natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Furthermore, the Commission reached the preliminary conclusion that the preferential electricity tariffs could involve a transfer of State resources which would be imputable to the State since Hidroelectrica was controlled by the Romanian State (in 80,06 % of its share capital was owned by Romania).
Za namene člena 107(1) Pogodbe je treba, da bi ugotovili, ali je bila podjetjema Termoelectrica in Electrocentrale Deva dodeljena gospodarska ugodnost, ki pod običajnimi tržnimi pogoji ni na voljo, zaradi sklenitve in izvajanja pogodb, ugotoviti, kakšne so bile v Romuniji cene pod tržnimi pogoji za podobne transakcije v obdobju med letoma 2009 in 2011.
In addition, the Commission referred to the Ministerial Order No 445/2009, through which the representatives of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Business Environment, members of the Administration Boards of the state-owned electricity companies, were obliged to ensure that as of 31 March 2010 electricity destined for the wholesale market should be traded exclusively on OPCOM.
V zvezi s tem se je v nasprotju s predhodnim stališčem, zavzetim v sklepu o začetku postopka, v pregledu izkazalo, da pogoji in obdobja pogodb za dobavo električne energije, sklenjenih na trgu OPCOM-PCCB, niso bili dovolj podobni tistim v obeh pogodbah, zlasti glede obdobja trajanja in posebnih dvostransko dogovorjenih pogojev (uvodne izjave 18, 23 do 25, 39 in 40).
Consequently, the representatives of the Ministry of Economy and Trade had control, or at least influence, over state-owned companies' contracting practice, including Hidroelectrica's contracting practice.
Na dobro delujočih trgih z električno energijo z ustrezno likvidnostjo in terminskimi instrumenti, ki omogočajo predvidljivost cen za prihodnje dobave, so promptne cene dober pokazatelj ali približek tržnih cen in jih je mogoče uporabiti kot merila za oceno ravni cen v posameznih pogodbah.
This could have an effect on intra-Union trade, within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty.
Toda v tem primeru se je treba glede na to, da je bil v Romuniji v letu 2009 še vedno razmeroma visok delež povpraševanja preskrbljen po reguliranih cenah, omejeno likvidnost trgovalnih platform OPCOM v obdobju 2009–2011 in dejstvo, da so bile energetske borze, ki jih je upravljal OPCOM, označene kot ustrezni protimonopolni trg, kjer se zlorablja prevladujoč položaj (uvodne izjave 34 do 40), pri ocenjevanju morebitne prisotnosti gospodarske ugodnosti nad tržnimi cenami zanesti na ustrezna referenčna merila, ki niso cene na trgu OPCOM PCCB.
The Commission preliminary conclusion was that if the Contracts entailed State aid then they would have been considered as aid granted in breach of the notification and stand-still obligations established in Article 108(3) of the Treaty.
Vendar je v tem smislu podobnost cen s tistimi, ki so jih plačali drugi kupci razen podjetja Hidroelectrica, ali utemeljitev na podlagi stroškov, ki so jo predložili Romunija in upravičenci (uvodne izjave 66 do 68), ni veljaven pokazatelj, da so bili zadevni pogodbeni pogoji in cene v skladu s tržnimi pogoji.
In light of the above, the Commission reached the preliminary conclusion that the preferential electricity tariffs could potentially involve State aid and invited Romania to provide sufficient information to alleviate its doubts.
Dejansko so bile cene, ki jih je podjetje Hidroelectrica plačalo podjetju Electrocentrale Deva med letoma 2009 in 2011, podobne cenam, ki so jih plačala druga podjetja za distribucijo električne energije v državni ali zasebni lasti za nakup električne energije od podjetja Electrocentrale Deva.
COMMENTS FROM ROMANIA
Vendar so bili ti nakupi izvedeni med podjetjem Electrocentrale Deva in podjetji za distribucijo električne energije, ki so gospodinjstvom in malim podjetjem prodajala električno energijo na maloprodajnem trgu po reguliranih cenah in pogojih (uvodna izjava 34).
The Romanian Authorities abstained from providing any observations on whether or not the Contracts entailed State aid.
