natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The competent authority may, following confirmation of HPAI virus in pigs or any other mammals on any holding, undertake surveillance to identify and apply measures to prevent any further spread of HPAI to other species.
Pristojni organ lahko zagotovi, da se po izbruhu virusa visoko patogene aviarne influence pri prašičih ali drugih sesalcih na katerem koli gospodarstvu izvaja nadzor za ugotavljanje in uvedbo ukrepov, da se prepreči nadaljnje širjenje virusa visoko patogene aviarne influence na druge živali.
Member States shall ensure that paragraphs 2 to 5 of this Article are complied with, following the application of the measures provided for in Article 7.
Države članice zagotovijo, da so določbe iz odstavkov 2 do 5 tega člena ustrezno izpolnjene, potem, ko so bili izvedeni ukrepi iz člena 7.
The re-population of commercial poultry holdings shall not take place for a period of 21 days following the date of completion of the final cleansing and disinfection in accordance with the instructions given by the official veterinarian.
Ponovna naselitev perutnine na komercialna gospodarstva se ne izvaja 21 dni po zaključku končnega čiščenja in razkuževanja v skladu z navodili uradnega veterinarja.
The following measures shall be performed during a period of 21 days following the date of the re-population of the commercial poultry holdings:
V obdobju 21 dni po ponovni naselitvi komercialnih gospodarstev s perutnino se izvajajo naslednji ukrepi:
That clinical examination, or if more than one is carried out, the final clinical examination, is undertaken as near as possible to the end of the 21 day-period referred to above;
Ta klinični pregled ali končni klinični pregled, če se izvede več pregledov, se opravi čim bolj proti koncu zgoraj navedenega obdobja 21 dni;
laboratory tests are carried out in accordance with the instructions of the competent authority;
laboratorijski testi se opravijo v skladu z navodili pristojnega organa;
poultry that die during the re-population phase are tested in accordance with the instructions of the competent authority;
perutnina, ki pogine med ponovnim naseljevanjem, se testira v skladu z navodili pristojnega organa;
any significant change in production data, as referred to in point (f), and other abnormalities are immediately reported to the competent authority.
vse pomembne spremembe podatkov o proizvodnji, omenjenih v točki (f), in druge nepravilnosti se nemudoma sporočijo pristojnemu organu.
Directive as last amended by the 2003 Act of Accession.
Direktiva, kakor je nazadnje spremenjena z Aktom o pristopu iz leta 2003.
OJ L 139, 30.4.2004, p. 55, corrected by OJ L 226, 25.6.2004, p. 22.
UL L 139, 30.4.2004, str. 55.
OJ L 139, 30.4.2004, p. 1, corrected by OJ L 226, 25.6.2004, p. 3.
UL L 139, 30.4.2004, str. 1.
closing the procedure initiated against Italy, Friuli-Venezia Giulia Region, in respect of the measures provided for in Draft Law No 106/1/A — ‘Aid for the establishment of infrastructure and services in the goods transport sector, for the restructuring of road haulage and the development of combined transport’
o zaključku postopka proti Italiji, deželi Furlaniji-Julijski krajini v zvezi z ukrepi iz Osnutka zakona št. 106/1/A – „Pomoč za vzpostavitev infrastrukture in storitev v prevozu blaga, prestrukturiranje cestnega prevoza tovora in razvoj kombiniranega prevoza“
(notified under document number C(2004) 1376)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2004) 1376)
Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 62(1)(a) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Sporazuma o ustanovitvi Evropskega gospodarskega prostora in zlasti člena 62(1)(a) Sporazuma,
Having invited the parties concerned to submit their comments in accordance with the abovementioned provisions [1],
po pozivu zainteresiranim strankam, naj predložijo svoje pripombe v skladu z navedenimi določbami [1],
By letter of 5 February 2001, which was registered at the Secretariat-General on 9 February 2001, the Italian authorities, acting in accordance with Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty, notified the Commission of a draft regional Law concerning the development of combined transport.
