natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The maximum compensation for these categories of stranded costs is equivalent to the maximum volume of electricity that the generator in question can produce from the gas contracted under take or pay conditions, multiplied by the estimated difference between the price per unit of energy of this gas and the average price per unit of energy of the coal needed to produce the same amount of electricity, and by a coefficient reflecting the ratio between the average cost per unit of energy of gas from Polish gas fields and the average cost per unit of energy of the gas used by generators not using gas from Polish gas fields (if the generator concerned does not use Polish gas).
Najvišje nadomestilo za te kategorije nasedlih stroškov je enakovredno največji količini električne energije, ki jo zadevni proizvajalec lahko proizvede iz plina, za katerega je bila sklenjena pogodba pod pogoji „vzemi ali plačaj“, pomnoženi z ocenjeno razliko med ceno na enoto energije tega plina in povprečno ceno na enoto energije premoga, potrebnega za proizvodnjo enake količine električne energije, in s količnikom, ki izraža razmerje med povprečnimi stroški na enoto energije plina s poljskih plinskih polj in povprečnimi stroški na enoto energije plina, ki ga uporabljajo proizvajalci, ki ne uporabljajo plina s poljskih plinskih polj (če zadevni proizvajalec ne uporablja poljskega plina).
The following table indicates the maximum payments for compensation linked to take or pay contracts under the Act:
V naslednji preglednici so navedena najvišja izplačila za nadomestilo v zvezi s pogodbami „vzemi ali plačaj“ v skladu z Zakonom:
Maximum compensation for stranded costs linked to take or pay contracts
Najvišje nadomestilo za nasedle stroške v zvezi s pogodbami „vzemi ali plačaj“
Generator
Proizvajalec
A mechanism has been put in place to update the actual compensation granted each year to each of these generators for stranded costs linked to take or pay contracts.
Vzpostavljen je bil mehanizem za posodabljanje dejanskega nadomestila, ki se vsako leto dodeli vsakemu od teh proizvajalcev za nasedle stroške v zvezi s pogodbami „vzemi ali plačaj“.
Actual compensation in a given year comprises two items:
Dejansko nadomestilo v danem letu sestavljata dve postavki:
first, an amount equivalent to the actual quantity of electricity produced in a given year by the generator in question from the gas obtained under his take or pay contract, multiplied by the difference between the actual price per unit of energy of the gas purchased under the take or pay contract and the actual average price per unit of energy of the quantity of coal necessary to produce the same amount of electricity in that year, minus the difference between the average sales price per unit of energy of the electricity charged by the generator concerned in that year and the average sales price per unit of energy of electricity charged by coal-fired generators in that year (when this difference is negative it is not taken into account in the calculations).
prvič, znesek, enakovreden dejanski količini električne energije, ki jo je zadevni proizvajalec proizvedel v danem letu iz plina, pridobljenega v skladu s pogodbo „vzemi ali plačaj“, pomnožen z razliko med dejansko ceno na enoto energije plina, nabavljenega po pogodbi „vzemi ali plačaj“, in dejansko povprečno ceno na enoto energije, potrebne količine premoga za proizvodnjo enake količine električne energije v tem letu, minus razlika med povprečno prodajno ceno na enoto energije električne energije, ki jo je zadevni proizvajalec zaračunal v tem letu, in povprečno prodajno ceno na enoto energije električne energije, ki so jo v tem letu zaračunali proizvajalci, ki uporabljajo premog (kadar je ta razlika negativna, se ne upošteva pri izračunu).
The coefficient reflecting the ratio between the average cost per unit of energy of gas from Polish gas fields and the average cost per unit of energy of the gas used by generators not using gas from Polish gas fields (if the generator concerned does not use Polish gas) is also applied;
Uporablja se tudi količnik, ki izraža razmerje med povprečnimi stroški na enoto energije plina s poljskih plinskih polj in povprečnimi stroški na enoto energije plina, ki ga uporabljajo proizvajalci, ki ne uporabljajo plina s poljskih plinskih polj (če zadevni proizvajalec ne uporablja poljskega plina);
second, an amount equivalent to the actual fines paid by the generator in question in that year for gas contracted under take or pay provisions and not taken.
drugič, znesek, enakovreden dejanski globi, ki jo je zadevni proizvajalec to leto plačal za plin, za katerega je bila sklenjena pogodba z določbami „vzemi ali plačaj“, a ga ni vzel.
For each power generator, the sum of actual annual compensation as calculated in accordance with the methodology laid down in recital 148 may not exceed the maximum amount of compensation provided for in Table 4.