Podjetje Hidroelectrica je kupovalo električno energijo na veleprodajnem trgu za maloprodajo industrijskim odjemalcem in/ali trgovcem na konkurenčnem trgu, kjer cene in količine niso bile regulirane in so se kupci lahko vzdržali nakupa od dragih trgovcev, kot sta podjetji Termoelectrica in Electrocentrale Deva, ter izbrali cenejšega dobavitelja ne glede na njegove stroške proizvodnje.
On 24 March 2013, Romania provided observations on third parties' comments regarding other cases involving Hidroelectrica, which were also covered by the Commission's investigation [31].
Tako tudi če bi bile cene podobne in ob predpostavki, da je prodaja podjetij Termoelectrica in Electrocentrale Deva na organiziranem trgu omogočala povračilo stroškov, cene, ki so jih podjetja za distribucijo električne energije plačala podjetjema Termoelectrica in Electrocentrale Deva, niso primerljive in ne morejo biti veljavno referenčno merilo za cene, ki jih je podjetje Hidroelectrica plačalo na konkurenčnem prostem trgu.
The Romanian Authorities again abstained from providing any views.
Podobno utemeljitev stroškov, ki so jo ponudili romunski organi ter podjetji Termoelectrica in Electrocentrale Deva, pojasnjuje le, zakaj so bile cene, po katerih sta lahko Termoelectrica in Electrocentrale Deva prodajala brez izgube, visoke.
Within the formal investigation procedure, the Romanian Authorities were requested to explain the economic rationale of concluding the Contracts.
Ta utemeljitev ne dokazuje, da so bile te cene v skladu s tržnimi cenami, določenimi pod konkurenčnimi pogoji, kot so tisti, pod katerimi bi moralo podjetje Hidroelectrica skleniti in izvajati pogodbi, če ti pogodbi naj ne bi pomenili državno pomoč.
Romania did not provide any justification in this respect.
Da bi ugotovili, ali so bile pogodbene cene v skladu s tržnimi pogoji v Romuniji, jih je treba primerjati s cenovnimi pogoji, ki prevladujejo za druge dvostransko dogovorjene pogodbe, sklenjene na prostem trgu istočasno kot pogodbi.
Romania only argued that the Contracts allowed Hidroelectrica to better quantify a maximum value of the costs incurred when purchasing electricity, providing it protection against the volatility of the prices on the spot market.
Komisija je uporabila zbirko podatkov, ki so jo zagotovili romunski organi, saj meni, da je to najboljši dokazni vir, ki odraža tržne razmere v Romuniji (uvodne izjave 42 do 45).
Moreover, the Romanian Authorities also clarified that the Contracts were not agreements of assistance as defined in Hidroelectrica's Judicial Administrator Report regarding the causes of Hidroelectrica's insolvency [32].
Kakor je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 45, nobena dolgoročna pogodba, sklenjena ali veljavna v letu 2009, nima enakih značilnosti kot pogodbi.
According to that report, agreements of assistance are those contracts concluded by Hidroelectrica in order to cover discontinuities in its production.
Zato je Komisija izvedla ekonometrično analizo, da bi določila cenovno referenčno merilo na podlagi pogodb za električno energijo, sočasnih s pogodbama, v celotnem zadevnem obdobju.
The purpose of that type of contract is to prevent the payment of any damages triggered by non-respect of a contractual commitment to supply.
Podroben tehnični opis ekonometrične analize in njenih rezultatov je naveden v Prilogi.
The Romanian Authorities clarified [33] why in practice, with the exception of the three instances mentioned in recital 28, ANRE did not establish the contractual prices as provided under the Contracts.
Zaradi pomanjkanja jasnih referenčnih meril za ugotavljanje „tržnih pogojev“ je bilo pri pregledovanju, ali sta pogodbi vsebovali cene nad tržno ravnijo, referenčno merilo tržnih cen ocenjeno kot približek v okviru konzervativnih domnev, in sicer z obračunom bistvenih odstopanj navzgor od ocenjene tržne cene.
It was explained that the Contracts were not concluded on the regulated market and therefore the price was not adjusted by ANRE.