Italijanski organi so z dopisom z dne 5. februarja 2001, ki je bil evidentiran pri Generalnem sekretariatu 9. februarja 2001, v skladu s členom 88(3) Pogodbe ES obvestili Komisijo o osnutku deželnega zakona za razvoj kombiniranega prevoza.
The notification was registered by the Secretariat-General of the European Commission under No N 134/01.
Generalni sekretariat Evropske komisije je obvestilo evidentiral pod št. N 134/01.
The Commission sent the Italian authorities a letter requesting further information on 27 August 2001.
Komisija je italijanskim organom dopis z zahtevo po dodatnih informacijah poslala 27. avgusta 2001.
The Italian authorities asked for an extension of the deadline to reply to this request by letter dated 9 October 2001, which was registered as DG TREN A/67862.
Italijanski organi so prosili za podaljšanje roka za predložitev odgovora na zahtevo z dopisom z dne 9. oktobra 2001, ki je bil evidentiran pod referenco DG TREN A/67862.
The extension was agreed to by the Commission Services by letter dated 9 November 2001.
Službe Komisije so odobrile podaljšanje roka z dopisom z dne 9. novembra 2001.
A meeting was held between representatives of the Commission and representatives of the Italian authorities on 19 December 2001.
Dne 19. decembra 2001 je potekal sestanek med predstavniki Komisije in italijanskih organov.
The reply to the second request for information was received by letter dated 24 July 2002, which was registered as DG TREN A/64121.
Odgovor na drugo zahtevo po informacijah je bil prejet v dopisu z dne 24. julija 2002 in evidentiran pod referenco DG TREN A/64121.
A further meeting was held with representatives of the Italian authorities on 18 December 2002.
Dodaten sestanek s predstavniki italijanskih organov je potekal 18. decembra 2002.
The Commission requested further clarifications by letter dated 22 January 2003.
Komisija je zahtevala dodatna pojasnila z dopisom z dne 22. januarja 2003.
The reply was sent by letter dated 25 March 2003 (reference No DG TREN A/16616).
Odgovor je bil poslan v dopisu z dne 25. marca 2003 (referenca DG TREN A/16616).
A final letter was sent by the Commission on 27 May 2003.
Komisija je poslala zadnji dopis 27. maja 2003.
The reply to this request was received by letter dated 4 July 2003 (reference No SG A/6389).
Odgovor na zahteve v njem je bil poslan v dopisu z dne 4. julija 2003 (referenca SG A/6389).
Final clarifications were received by letter dated 17 July 2003 (reference No SG A/6942).
Zaključna pojasnila so bila prejeta v dopisu z dne 17. julija 2003 (referenca SG A/6942).
The Commission decision to initiate the procedure on 11 November 2003 was published in the Official Journal of the European Union [2].
Sklep Komisije o začetku postopka z dne 11. novembra 2003 je bil objavljen v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [2].
Interested parties were invited by the Commission to submit comments.
Komisija je zainteresirane stranke pozvala k oddaji pripomb.
Italy submitted its comments by letter dated 27 January 2004, which was registered on 28 January 2004.
Italija je predložila svoje pripombe v dopisu z dne 27. januarja 2004, ki je bil evidentiran 28. januarja 2004.
The Commission did not receive comments from any other interested parties.
Komisija ni prejela pripomb drugih zainteresiranih strank.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE AID MEASURE
PODROBEN OPIS UKREPA POMOČI
The aid measure in respect of which the procedure was initiated concerned start-up aid for the development of new rail and maritime services.
Ukrep pomoči, glede katerega je bil sprožen postopek, se je nanašal na začetno pomoč za razvoj novih storitev v železniškem in pomorskem prometu.