Znesek dejanskega letnega nadomestila za vsakega proizvajalca energije, izračunan v skladu z metodologijo, določeno v uvodni izjavi 148, ne sme presegati najvišjega zneska nadomestila, predvidenega v preglednici 4.
All payments for the compensation of stranded costs linked to take or pay contracts cease when this maximum amount is exceeded.
Vsa izplačila nadomestila za nasedle stroške v zvezi s pogodbami „vzemi ali plačaj“ prenehajo, ko je presežen ta najvišji znesek.
In any event, payments cease at the latest when the terminated PPA was originally scheduled to expire.
V vsakem primeru se izplačila prenehajo najpozneje takrat, ko naj bi se po prvotnih načrtih iztekla prekinjena pogodba PNE.
The above-mentioned provisions apply only to quantities of gas acquired under take or pay contracts that had already been concluded at the time of Poland's accession to the European Union.
Navedene določbe se uporabljajo samo za količine plina, kupljene v skladu s pogodbami „vzemi ali plačaj“, ki so že bile sklenjene ob pristopu Poljske k Evropski uniji.
Additional quantities of gas contracted under take or pay provisions by the same power generator after accession do not qualify for compensation.
Dodatne količine plina, za katere je isti proizvajalec energije sklenil pogodbo z določbami „vzemi ali plačaj“ po pristopu, niso upravičene do nadomestila.
Furthermore, if the quantity of gas acquired under the take or pay provisions is reduced after accession, then this reduction is reflected in compensation payments.
Če se poleg tega količina plina, kupljenega v skladu z določbami „vzemi ali plačaj“, po pristopu zmanjša, potem se to zmanjšanje izrazi pri izplačilih nadomestila.
REPLY FROM POLAND ON COMMENTS FROM INTERESTED PARTIES
ODGOVOR POLJSKE NA PRIPOMBE ZAINTERESIRANIH STRANK
Poland takes the view that PPAs should not be regarded as state aid by the Commission.
Poljska meni, da Komisija ne bi smela šteti pogodb PNE za državno pomoč.
However, if they were to be deemed as constituting state aid, they should be treated as aid not applicable after accession.
Če pa bi štele za državno pomoč, bi jih bilo treba obravnavati kot pomoč, ki se ne uporablja po pristopu.
Poland notes that the exemption from the obligation to submit tariffs to the President of the Office for Energy Regulation for approval was intended to encourage power generators to behave like market operators and limit energy generation costs.
Poljska ugotavlja, da je bilo izvzetje od obveznosti predložitve cenikov v odobritev predsedniku Urada za urejanje energetike namenjeno spodbujanju proizvajalcev energije k temu, da bi ravnali kot udeleženci na trgu in omejili stroške proizvodnje energije.
Poland emphasises that the conclusion of PPAs was preceded by a tender procedure which was open and non-discriminatory and addressed to all generators (public and private alike).
Poljska poudarja, da je pred sklenitvijo pogodb PNE potekal razpisni postopek, ki je bil odprt in nediskriminacijski ter namenjen vsem proizvajalcem (javnim in zasebnim).
The Commission is also requested to note that some PPAs were linked to privatisation and that the price of the privatised enterprise reflected the fact that a PPA had been concluded.
Komisija naj upošteva tudi, da so bile nekatere pogodbe PNE povezane s privatizacijo in da se je v ceni privatiziranega podjetja izražalo to, da je bila sklenjena pogodba PNE.
Should the Commission deem PPAs to constitute state aid, Poland considers that the aid should not be qualified as operating aid, as in practice it was linked to the discharge of the public duties vested in the power generators.
Če bi Komisija štela pogodbe PNE za državno pomoč, Poljska meni, da se ta pomoč ne bi smela obravnavati kot pomoč za tekoče poslovanje, ker je bila v praksi povezana z opravljanjem javnih nalog, dodeljenih proizvajalcem energije.
PPAs were designed to ensure security of supply.
Pogodbe PNE so bile zasnovane za zagotavljanje zanesljivosti oskrbe.
Poland once again reiterated its standpoint that PPAs should not be assessed in the light of the Stranded Costs Methodology; the Methodology should be used only for costs arising when a Member State fails to discharge its obligations and guarantees vis-à-vis generators.
Poljska je še enkrat poudarila svoje stališče, da pogodb PNE ne bi smeli ocenjevati v skladu z metodologijo za nasedle stroške; ta metodologija naj bi se uporabljala samo za stroške, ki nastanejo, kadar država članica ne poravna svojih obveznosti in jamstev v zvezi s proizvajalci.
