natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Pursuant to the third sentence of Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV 2011, the exemption provided for in the second sentence of the same paragraph was to be granted only once the competent regulatory authority (either the BNetzA or one of the regional regulators, ‘Landesregulierungsbehörde’) had verified that the legal conditions were fulfilled.
UPRAVIČENCI IN ZNESEK POMOČI
Once that verification was completed, the BNetzA or the Landesregulierungsbehörde delivered an authorisation that entitled the baseload consumer to the full exemption as of 1 January 2011 (provided all conditions were met at that date) and for an indefinite period (provided that the requirements continued to be met).
Velika večina teh podjetij pripada različnim panogam proizvodnega sektorja, zlasti kemični industriji (vključno z industrijskimi plini), papirni, tekstilni in jeklarski industriji, industriji neželeznih kovin, rafinerijam nafte ter steklarstvu.
The full exemption resulted in a reduction of revenues for network operators.
Podjetja, ki se ukvarjajo s storitvami (npr. spletnim gostovanjem), so samo občasno prejela popolno oprostitev.
This financial loss has been compensated through a special surcharge as of 2012 (see section 2.4 below).
Ta podjetja so bila podjetja z velikimi podatkovnimi centri.
The full exemption was abolished by an amendment to the StromNEV as of 1 January 2014.
MEHANIZEM FINANCIRANJA
BENEFICIARIES AND AID AMOUNT
MEHANIZEM FINANCIRANJA, KOT JE OPISAN V ČLENU 19 STROMNEV 2011
Germany has provided a provisional list of undertakings entitled to an exemption under the second sentence of Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV 2011.
Ker so bili oproščeni pasovni odjemalci priključeni na različne ravni omrežja, je popolna oprostitev pomenila izgube prihodka za operaterje prenosnega sistema in operaterje distribucijskega sistema.
Based on this information, more than 200 undertakings were exempted from network charges under the second sentence of Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV 2011 in the period 2011 to 2013.
V skladu s šestim stavkom člena 19(2) StromNEV 2011 so morali operaterji prenosnega sistema plačati nadomestilo operaterjem distribucijskega sistema za njihove izgube prihodka zaradi popolne oprostitve.
Only occasionally have undertakings involved in the service sector (for instance web hosting) obtained a full exemption.
Za podrobna pravila o tem, kako izvesti ta pobot, je člen 19(2) StromNEV 2011 napotoval na člen 9 zakona o soproizvodnji toplote in električne energije (Kraft-Wärme-Kopplungsgesetz, v nadaljnjem besedilu: KWKG), ki se je takrat uporabljal in naj bi se uporabljal po analogiji.
Those undertakings were undertakings with large data centres.
Namen pobota je bil razporediti finančno breme med operaterje prenosnega sistema, tako da je vsak operater nosil enako breme sorazmerno z električno energijo, dobavljeno končnim odjemalcem, (neposredno ali posredno) priključenim na njihovo omrežno območje.
The estimates provided by Germany indicate that the losses incurred by the network operators due to the full exemption over the period 2011 to 2013 amount to approximately EUR 900 million compared to a situation in which baseload consumers would have paid the normal charge.
S členom 9 KWKG, na katerega je napotoval sedmi stavek člena 19(2) StromNEV 2011, je bil vzpostavljen sistem, v katerem so operaterji prenosnega sistema prejemali nadomestilo prek tako imenovane dodatne dajatve za soproizvodnjo toplote in električne energije za dodatne stroške zaradi svoje obveznosti plačevanja podpore proizvajalcem električne energije iz soproizvodnje, priključenim na njihovo omrežje, na podlagi KWKG in obveznosti, da plačajo nadomestilo operaterjem distribucijskega sistema za podporo, ki so jo tudi ti plačevali proizvajalcem električne energije iz soproizvodnje, priključenim na njihovo omrežje, na podlagi KWKG.
The loss is, however, probably lower as in the calculation of the 2011 network charges network operators normally took into account the fact that the baseload consumers would have been eligible for individual network charges under Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV 2010.
