVR/Safeway joint venture.
Druga zainteresirana stranka je prav tako opozorila na nelojalno konkurenčno prednost, ki jo uživa mešana družba AVR/Safeway.
Large quantities of hazardous waste are imported from Ireland.
Velike količine nevarnih odpadkov se uvozijo iz Irske.
This interested party maintained too that the measure would distort competition on the international market for ‘turnkey clean-up’ operations of PCBs, pesticides and other hazardous organic waste.
Ta zainteresirana stranka je prav tako trdila, da bi ukrep izkrivil konkurenco na mednarodnem trgu dejavnosti „čiščenja na ključ“ za poliklorirane bifenile, pesticide in druge nevarne organske odpadke.
The third interested party, Edelchemie, was concerned about the domestic market.
Tretja zainteresirana stranka, Edelchemie, je bila zaskrbljena zaradi domačega trga.
It had developed its own technology for treating photographic and galvanic waste (ECO option) and recovering valuable materials from this waste (including precious metals and obsidian).
Razvila je svojo tehnologijo za obdelavo fotografskih in galvanskih odpadkov (možnost EKO) in predelavo koristnih materialov iz teh odpadkov (vključno s plemenitimi kovinami in obsidianom).
The measures to assist AVR would not only harm its business but would also stifle technological development.
Ukrepi pomoči za podjetje AVR ne bi le škodili njenemu poslovanju, temveč bi tudi zavrli tehnološki razvoj.
Edelchemie's comments concern AVR Nuts, AVR Chemie and its predecessors as from 1963, providing details on Dutch hazardous waste policy over the years.
Pripombe Edelchemie zadevajo AVR Nuts, AVR Chemie in njegove predhodnike od leta 1963, pri čemer so navedeni podrobni podatki o nizozemski politiki na področju nevarnih odpadkov v teh letih.
Lastly, the three joint competitors drew attention to the domestic market for RDF waste.
Kot četrta zainteresirana stranka so trije združeni konkurenti opozorili na domači trg z odpadki RDF.
Equivalent capacity to AVR’s RDFs would exist both in the Netherlands and in other Member States.
Tako na Nizozemskem kot v drugih državah članicah bi obstajala zmogljivost peči RDF, ki je enakovredna zmogljivostim podjetja AVR.
The expansion of AVR’s activities would have created overcapacity on the Dutch market for RDF waste and the data on RDF waste would not give a complete and correct picture.
Razširitev dejavnosti podjetja AVR bi povzročila presežek zmogljivosti na nizozemskem trgu odpadkov RDF, podatki o odpadkih RDF pa ne bi ustvarili celovite in pravilne slike.
In the mid-1990s AVR closed one of its RDFs and, even then, the supply of hazardous waste could be expected to decline further.
Sredi devetdesetih let prejšnjega stoletja je podjetje AVR zaprlo eno od svojih peči RDF in celo takrat je bilo mogoče pričakovati, da se bo dobava nevarnih odpadkov še naprej zmanjševala.
In view of those expectations, it had been appropriate to close one of the two remaining RDFs.
Glede na ta pričakovanja je bilo ustrezno zapreti eno od preostalih dveh peči RDF.
At the meeting on 26 May 2005, a representative stated literally that ‘The right decision [in 2002] had been to close down one RDF’.
Na sestanku 26. maja 2005 je predstavnik izjavil: „Pravilna odločitev [v letu 2002] je bila, da se zapre ena peč RDF“.
Moreover, AVR would abuse its dominant position by charging high fees, by requiring that the RDFs be supplied at the same time with high-calorific waste and because the fee structure would not be transparent and publicly available.
Podjetje AVR bi poleg tega zlorabilo svoj prevladujoč položaj tako, da bi zaračunavalo visoke pristojbine, zahtevalo, da se za peči RDF hkrati dobavijo odpadki z visoko kalorično vrednostjo, in ne bi zagotovilo preglednosti strukture pristojbin in njihove dostopnosti javnosti.
It would, furthermore, enable AVR IW to charge fees for certain types of RDF waste and subsequently to treat this waste in the grate incinerators of the municipal waste incinerators, and this would result in lower operating costs as these furnaces can operate at a lower temperature.
Poleg tega bi podjetju AVR IW omogočilo, da zaračunava pristojbine za določene vrste odpadkov RDF in kasneje te odpadke obdeluje v rešetkastih pečeh sežigalnic komunalnih odpadkov, to pa bi povzročilo nižje stroške poslovanja, saj lahko te peči obratujejo pri nižjih temperaturah.
The measure would constitute incompatible operating aid.
Ukrep bi pomenil nezdružljivo pomoč za tekoče poslovanje.
The service would not constitute an SGEI and the four criteria resulting from the Altmark judgment and which determine whether or not compensation constitutes state aid [15] would not be fulfilled.
Taka dejavnost ne bi bila storitev splošnega gospodarskega pomena in štiri merila, ki izhajajo iz sodbe v zadevi Altmark in ki določajo, ali je nadomestilo državna pomoč, [15] ne bi bila izpolnjena.
For the Commission to approve (part of) the aid, various conditions would have to be met to prevent cross-subsidisation, tying practices and price discrimination.
Da bi Komisija lahko odobrila pomoč (del pomoči), morajo biti izpolnjeni različni pogoji, da se prepreči navzkrižno subvencioniranje, nalaganje obveznosti in cenovna diskriminacija.
In addition, the Netherlands should not be allowed to extend the measure by another ten years.
Nizozemska tudi ne bi smela podaljšati ukrepa za dodatnih deset let.
The two joint competitors also sent in comments following the Commission’s decision to extend the procedure.
Dva združena konkurenta sta tudi predložila pripombe po tem, ko je Komisija sklenila podaljšati postopek.
They restated all the elements of their first submission and provided additional documents to demonstrate the existence of cross-subsidisation.
Ponovno sta navedla vse elemente iz svoje prve predložitve in predložila dodatna dokazila glede obstoja navzkrižnega subvencioniranja.
In addition, the following issues were raised.
Poleg tega sta predstavila naslednje pripombe:
First, it was surprising that, despite the closure of one of the RDFs, the predetermined operating deficit was so much higher than initially foreseen.
Prvič, presenetljivo je, da je bil kljub zaprtju ene od peči RDF vnaprej določen primanjkljaj iz rednega poslovanja toliko višji od prvotno predvidenega.
If the fourth Altmark criterion (efficiency) had been respected, the operating deficit should have fallen.
Če bi se upoštevalo četrto merilo iz sodbe Altmark (učinkovitost), bi se moral primanjkljaj iz rednega poslovanja znižati.
Second, they objected to the aid as compensation for closing down the RDFs.
Drugič, nasprotovala sta pomoči kot nadomestilu za zaprtje peči RDF.
There was no countervailing obligation on AVR.
Podjetju AVR ni bila naložena nobena izravnalna obveznost.
This compensation should not be referred to as an indemnification and was not justified, among other things because the investments were made with a view to maintaining operations for 10 years, whereas they have been used for less than 3 years.
To nadomestilo se ne bi smelo obravnavati kot odškodnina in ni bilo upravičeno, tudi zato, ker so bile naložbe opravljene z namenom ohranitve obratovanja za obdobje 10 let, uporabljale pa so se manj kot 3 leta.