ASSESSMENT BY THE COMMISSION
OCENA KOMISIJE
As mentioned in recital 133, the Polish authorities have submitted the Act to the Commission as part of the present procedure for it to be assessed under the state aid rules.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 133, so poljski organi predložili Zakon Komisiji v okviru tega postopka, da bi ga ocenila v skladu s pravili o državni pomoči.
The Act provides for compensation linked to early termination of PPAs and cannot therefore be dissociated from the PPAs themselves.
Zakon predvideva nadomestilo, povezano s predčasnim prenehanjem pogodb PNE, zato ga ni mogoče obravnavati ločeno od samih pogodb PNE.
In its decision to initiate the procedure, the Commission expressed doubts about possible state aid elements and PPAs' compatibility with state aid legislation.
Komisija je v odločitvi o sprožitvi postopka izrazila pomisleke o možnih elementih državne pomoči in združljivosti pogodb PNE z zakonodajo o državni pomoči. Na dan te odločbe so pogodbe PNE še vedno veljavne.
The PPAs are still in force at the date of the present Decision.. Therefore the Commission has a duty to assess the PPAs listed in Appendix 1 to the Act.
Komisija mora zato oceniti pogodbe PNE, navedene v Dodatku 1 k Zakonu.
With regard to PPAs
V zvezi s pogodbami PNE
Existence of state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty
Obstoj državne pomoči v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES
Below the Commission analyses each of the four cumulative criteria which comprise the definition of state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty: the involvement of state resources, the existence of an economic advantage, the selectivity of the advantage and the impact on trade.
Komisija v nadaljevanju analizira vsa štiri kumulativna merila, ki sestavljajo opredelitev državne pomoči v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES: udeležba državnih sredstev, obstoj gospodarske prednosti, selektivnost prednosti in vpliv na trgovino.
It is important that this analysis should determine the time at which these criteria are examined and which will, as a result, be taken into account for the state aid assessment of the PPAs.
Pomembno je, da se pri tej analizi določi čas, v katerem se proučujejo ta merila in ki se bo posledično upošteval pri oceni državne pomoči v zvezi s pogodbami PNE.
In their comments, the interested parties argued (with reference to several assessment criteria) that the Commission should consider only the situation prevailing when the PPAs were signed.
Zainteresirane stranke so v svojih pripombah trdile (ob sklicevanju na različna merila ocenjevanja), da bi morala Komisija upoštevati samo razmere, ki so prevladovale ob podpisu pogodb PNE.
The findings of this analysis would then extend to the whole duration of each PPA, at least until it was substantially amended.
Ugotovitve te analize bi se potem razširile na celotno trajanje vsake pogodbe PNE, vsaj dokler ne bi bila bistveno spremenjena.
It is true that, when carrying out an analysis to determine the existence of aid in a specific case, the Commission must examine the situation prevailing at the time when the measure entered into force.
Res je, da mora Komisija pri opravljanju analize za ugotavljanje obstoja pomoči v posameznem primeru resnično proučiti razmere, ki so prevladovale takrat, ko je ukrep začel veljati.
However, that does not mean that the assessment of the four criteria in the definition of state aid should be limited to the precise time at which the aid was granted.
Vendar pa to ne pomeni, da mora biti presoja štirih meril pri opredelitvi državne pomoči omejena natančno na tisti čas, ko je bila pomoč dodeljena.
If, from the outset, the aid was granted for a long duration in the form of successive payments — as opposed to a one-off payment — the Commission must determine whether the criteria were met over the whole planned duration of the measure.
Če je bila pomoč od začetka dodeljena za daljše obdobje v obliki zaporednih plačil – v nasprotju z enkratnim plačilom – mora Komisija ugotoviti, ali so bila merila izpolnjena v celotnem načrtovanem obdobju trajanja tega ukrepa.
In the present case, the Commission has reached the conclusion that the assessment findings were identical irrespective of whether the PPAs were deemed to constitute state aid when they were concluded.
V zadevnem primeru je Komisija sklenila, da so bile ugotovitve ocenjevanja popolnoma enake ne glede na to, ali so pogodbe PNE ob sklenitvi štele za državno pomoč.
If the Commission were to take the view that the four criteria for aid were present when the PPAs were concluded, the measure should be assessed in accordance with the Accession Treaty.
Če bi Komisija menila, da so bila štiri merila za pomoč izpolnjena, ko so bile pogodbe PNE sklenjene, bi bilo treba ta ukrep oceniti v skladu s Pristopno pogodbo.
As a result of this assessment (point 7.1.2 below), the measure would constitute new aid as of 1 May 2004 and its compatibility with the common market should be assessed as of that date.
