natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The German authorities point out that in the Q-Cells decision, the Commission came to the conclusion that there is no link between two investments if both investments have their own land, buildings and equipment, the administration is separate and only the strategic and operational management are performed together.
Kot poudarjajo nemški organi, je Komisija v odločitvi Q-Cells sklenila, da dve naložbi nista povezani, če ima vsaka svoje zemljišče, zgradbe in opremo, če imata ločeno upravljanje ter skupaj izvajata samo strateško in operativno upravljanje.
They inform that the common strategic and operational management of Sovello1 and Sovello2 is merely based on commercial grounds and is not imperative for the existence and the functioning of the two projects.
Sporočajo, da je podlaga za skupno strateško in operativno upravljanje obratov Sovello1 in Sovello2 zgolj poslovna, kar ni bistvenega pomena za obstoj in delovanje obeh projektov.
The German authorities suggest that the existence of a strategic plan to expand capacity through a follow-up project in case of success of the pilot project, as mentioned in the MJVA1, should not be interpreted differently from the strategic plans as set out in the Qimonda decision.
Nemški organi trdijo, da obstoječega strateškega načrta za razširitev zmogljivosti z nadaljevalnim projektom, če bi bil pilotni projekt uspešen, kot je navedeno v SSP1, ne bi smeli razlagati drugače kot strateških načrtov, kot so določeni v odločitvi Qimonda.
The German authorities affirm that the objectives of the two projects Sovello1 and Sovello2 are different, even if the output of both projects is solar modules.
Nemški organi zatrjujejo, da se cilji projektov Sovello1 in Sovello2 razlikujejo, čeprav oba projekta proizvajata solarne module.
Sovello1 is more akin to a feasibility study (testing the technological and economical feasibility of manufacturing at industrial scale along the value added chain on the basis of the String-Ribbon technology) whereas Sovello2 is the full-scale commercial production of a specific product group, standardising the technical experience gathered in Sovello1.
Sovello1 je bolj podoben študiji izvedljivosti (preskušanje tehnološke in ekonomske izvedljivosti industrijske proizvodnje vzdolž verige z dodano vrednostjo na podlagi tehnologije string-ribbon), medtem ko gre pri projektu Sovello2 za popolnoma komercialno proizvodnjo določene skupine izdelkov, pri kateri se standardizirajo izkušnje, pridobljene v projektu Sovello1.
The German authorities argue that the comparison in paragraph 61 of the Commission opening decision (comparing the cost multiplication factor of the investments concerned by the Qimonda decision with the cost multiplication factor for the two Sovello investment projects) does not take account of sector-specific characteristics and is thus not appropriate to exclude Sovello1 from the qualification as a pilot project.
Nemški organi trdijo, da primerjava iz odstavka 61 odločitve Komisije o sprožitvi postopka (primerjava multiplikacijskega faktorja stroškov za naložbe, ki so bile obravnavane v odločitvi Qimonda, z multiplikacijskim faktorjem stroškov za oba naložbena projekta Sovello) ne upošteva značilnosti sektorja in zato ni primerna za izključitev projekta Sovello1 iz okvira pilotnega projekta.
They argue that the costs in the Qimonda decision refer to three investments, that the costs for building and equipment in the semiconductor industry are much higher than in the solar industry, and that the output per machine is significantly lower in the semiconductor industry (so for mass production, they need to install much more equipment).
Trdijo, da se stroški v odločitvi Qimonda nanašajo na tri naložbe, da so stroški gradnje in opreme v sektorju polprevodnikov veliko višji kot v sončni industriji ter da je izkoristek strojne naprave v sektorju polprevodnikov veliko manjši (tako da je treba za množično proizvodnjo namestiti veliko več opreme).
In addition, pilot projects in the semiconductor sector would be feasible for relatively lower costs, because of a much higher standardisation of the machinery in this sector.