The beneficiaries of the aid measure provided for in the draft regional Law were (public or private) entities operating in the cargo-handling sector, for a period not exceeding three years for the establishment of new rail cargo services with a modal interchange point in commercial ports or multimodal terminals in the Region and for the establishment of new maritime cabotage services departing from or heading to commercial ports in the Friuli-Venizia Giulia Region (Article 8 of draft Regional Law 106/1/A).
Upravičenci do ukrepa pomoči, predvidenega v osnutku deželnega zakona, so bili (javni ali zasebni) subjekti, ki poslujejo v sektorju pretovarjanja, v obdobju, ne daljšem od treh let, za oblikovanje novih železniških storitev s točko za modalno izmenjavo v komercialnih pristaniščih ali večmodalnih terminalih v deželi ter za oblikovanje novih storitev kabotaže v pomorskem prometu za tovor, ki zapušča ali je namenjen v komercialna pristanišča v Furlaniji-Julijski krajini (člen 8 osnutka deželnega zakona št. 106/1/A).
The Commission decision to initiate the procedure provided for in Article 88(2) of the Treaty and to request clarification from the Italian authorities arose from an initial examination of the notified scheme.
Sklep Komisije, da začne postopek, določen v členu 88(2) Pogodbe, in da zahteva pojasnila od italijanskih organov, je posledica začetnega pregleda uradno priglašenega projekta.
In particular, concerns were expressed as to whether the implementing arrangements guaranteed that the measures were both necessary and strictly proportionate.
Izražena je bila zlasti zaskrbljenost, ali izvedbene rešitve zagotavljajo ukrepe, ki so potrebni in sorazmerni.
The Commission had doubts in particular regarding the issues set out in points 12 to 17.
Komisija je bila v dvomih zlasti glede vidikov, navedenih v uvodnih izjavah od 12 do 17.
Viability of the aid scheme: Apart from national services, the measure was intended to encourage the creation of services between the Friuli-Venezia Giulia Region and central and eastern europe.
Izvedljivost programa pomoči: Ukrep je bil poleg storitev na nacionalni ravni namenjen tudi spodbujanju vzpostavitve storitev med deželo Furlanijo-Julijsko krajino ter srednjo in vzhodno Evropo.
The Commission considered that, for the scheme to be viable in the long term, the Italian authorities had to ensure that it had the support of the authorities of the States concerned.
Komisija je menila, da bi morali italijanski organi za dolgoročno izvedljivost projekta zagotoviti podporo organov zadevnih držav.
While the beneficiary was required to charge for the use of such new services in a manner commensurate with the intensity of the aid received, this did not seem sufficient to guarantee the future viability of these services.
Upravičenec je moral zaračunavati uporabo takih novih storitev na način, ki je sorazmeren z intenzivnostjo prejete pomoči, vendar ta obveznost ni bila zadostno zagotovilo za izvedljivost teh storitev v prihodnosti.
Proportionality: The planned intensity of 30 % of the real costs (defined as the difference between the costs incurred and the revenue received by the beneficiary in providing the service in question) would not have guaranteed compliance with the usual [3] maximum aid ceiling of 30 % of the eligible costs.
Sorazmernost: Načrtovana intenzivnost v višini 30 % dejanskih stroškov (opredeljenih kot razlika med nastalimi stroški in ustvarjenimi prihodki upravičenca pri zagotavljanju zadevne storitve) ne bi zagotovila, da bo upoštevana običajna [3] zgornja meja pomoči v višini 30 % upravičenih stroškov.
No undue distortion of competition: The aid measure should not result in the diversion of traffic flows between neighbouring ports or existing intermodal services, thereby attracting traffic already transported intermodally.
Nedovoljeno izkrivljanje konkurence: Načrtovani ukrep pomoči ne bi smel spreminjati pretoka prometa med sosednjimi pristanišči ali obstoječih intermodalnih storitev, in tako pritegniti prometa, ki se že opravlja intermodalno.
The draft Law did not include mechanisms to guarantee that the level of distortion of competition produced by the measure would be acceptable.
