natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
As the electricity market is largely liberalised and there is trade flow in energy products and electricity between the EEA States (e.g. Norway imports and exports a certain percentage of its electricity), the described (potential) distortion of competition takes place in relation to other EEA undertakings.
Ker je trg električne energije zelo liberaliziran in med državami EGP potekajo trgovinski tokovi energetskih proizvodov in električne energije (npr. Norveška uvaža in izvaža določen odstotek svoje električne energije), se opisano (potencialno) izkrivljanje konkurence dogaja v povezavi z drugimi podjetji EGP.
This is further demonstrated by the fact that various types of electricity are traded in Nordpool, a common framework between the Nordic countries.
To nadalje dokazuje dejstvo, da se v Nordpoolu, skupnem okviru nordijskih držav, trguje z različnimi vrstami električne energije.
The Energy Fund system is, therefore, distorting or threatening to distort competition and affect trade between the Contracting Parties.
Zato energetski sklad izkrivlja ali bi lahko izkrivljal konkurenco in vplival na trgovino med pogodbenicami.
As shown above in section II.1 of this Decision, the system provided by the Energy Fund entails aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.
Kot je ponazorjeno v oddelku II.1 te odločbe, sistem, ki ga zagotavlja energetski sklad, vključuje pomoč v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
It needs to be determined whether it also constitutes new aid, which should have been notified in sufficient time for the Authority to make an assessment, see Article 2 in Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement.
Treba je ugotoviti, ali pomeni tudi novo pomoč, ki bi jo bilo treba priglasiti dovolj zgodaj, da bi Nadzorni organ lahko izvedel oceno, glej člen 2 dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču.
New aid is defined as all aid (…), ‘which is not existing aid, including alterations to existing aid’, see Article 1(c) in Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement.
Nova pomoč je opredeljena kot vsaka pomoč (…), „ki ni obstoječa pomoč, vključno s spremembami obstoječe pomoči“, glej člen 1(c) dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o Nadzornem organu in sodišču.
The Norwegian Government states that the programmes merged under the Energy Fund mechanism existed before the entry of Norway into the European Economic Area.
Norveška vlada navaja, da so programi, združeni v mehanizmu energetskega sklada, obstajali pred vstopom Norveške v Evropski gospodarski prostor.
Therefore, the schemes originally constituted existing aid within the meaning of Article 1(b)(ii) in Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement.
Zato so sheme prvotno pomenile obstoječo pomoč v smislu člena 1(b)(ii) dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču.
With the notification, the Norwegian authorities notified the Authority of alterations to the existing aid schemes.
S priglasitvijo so norveški organi Nadzorni organ obvestili o spremembah obstoječih shem pomoči.
These consist mainly of:
Te v glavnem obsegajo:
the 2002 merger of the existing schemes under the newly established Energy Fund;
združitev obstoječih shem v okviru novoustanovljenega energetskega sklada v letu 2002,
the new administration of the support with the creation of the new administrative body Enova, thereby replacing the formerly responsible Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate;
novo upravljanje podpore z ustanovitvijo novega upravnega organa Enova, ki je tako nadomestil nekdaj odgovorni Norveški direktorat za vodne vire in energetiko,
the development of new energy objectives by Parliament, which means that the measures under the schemes should now achieve measurable energy efficiency and production goals;
razvoj novih energetskih ciljev s strani Parlamenta, kar pomeni, da morajo ukrepi na podlagi teh shem po novem doseči izmerljivo energetsko učinkovitost in proizvodne cilje,
and finally a new financing mechanism (levy on the distribution tariff).
in nazadnje, nov mehanizem financiranja (dajatev na tarifo za dobavo).
These changes were accompanied by a new set of legal provisions on Enova, which have an impact on the support granted in that the measures should now achieve new policy objectives agreed in 2002 between the Norwegian State and Enova.
Te spremembe je spremljal nov sklop zakonskih določb o organu Enova, ki na dodeljeno podporo vplivajo v tem smislu, da morajo ukrepi sedaj doseči nove politične cilje, o katerih sta se leta 2002 dogovorili država Norveška in Enova.
These alterations were not purely of a technical or administrative nature [see Article 4(1) in the Authority's Decision of 14 July 2004 [54]], but significantly changed the previously existing system and its legal framework.
Te spremembe niso bile strogo tehnične ali upravne narave (glej člen 4(1) Odločbe Nadzornega organa z dne 14. julija 2004 [54]), ampak so bistveno spremenile predhodno obstoječi sistem in njegov pravni okvir.