Analogna uporaba člena 9 KWKG je pomenila, da so lahko operaterji omrežja uvedli dodatno dajatev, da so pridobili nadomestilo za finančne izgube zaradi popolne oprostitve, in da je bilo treba prihodke, zbrane s to dodatno dajatvijo, prenesti z operaterjev prenosnega sistema na operaterje distribucijskega sistema.
FINANCING MECHANISM
V členu 20 StromNEV 2011 je bilo navedeno, da morajo operaterji elektroenergetskega omrežja pred objavo svojih omrežnin za električno energijo poskrbeti, da so prihodki od plačil zadostni za kritje njihovih pričakovanih stroškov.
THE FINANCING MECHANISM AS DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPH 19 OF THE STROMNEV 2011
Od začetka veljave ARegV, ki vzpostavlja regulativni sistem, namenjen spodbujanju operaterjev omrežja k učinkovitejšemu upravljanju omrežja, se ne zahteva več, da omrežnine odobri BNetzA (zaradi člena 23a EnWG).
Given that the exempted baseload consumers were connected to different network levels, the full exemption led to losses in revenue both for the transmission system operators (‘TSO’) and the distribution system operators (‘DSO’).
Namesto tega točka 1 člena 32(1) ARegV 2011 določa, da BNetzA odobri najvišjo raven prihodka, ki ga operaterji omrežja lahko prejmejo od uporabnikov omrežja.
The sixth sentence of Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV 2011 obliged the TSO to compensate the DSO for their losses in revenue resulting from the full exemption.
V skladu s členom 17 ARegV 2011 morajo operaterji omrežja to najvišjo dovoljeno raven prihodka upoštevati pri določitvi omrežnin.
However, for the reasons set out in detail under section 2.4.3, such compensation de facto only took place as of 2012.
Operaterji omrežja pa morajo pred objavo svojih omrežnin za električno energijo še vedno poskrbeti, da so prihodki od omrežnin zadostni za kritje njihovih pričakovanih stroškov (vendar v okviru najvišje dovoljene ravni prihodka).
In 2011, the losses were born by the TSO and DSO to whose network the exempted baseload consumers were connected.
Kot je pojasnjeno spodaj, je agencija BNetzA sprejela regulativno odločbo, da bi podrobneje uredila sistem dodatne dajatve, ki je bila nazadnje uvedena leta 2012 (glej oddelek 2.4.2).
Furthermore, pursuant to the seventh sentence of Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV 2011, the TSO had to set off the sum of their payments to the DSO and their own losses amongst themselves.
Nasprotno pa leta 2011 šesti in sedmi stavek člena 19(2) StromNEV 2011 nista bila uveljavljena in vsak operater omrežja je moral nositi svoje stroške (glej oddelek 2.4.3).
For the detailed rules on how to carry out that set-off, Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV 2011 referred to Paragraph 9 of the Combined Heat and Power Generation Act (Kraft-Wärme-Kopplungsgesetz, ‘KWKG’) applicable at the time, which was to be applied by analogy.
FINANCIRANJE PREK „DODATNE DAJATVE IZ ČLENA 19“ OD LETA 2012
The set-off served to spread the financial burden between the TSO in such a way that each TSO bore the same burden in proportion to the electricity supplied to final consumers (directly or indirectly) connected to their respective network area.
Agencija BNetzA je poleg tega operaterjem distribucijskega sistema naložila obveznost, da prilive od te dodatne dajatve mesečno nakažejo operaterjem prenosnega sistema (kot je določeno tudi v členu 9(5) KWKG, na katerega se nanaša sedmi stavek člena 19(2) StromNEV 2011).
Paragraph 9 of the KWKG, to which the seventh sentence of Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV 2011 referred, established the system by which TSOs were compensated through the so-called CHP-surcharge for the extra costs resulting from their obligation to pay support to producers of cogenerated electricity connected to their network under the KWKG and their obligation to compensate DSOs for the support that they also paid to producers of cogenerated electricity connected to their network under the KWKG.