Predlog zakona ni vseboval mehanizmov za zagotovitev sprejemljive ravni izkrivljanja konkurence, ki bi nastala zaradi ukrepa.
The Commission considered that publication in the Region’s Official Gazette and a summary notice in at least two daily papers, including one with a nationwide circulation, were insufficient means of guaranteeing transparency and equality of treatment for operators.
Komisija je menila, da objava v deželnem uradnem listu in objava povzetka obvestila v najmanj dveh dnevnih časopisih, od katerih se eden prodaja po vsej državi, ne zadostujeta za transparentnost in enako obravnavo gospodarskih subjektov.
By letter dated 27 January 2004, the Italian authorities stated, through the Italian Permanent Representation, that they had decided to withdraw the notified measure contained in Article 8 of draft Law No 106/1/A.
V dopisu z dne 27. januarja 2004 so italijanski organi prek Stalnega predstavništva sporočili, da so sprejeli odločitev o umiku priglašenega ukrepa iz člena 8 osnutka zakona 106/1/A.
In view of the withdrawal of the aid measure,
Zaradi umika ukrepa pomoči –
The Commission hereby closes the procedure initiated on 11 November 2003.
Komisija zaključi postopek, ki je bil uveden 11. novembra 2003.
Vice-President
Podpredsedníca
OJ C 311, 20.12.2003, p. 18.
UL C 311, 20.12.2003, str. 18.
Maximum aid intensity provided for in COM(2002) 54 final of 4 February 2002 (Marco Polo proposal) — OJ C 126 E, 28.5.2002, p. 354; aid C 65/2000 — France ‘Start-up aid for short-sea shipping services’ ( OJ C 37, 3.2.2001, p. 16).
Najvišja intenzivnost pomoči, določena v predlogu Marco Polo, COM(2002) 54 konč.
As the notification was incomplete, the Commission requested additional information with letter D(01) 5496 of 5 April 2001.
Ker je bilo obvestilo nepopolno, je Komisija zahtevala dodatne informacije z dopisom št. D(01) 5496 z dne 5. aprila 2001.
A reply to this letter was received on 20 June 2001 and registered as DG TREN A/61295.
Odgovor na ta dopis je bil prejet 20. junija 2001 in evidentiran pod referenco DG TREN A/61295.
The Commission sent the Italian authorities a new request for information on 7 October 2002.
Komisija je italijanskim organom nov dopis z zahtevo po dodatnih informacijah poslala 7. oktobra 2002.
The reply was received by letter dated 21 November 2002 (reference No SG(2002) A/11582).
Odgovor je bil prejet v dopisu z dne 21. novembra 2002 (referenca SG (2002) A/11582).
of 19 June 2006
z dne 19. junija 2006
establishing that Article 30(1) of Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors applies to the production and sale of electricity in Finland, excluding the Åland Islands
o uporabi člena 30(1) Direktive 2004/17/ES Evropskega Parlamenta in Sveta o usklajevanju postopkov za oddajo naročil v vodnem, energetskem in transportnem sektorju ter sektorju poštnih storitev za proizvodnjo in prodajo električne energije na Finskem, pri čemer Ålandski otoki niso vključeni
(notified under document number C(2006) 2337)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2006) 2337)
(Only the Finnish and the Swedish texts are authentic)
(Besedilo v finskem in švedskem jeziku je edino verodostojno)
Having regard to Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors [1], and in particular Article 30(4) and (6) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Direktive 2004/17/ES Evropskega Parlamenta in Sveta z dne 31. marca 2004 o usklajevanju postopkov za oddajo naročil v vodnem, energetskem in transportnem sektorju ter sektorju poštnih storitev [1], in zlasti členov 30(4) in (6) Direktive,
Having regard to the request submitted by the Republic of Finland by e-mail of 20 February 2006, and to the additional information requested by Commission staff by e-mail of 10 March 2006 and submitted by the Republic of Finland by e-mail of 23 March 2006,
ob upoštevanju zahtevka, ki ga je Republika Finska vložila po elektronski pošti 20. februarja 2006, in dodatnih informacij, za katere je osebje Komisije zaprosilo po elektronski pošti 10. marca 2006, Republika Finska pa jih je poslala po elektronski pošti 23. marca 2006,
Having regard to the conclusions of the independent national authority, Kilpailuvirasto (the Finnish Competition Authority), that the conditions for the applicability of Article 30(1) of Directive 2004/17/EC would be met,
ob upoštevanju sklepov neodvisnega nacionalnega organa, Kilpailuvirasto (Finski urad za konkurenco), da so pogoji za uporabo člena 30(1) Direktive 2004/17/ES izpolnjeni,
Article 30 of Directive 2004/17/EC provides that contracts, intended to enable the performance of one of the activities to which the Directive applies, shall not be subject to the Directive if, in the Member State in which it is carried out, the activity is directly exposed to competition on markets to which access is not restricted.