Firstly, in line with the Court's judgment in Namur Les Assurances [55], the existence of new aid must be determined by reference to the provisions providing for it.
Prvič, v skladu s sodbo Sodišča v zadevi Namur Les Assurances [55] je treba obstoj nove pomoči določiti glede na določbe, ki jo zagotavljajo.
In this regard, it should be noted that with the establishment of the Energy Fund and Enova, a whole new set of rules governing the support under the Energy Fund and its financing was adopted.
V zvezi se tem je treba opozoriti, da je bil z ustanovitvijo energetskega sklada in organa Enova sprejet povsem nov sklop pravil, ki urejajo podporo v okviru energetskega sklada in njeno financiranje.
Firstly, there was a Parliamentary decision of 5 April 2001, by which the Energy Act of 29 June 1990 was amended.
Prvič, Parlamentarna odločba z dne 5. aprila 2001 je spremenila Zakon o energetiki z dne 29. junija 1990.
The decision authorised the Government to oblige the distributor of energy (by a licence, ‘omsetningskonsesjoner’) to add a levy to the electricity distribution tariff paid by the end consumer.
Odločba je vladi dovoljevala, da od distributerjev energije (z dovoljenjem, omsetningskonsesjoner) zahteva, da tarifi za dobavo električne energije, ki jo plača končni odjemalec, dodajo dajatev.
This levy shall then contribute to the financing of the Energy Fund.
Ta dajatev nato prispeva k financiranju energetskega sklada.
A then newly adopted Government regulation of 10 December 2001 lays down the details of how this levy should be collected and transferred to the Energy Fund.
Tedaj novo sprejeta vladna uredba z dne 10. decembra 2001 določa podrobnosti o pobiranju dajatve in njenem prenosu v energetski sklad.
In the propositions leading up to the parliamentary decision, the Government had defined new and concrete energy objectives (see I.4 of this Decision), whose fulfilment should be achieved within a given time frame by the establishment of the Energy Fund and Enova.
V predlogih, ki so vodili do parlamentarne odločbe, je vlada opredelila nove in konkretne energetske cilje (glej I.4 te odločbe), ki jih je bilo treba doseči v danem časovnem okviru do ustanovitve energetskega sklada in organa Enova.
The objectives and their achievements were further specified in the Agreement between the Ministry and Enova.
Ti cilji in njihova izpolnitev so bili podrobneje določeni v Sporazumu med ministrstvom in organom Enova.
A new regulation on the Energy Fund placed the Fund under the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy and stipulated its administration by Enova.
Nova uredba o energetskem skladu je energetski sklad postavila pod okrilje Ministrstva za nafto in energijo ter določila njegovo upravljanje s strani organa Enova.
This demonstrates that in the years 2000/2001 the legal provisions governing the support of energy efficiency measures were significantly altered and supplemented.
To dokazuje, da so bili pravni predpisi, ki urejajo podporo ukrepom za energetsko učinkovitost, v letih 2000/2001 bistveno spremenjeni in dopolnjeni.
These legislative and administrative changes were done with the intention to substantially alter the current support regime and create a completely new way to fund energy saving measures and renewable energy production [56].
Te zakonodajne in upravne spremembe so bile izvedene z namenom, da bi bistveno spremenili trenutno ureditev podpore in oblikovali povsem nov način financiranja ukrepov varčevanja z energijo in proizvodnje obnovljivih virov energije [56].
The merger of the two new schemes was more than a mere technical formality as their combination under one heading was effectuated in order to provide for better targeted State support and achieve more tangible results in terms of sustainable energy policies.
Združitev obeh novih shem je bila več kot samo tehnična formalnost, saj sta se v okviru ene postavke združili z namenom, da bi zagotovili boljšo ciljno usmerjenost državne podpore in dosegli vidnejše rezultate v zvezi s trajnostnimi energetskimi politikami.
Support decisions for projects will now have to take into account whether the projects can contribute to the new objectives defined by Parliament in 2000/2001, which is a substantive alteration to the previous support mechanisms.A completely new administrative structure substitutes the formerly responsible Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate's (NVE) competence with that of the newly founded administrative body Enova.
V odločbah o podpori projektom bo po novem treba upoštevati, ali projekti lahko prispevajo k novim ciljem, ki jih je parlament opredelil v letih 2000/2001, kar je bistvena sprememba v primerjavi s prejšnjimi mehanizmi podpore.Popolnoma nova upravna struktura nadomešča pristojnost nekdaj pristojnega Norveškega direktorata za vodne vire in energetiko (NVE) s pristojnostjo novoustanovljenega upravnega organa Enova.