Namen dodatne dajatve iz člena 19 je bil vzpostaviti mehanizem financiranja, s katerim se finančno breme zaradi uporabe člena 19(2) StromNEV 2011 pregledno in homogeno porazdeli, ter s tem ustvariti enake pogoje za vse odjemalce električne energije v Nemčiji.
The analogous application of Paragraph 9 of the KWKG implied that network operators could introduce a surcharge to obtain compensation for the financial losses resulting from the full exemption and that the revenues collected from this surcharge had to be transferred from DSOs to the TSOs.
Agencija BNetzA ni vsako leto izračunala zneska dodatne dajatve iz člena 19, temveč ga je moral vsako leto izračunati operater prenosnega sistema na podlagi metodologije, ki jo je določila agencija BNetzA.
In addition, Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV 2011 stipulated that Paragraph 20 of the StromNEV 2011 was applicable by analogy.
To je pomenilo, da je moral operater prenosnega sistema na eni stani določiti napovedane finančne izgube, ki izhajajo iz popolne oprostitve, v primerjavi s polno omrežnino, na drugi strani pa napovedano porabo, da je lahko določil dodano dajatev iz člena 19 na kWh.
Paragraph 20 of the StromNEV 2011 stated that electricity grid operators had to make sure, prior to publishing their network charges for electricity, that the revenues of the charges were sufficient to cover their expected costs.
Za prvo leto obratovanja (tj. leto 2012) pa je agencija BNetzA določila znesek, ki ga je bilo treba povrniti prek dodatne dajatve iz člena 19, v višini 440 milijonov EUR.
Since the entry into force of the ARegV, which establishes a regulatory system that is aimed at incentivising network operators to a more efficient network management, network charges do not need to be approved by the BNetzA anymore (as a result of Paragraph 23a of the EnWG).
Ta znesek je bil izhodišče za izračun dodatne dajatve.
According to Paragraph 17 ARegV 2011 this authorized maximum revenue level must be respected when network operators determine network charges.
Preostalih 140 milijonov EUR je bilo namenjenih kritju izgub prihodka zaradi individualnih omrežnin na podlagi prvega stavka člena 19(2) StromNEV 2011.
Network operators continue, however, to be obliged to make sure prior to publishing their network charges for electricity, that the revenues of the charges were sufficient to cover their expected costs (but within the limit of the authorized maximum revenue level).
Pred spremembami, uvedenimi v StromNEV s členom 7 zakona z dne 26. julija 2011, so bile izgube prihodkov zaradi individualnih omrežnin za netipične uporabnike omrežja povrnjene – če je bil operater omrežja učinkovita družba in si je lahko na podlagi uredbe ARegV povrnil celotne stroške, in sicer prek omrežnin: ker so operaterji omrežja vnaprej vedeli, da bodo nekateri uporabniki plačali manj, so lahko to že upoštevali pri izračunu omrežnin na podlagi člena 20 StromNEV.
As explained below, the BNetzA adopted a regulatory decision in order to regulate more in detail the surcharge system, which was eventually put in place as of 2012 (see section 2.4.2).
V skladu s šestim in sedmim stavkom člena 19(2) StromNEV 2011 pa je bilo treba izgubo prihodkov zaradi individualnih omrežnin za nekonične odjemalce in popolne oprostitve za pasovne odjemalce nadomestiti s posebno dodatno dajatvijo.
By contrast, in 2011, the sixth and seventh sentences of Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV 2011 were not implemented and each network operator bore its own costs (see section 2.4.3).
Poleg tega je regulativna odločba z dne 14. decembra 2011 določala, da mora operater prenosnega sistema za vsako leto ugotoviti, kakšna je bila dejanska potreba po finančnih sredstvih v prejšnjem letu.
FINANCING VIA THE ‘PARAGRAPH 19-SURCHARGE’ AS OF 2012
Če bi prilivi od dodatne dajatve iz člena 19 presegli znesek, dejansko potreben za nadomestilo operaterju prenosnega sistema za izgubo prihodka zaradi popolne oprostitve in nadomestilo operaterju distribucijskega sistema, bi bilo treba dodatno dajatev v naslednjem letu znižati za zadevno razliko.
