natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The laboratory shall report results, and the GIPSA seal number, on the lab report, and provide it to the applicant for service.
Laboratorij v poročilu navede rezultate in številko pečata GIPSA ter ga posreduje vložniku, ki zahteva storitev.
The applicant shall provide the lab report to the GIPSA office that sampled the lot.
Vložnik posreduje poročilo laboratorija uradu GIPSA, ki je opravilo vzorčenje serije.
GIPSA will issue an official document as follows, and provide it to the applicant:
GIPSA izda naslednji uradni dokument, ki ga posreduje vložniku:
“GIPSA officially sampled the lot of rice identified as (specify lot identification) and applied seal number (enter seal number).
‚GIPSA je uradno vzorčila serijo riža, identificiranega kot (vstaviti identifikacijo serije) in odtisnila številko pečata (vstaviti številko pečata).
(Enter lab name), who participates in the LibertyLink rice proficiency program administered by GIPSA, tested a sample identified with this seal number and did not detect LibertyLink rice based on the verified 35S:BAR method.
(Vstaviti ime laboratorija), ki sodeluje pri programu za kakovost riža LibertyLink, ki ga upravlja GIPSA, je s potrjeno metodo 35S:BAR testiral vzorec, identificiran s to številko pečata, in ni ugotovil navzočnosti riža LibertyLink.
The lab report is attached.” ’
Poročilo laboratorija je priloženo.‘ “
Sampling.
Vzorčenje.
Each consignment (lot) of U.S. long grain rice to be shipped to Europe shall be officially sampled by USDA's Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) personnel in accordance with established sampling procedures.
Osebje Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) ameriškega kmetijskega ministrstva uradno vzorči vsako pošiljko (serijo) ameriškega dolgozrnatega riža, ki se pošilja v Evropo, v skladu z uveljavljenimi postopki vzorčenja.
The lot shall be considered negative only when all sample results are negative.
Serija se šteje za negativno le, če so rezultati vseh vzorcev negativni.
Reporting.
Poročanje.
Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 335/2013 of 12 April 2013 amending Regulation (EC) No 1974/2006 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)
Popravek Izvedbene uredbe Komisije (EU) št. 335/2013 z dne 12. aprila 2013 o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 1974/2006 o podrobnih pravilih glede uporabe Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1698/2005 o podpori za razvoj podeželja iz Evropskega kmetijskega sklada za razvoj podeželja (EKSRP)
(Official Journal of the European Union L 105 of 13 April 2013)
(Uradni list Evropske unije L 105 z dne 13. aprila 2013)
On page 3, in Article 1(9), as regards Article 41b(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1974/2006:
Stran 3, člen 1(9) glede člena 41b(4) Uredbe (ES) št. 1974/2006:
Paragraph 2 shall not apply to LEADER preparatory support and technical assistance.’,
Odstavek 2 se ne uporablja za podporo pri pripravi in za tehnično pomoč v okviru osi LEADER.“
Paragraph 2 shall not apply to LEADER preparatory support or to technical assistance.’.
Odstavek 2 se ne uporablja za pripravljalno podporo LEADER in za tehnično pomoč.“
State aid C 39/06 (ex NN 94/05) — First time shareholders scheme implemented by the United Kingdom
Državna pomoč C 39/06 (ex NN 94/05) – Shema delničarjev, ki to postanejo prvič; izvaja se v Združenem kraljestvu
(notified under document number C(2007) 5398)
(notificirano pod dokumentarno številko C(2007) 5398)
By letter dated 15 June 2004, the Commission was informed by a citizen of the United Kingdom of unlawful aid granted by the Shetland Islands Council, the public authority of the Shetlands Islands of the United Kingdom.
Državljan Združenega kraljestva je Komisijo z dopisom z dne 15. junija 2004 obvestil o nezakoniti pomoči, ki jo je dodelil Svet Shetlandskih otokov, javni organ Shetlandskih otokov Združenega kraljestva.
By letters dated 24 August 2004, 4 February 2005, 11 May 2005 and 16 December 2005, the Commission requested the United Kingdom to provide information about such aid.