Enova is bound by an Agreement with the Ministry to administer the Energy Fund to achieve Parliament's newly defined energy objective and to manage the Fund according to the newly adopted legislation.
Na podlagi sporazuma z ministrstvom je Enova zavezana k takšnemu upravljanju energetskega sklada, da se dosežejo novo opredeljeni energetski cilji Parlamenta, in k vodenju sklada v skladu z novo sprejeto zakonodajo.
It further is called upon to promote — through the administration of the funds — competition in the market.
Nadalje je pozvana k spodbujanju – z upravljanjem sredstev – konkurence na trgu.
This shows that Enova does not simply continue the NVE's work, but is entrusted with new tasks and obligations, which is a substantial alteration of the previous schemes.
To dokazuje, da Enova ne samo nadaljuje delo NVE, ampak so mu zaupane nove naloge in obveznosti, kar je bistvena sprememba v primerjavi s prejšnjima shemama.
Finally, it is of importance that a new financing mechanism has been set up.
Nazadnje je pomembno, da je bil vzpostavljen nov mehanizem financiranja.
Instead of budgetary allocations, the support measures are (increasingly) financed via the means of a levy on the distribution tariff, which is used for financing the Energy Fund.
Namesto s proračunsko dodeljenimi sredstvi se podporni ukrepi (vedno pogosteje) financirajo iz dajatve na tarifo za dobavo, ki se uporablja za financiranje energetskega sklada.
While Norway pointed out that the levy as such has been introduced prior to the entry into force of the EEA Agreement, this does not alter the Authority's finding that the introduction of the new financing mechanism resulted in a substantial change.
Čeprav je Norveška poudarila, da je bila dajatev kot takšna uvedena že pred začetkom veljavnosti Sporazuma EGP, to ne spreminja ugotovitve Nadzornega organa, da je uvedba novega mehanizma financiranja povzročila bistveno spremembo.
Before 2002, the levy was managed by the grid companies to mainly finance their own information activities on energy efficiency.
Pred letom 2002 so dajatev upravljala prenosna podjetja, in sicer v glavnem za financiranje lastnih informacijskih dejavnosti na temo energetske učinkovitosti.
Now the levy is set up and controlled by the Norwegian State, which earmarks it for financing the Energy Fund.
Po novem dajatev določa in nadzoruje država Norveška, ki jo namenja za financiranje energetskega sklada.
The Fund can apply the finances to all different kind of support measures, not limited to information activities [57].
Sklad lahko finančna sredstva uporabi za različne vrste podpornih ukrepov, ki niso omejeni na informacijske dejavnosti [57].
In light of the above, the Authority concludes that the alterations to the funding system are of a substantial nature.The described changes alter the aid scheme as such, without being a severable part from the existing schemes [58].
Na podlagi navedenega Nadzorni organ ugotavlja, da gre za bistvene spremembe sistema financiranja.Opisane spremembe vplivajo na shemo pomoči kot takšno, ne da bi jih bilo mogoče ločiti od obstoječih shem [58].
The new financing and administrative mechanism as well as Enova's obligation to achieve newly defined energy objectives concern the very structure of the support programme and apply to all measures supported under the Energy Fund.
Novi finančni in upravni mehanizem ter obveznost organa Enova, da doseže energetske cilje, se nanašata na samo strukturo programa podpore in veljata za vse ukrepe, ki se podprejo v okviru energetskega sklada.
The alterations were undertaken with a view to make better use of public resources and achieve more sustainable energy efficiency results, which made it necessary to introduce new structures and new objectives.
Spremembe so bile izvedene, da bi lahko bolje uporabili javna sredstva in bi pri energetski učinkovitosti dosegli bolj trajnostne rezultate, zaradi česar je bilo treba uvesti nove strukture in nove cilje.
These new structures and objectives determine each support decision and cannot be considered as severable from the formerly existing aid measures.Consequently, the notified alterations are to be classified as new aid within the meaning of Article 1(c) in Part II to Protocol 3 of the Surveillance and Court Agreement.
Te nove strukture in cilji pogojujejo vsako odločbo o podpori in ne morejo veljati za neodvisne od predhodno obstoječih ukrepov pomoči.Na podlagi tega je treba priglašene spremembe obravnavati kot novo pomoč v smislu člena 1(c) dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču.
The Energy Fund became operational on 1 January 2002, i.e. before June 2003, when the scheme was notified to the Authority.