Analiza je pokazala, da so glede na referenčne cene in ob konzervativnih domnevah cene, ki jih je podjetje Termoelectrica zaračunalo podjetju Hydroelectric, presegale tržne cene.
The Romanian Authorities also explained that: (i) initially ANRE provided the Ministry of Economy and Trade with a minimum and maximum threshold based on which the prices were established; (ii) such thresholds were established on the basis of clear technical parameters specific to thermo-electricity producers; (iii) ANRE subsequently stopped this practice and the Ministry of Economy and Trade took it over, on the basis of similar principles to those used by ANRE.
Če se ustrezno upošteva dejstvo, da je bila primerjava transakcij na veleprodajni ravni za pogodbi izvedena s pogodbami na maloprodajni ravni, s prištevanjem 5-odstotne maloprodajne marže, ki jo v povprečju zaračunajo trgovci na romunskem trgu, znaša razlika glede na tržne cene: 18,8 RON/MWh v letu 2010 in 19,8 RON/MWh v letu 2011 za podjetje Termoelectrica ter 17,5 RON/MWh v letu 2010 in 13,9 RON/MWh v letu 2011.
As regards the Contract with Termoelectrica, the Romanian Authorities confirmed that Hidreoelectrica was the sole electricity consumer for Termoelectrica's Paroseni Plant.
Ekonometrična analiza je tako bila prvi znak, da sta pogodbi podjetjema Termoelectrica in Electrocentrale Deva zagotovili gospodarsko ugodnost nad tržnimi pogoji.
In addition, it was clarified that Hidroelectrica did not purchase the entire electricity quantity as initially estimated under the Contract, but instead it only purchased the quantity needed in order to cover any fluctuations in production, due to the unpredictable evolution of hydro conditions.
Vendar samo dejstvo, da so bile cene po obeh pogodbah ocenjene nad referenčnimi cenami iz podobnih pogodb, ne zadostuje za ugotovitev, da teh pogodb ne bi sklenil in ohranil veljavnih upravljavec trga, ki bi deloval namesto podjetja Hidroelectrica.
As regards the Contract with Electrocentrale Deva, the Romanian Authorities clarified that during the relevant period 2009-2011, Electrocentrale Deva also sold electricity to clients other than Hidroelectrica.
Objektivni razlogi sicer še vedno lahko pomenijo, da visokih ravni cen samih ni mogoče šteti kot pridobitev gospodarske ugodnosti nad tržnimi pogoji prodajalcem električne energije.
It was thus shown that in the years 2010 and 2011, Electrocentrale Deva sold large quantities of electricity (comparable or even higher quantities) to customers other than Hidroelectrica for comparable prices [34].
Zato je treba z dodatnimi dokazi o cenah nad tržnimi razmerami podpreti trdnost rezultatov ekonometrične analize.
COMMENTS FROM THIRD PARTIES
V tem smislu je treba ugotoviti, ali je podjetje Hidroelectrica ravnalo na način, primerljiv zasebnemu gospodarskemu subjektu v podobni situaciji („preskus nosilcev dejavnosti v tržnem gospodarstvu“) [37].
In their preliminary observations on the Opening Decision, both Termoelectrica and Electrocentrale Deva claimed that neither the initial contractual prices nor their subsequent changes conferred any advantage on them, arguing that such prices were established by ANRE and calculated on the basis of their production costs.
Komisija je torej ocenila, ali bi zasebni subjekt, postavljen v podobno situacijo, ravnal na enak način kot podjetje Hidroelectrica pri sklepanju in vzdrževanju obeh pogodb.
In addition, Romania argued that the subsequent changes in the contractual prices were determined by the increase in the price of oil [35] or coal [36].
V okviru tega so pomembne okoliščine, opisane v uvodnih izjavah 82 do 85 v nadaljevanju v zvezi s sklenitvijo in izvajanjem obeh pogodb.
Electrocentrale Deva also claimed that the price of electricity was approximately 70 % influenced by the price of coal.