Komisija je v dopisih z dne 24. avgusta 2004, 4. februarja 2005, 11. maja 2005 in 16. decembra 2005 zahtevala, da Združeno kraljestvo predloži informacije o takšni pomoči.
By letter dated 13 September 2006, the Commission informed the United Kingdom of the decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of the aid.
Z dopisom z dne 13. septembra 2006 je Komisija obvestila Združeno kraljestvo o svoji odločitvi, da bo v zvezi s pomočjo sprožila postopek v skladu s členom 88(2) Pogodbe ES.
The United Kingdom provided its comments on the aid by letter dated 16 October 2006.
Združeno kraljestvo je svoje pripombe glede pomoči predložilo z dopisom z dne 16. oktobra 2006.
The Commission decision to initiate the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 30 November 2006 [3].
Odločitev Komisije o sprožitvi postopka je bila objavljena v Uradnem listu Evropske unije dne 30. novembra 2006 [3].
The Commission invited any interested parties to submit their comments on the aid.
Komisija je zainteresirane stranke povabila, da predložijo svoje pripombe o pomoči.
The Shetland Islands Council made payments to the fisheries sector under the scope of two general aid measures named ‘Aid to the Fish Catching and Processing Industry’ and ‘Aid to the Fish Farming Industry’, which actually consisted of several different types of aid schemes in force since the 1970s.
Svet Shetlandskih otokov je izvršil plačila ribiškemu sektorju na podlagi dveh splošnih ukrepov pomoči, imenovanih „Pomoč za ribištvo in ribiško predelovalno industrijo“ ter „Pomoč za ribogojno industrijo“, ki jih je dejansko sestavljalo več različnih vrst shem pomoči, ki veljajo od 70-ih let 20. stoletja.
One of these schemes was the ‘First time shareholders scheme’ (the scheme).
Ena taka shema je bila tako imenovana „Shema delničarjev, ki to postanejo prvič“ („shema“).
Under that scheme, which was in force from 1982 until 14 January 2005, grants could be given as contribution to matching own financial contribution for the purchase of a share in an existing or new fishing vessel.
V okviru navedene sheme, ki je veljala od 1982 do 14. januarja 2005, so bile dodeljene subvencije kot prispevek, enakovreden lastnemu finančnemu prispevku za nakup deleža v obstoječem ali novem ribiškem plovilu.
Aid was only granted to persons over 18 years old that did not already own a share in a fishing vessel.
Pomoč je bila dodeljena le osebam, starejšim od 18 let, ki še niso lastnice deleža v ribiškem plovilu.
Aid was granted for 50 % of the acquisition costs of the share, with a maximum of GBP 7500 in case of an existing vessel and GBP 15000 in case of a new vessel.
Pomoč je bila dodeljena v višini 50 % stroškov nakupa deleža, v višini največ do 7500 GBP za obstoječe plovilo in 15000 GBP za novo plovilo.
The other 50 % could only be financed by the beneficiaries own contribution, derived either from his own savings or from a family loan.
Ostalih 50 % se lahko financira le z lastnim prispevkom upravičencev, ki izhaja iz lastnih prihrankov ali družinskega posojila.
The amount of aid could never exceed 25 % of the value of the vessel.
Znesek pomoči nikoli ne sme preseči 25 % vrednosti plovila.
The aid was granted subject to the condition that the vessel would be used for full-time fishing for the following five years and that the beneficiary retained his share in the vessel for a period of five years from receipt of the aid.
Pomoč je bila dodeljena pod pogojem, da se plovilo nadaljnjih 5 let uporablja za ribolov polni delovni čas in da upravičenec obdrži svoj delež v plovilu pet let od prejema pomoči.
The Commission had serious doubts that the aid granted under the scheme for individuals who acquired for the first time a share in a second-hand vessel could to be compatible with the requirements established in point 2.2.3.3 of the Guidelines for the examination of State aid to fisheries and aquaculture of 1994, 1997 and 2001 respectively [4].