Poleg tega bi bilo pilotne projekte v sektorju polprevodnikov mogoče izvajati z relativno nižjimi stroški, ker so strojne naprave v tem sektorju veliko bolj standardizirane.
Germany furthermore suggests that a higher ratio ‘cost of follow-up project/cost of pilot project’ could also result from a better financial position of the investor (and hence should not constitute a criterion for being entitled to more State aid).
Nemčija poleg tega zatrjuje, da je višje razmerje med „stroški nadaljevalnega projekta in stroški pilotnega projekta“ lahko tudi rezultat boljšega finančnega položaja vlagatelja (zato to ne bi smelo biti merilo, na podlagi katerega bi bil neki subjekt upravičen do višje državne pomoči).
The German authorities take the view that the general declaration of intent, laid down in the MJVA1, to enlarge the production capacity of Sovello is no proof for a functional link between Sovello1 and Sovello2, since it does not contain more precise specifications for a second investment project with respect to location, production technologies, machinery, silicon supply, and financing.
Nemški organi zastopajo stališče, da splošna izjava o namenu za povečanje proizvodnih zmogljivosti podjetja Sovello v SSP1 ne dokazuje funkcionalne povezave med projektoma Sovello1 in Sovello2, saj ne vsebuje podrobnejših opredelitev za drugi naložbeni projekt v zvezi z lokacijo, proizvodnimi tehnologijami, strojnimi napravami, dobavo silicija in financiranjem.
The German authorities indicate that the final decision to realise Sovello2 was taken in June 2006 on the basis of: (1) the continuous fast growing demand on the market, safeguarding the sales on a long-term basis; (2) the conclusion of a long-term contract for the supply of the raw material silicon (contract with REC signed in June 2006); (3) the proven technical and economic success of the pilot project Sovello1 (target factory yield and stable cell efficiency reached in June 2006).
Nemški organi navajajo, da je bila dokončna odločitev o izvedbi projekta Sovello2 sprejeta junija 2006, in sicer na podlagi: (1) nenehnega hitro naraščajočega povpraševanja na trgu, ki zagotavlja dolgoročno ohranjanje prodaje; (2) sklenitve dolgoročne pogodbe za dobavo surovine silicij (pogodba z RPC, podpisana junija 2006); (3) izkazanega tehničnega in ekonomskega uspeha pilotnega projekta Sovello1 (ciljni tovarniški izkoristek in stabilna učinkovitost celic, dosežena junija 2006).
The German authorities point out that at the time of the investment decision on Sovello1 (January 2005), it was neither technically nor economically possible to carry out the Sovello2 investment.
Nemški organi poudarjajo, da ob odločitvi za naložbo v Sovello1 (januar 2005) ni bilo niti tehnično niti ekonomsko mogoče izvesti naložbe Sovello2.
The success of the Sovello1 project was not foreseeable at the time of the investment decision.
Ko je bila sprejeta odločitev o naložbi, še ni bilo mogoče predvideti uspeha projekta Sovello1.
No economic incentive to artificially separate Sovello1 and Sovello2
Nobene ekonomske spodbude za umetno ločitev projektov Sovello1 in Sovello2
The German authorities argue that Sovello had no economic incentive to artificially separate Sovello1 and Sovello2.
Nemški organi trdijo, da Sovello ni imel nobene ekonomske spodbude za umetno ločitev projektov Sovello1 in Sovello2.
They indicate that Sovello incurred additional costs of approx. EUR […] [32] due to the autarkic concept of the two production facilities.
Navajajo, da je imel Sovello dodatne stroške v višini približno […] EUR [32] zaradi samozadostnosti obeh proizvodnih objektov.
Furthermore, they consider that, as a consequence, Sovello did not profit from synergies and economies of scale that would normally result from a single investment project.
Poleg tega menijo, da Sovello zato ni mogel izkoristiti ugodnosti, ki jih ponujata sinergija in ekonomija obsega in bi jih omogočal enoten naložbeni projekt.