Energetski sklad je začel delovati 1. januarja 2002, tj. pred junijem 2003, ko je bila shema priglašena Nadzornemu organu.
The Energy Fund system was therefore belatedly notified to the Authority and thereby infringed the standstill obligation in Article 1(3) in Part I of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement.
Sistem energetskega sklada je bil Nadzornemu organu torej priglašen prepozno, zato je kršil obveznost mirovanja iz člena 1(3) dela I Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču.
The aid is thus to be classified as ‘unlawful aid’ within the meaning of Article 1 (f) in Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement.
Pomoč je torej treba obravnavati kot nezakonito pomoč v smislu člena 1(f) dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču.
Any unlawful aid which is not declared compatible with Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement is subject to recovery.
Vsako nezakonito pomoč, ki ni razglašena za združljivo s členom 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP, je treba povrniti.
In the Authority's view, the aid measures do not comply with any of the exemptions provided for under Article 61(2) or (3)(a), (b) and (d) of the EEA Agreement.
Po mnenju Nadzornega organa ukrepi pomoči ne ustrezajo nobeni od izjem iz člena 61(2) ali (3)(a), (b) in (d) Sporazuma EGP.
Therefore, one has to assess whether the aid could be justified under Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement.
Zato je treba oceniti, ali se pomoč lahko upraviči na podlagi člena 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP.
Under this provision aid may be declared compatible if ‘it facilitates the development of certain economic activities or of certain economic areas, where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest’.
V skladu s to določbo se pomoč lahko razglasi za združljivo, če „pospešuje razvoj nekaterih gospodarskih dejavnosti ali nekaterih gospodarskih območij, kadar takšna pomoč ne škoduje trgovinskim pogojem v obsegu, ki bi bil v nasprotju s skupnimi interesi“.
The Authority will assess the Energy Fund according to Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement in conjunction with the Authority's Environmental Guidelines.
Nadzorni organ bo energetski sklad ocenil v skladu s členom 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP v povezavi z Okoljskimi smernicami Nadzornega organa.
These Guidelines required the EFTA States to bring their environmental aid schemes into line with these Environmental Guidelines by 1 January 2002.
Na podlagi teh smernic so morale države Efte svoje sheme okoljske pomoči do 1. januarja 2002 uskladiti z navedenimi okoljskimi smernicami.
In the following assessment, the Authority will make a distinction between the Energy Fund system as notified to the Authority and as applied since 1 January 2002 (see section II 3.1 of this Decision) and the future changes envisaged by the Norwegian authorities which intend to make the support compatible with the EEA State aid provisions (see section II 3.2 of this Decision).
V naslednji oceni bo Nadzorni organ razlikoval med sistemom energetskega sklada, ki je bil priglašen Nadzornemu organu in se je uporabljal od 1. januarja 2002 (glej oddelek II 3.1 te odločbe), in prihodnjimi spremembami, ki so jih predvideli norveški organi, da bi bila podpora združljiva z določbami o državni pomoči EGP (glej oddelek II 3.2. te odločbe).
Assessment of the Energy Fund as notified to the Authority
Ocena energetskega sklada, priglašenega Nadzornemu organu
The investment support (renewable energy production, energy saving investment, new energy technology, energy audits)
Podpora za naložbe (proizvodnja obnovljivih virov energije, naložbe v varčevanje z energijo, nova energetska tehnologija, energetski pregledi)
In its decision of 18 May 2005 to open the formal investigation procedure, the Authority expressed doubts as to whether the investment support granted by the Energy Fund could be declared compatible under the Environmental Guidelines.
Nadzorni organ je v svoji odločbi z dne 18. maja 2005 o sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave izrazil dvome, da bi se podpora za naložbe iz energetskega sklada lahko razglasila za združljivo na podlagi Okoljskih smernic.
In their comments of 15 July 2005 to the opening decision, the Norwegian authorities argued that the system should be authorised directly under Article 61(3) (c) of the EEA Agreement.
Norveški organi so v svojih pripombah z dne 15. julija 2005 k odločbi o uvedbi postopka trdili, da se mora sistem odobriti neposredno na podlagi člena 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP.
The Authority does not follow the view, at least as far as the support concerned is covered by the Environmental Guidelines.
Nadzorni organ se s tem ne strinja, vsaj kolikor je zadevna podpora zajeta v Okoljskih smernicah.
In the Authority's opinion, the European Commission's WRAP decision [59] is not relevant in this regard.
Po mnenju Nadzornega organa odločba WRAP [59] Evropske komisije v tej zvezi ni pomembna.