Komisija je resno dvomila o tem, da bi bila lahko pomoč, dodeljena na podlagi sheme, za posameznike, ki so prvič postali delničarji rabljenega plovila, združljiva z zahtevami iz točke 2.2.3.3. smernic za pregled državnih pomoči za ribištvo in ribogojstvo iz let 1994, 1997 oziroma 2001 [4].
In particular, it had doubts on the compliance of the scheme with the condition to grant aid only with regard to vessels not older than 10 [5] or respectively 20 [6] years that could be used for at least another 10 years.
Zlasti pa dvomi o združljivosti sheme s pogojem, da se pomoč dodeli le za plovila, ki niso starejša od 10 [5] oziroma 20 [6] let in se lahko uporabljajo še najmanj nadaljnjih 10 let.
In addition, the Commission had doubts on the compatibility of the aid rate of the scheme of 25 % of the actual cost of acquisition of the vessel, which seemed not to comply with the 2001 Guidelines, applicable to existing aid schemes as from 1 July 2001, allowing an aid rate up to 20 % only [7].
Poleg tega Komisija dvomi o združljivosti stopnje pomoči sheme v višini 25 % dejanskih stroškov nakupa plovila, za katero se zdi, da ni v skladu s smernicami iz leta 2001, ki se od 1. julija 2001 uporabljajo pri obstoječih shemah pomoči in za katere je dovoljena stopnja pomoči le do 20 % [7].
As regards the aid granted for the acquisition of a share in a new vessels the Commission considered that the scheme seemed to make no reference to the reference level for the size of the fishing fleet nor to the hygiene and safety requirements and the obligation for the registration of the vessel in the fleet register, in accordance with the conditions of Articles 6, 7, 9 and 10 of and Annex III to Council Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 of 17 December laying down the detailed rules and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries sector [8], as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2369/2002 of 20 December 2002 [9].
Glede pomoči, dodeljene za nakup deleža v novih plovilih, Komisija meni, da se za shemo zdi, da se ne sklicuje niti na referenčno stopnjo za velikost ribiške flote niti na zahteve glede higiene in varnosti ter ne obvezuje k registraciji plovil v ladijski register v skladu s pogoji iz členov 6, 7, 9 in 10 Priloge III k Uredbi Sveta (ES) št. 2792/1999 z dne 17. decembra o določitvi podrobnih pravil in sporazumov glede strukturne pomoči Skupnosti v ribiškem sektorju [8], kot je bila spremenjena z Uredbo (ES) št. 2369/2002 z dne 20. decembra 2002 [9].
In addition, the scheme seemed not to contain any provisions with regard to the additional requirements provided for in Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2369/2002.III.
Poleg tega se za shemo zdi, da ne vsebuje nikakršnih določb v zvezi z dodatnimi zahtevami iz Uredbe (ES) št. 2792/1999, kakor je bila spremenjena z Uredbo (ES) št. 2369/2002.III.
In its reply dated 16 October 2006, the United Kingdom provided further information on the aid granted under the scheme.
V svojem odgovoru z dne 16 oktobra 2006 je Združeno kraljestvo predložilo dodatne informacije o pomoči, dodeljeni v okviru sheme.
It pointed out that the total amount of aid granted under the scheme was GBP 581750 rather that the GBP 8000000 referred to by the Commission in its decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty.
Poudarilo je, da je bil skupni znesek dodeljene pomoči v okviru sheme 581750 GBP in ne 8000000 GBP, kot je navedla Komisija v svoji odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka, določenega v členu 88(2) Pogodbe ES.
The United Kingdom also pointed out that after 1 July 2001, no aid had been granted with regard to new vessels, and that, therefore, the question of the non-compatibility of the scheme after that date was of no relevance.
Združeno kraljestvo je tudi opozorilo, da po 1. juliju 2001 ni bila za nova plovila dodeljena nobena pomoč in da zato po tem datumu vprašanje neskladnosti sheme ni pomembno.
Concerning the aids for acquisition of a share in a second-hand vessel, the United Kingdom confirmed that the scheme did not contain any condition regarding the age of the vessel, nor a provision requiring that the vessels could be used for at least another 10 years.