Moreover, they emphasise that the higher investment costs are not compensated by the higher aid amount that could be expected if the two projects would be considered to be separate: this higher aid amount would only amount to approx. EUR 10 million [33].
Poudarjajo tudi, da se višji naložbeni stroški ne izravnajo z višjim zneskom pomoči, ki bi ga lahko pričakovali, če bi projekta veljala za ločena, saj bi dodatni znesek pomoči znašal samo približno 10 milijonov EUR [33].
Conclusion: Sovello1 and Sovello2 are not a single investment project
Sklep: Sovello1 in Sovello2 nista enoten naložbeni projekt
The German authorities argue that it follows from previous decisions that the Commission would have presumed two separate investment projects to form a single investment project only when all criteria mentioned in point 49 of the MSF 2002 are jointly fulfilled.
Kot zatrjujejo nemški organi, iz preteklih odločitev izhaja, da bi Komisija dva ločena naložbena projekta štela za enega samega, samo če bi bila skupaj izpolnjena vsa merila iz točke 49 Večsektorskega okvira 2002.
They therefore hold that even if Sovello1 was not recognised as a pilot project, Sovello1 and Sovello2 would still not constitute a single investment project since the criteria set forward in point 49 of the MSF 2002 are not jointly fulfilled.
Čeprav Sovello1 ne bi bil priznan za pilotni projekt, po njihovem mnenju Sovello1 in Sovello2 tako še vedno ne moreta biti enoten naložbeni projekt, saj niso skupaj izpolnjena merila iz točke 49 Večsektorskega okvira 2002.
The German authorities conclude that the geographic and timely proximity of the two projects should not lead to the conclusion that these two investments form a single investment project in the meaning of point 49 of the MSF 2002 and are artificially subdivided in order to escape the provisions of the MSF 2002.
Nemški organi nazadnje ugotavljajo, da geografska in časovna bližina projektov ne bi smela biti podlaga za sklep, da sta naložbi enoten naložbeni projekt v smislu točke 49 Večsektorskega okvira 2002 in sta bila umetno razdeljena, da bi se izognili upoštevanju določb Večsektorskega okvira 2002.
In its decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure, the Commission concluded that the financial support to be given by the German authorities to Sovello on the basis of the existing GA and IZ regional aid schemes constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty.
Komisija je v odločitvi o sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave ugotovila, da je finančna podpora, ki naj bi jo nemški organi dali podjetju Sovello na podlagi obstoječih predpisov o regionalni pomoči (garancijska shema in zakon o dodatku za naložbe), državna pomoč v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES.
The German authorities have not contested that conclusion.
Nemški organi tej ugotovitvi niso nasprotovali.
By notifying the measure on 20 December 2006, the German authorities complied with the individual notification requirement of point 24 of the MSF 2002.
Nemški organi so s priglasitvijo ukrepa 20. decembra 2006 izpolnili zahtevo po posamični priglasitvi iz točke 24 Večsektorskega okvira 2002.
In line with point 63 and footnote 58 of the Guidelines on national regional aid for 2007-2013 [34], stating that individually notifiable investment projects will be assessed in accordance with the rules in force at the time of notification, the Commission assesses the notified aid measure under the provisions of the RAG 1998, the regional aid map for Germany for 2004-2006, and the MSF 2002.
Komisija v skladu s točko 63 in opombo 58 Smernic o nacionalni regionalni pomoči za obdobje 2007–2013 [34], v katerih je navedeno, da se bodo naložbeni projekti, ki jih je treba priglasiti posamično, ocenjevali v skladu s pravili, ki bodo veljala ob priglasitvi, ocenjuje priglašeni ukrep pomoči v skladu z določbami Smernic 1998, karto regionalne pomoči za Nemčijo za obdobje 2004–2006 in Večsektorskim okvirom 2002.