Na podlagi te ocene (točka 7.1.2) bi ukrep pomenil novo pomoč od 1. maja 2004 in njegovo združljivost s skupnim trgom bi bilo treba ocenjevati od tega datuma.
Should it be concluded, however, that the PPAs did not constitute state aid when they were signed, the Commission is of the view that they became state aid at the time of accession — at the latest on the date of accession of Poland to the EU (point 7.1.2 below).
Če pa bi bilo ugotovljeno, da pogodbe PNE niso pomenile državne pomoči, ko so bile podpisane, Komisija meni, da so postale državna pomoč ob pristopu – najpozneje na dan pristopa Poljske k EU (točka 7.1.2).
On the basis of the Accession Treaty and in accordance with Article 1(b)(v) of Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, the Commission would conclude that the measure constitutes new aid as of 1 May 2004 and its compatibility with the state aid rules is to be assessed as of that date (point 7.1.2 below).
Na podlagi Pristopne pogodbe in v skladu s členom 1(b)(v) Uredbe (ES) št. 659/1999 bi Komisija ugotovila, da ukrep pomeni novo pomoč od 1. maja 2004 ter da je treba njegovo združljivost s pravili o državni pomoči ocenjevati od tega dne (točka 7.1.2).
Therefore the Commission is assessing whether, as of the day on which Poland acceded to the European Union and since that date, the measure meets all the criteria for the existence of state aid.
Zato Komisija ocenjuje, ali ta ukrep izpolnjuje vsa merila za obstoj državne pomoči od dneva pristopa Poljske k Evropski uniji.
In this regard, the Commission wishes to respond to comments submitted by the interested parties to the effect that private-law contracts cannot automatically become void as a result of accession and liberalisation, as this outcome would, according to the interested parties, go against the principles of legal certainty and legitimate expectations.
V zvezi s tem želi Komisija odgovoriti na pripombe, ki so jih predložile zainteresirane stranke, da pogodbe zasebnega prava ne morejo samodejno postati nične zaradi pristopa in liberalizacije, saj bi bil po mnenju zainteresiranih strank tak izid v nasprotju z načeli pravne gotovosti in upravičenih pričakovanj.
From the date of accession, the provisions of the original Treaties and those of the secondary legislation became binding in Poland, in line with Article 2 of the Accession Act.
Z dnevom pristopa so postale določbe izvirnih pogodb in sekundarne zakonodaje na Poljskem zavezujoče v skladu s členom 2 Pristopnega akta.
The Commission is duty bound to apply EU competition law to Poland in the same way as it does to all other Member States as regards the energy sector and all other sectors of the Polish economy.
Komisija je zavezana k uporabi zakonodaje EU o konkurenci za Poljsko, tako kot jo uporablja za vse druge države članice, kar zadeva sektor energetike in vse druge sektorje poljskega gospodarstva.
The Commission notes that the form of aid (private-law contract as in the case of the PPAs) is not relevant from the state aid viewpoint; only the effect of the measure is relevant to the Commission's analysis.
Komisija ugotavlja, da oblika pomoči (pogodba zasebnega prava v primeru pogodb PNE) ni pomembna z vidika državne pomoči; za analizo Komisije je pomemben samo učinek ukrepa.
The Commission therefore found no valid arguments in the interested parties' comments to explain why this procedure is incompatible with the principles of legal certainty or legitimate expectations.
Komisija zato ni našla nobenih utemeljenih argumentov v pripombah zainteresiranih strank, ki bi pojasnili, zakaj ta postopek ni skladen z načeli pravne gotovosti in upravičenih pričakovanj.
State resources and imputability to the state
Državna sredstva in pripisovanje državi
The guarantee of profitability, which is the basis of the PPAs, manifests itself in practice in the obligation for PSE to purchase electricity at a price which covers investment and operating costs plus a certain margin of profit.
Jamstvo donosnosti, ki je podlaga pogodb PNE, se v praksi kaže kot obveznost PSE glede nakupa električne energije po ceni, ki vključuje stroške naložb in poslovanja ter določeno stopnjo dobička.
The purchase price is borne in full by PSE, a company which is entirely owned and controlled by the Treasury.
Nakupno ceno v celoti krije PSE, družba, ki jo ima v popolni lasti in jo obvladuje Ministrstvo za finance.
The interested parties have argued that the decision to conclude the PPAs was made by PSE
Zainteresirane stranke so trdile, da je odločitev o sklenitvi pogodb PNE sprejel PSE.
As far as state resources are concerned, the Commission has also considered the application of the PreussenElektra judgment, in which the Court of Justice examined a mechanism whereby privately owned companies were compelled by the state to purchase electricity from specific producers at a price fixed by the state which was higher than the market price.