Prvič, podjetju Hidroelectrica so bili na datum sklenitve obeh pogodb na trgu na voljo cenejši viri električne energije, na primer: v letih 2008–2009 je podjetje Nuclearelectrica ponujalo električno energijo za 153 RON/MWh v primerjavi z 227 RON/MWh za podjetje Termoelectrica in 230 RON/MWh za podjetje Electrocentrale Deva [38].
ASSESSMENT
Drugič, podjetje Hidroelectrica bi lahko električno energijo, kupljeno od podjetij Termoelectrica in Electrocentrale Deva, prodalo tretjim osebam le z izgubo.
In this decision, the Commission assesses whether Termoelectrica and Electrocentrale Deva received State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty, see recital 101, and if so, whether such aid might be compatible with the internal market, see recitals 102 to 105.
Kakor je prikazano v uvodnih izjavah 46 in 47, so bile maloprodajne cene podjetja Hidroelectrica na prostem trgu precej nižje od teh veleprodajnih nakupnih cen, pri čemer je najvišja cena, po kateri je podjetje Hidroelectrica naprej prodalo električno energijo na trgu z neposredno dogovorjenimi pogodbami, leta 2010 znašala 190 RON/MWh v primerjavi z nakupno ceno 230 RON/MWh podjetja Termoelectrica in 234 RON/MWh podjetja Electrocentrale Deva.
Existence of State aid
Iz tega sledi, da je podjetje Hidroelectrica vsako MWh, kupljeno od podjetij Termoelectrica in Electrocentrale Deva, prodalo naprej z izgubo.
Article 107(1) of the Treaty provides that any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever, which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods and affects trade among Member States, is incompatible with the internal market.
V tem smislu pregled ni zagotovil nobenega pojasnila, zakaj je podjetje Hidroelectrica pristalo na nakup celotne proizvodnje elektrarne Paroseni podjetja Termoelectrica (uvodna izjava 24).
The conditions laid down in Article 107(1) of the Treaty are cumulative and thus for a measure to be qualified as State aid all the conditions must be fulfilled simultaneously.
Zaveza za nakup kakršne koli proizvodne količine elektrarne na desetletni dolgoročni osnovi je pomemben znak, da Hidroelectrica ni potrebovala pogodb, da bi spoštovala svoje pogodbene obveznosti v zvezi z dobavo.
Assessment of the economic advantage
To je poleg tega potrdila tudi Romunija (uvodna izjava 63).
For the purpose of Article 107(1) of the Treaty, in order to determine whether an economic advantage not otherwise available at market conditions was granted to Termoelectrica and Electrocentrale Deva as a result of the conclusion and implementation of the Contracts, it is necessary to determine what prices at market conditions were in Romania in the period between 2009 and 2011, for similar transactions.
Nasprotno, potrebo po podpori dragega in nekonkurenčnega delovanja obeh podjetij in premogovnikov, ki so ju oskrbovali, so direktorji podjetij Termoelectrica (uvodna izjava 20) in Electrocentrale Deva (uvodna izjava 21) predložili pristojnemu ministru kot razlog, zakaj bi moralo podjetje Hidroelectrica skleniti pogodbi.
In that respect, contrary to the preliminary view held in the Opening Decision, the investigation has shown that the terms and durations of electricity supply contracts concluded in OPCOM-PCCB are not sufficiently similar to those of the Contracts, notably as to duration and bespoke, bi-laterally negotiated conditions (recitals 18, 23-25, 39 and 40).
Vendar lahko pri sklepanju gospodarskih poslov, če javna podjetja upoštevajo protivrednosti pomoči šibkim podjetjem ali sektorjem iz razlogov socialne ali gospodarske politike, ki sta tuji njunim poslovnim interesom, in sklenejo takšne transakcije pod pogoji, ki jih običajni upravljavec trga ne bi sprejel, sprejeti pogoji, kakor v zvezi z nakupnimi cenami podjetja Hidroelectrica v tem primeru, prinesejo neupravičeno gospodarsko korist drugi stranki ali strankam, s tem pa je izpolnjen eden od pogojev uporabe člena 107(1) Pogodbe.