The difference between the two cases is that in the case of recycling, the Guidelines do not provide for any provision on investment aid, whereas renewable energy investment support is covered by the Environmental Guidelines.
Razlika med obema primeroma je v tem, da Smernice v primeru recikliranja ne vsebujejo določb o pomoči za naložbe, medtem ko je podpora za naložbe v obnovljive vire energije zajeta v Okoljskih smernicah.
The Authority is bound by its own guidelines [60].
Nadzorni organ zavezujejo njegove lastne smernice [60].
It therefore, finds that it cannot ignore the investment aid chapter of the Guidelines (section D.1.3, in particular point (27) and section D.1.7 (32) or the operating aid chapter (section D.3.3.1 (54)), which cover the situation of renewable energy sources) and the aid intensities contained therein.1.
Zato ugotavlja, da ne more prezreti poglavja o pomoči za naložbe iz Smernic (oddelek D.1.3, predvsem točka (27), in oddelek D.1.7 (32) ali poglavje o pomoči za tekoče poslovanje (oddelek D.3.3.1 (54)), v katerih so zajeti obnovljivi viri energije) in intenzivnosti pomoči, ki jih ta vsebuje.1.
Investment support for renewable energy production
Podpora za naložbe v proizvodnjo obnovljivih virov energije
Investment for renewable energy production can be supported up to an aid intensity of 40 % or, where necessary, of 100 % of eligible costs, see section D.1.3 (27) of the Environmental Guidelines.
Naložba za proizvodnjo obnovljivih virov energije se lahko podpre do intenzivnosti pomoči v višini 40 % ali, kjer je to potrebno, 100 % upravičenih stroškov, glej oddelek D.1.3 (27) Okoljskih smernic.
Section D.1.6 (31) clarifies what constitutes the eligible investment, namely investment in land, buildings, plants and equipment, and, under certain conditions, intangible assets.
V oddelku D.1.6 (31) je pojasnjeno, katere so upravičene naložbe, in sicer so to naložbe v zemljišče, zgradbe, stroje in opremo, pod nekaterimi pogoji pa tudi v neopredmetena sredstva.
Section D.1.7 (32) establishes that eligible costs are the difference between the investment costs of a renewable energy production plant and the investment costs of a conventional power plant (hereinafter ‘extra cost approach’).
Oddelek D.1.7 (32) določa, da so upravičeni stroški razlika med naložbenimi stroški obrata za proizvodnjo obnovljivih virov energije in naložbenimi stroški konvencionalne elektrarne (v nadaljnjem besedilu „metoda dodatnih stroškov“).
The Authority noted in its Decision to open the formal investigation procedure [61] that the support for renewable energy sources was not based on an extra cost approach as laid down in D.1.7 (32) of the Guidelines.
Nadzorni organ je v svoji odločbi o sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave [61] navedel, da pomoč za obnovljive vire energije ni temeljila na metodi dodatnih stroškov, kot je določeno v D.1.7 (32) Smernic.
It also found that without the amendments later suggested by the Norwegian authorities, there would be no guarantee that the support would stay within the boundaries of the 40 % threshold.
Ugotovil je tudi, da brez sprememb, ki so jih pozneje predlagali norveški organi, ne bi bilo mogoče zagotoviti, da bi podpora upoštevala 40-odstotni prag.
There was, furthermore, no guarantee that it would stay within the higher threshold of 100 % of extra costs nor that the scheme would not lead to overcompensation.
Prav tako ni bilo mogoče zagotoviti, da bi upoštevala višji prag 100 % dodatnih stroškov in da shema ne bi povzročila prekomernega nadomestila.
There were, e.g., no guarantees that only eligible investment costs would be supported and that no more aid than necessary to trigger the project would be given to an undertaking.
Ni bilo mogoče npr. zagotoviti, da bi bili podprti samo upravičeni naložbeni stroški in da bi bila podjetju dodeljena samo pomoč, ki je potrebna za sprožitev projekta.
Hence, the Authority took the preliminary view that the Energy Fund, as notified, could not be justified according to the investment aid chapter (section D.1.3 of the Environmental Guidelines) and constituted incompatible State aid.
Zato je Nadzorni organ izrazil predhodno mnenje, da priglašenega energetskega sklada ni mogoče upravičiti na podlagi poglavja o pomoči za naložbe (oddelek D.1.3 Okoljskih smernic) in pomeni nezdružljivo državno pomoč.
The comments by the Norwegian authorities have not removed these doubts.
Pripombe norveških organov teh dvomov niso razpršile.