Kar zadeva državna sredstva, je Komisija obravnavala tudi uporabo sodbe PreussenElektra, v kateri je Sodišče proučilo mehanizem, v okviru katerega je država prisilila družbe v zasebni lasti k nakupu električne energije od določenih proizvajalcev po ceni, ki jo je določila država in je bila višja od tržne cene.
The Court ruled that, in this case, there was no transfer of public resources, and therefore no state aid.
Sodišče je razsodilo, da v tem primeru ni bilo prenosa državnih sredstev in torej tudi ne državne pomoči.
The Polish situation is significantly different from the system examined by the Court in the aforementioned ruling.
Poljski primer je bistveno drugačen od sistema, ki ga je Sodišče proučilo v navedeni odločitvi.
In particular, the difference lies in the ownership structure of the companies to which the obligation to purchase the electricity applies.
Razlika je predvsem v lastniški strukturi družb, ki jih zadeva obveznost nakupa električne energije.
In the PreussenElektra case, the company which the State required to purchase the electricity was privately owned, whereas PSE is entirely owned and controlled by the state.
V zadevi PreussenElektra je bila družba, od katere je država zahtevala nakup električne energije, v zasebni lasti, medtem ko ima PSE v celoti v lasti in ga obvladuje država.
PSE is under state control in accordance with the definition set out in Commission Directive 2006/111/EC of 16 November 2006 on the transparency of financial relations between Member States and public undertakings as well as on financial transparency within certain undertakings.
PSE je pod državnim nadzorom v skladu z opredelitvijo, določeno v Direktivi Komisije 2006/111/ES z dne 16. novembra 2006 o preglednosti finančnih odnosov med državami članicami in javnimi podjetji ter o finančni preglednosti znotraj določenih podjetij.
The resources used therefore belong to a fully state-owned company.
Uporabljena sredstva torej pripadajo družbi v popolni državni lasti.
In the PreussenElektra case, when the funds are traced from the recipient back to the source, it emerges that at no time were they under the direct or indirect control of the state.
V zadevi PreussenElektra se pri sledenju sredstev od prejemnika do vira ugotavlja, da niso bila nikoli pod neposrednim ali posrednim nadzorom države.
In contrast to the situation described in the PreussenElektra judgment, in the Polish case the funds are under state control because they are transferred to a public company (i.e. PSE) and will therefore be regarded as state resources.
V nasprotju s položajem, opisanim v sodbi PreussenElektra, so v poljskem primeru sredstva pod državnim nadzorom, ker se prenesejo na javno družbo (in sicer PSE), zato bodo obravnavna kot državna sredstva.
On the basis of the assessment of the measure and in the light of the aforementioned judgment, the Commission concludes that the PPAs do comprise state resources.
Na podlagi ocene ukrepa in glede na navedeno sodbo Komisija ugotavlja, da pogodbe PNE vsebujejo državna sredstva.
As far as imputability is concerned, in the Stardust judgment, the Court stated that resources allocated to companies that are under the control of the state are state resources.
Kar zadeva pripisovanje sredstev, je v sodbi Stardust Sodišče navedlo, da so sredstva, dodeljena družbam, ki so pod nadzorom države, državna sredstva.
However, the Court added that it is also necessary to examine whether the use of such resources is imputable to the state in a concrete manner.
Vendar pa je Sodišče dodalo, da je treba proučiti tudi, ali je mogoče uporabo teh sredstev konkretno pripisati državi.
According to the Stardust judgment of the Court of Justice, when a publicly owned company uses its funds in a way which is imputable to the state, then these funds should be regarded as state resources within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty.
Če družba v javni lasti uporabi svoja sredstva tako, da se to lahko pripiše državi, je treba ta sredstva skladno s sodbo Sodišča Stardust obravnavati kot državna sredstva v smislu člena 87(1) Pogodbe ES.
It clearly appears from the comments submitted by Poland and interested parties that the decision to launch a programme to attract investors to the power generation sector was designed to promote the sector's modernisation, update power plants so as to bring them into line with EU standards and ensure that energy supplies fully covered demand.
Iz pripomb, ki so jih predložile Poljska in zainteresirane stranke, je jasno, da je bila odločitev o uvedbi programa za privabljanje vlagateljev v sektor proizvodnje električne energije namenjena spodbujanju posodobitve tega sektorja, posodobitvi elektrarn, da bi se uskladile s standardi EU, in zagotavljanju, da oskrba z energijo popolnoma zadovolji povpraševanje.