V zvezi s pomočjo za nakup deleža v rabljenih plovilih je Združeno kraljestvo potrdilo, da shema ni vsebovala nikakršnega pogoja v zvezi s starostjo plovila niti določbe, ki bi zahtevala, da se lahko plovilo uporablja najmanj nadaljnjih 10 let.
However, the United Kingdom argued that the scheme did contain a five-year grant condition and that this provision represented an implicit commitment that the vessel would at least continue to be used for fishing for that length of time.
Vendar Združeno kraljestvo dokazuje, da je shema vključevala petletni pogoj za subvencijo in da ta določba pomeni brezpogojno zavezo, da se bo plovilo uporabljalo za ribolov najmanj v tem času.
The United Kingdom provided a list of all 78 individual aids, each amounting to GBP 7500, granted between 25 April 1996 and 15 July 2003 for the acquisition of a share in a second-hand vessel, specifying the name of the beneficiary and the name and age of the vessel.
Združeno kraljestvo je zagotovilo seznam vseh 78 individualnih pomoči, od katerih je vsaka znašala 7500 GBP in ki so bile dodeljene med 25. aprilom 1996 in 15. julijem 2003 za nakup deleža v rabljenem plovilu; na tem seznamu je označeno ime upravičenca ter ime in starost plovila.
The rate of the aid varied between 0,12 % and 25 %.
Stopnja pomoči niha med 0,12 in 25 %.
After 1 January 2001, the aid rate was never higher than 3,75 %.
Po 1. januarju 2001 stopnja pomoči ni bila nikoli višja od 3,75 %.
The United Kingdom pointed out that 36 of those 78 grants seemed to be non-compliant, but that 28 of those had been or were in the process of being recovered following the loss, sequestration, sale, or decommissioning of the vessel in question.
Združeno kraljestvo je poudarilo, da se zdi 36 od navedenih 78 subvencij neustreznih, 28 od teh pa jih je ali jih je bilo v postopku vračila po izgubi, sodni zaplembi, prodaji ali razgradnji zadevnega plovila.
In the case of two of the eight residual items, grant recovery had not been not pursued as the loss occurred after the expiry of the five-year grant period.
V primeru dveh od osmih ostalih točk se pri vračilu subvencije ni vztrajalo, ker se je izguba zgodila po izteku petletnega obdobja.
The United Kingdom thus concluded that only six potentially non-compliant grants remained, concerning vessels that were still in operation or subsequent vessels to which the benefit of the grant in question had been transferred.
Združeno kraljestvo je tako sklenilo, da je ostalo le 6 potencialno neustreznih subvencij v zvezi s plovili, ki še delujejo ali poznejših plovil, na katera se je prenesla prednost zadevne subvencije.
Finally, the United Kingdom maintained that, should the Commission adopt a negative decision, recovery of aid granted prior to 3 June 2003 should not be required as that be contrary to the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations.
Nazadnje je Združeno kraljestvo trdilo, da se v primeru negativne odločitve Komisije ne sme zahtevati vračila pomoči, dodeljene pred 3. junijem 2003, ker bi bilo to v nasprotju z načelom varovanja pravno utemeljenih pričakovanj.
In that respect, the United Kingdom made reference to Commission Decision 2003/612/EC of 3 June 2003 on loans for the purchase of fishing quotas in the Shetland Islands (United Kingdom) [10] and Commission Decision 2006/226/EC of 7 December 2005 on Investments of Shetland Leasing and Property Developments in the Shetland Islands (United Kingdom) [11], stating that until 3 June 2003 the Shetland Islands Council legitimately considered the funds used for such aid to be private rather than public.
V zvezi s tem se je Združeno kraljestvo sklicevalo na Odločbo Komisije 2003/612/ES z dne 3. junija 2003 o posojilih za nakup ribolovnih kvot na Shetlandskih otokih (Združeno kraljestvo) [10] in Odločbo Komisije 2006/226/ES z dne 7. decembra 2005 o naložbah Shetland Leasing and Property Developments na Shetlandskih otokih (Združeno kraljestvo) [11] ter navedlo, da je do 3. junija 2003 Svet Shetlandskih otokov sredstva za takšno pomoč pravno utemeljeno obravnaval kot zasebna in ne javna.