Člen 30 Direktive 2004/17/ES določa, da naročila, ki omogočajo izvajanje ene od dejavnosti, za katere se Direktiva uporablja, niso predmet Direktive, če je dejavnost v državi članici, v kateri se izvaja, neposredno izpostavljena konkurenci na trgih, do katerih dostop ni omejen.
This legislation is listed in Annex XI to Directive 2004/17/EC, which, for the electricity sector, refers to Directive 96/92/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 1996 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity [2].
Ta zakonodaja je navedena v Prilogi XI Direktive 2004/17/ES, ki se v zvezi z elektroenergetskim sektorjem sklicuje na Direktivo 96/92/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 19. decembra 1996 o skupnih pravilih za notranji trg z električno energijo [2].
Pursuant to Article 62(2) of Directive 2004/17/EC, Title III of that Directive setting out the rules on service design contests does not apply to contests organised for the pursuit, in the Member State concerned, of an activity to which the applicability of Article 30(1) of the Directive has been established by a Commission decision or has been deemed applicable under the second or third subparagraph of Article 30(4) or the fourth subparagraph of Article 30(5).
V skladu s členom 62(2) Direktive 2004/17/ES se naslov III navedene direktive, ki določa pravila za natečaje, ne uporablja za natečaje, ki se v zadevni državi članici organizirajo za izvajanje dejavnosti, za katero se uporablja člen 30(1) Direktive v skladu z odločbo Komisije ali se šteje, da se uporablja v skladu z drugim ali tretjim pododstavkom člena 30(4) ali četrtim pododstavkom člena 30(5).
The request submitted by the Republic of Finland concerns production, including co-generation, as well as the sale (wholesale and retail) of electricity.
Zahtevek Republike Finske zadeva proizvodnjo, vključno s soproizvodnjo ter prodajo (veleprodajo in maloprodajo) električne energije.
The wholesale market in Finland is to a large degree integrated into the Nordic power market (Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland).
Veleprodajni trg na Finskem je v veliki meri vključen v nordijski trg energije (Danska, Norveška, Švedska in Finska).
It consists of a bilateral trading market between generators on one hand and suppliers and industrial companies on the other hand, and a voluntary Nordic power exchange Nordpool which has a spot market and a forward market.
Sestavljen je iz dvostranskega trga med proizvajalci na eni strani ter dobavitelji in industrijskimi podjetji na drugi, in prostovoljne nordijske energetske borze Nordpool, ki ima promptni in terminski trg.
There is, therefore, a clear development towards a regional wholesale market, although transmission bottlenecks sometimes divide this market up into geographically distinct price areas, of which Finland is one.
Tako obstaja jasen razvoj proti regionalnemu veleprodajnemu trgu, čeprav ozka grla v prenosu včasih ta trg delijo na zemljepisno različna cenovna območja, med katerimi Finska predstavlja eno območje.
Thus, according to the Finnish authorities and Nordpool Finland, Finland was a separate pricing area during 9,3 % of the time in 2005 [4].