The legal framework for the compensation and the set-off of the losses in revenue resulting from the full exemption was concretized by a regulatory decision of the BNetzA adopted on 14 December 2011 (‘the regulatory decision of 14 December 2011’) on the basis of Paragraph 29(1) of the EnWG and point 6 of Paragraph 30(2) of the StromNEV 2011.
Če so bili prilivi nezadostni, je bila dodatna dajatev ustrezno povišana.
The decision imposed on the DSO the obligation to collect from end users a surcharge called the ‘Paragraph 19-surcharge’.
MEHANIZEM FINANCIRANJA ZA LETO 2011
The BNetzA further imposed on the DSO the obligation to transfer the proceeds from this surcharge to the TSO on a monthly basis (as also provided for under Paragraph 9(5) of the KWKG to which the seventh sentence of Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV 2011 refers).
V regulativni odločbi z dne 14. decembra 2011 je bilo izrecno navedeno, da izgub prihodka v letu 2011 ne krije mehanizem nadomestila in pobota iz uvodne izjave 30.
The purpose of the Paragraph 19-surcharge was to establish a financing mechanism that distributes the financial burden resulting from the application of Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV 2011 in a transparent and homogenous way and thus to create equal conditions for all electricity consumers across Germany.
Kar zadeva izgube v letu 2011, operaterji distribucijskega sistema tako niso bili upravičeni do nadomestila, ki ga plačajo operaterji prenosnega sistema.
The amount of the Paragraph 19-surcharge was not calculated by the BNetzA but needed to be calculated each year by the TSO on the basis of the methodology set out by the BNetzA.
Operaterji distribucijskega sistema in operaterji prenosnega sistema so morali te izgube prihodka kriti iz lastnih sredstev.
This implied that the TSO had to determine on the one hand the forecasted financial losses resulting from the full exemption compared to the full network charge and on the other hand the forecasted consumption in order to determine the Paragraph 19-surcharge per kWh.
Te izgube so lahko vključili v tako imenovane upravne račune (v nadaljnjem besedilu: Regulierungskonto), vzpostavljene na podlagi ARegV.
For the first year of operation (that is to say 2012), however, the BNetzA set the amount that needed to be recovered through the Paragraph 19-surcharge at EUR 440 million.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 32, je uredba ARegV vzpostavila regulativni sistem, ki je namenjen spodbujanju operaterjev omrežja k učinkovitejšemu upravljanju omrežja in v skladu s katerim za operaterje omrežja velja najvišja raven prihodka, ki jo določi BNetzA.
This amount served as a basis for the calculation of the surcharge.
Ta najvišja dovoljena raven prihodka se določi za največ 5-letno regulativno obdobje.
Of this amount, EUR 300 million needed to be recovered in order to compensate for the losses in revenue resulting from the full exemption.
Za določitev te najvišje ravni prihodka morajo operaterji omrežja agenciji BNetzA pred začetkom regulativnega obdobja zagotoviti različne računovodske podatke (vključno s stroški in prihodki).
The remaining EUR 140 million were destined to cover the losses in revenue resulting from individual network charges based on the first sentence of Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV 2011.
Poleg tega se najvišja raven prihodka, ki ga lahko operaterji omrežja pridobijo od uporabnikov omrežja, v 5-letnem regulativnem obdobju spreminja, da se upoštevajo neučinkovitosti operaterjev omrežja, s čimer bi jih spodbudili k večji učinkovitosti.
Before the amendments introduced by Article 7 of the Law of 26 July 2011 in the StromNEV, the loss of revenues resulting from individual network charges for atypical network users were recouped, to the extent that the network operator was an efficient company and hence could under the ARegV recoup its entire costs, through network charges: as network operators knew in advance that some users would pay less, they could already factor that in in the calculation of network charges under Paragraph 20 of the StromNEV.
To pomeni, da se bo najvišja dovoljena raven prihodka v regulativnem obdobju znižala.