Compatibility of the aid with the general provisions of the RAG 1998
Združljivost pomoči s splošnimi določbami Smernic 1998
As the Commission already found in its decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure, the project comprises an initial investment within the meaning of the RAG 1998, the costs eligible for investment aid are defined, and the rules on cumulation are respected.
Kot je Komisija že ugotovila v odločitvi o sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave, projekt obsega začetno naložbo v smislu Smernic 1998, upravičeni stroški naložbe so opredeljeni, upoštevajo pa se tudi pravila o kumulaciji.
Furthermore, Sovello has applied for aid before starting work on the project and it has the obligation to maintain the investment in the region for a minimum of five years after completion of the project.
Poleg tega je Sovello zaprosil za pomoč pred začetkom del pri projektu in je dolžan ohraniti naložbo v regiji najmanj pet let po dokončanju projekta.
Sovello provides a financial contribution of at least 25 % of the eligible costs in a form which is free of any public support.
Sovello zagotavlja finančni prispevek v višini vsaj 25 % upravičenih stroškov v obliki, ki ni deležna javne podpore.
As the aid to Sovello is disbursed on the basis of approved aid schemes, the aid is therefore in principle in compliance with the general provisions of the RAG 1998.
Ker se pomoč podjetju Sovello izplača na podlagi že odobrenih programov pomoči, je pomoč tako načeloma v skladu s splošnimi določbami Smernic 1998.
The Commission confirms this finding in its present decision.
Komisija v tej odločbi potrjuje to ugotovitev.
Compatibility of the aid with the MSF 2002 provisions
Združljivost pomoči z določbami Večsektorskega okvira 2002
Single investment project
Enoten naložbeni projekt
Point 49 of the MSF 2002 states that an investment project should not be artificially divided into sub-projects in order to escape the provisions of the framework.
V točki 49 Večsektorskega okvira 2002 je navedeno, da se naložbeni projekt ne sme umetno razdeliti v podprojekte, da bi se tako izognili upoštevanju določb okvira.
A single investment project includes all the fixed investments on a production site in a period of three years [35].
Enoten naložbeni projekt vključuje vse naložbe v osnovna sredstva na proizvodni lokaciji v obdobju treh let [35].
A production site is ‘an economically indivisible series of fixed capital items fulfilling a precise technical function, linked by a physical or functional link, and which have clearly identified aims, such as the production of a defined product’.
Proizvodna lokacija je „ekonomsko nedeljiva serija osnovnih sredstev, ki izpolnjujejo natančno določeno tehnično funkcijo, so fizično ali funkcionalno povezana in imajo jasno opredeljene cilje, kot je proizvodnja določenega izdelka“.
As Sovello received aid in the past for a previous investment project Sovello1 on the same location (on land adjacent to the Sovello2 site), and less than three years elapsed between the start of works on Sovello1 (2005) and Sovello2 (July 2006), it is necessary to establish whether this investment forms a single investment project with the notified project Sovello2.
Ker je Sovello v preteklosti že dobil pomoč za predhodni naložbeni projekt Sovello1 na isti lokaciji (na zemljišču, ki meji na zemljišče Sovello2) in so od začetka del na projektu Sovello1 (2005) in Sovello2 (julij 2006) pretekla manj kot tri leta, je treba ugotoviti, ali je prva naložba enoten naložbeni projekt s priglašenim projektom Sovello2.
The Commission would normally assume that the fixed investments on a production site in a period of three years constitute a single investment project.
Komisija bi običajno domnevala, da so naložbe v osnovna sredstva na proizvodni lokaciji v obdobju treh let enoten naložbeni projekt.
The comments submitted by the Member State regarding the single investment project issue are assessed on the basis of the criteria listed in point 49 of the MSF 2002.
Pripombe v zvezi z vprašanjem enotnega naložbenega projekta, ki jih je predložila država članica, se presojajo na podlagi meril, naštetih v točki 49 Večsektorskega okvira 2002.