Tako je bila Finska, po podatkih finskih organov in Nordpoola Finske, ločeno cenovno območje 9,3 % časa v letu 2005 [4].
For production there is also clear development towards a regional market, although transmission bottlenecks and limits to the capacity [5] of the connections between the Finnish networks and those of other areas of the Community and to Russia, can have the effect of temporarily limiting the market to the territory of Finland, excluding the Åland islands.
Tudi pri proizvodnji je jasen razvoj proti regionalnemu trgu, čeprav lahko ozka grla pri prenosu in omejene možnosti [5] povezav med finskimi omrežji in omrežji drugih območij Skupnosti in Rusije začasno omejijo trg na finsko ozemlje, pri čemer Ålandski otoki niso vključeni.
The retail market area corresponds to the territory of Finland, excluding the Åland islands, given that, as confirmed by the Finnish authorities, electricity dealers from other Nordic countries that are not established in Finland are not yet a real alternative as far as consumers or small or medium-sized customers are concerned.
Maloprodajni trg je skladen s finskim ozemljem, pri čemer Ålandski otoki niso vključeni, ker, kot so potrdili finski organi, trgovci z električno energijo iz ostalih nordijskih držav, ki nimajo sedeža na Finskem, še niso resnična alternativa, kar zadeva potrošnike ali male ali srednje velike stranke.
This assessment, and any other contained in this Decision, is made solely for the purposes of Directive 2004/17/EC and is without prejudice to the application of the rules on competition.
Ta in vse druge ocene iz te odločbe so opravljene izključno za namen Direktive 2004/17/ES ter ne posegajo v uporabo pravil o konkurenci.
Finland has implemented and applied not only Directive 96/92/EC but also Directive 2003/54/EC, opting for full ownership unbundling for transmission networks and legal and functional unbundling for distribution networks except for the smallest companies.
Finska ne izvaja in uporablja samo Direktive 96/92/ES, ampak tudi Direktivo 2003/54/ES, pri čemer je izbrala popolno ločevanje lastništva za prenosna omrežja ter pravno in funkcionalno ločevanje za distribucijsko omrežje razen za najmanjša podjetja.
Consequently, and in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 30(3), access to the market should be deemed not to be restricted.
Na podlagi tega in v skladu s prvim pododstavkom člena 30(3) je treba dostop na trg šteti za neomejenega.
Direct exposure to competition should be evaluated on the basis of various indicators, none of which are, per se, decisive.
Neposredno izpostavljenost konkurenci je treba vrednotiti na podlagi različnih pokazateljev, od katerih ni nobeden sam po sebi odločilen.
In the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Report on progress in creating the internal gas and electricity market [6], hereafter referred to as the ‘2005 Report’, the Commission stated that, ‘many national markets display a high degree of concentration of the industry, impeding the development of effective competition.’ [7].
V sporočilu Komisije Svetu in Evropskemu parlamentu, Poročilu o napredku pri oblikovanju notranjega trga s plinom in električno energijo [6], v nadaljevanju „Poročilo iz leta 2005“ je Komisija navedla, da „mnogo nacionalnih trgov kaže visoko stopnjo koncentracije industrije, ki ovira razvoj učinkovite konkurence“ [7].
Consequently, it considered that, in respect of electricity generation, ‘one indicator for the degree of competition on national markets is the total market share of the biggest three producers’ [8].
Zato je menila, da je v zvezi s proizvodnjo električne energije „eden od pokazateljev stopnje konkurence na nacionalnih trgih skupni tržni delež treh največjih proizvajalcev“ [8].
According to the ‘Technical Annex’ [9], the aggregate market share of the three largest generators of the total production on the Nordic market is 40 % [10], which is a satisfactorily low level.
Glede na „Tehnično prilogo“ [9] je vsota tržnih deležev treh največjih proizvajalcev celotne proizvodnje na nordijskem trgu 40 % [10], kar je zadovoljivo nizka stopnja.