However, in this case, given the still relatively high proportion of demand being served at regulated tariffs in Romania in 2009, the limited liquidity of OPCOM trading platforms in the period 2009-2011, and the fact that the power exchanges managed by OPCOM were designated as a relevant antitrust market subject to abuse of dominant position (recitals 34-40), it is appropriate to rely on suitable benchmarks other than prices in OPCOM PCCB for assessing the possible presence of an economic advantage over market prices.
V skladu s tem ta preskus tudi kvalitativno potrjuje rezultate ekonometrične analize, ki kaže, da sta pogodbi podjetjema Termoelectrica in Electrocentrale Deva prinesli gospodarsko ugodnost, ki pod tržnimi pogoji ni bila na voljo.
However, in that respect, the similarity of prices with those paid by buyers other than Hidroelectrica or the cost-based justification put forward by Romania and the beneficiaries (recitals 66-68), are not valid indication that the contract conditions and prices at issue were in line with market conditions.
Podatki, ki so jih zagotovili romunski organi, niso zajeli dolgoročnih pogodb s točno takimi pogoji glede količine in obdobja kot so bili v obeh pogodbah.
As a matter of fact, the prices paid by Hidroelectrica to Electrocentrale Deva between 2009 and 2011 were similar to prices paid by other electricity distribution companies, State and privately owned, which were purchasing electricity from Electrocentrale Deva.
Ker Komisija ni imela jasnih referenčnih meril za ugotavljanje „tržnih pogojev“, je na letni osnovi primerjala pogodbene cene, ki jih je plačalo podjetje Hidroelectrica, z najvišjimi cenami v Romuniji med letoma 2009 in 2011 v dolgoročnih maloprodajnih pogodbah, ki jih je zagotovila Romunija (glej uvodne izjave 42 do 45).
However, those purchases were taking place between Electrocentrale Deva and electricity distribution companies, which were selling electricity to households and small businesses on the retail market at regulated prices and conditions (recital 34).
Ta primerjava sloni na konzervativni predpostavki, da bi lahko podjetji Termoelectrica in Electrocentrale Deva zamenjali svoji pogodbi s podjetjem Hidroelectrica z več pogodbami z drugimi kupci na trgu, ki so ponujali najvišje cen, in je zelo konzervativna: namesto da bi za tržno ceno vzela povprečje, mediano ali modus v primerljivih transakcijah, je za tržno ceno vzeta najvišja cena iz več transakcij, ki jih ni mogoče v celoti primerjati.
Hidroelectrica was buying electricity on the wholesale market for retail resale on the competitive market to industrial consumers and/or traders, on which prices and quantities were not regulated and buyers could refrain from buying from expensive sellers, like Termoelectrica and Electrocentrale Deva and chose the cheapest supplier, independent of its production costs.
Glede na pomanjkanje homogenosti transakcij in obstoj morebitnih dejavnikov ali nepravilnosti, ki bi lahko pomagali pojasniti dogovorjeno raven cen v poslih z najvišjimi cenami, ki so bili vzeti za primerjavo, je ta pristop ugodnejši za upravičenca, saj lahko podceni prejeto korist.
Therefore, even if prices were similar and assuming that sales of Termoelectrica and Electrocentrale Deva on the regulated market allowed for cost-recovery, the prices paid by the electricity distribution companies to Termoelectrica and Electrocentrale Deva are not comparable with and cannot constitute a valid benchmark for the prices paid by Hidroelectrica on the competitive free market.
Tehtane povprečne cene za količine električne energije, ki sta jih podjetji Electrocentrale Deva in Termoelectrica dobavili podjetju Hidroelectrica med letoma 2009 in 2011 (uvodna izjava 32), so bile:
Likewise, the cost justification adduced by Termoelectrica and Electrocentrale Deva and the Romanian authorities only explains why the prices at which Termoelectrica and Electrocentrale Deva were capable of selling without loss were high.
(v RON/MWh)
This justification does not establish that these prices were in line with market prices determined under competitive conditions such as those under which Hidroelectrica should have concluded and implemented the Contracts, if these Contracts were to be deemed to entail no State aid.