The aid has been granted to a limited number of companies within the fisheries sector and is thus of a selective nature.
Pomoč se je dodelila omejenemu številu podjetij v ribiškem sektorju in je torej selektivna.
The aid has been granted by the Shetland Islands Council from state resources and benefited companies which are in direct competition with other companies in the fisheries sector, both within the United Kingdom and in other Member States.
Pomoč je dodelil Svet Shetlandskih otokov iz državnih sredstev in pomagal podjetjem, ki neposredno konkurirajo drugim podjetjem v ribiškem sektorju, tako v Združenem kraljestvu kot v drugih državah članicah.
According to the United Kingdom, the two general schemes referred to in Recital 4 have been applied before the accession of the United Kingdom to the European Economic Community.
Po mnenju Združenega kraljestva sta se pred pristopom Združenega kraljestva k Evropski gospodarski skupnosti uporabljali dve splošni shemi iz uvodne izjave 4.
However, the Commission notes that according to the information provided, the First time shareholders scheme was only put in place in 1982.
Vendar Komisija meni, da je bila v skladu s predloženimi informacijami Shema delničarjev, ki to postanejo prvič, uvedena šele leta 1982.
In any event, due to the absence of past records, the United Kingdom has not been able to provide evidence that the aid existed already before the United Kingdom joined the Community.
Vsekakor Združeno kraljestvo zaradi pomanjkanja evidenc iz preteklosti ni moglo predložiti dokazil, da je pomoč obstajala že pred pristopom Združenega kraljestva k Skupnosti.
As a result, the aid should be considered as new aid.
Zaradi tega se pomoč šteje kot nova pomoč.
Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 does not lay down any limitation period for the examination of ‘unlawful aid’, as defined in Article 1(f) thereof, namely aid implemented before the Commission is able to reach a conclusion as to its compatibility with the common market.
Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 659/1999 ne določa zastaralnega roka za pregled „nezakonite pomoči“, kot je opredeljena v členu 1(f) Uredbe, in sicer kot pomoč, ki se izvaja preden je Komisija lahko dosegla sklep o njeni združljivosti s skupnim trgom.
However, Article 15 of that Regulation stipulates that the power of the Commission to require the recovery of aid is subject to a limitation period of 10 years and that the limitation period begins on the day on which the unlawful aid is awarded to the beneficiary and that that limitation period is interrupted by any action taken by the Commission.
Vendar člen 15 navedene uredbe določa, da imajo pooblastila Komisije za zahtevo vračila pomoči desetletni zastaralni rok in da začne zastaralni rok teči na dan, ko je nezakonita pomoč dodeljena upravičencu ter da se ta zastaralni rok prekine s katerim koli ukrepom Komisije.
Consequently, the Commission has limited its assessment to the aid granted between 24 August 1994 and January 2005.
Zato je Komisija svojo oceno omejila na pomoč, ki je bila dodeljena od 24. avgusta 1994 do januarja 2005.
State aid can be declared compatible with the common market if it complies with one of the exceptions provided for in the EC Treaty.
Državna pomoč se lahko opredeli kot združljiva s skupnim trgom, če je skladna z eno od izjem, določenih v Pogodbi ES.
As regards State aid to the fisheries sector, State aid measures are deemed to be compatible with the common market if they comply with the conditions of the Guidelines for the examination of State aid to fisheries and aquaculture.
Kar zadeva državno pomoč za ribiški sektor, se državna pomoč obravnava kot združljiva s skupnim trgom, če izpolnjuje pogoje iz Smernic za pregled državnih pomoči za ribištvo in ribogojstvo.
According to the second paragraph of point 5.3 of the Guidelines of 2004: ‘An unlawful aid’ within the meaning of Article 1(f) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 will be appraised in accordance with the guidelines applicable at the time when the administrative act granting the aid has entered into force.’