The Commission considers that there is no indication that the investment was artificially split into two projects in order to escape the provisions of the MSF 2002.
Po mnenju Komisije nič ne kaže, da bi bila naložba umetno razdeljena na dva projekta, s čimer bi se izognili upoštevanju določb Večsektorskega okvira 2002.
However, the absence of an intentional circumvention of MSF 2002 rules does not allow to come automatically to the conclusion that projects started within the three-year period do not constitute a single investment project (cf. also paragraphs 47 to 49 of the AMD decision, where the Commission concluded to the existence of a single investment project although there was no intention to artificially subdivide the projects in order to circumvent the MSF 2002 rules).
Vendar pa dejstvo, da ni bilo namernega izogibanja Večsektorskemu okviru 2002, ne vodi samodejno do sklepa, da projekti, ki so se začeli v obdobju treh let, ne tvorijo enotnega naložbenega projekta (gl. tudi odstavke od 47 do 49 odločitve AMD, kjer je Komisija ugotovila obstoj enotnega naložbenega projekta, čeprav ni bil dokazan namen, da bi umetno razdelili projekte in se tako izognili upoštevanju predpisov Večsektorskega okvira 2002).
Whether a single investment project exists or not has to be established on the basis of facts, applying the criteria developed in point 49 of the MSF 2002, and not on the basis of intentions.
Obstoj ali neobstoj enotnega naložbenega projekta je treba ugotavljati na podlagi dejstev in z uporabo meril, razvitih v točki 49 Večsektorskega okvira 2002, ne pa na podlagi namenov.
The German authorities derive from their analysis of the Commission practice that all criteria mentioned in point 49 of the MSF 2002 must be fulfilled cumulatively in order to classify two projects as a single investment project.
Nemški organi na podlagi svoje analize prakse Komisije ugotavljajo, da morajo biti vsa merila iz točke 49 Večsektorskega okvira 2002 izpolnjena kumulativno, če naj bi dva projekta opredelili kot enoten naložbeni projekt.
The Commission does not agree with this interpretation.
Komisija se s to razlago ne strinja.
None of the previous Commission decisions states that all criteria should be cumulatively met in order to conclude that a single investment project exists.
V nobeni od predhodnih odločitev Komisije ni navedeno, da morajo biti za ugotovitev, da obstaja enoten naložbeni projekt, kumulativno izpolnjena vsa merila.
The Commission considers that the MSF 2002 foresees a global assessment of these criteria.
Komisija meni, da je v Večsektorskem okviru 2002 določena celostna presoja teh meril.
The criteria are to be balanced in a global assessment on a case-by-case basis.
Merila je v celostni presoji treba pretehtati za vsak primer posebej.
This implies that two investments could constitute a single investment project even if not all the criteria were fully met.
To pomeni, da bi bili dve naložbi lahko enoten naložbeni projekt, čeprav ne bi bila v celoti izpolnjena vsa merila.
In the following, the criteria
V nadaljevanju se merila, in sicer
precise technical function
natančno določena tehnična funkcija,
physical or functional link
fizična ali funkcionalna povezava,
clearly identified aim
jasno opredeljen cilj,
economic indivisibility
ekonomska nedeljivost,
are analysed and balanced in a global assessment.
analizirajo in tehtajo v celostni presoji.
The argument of the German authorities that Sovello had no economic incentive to artificially separate Sovello1 and Sovello2 is also taken into consideration.
Upošteva se tudi argument nemških organov, da podjetje Sovello ni imelo nobene ekonomske spodbude za umetno ločitev projektov Sovello1 in Sovello2.
Precise technical function
Natančno določena tehnična funkcija
Both plants fulfil a precise technical function which is identical for both: production of solar modules based on the String-Ribbon technology.
Oba obrata opravljata natančno določeno tehnično funkcijo, ki je pri obeh enaka: proizvodnja solarnih modulov na podlagi tehnologije string-ribbon.