Cena podjetja Electrocentrale Deva
For the purposes of establishing whether the contractual prices were in line with market conditions in Romania, it is appropriate to compare them with the price conditions prevailing for other bi-laterally negotiated contracts contemporaneous with the Contracts on the free market.
Razlika A – B
The Commission used the Dataset provided by the Romanian authorities, considering it the best available source of evidence to reflect the market conditions in Romania (recitals 42-45).
Cena podjetja Termoelectrica
As indicated in recital 45, no long-term contract concluded or in force in 2009 replicates the characteristics of the Contracts.
Po primerjavi v okviru teh konzervativnih predpostavk kaže, da so bile povprečne cene, ki jih je Hidroelectrica plačala podjetjema Termoelectrica in Electrocentrale Deva, še vedno nad najvišjimi cenami leta 2010 in 2011, kar potrjuje ugotovitve ekonometrične analize.
Therefore, the Commission carried out an econometric analysis in order to estimate a price benchmark based on electricity contracts contemporaneous with the Contracts throughout the relevant period.
Cene, ki jih je podjetje Termoelectrica zaračunalo podjetju Hidroelectrica, so bile 16,6 RON/MWh nad najvišjimi cenami v letu 2010 in 14,3 RON/MWh v letu 2011, medtem ko so bile cene, ki jih je podjetje Electrocentrale Deva zaračunalo podjetju Hidroelectrica 9,8 RON/MWh nad najvišjimi cenami v letu 2010 in 4,4 RON/MWh v letu 2011.
A detailed technical description of the econometric analysis and its results is provided in the Annex.
Glede na navedeno je mogoče sklepati, da sta pogodbi postavili podjetji Termoelectrica in Electrocentrale Deva v ugodnejši položaj, saj sta jima prinesli gospodarsko ugodnost, ki ni bila na voljo pod tržnimi pogoji.
In the absence of a definite reference to establish the ‘market conditions’, in order to check whether the Contracts had prices above market level, a benchmark of market prices was estimated as a proxy, under conservative assumptions, namely, by accounting for important deviations upwards from the estimated market price.
Zato Komisija ugotavlja, da podjetje Hidroelectrica v danih okoliščinah ni delovalo kot udeleženec v tržnem gospodarstvu in je podjetjema Termoelectrica in Electrocentrale Deva dodelila neupravičeno gospodarsko ugodnost.
Based on this conservative approach, the Commission performed a comparison of the prices of the Contracts against the benchmark market price, yearly, between 2009 and 2011.
Državna sredstva in pripisljivost
The comparison was made yearly because the selling prices under the Contracts were increased every year.
Da bi se ukrep štel za pomoč v smislu člena 107(1) Pogodbe, mora biti dodeljen neposredno ali posredno iz državnih sredstev in ga je mogoče pripisati državi.
The analysis shows that, based on the benchmark prices and under conservative assumptions, the prices charged by Termoelectrica to Hydroelectric were above market prices.
Kakor je prikazano v uvodni izjavi 11 je podjetje Hidroelectrica pod neposrednim nadzorom romunske države.
If due account is taken of the fact that the comparison of transactions at wholesale level for the Contracts is carried out with contracts at the retail level, by adding a 5 % retail margin charged on average by traders on the Romanian market, the difference with market prices is: 18,8 RON/MWh in 2010 and 19,8 RON/MWh in 2011 for Termoelectrica and 17,5 RON/MWh in 2010 and 13,9 RON/MWh in 2011.
Iz tega sledi, da sredstva, ki jih je izgubilo podjetje Hidroelectrica, znašajo toliko kot državna sredstva, ki jih je izgubila Romunija.
The econometric analysis therefore provides a first indication that the Contracts provided Termoelectrica and Electrocentrale Deva with an economic advantage over market conditions.
Romunska država imenuje tudi direktorje v odbor podjetja.
However, the mere fact that prices under the Contracts were assessed to be above benchmark prices of similar contracts is not sufficient to establish that these contracts would not have been entered into and maintained in force by a market operator acting in lieu of Hidroelectrica.
Poleg tega so ti direktorji istočasno izvrševali politične dolžnosti na ministrstvu, ki nadzoruje udeleženost države v podjetju Hidroelectrica.