Under the sixth and seventh sentence of Paragraph 19(2) of the StromNEV 2011, however, the loss of revenues resulting from individual network charges for non-peak consumers and the full exemption for baseload consumers had to be compensated through a dedicated surcharge.
BNetzA izmeri učinkovitost operaterja omrežja pred regulativnim obdobjem na podlagi primerjave operaterjev omrežja.
In addition, the regulatory decision of 14 December 2011 provided that the TSO had to establish for each year what the real need in terms of financial resources was for the previous year.
Pozitivne ali negativne razlike med najvišjo dovoljeno ravnijo in dejansko ustvarjenimi prihodki se knjižijo na posebnem upravnem računu, ki je računovodsko orodje, ki ga upravlja BNetzA (člen 5 ARegV) za spodbujanje operaterjev omrežja k večji učinkovitosti.
Where the proceeds from the Paragraph 19-surcharge exceeded the amount actually needed to compensate the TSO for the losses in revenue resulting from the full exemption and the compensation of DSO, the surcharge in the subsequent year would have to be reduced by the difference.
Ob koncu 5-letnega obdobja 2009–2013 so bili presežni prihodki pobotani s presežnimi zmanjšanji prihodkov.
Where the proceeds were insufficient, the surcharge was increased accordingly.
Posledično pozitivno ali negativno stanje je bilo preneseno na naslednje regulativno obdobje (člen 5(4) ARegV 2011) in porazdeljeno na pet let drugega regulativnega obdobja kot znižanje ali povišanje sicer veljavne najvišje ravni prihodka.
FINANCING MECHANISM FOR 2011
Če pa bi prihodki, ustvarjeni v določenem letu regulativnega obdobja, presegli najvišjo dovoljeno raven prihodka za več kot 5 %, bi moral zadevni operater omrežja prilagoditi svoje omrežnine (da se prepreči ponovitev enakega položaja v naslednjem letu in da se prepreči, da bi bilo znižanje omrežnin preloženo na naslednje regulativno obdobje).
The regulatory decision of 14 December 2011 explicitly stated that the losses in revenue incurred in 2011 were not covered by the compensation and set-off mechanism described in recital 30.
Če bi bili prihodki, ustvarjeni v določenem letu regulativnega obdobja, za več kot 5 % nižji od najvišje dovoljene ravni prihodka, bi imel zadevni operater omrežja pravico prilagoditi svoje omrežnine (da se prepreči ponovitev enakega položaja v naslednjem letu in nenadno povišanje omrežnin v naslednjem regulativnem obdobju).
As regards the losses incurred in 2011, the DSO were thus not entitled to be compensated by the TSO.
V zadnjem primeru lahko operater omrežja izbere, ali bo omrežnine prilagodil ali ne.
Both the DSO and the TSO had to cover those losses in revenue from their own resources.
V tem okviru je bilo treba nadomestiti izgube prihodka, ki so jih operaterji omrežja utrpeli zaradi popolne oprostitve leta 2011.
As mentioned in recital 32, the ARegV established a regulatory system that is aimed at incentivising network operators to a more efficient network management and under which network operators are subject to a maximum revenue level established by the BNetzA.
Če so bile ob koncu prvega regulativnega obdobja izgube prihodka za leto 2011 nadomeščene z dodatnimi prihodki v drugih letih tega regulativnega obdobja, ni bilo nadomestitve izgub.
This authorized maximum revenue level is established for a regulatory period of 5 years the maximum.
Samo če izgub ni bilo mogoče nadomestiti z dodatnimi prihodki v regulativnem obdobju, ki se je končalo leta 2013, je lahko izguba prihodkov leta 2011 vodila do posrednega nadomestila v naslednjem regulativnem obdobju z rahlim povišanjem najvišje dovoljene ravni v naslednjem regulativnem obdobju.
In order to establish this maximum revenue level, network operators are obliged to provide the BNetzA with various accounting data (including costs and revenues) prior to the start of a regulatory period.