It is also noted that there is no indication that different input is needed for production in Sovello1 and Sovello2 (the raw material is silicon).
Ne gre tudi spregledati, da nič ne kaže, da so za proizvodnjo v obratih Sovello1 in Sovello2 potrebne drugačne surovine (oba uporabljata silicij).
The changes to the equipment and machinery of Sovello2, aimed at optimising the production efficiency and resulting from experience gathered in Sovello1, may lead to slight differences between the modules produced in Sovello1 and Sovello2.
Spremembe opreme in strojnih naprav v obratu Sovello2, ki so bile namenjene optimizaciji proizvodne učinkovitosti in izhajajo iz izkušenj, pridobljenih v projektu Sovello1, mogoče res vodijo do manjših razlik med moduli, ki se proizvajajo v obratih Sovello1 in Sovello2.
The Commission however considers that these are the result of normal adjustments in the context of industrial projects, and do not alter the fact that both plants have the same precise technical function.
Komisija pa vseeno meni, da so te rezultat običajnih prilagoditev v okviru industrijskih projektov in da to ne spreminja dejstva, da imata oba obrata enako natančno določeno tehnično funkcijo.
Physical or functional link
Fizična ali funkcionalna povezava
Sovello1 and Sovello2 are separate production facilities with separate fixed assets and with separate access to the public road network.
Sovello1 in Sovello2 sta ločena proizvodna obrata z ločenimi osnovnimi sredstvi in ločenim dostopom do javnega cestnega omrežja.
Both production facilities cover the complete production chain for solar modules, starting from wafers, via cells to modules.
Oba proizvodna obrata pokrivata celotno proizvodno verigo za solarne module, od rezin prek celic do modulov.
There are no physical links between the ‘series of fixed capital items fulfilling a precise technical function’ that constitute the two production facilities.
Med „serijama osnovnih sredstev, ki izpolnjujejo natančno določeno tehnično funkcijo“, ni nobenih fizičnih povezav, kar pomeni, da gre za dva proizvodna obrata.
An expert report submitted to the Commission concludes that the plants could be sold separately, and could be run separately without requiring any physical changes in the production process.
V strokovnem poročilu, ki je bilo predloženo Komisiji, je ugotovljeno, da bi bilo obrata mogoče prodati ločeno in bi ju bilo mogoče voditi ločeno brez fizičnih sprememb v proizvodnem postopku.
The Commission has no reason to reject this conclusion.
Komisija nima nobenega razloga, da bi zavrnila to ugotovitev.
Sovello1 and Sovello 2 have some centralised services.
Sovello1 in Sovello2 imata nekaj centraliziranih služb.
Furthermore, they produce the same product, using the same production process, machines and equipment, the suppliers of machines, equipment and raw materials are also typically the same and maintenance or management of spare parts is organised centrally.
Poleg tega proizvajata isti izdelek z uporabo enakega proizvodnega postopka, strojnih naprav in opreme, tudi dobavitelji naprav, opreme in surovin so običajno isti, vzdrževanje ali ravnanje z rezervnimi deli pa sta organizirana centralno.
However, it is true that typical elements that would demonstrate functional links between the ‘series of fixed capital items fulfilling a precise technical function’ that constitute the two production facilities are not present in this case.
Res pa je, da značilni elementi, ki bi dokazovali funkcionalne povezave med „serijo osnovnih sredstev, ki izpolnjujejo natančno določeno tehnično funkcijo“ in tvorijo dve proizvodni zmogljivosti, v tem primeru niso navzoči.
For example, there is no supply relationship between the Sovello projects, no common technical infrastructure (e.g. power plant or similar) nor an exchange of intermediate products.
Tako na primer ni dobavnega razmerja med projektoma Sovello, nobene skupne tehnične infrastrukture (npr. elektrarne ali podobnega), ni niti izmenjave neposrednih izdelkov.
Both plants constitute autarkic production lines.
Vsak obrat je samozadostna proizvodnja linija.