Po drugem odstavku točke 5.3 smernic iz leta 2004: „Nezakonita pomoč“ po členu 1(f) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999 se oceni v skladu s smernicami, ki so se uporabljale takrat, ko je začel veljati upravni akt o dodelitvi pomoči.
This is also in accordance with the general rules expressed in Commission notice on the determination of the applicable rules for the assessment of unlawful State aid [12].
To je tudi v skladu s splošnimi pravili iz obvestila Komisije o določanju uporabnih pravil za oceno nezakonite državne pomoči [12].
The aid thus needs to be assessed on the basis of its compatibility with the Guidelines of 1994, 1997 and 2001.
Tako je treba pomoč oceniti na podlagi njene združljivosti s smernicami iz let 1994, 1997 in 2001.
New Vessels
Nova plovila
As regards the aid granted for the acquisition of a share in a new vessel, in its decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty, the Commission pointed out that the aid granted before 1 July 2001 could be regarded compatible with the common market.
Komisija je glede pomoči, dodeljene za nakup deleža v novem plovilu, v svoji odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka iz člena 88(2) Pogodbe ES poudarila, da se pomoč, dodeljena pred 1. julijem 2001 lahko šteje za združljivo s skupnim trgom.
After that date, however, the conditions of the scheme seemed no longer compatible with the applicable conditions and therefore the Commission has had serious doubts that any such aid granted after that date would be incompatible.
Vendar se zdi, da pogoji sheme po navedenem datumu niso več združljivi z veljavnimi pogoji in zato Komisija resno dvomi, da bi bila kakršna koli taka pomoč, dodeljena po navedenem datumu, združljiva.
From the information provided by the United Kingdom, it can be established that no aid has been granted after 1 July 2001 for the acquisition of a share in a new vessel and that since 14 January 2005 the scheme is no longer in force.
Glede na informacije, ki jih je predložilo Združeno kraljestvo, je mogoče ugotoviti, da po 1. juliju 2001 ni bila dodeljena nobena pomoč za nakup deleža v novem plovilu in da shema od 14. januarja 2005 ne velja več.
Used vessels
Uporabljena plovila
According to point 2.2.3.3 of the 1994, 1997 and 2001 Guidelines, aid may be deemed compatible with the common market only when the vessel can be used for at least another 10 years.
V skladu s točko 2.2.3.3 smernic iz let 1994, 1997 in 2001 se lahko pomoč šteje za združljivo s skupnim trgom le pod pogojem, da se plovilo lahko uporablja najmanj nadaljnjih 10 let.
In addition, under the 1994 and 1997 Guidelines the vessel has to be at least 10 years old, and under the 2001 Guidelines, at least 20 years old.
Poleg tega mora biti plovilo v skladu s smernicami iz let 1994 in 1997 najmanj 10 let staro, v skladu s smernicami iz leta 2001 pa najmanj 20 let staro.
The scheme does not contain any conditions with regard to the age of the vessels and the United Kingdom has confirmed that no other conditions or actions could have ensured the compatibility with this condition.
Shema ne vključuje nikakršnih pogojev glede starosti plovil in Združeno kraljestvo je potrdilo, da nobeni drugi pogoji ali ukrepi ne morejo zagotoviti združljivosti s tem pogojem.
Moreover, the scheme did not require that the vessels be used for at least another 10 years.
Poleg tega shema ni zahtevala, da morajo biti plovila v uporabi najmanj nadaljnjih 10 let.
This makes the scheme clearly incompatible with the 1994, 1997 and 2001 Guidelines.
Zaradi tega shema očitno ni združljiva s smernicami iz let 1994, 1997 in 2001.
Such incompatibility cannot be removed by the requirement of the scheme to keep the share in the vessel for at least another five years and to use the vessel for fishing during those years.
Te nezdružljivosti se ne da odpraviti z zahtevo sheme, da je treba delež v plovilu ohraniti najmanj za nadaljnjih pet let in v teh letih uporabljati plovilo za ribolov.