Ker pa ARegV ne nadomešča celotnih stroškov, temveč samo stroške učinkovitega operaterja, tudi v tem primeru običajno ni bilo polnega nadomestila.
In addition, the maximum revenue level that network operators are allowed to obtain from network users is evolving during the 5 year regulatory period to take into account inefficiencies of network operators in order to induce them to increase efficiency.
CILJ POPOLNE OPROSTITVE
This implies that the approved maximum revenue will decrease during the regulatory period.
Iz obrazložitvenega memoranduma k StromNEV 2011 je razvidno, da je bila popolna oprostitev pasovnih odjemalcev uvedena zaradi domnevnih stabilizacijskih učinkov pasovnih odjemalcev na omrežje.
The efficiency of a network operator is measured prior to the regulatory period based on a comparison of the network operators by the BNetzA.
RAZLOGI ZA ZAČETEK POSTOPKA
The first regulatory period was from 2009 to 2013.
V sklepu o začetku postopka je Komisija ugotovila, da popolna oprostitev daje selektivno prednost pasovnim odjemalcem, katerih letna poraba električne energije presega 7000 ur polne uporabe in 10 GWh porabe.
The positive or negative differences between the approved maximum revenue level and the actually obtained revenues are booked on a special regulatory account, which is an accounting tool administered by the BNetzA (Paragraph 5 of the ARegV) in order to steer network operators towards more efficiency.
Kar zadeva leto 2011, je Komisija izrazila zaskrbljenost, da je lahko bila popolna oprostitev financirana prek državnih sredstev že pred uvedbo dodatne dajatve iz člena 19.
The resulting positive balance or negative balance was transferred to the next regulatory period (Paragraph 5(4) of the ARegV 2011) and spread over the five years of the second regulatory period as a decrease or increase of the otherwise applicable maximum revenue level.
Poleg tega je Komisija menila, da so lahko bile izgube prihodka zaradi popolne oprostitve leta 2011 nadomeščene prek Regulierungskonto, za katerega je Komisija ugotovila, da ga je spremljala agencija BNetzA.
However, if the revenues obtained in a given year of the regulatory period were to exceed by more than 5 % the approved maximum revenue level, the network operator concerned would have to adapt its network charges (to avoid that the same situations occurs again in the following year and to avoid that the reduction of network charges would be postponed until the next regulatory period).
Komisija je opozorila tudi, da Nemčija ni predstavila nobenega razloga za združljivost pomoči in se je samo sklicevala na stabilizacijski učinek na omrežja, ne da bi ta učinek količinsko opredelila.
If the revenues obtained in a given year of the regulatory period were to be below the approved maximum revenue level by more than 5 %, the network operator concerned would have the right to adapt its network charges (to avoid that the same situations occurs again in the following year and avoid a sudden increase of network charges in the next regulatory period).
Komisija je zato začela formalni postopek preiskave.
The network operator has, however, in the latter case the choice to adapt the network charges or not..
DOGODKI PO SKLEPU O ZAČETKU POSTOPKA
It is in this framework that the losses in revenue incurred by the network operators due to the full exemption in 2011 had to be compensated.
Višje deželno sodišče je ugotovilo, da pri popolni oprostitvi, odobreni na podlagi drugega stavka člena 19(2) StromNEV 2011, niso bile upoštevane omejitve iz člena 24 EnWG 2011, ki je zvezni vladi zgolj dajal pravico, da določi načine izračuna individualnih omrežnin, ne pa da uvede popolno oprostitev omrežnin.
At the time of the ‘Verprobung’ for 2011 (and which took place in 2010), the full exemption was not known and could not have been taken into account when network charges were established for 2011.
Višje deželno sodišče je ugotovilo tudi, da so omrežnine cena za zagotovljene storitve (tj. za dostop do omrežja in njegovo uporabo) in da se popolna oprostitev ne more šteti za individualno omrežnino ali ceno za storitev, temveč je ugodnost, izjema glede na načelo, da je treba operaterjem omrežja plačati sorazmerno omrežnino za uporabo omrežja.