natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Rather, they submit that the compensation scheme in Aust-Agder was based on a benchmarking exercise that ensures that the compensation granted covers the cost of a well-run operator.
Nadzorni organ na podlagi predloženih informacij ugotavlja, da nadomestilo, ki se je dodeljevalo od leta 2004 za obveznost izvajanja lokalnih rednih in šolskih avtobusnih prevozov v okrožju Aust-Agder, ne izpolnjuje vseh pogojev iz sodbe Altmark.
Consequently, the Authority has to examine the second alternative stipulated in the fourth Altmark condition.
Nadomestilo je torej upravičenim podjetjem dalo prednost v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
According to the information submitted, the Norwegian authorities compared the cost structures of all companies in the bus transport sector and isolated the 33 % best-run bus companies at average levels (i.e. fuel costs, maintenance costs, driver costs and administration costs).
Prednost – projekt ATP
Although this may constitute evidence of good performance in comparison to other companies, it cannot be taken as a basis for the average costs of a well-run and adequately equipped undertaking.
Nadzorni organ v odločbi o začetku postopka ni izključil možnosti, da je projekt ATP (glej uvodne izjave 56 do 58) podjetju Nettbuss Sør AS dal gospodarsko prednost, ki je podjetje ne bi dobilo v normalnih tržnih pogojih.
The Authority's Guidelines on the application of the State aid rules to compensation granted for the provision of services of general economic interest indicate that ‘the aim is to ensure that the high costs of an inefficient undertaking are not taken as a benchmark’.
V zvezi s pogoji iz sodbe v zadevi Altmark Nadzorni organ upošteva, da se projekt ATP nanaša na proge javne storitve in zato zanj veljajo isti predpisi kot za nadomestilo za lokalne redne in šolske prevoze.
The Authority notes that the ALFA-method and its indexation does not specify in detail the sample of undertakings that were taken into account for benchmarking purposes.
Zato je treba navesti, da je prvi pogoj iz sodbe v zadevi Altmark izpolnjen.
Therefore, although 67 % of bus companies have been considered by the Norwegian authorities as inefficient companies, that in itself does not lead to the conclusion that the remaining companies should be considered well-run operators for the purposes of an Altmark assessment.
Vendar pa Nadzorni organ ni prejel dodatnih informacij v zvezi z uporabo ostalih treh pogojev iz sodbe v zadevi Altmark.
There is no proof that the average of their costs represents the costs of an efficient undertaking.
Pri uporabi četrtega pogoja iz sodbe v zadevi Altmark po uradni dolžnosti Nadzorni organ upošteva dejstvo, da je podjetje Nettbuss Sør AS izvajalo prevozne storitve na progah, določenih v projektu ATP, brez izvedenega postopka oddaje javnega naročila.
The Norwegian authorities have not provided sufficient information on this point.
Norveški organi niso predložili nobenih informacij, ki bi dokazovale, da je dodeljeno nadomestilo temeljilo na analizi stroškov značilnih, dobro vodenih in ustrezno opremljenih podjetij.
In addition, this does not provide the full picture of the cost structure of a representative well-run and adequately equipped undertaking, as higher costs are not covered (e.g. higher fuel consumption in morphologically inaccessible areas).
Tudi če bi oceno, omenjeno v uvodnih izjavah 143 do 150, smiselno uporabili, bi bil zaključek isti, tj. da četrti pogoj iz sodbe v zadevi Altmark ni izpolnjen.
Likewise, no analytical ratios representative of productivity (such as turnover to capital employed, total cost to turnover, turnover per employee, value added per employee or staff costs to value added) or quality of supply have been submitted by the Norwegian authorities [49].
Zato Nadzorni organ ugotavlja, da je letni znesek v višini 800000 NOK (od leta 2004), zvišan na 2 milijona NOK (od leta 2010) in ponovno znižan na 1,5 milijona NOK (od leta 2011), ki je bil dodeljen za povečanje števila odhodov avtobusov na progah Lillesand–Kristiansand in Kristiansand–Arendal, podjetju Nettbuss Sør AS dal prednost.
Therefore, the Authority is not in a position to assess any quantified objectives in terms of return on equity or productivity gains.
Izkrivljanje konkurence in vpliv na trgovino med pogodbenicami
In any event, the fact that the final compensation is set on the basis of negotiations allows for discretionary cost adjustments that cannot reflect the costs of an efficient operator.
Nadzorni organ mora preveriti, ali sporni ukrepi pomoči lahko vplivajo na trgovino in izkrivljajo konkurenco [50].
In some instances, the Authority notes that the negotiations have led to a decrease of compensation compared to the result given by the ALFA-method.
Upravičenci do pomoči z drugimi prevozniki konkurirajo na trgih, ki so odprti za konkurenco [51].
In other instances, the compensation has been higher.
Nadzorni organ zato ugotavlja, da je letno nadomestilo izkrivljalo konkurenco, ker je okrepilo poslovni položaj upravičencev do pomoči na danih trgih.
In any case, the existence of negotiations for calculating the final compensation does not give any information as to whether the undertakings operating in the market are necessarily considered to be well-run operators.
Ob upoštevanju vpliva na trgovino in dejstva, da se ta zadeva nanaša na lokalni trg rednih in šolskih avtobusnih prevozov v okrožju Aust-Agder, Nadzorni organ opozarja, da je Sodišče v sodbi v zadevi Altmark, ki se je tudi nanašala na storitve regionalnih avtobusnih prevozov, navedlo:
Moreover, as the transport production was subject to amendments by the County throughout the year, with cancellations, reductions or additions of routes, this naturally had a material impact on the cost side of the contract.
„Javna subvencija, ki se dodeli podjetju, ki zagotavlja le lokalne in regionalne prevozne storitve, pri čemer ne zagotavlja prevoznih storitev zunaj države izvora, lahko vseeno vpliva na trgovino med državami članicami […].
Often, transport operators were offered the opportunity to reduce their traffic in order to have their actual costs covered.
Drugi pogoj za uporabo člena 92(1) Pogodbe, tj. da lahko pomoč vpliva na trgovino med državami članicami, zato ni odvisen od lokalnega ali regionalnega značaja prevoznih storitev ali od obsega zadevnega področja dejavnosti“ [52].
Or, they were compensated more in order to be able to maintain the existing level of production.
(160) To pomeni, da čeprav – kot v tem primeru – gre le za trg lokalnih ali regionalnih avtobusnih prevozov (okrožje Aust-Agder), lahko javna sredstva, dodeljena enemu prevozniku na zadevnem trgu, še vedno vplivajo na trgovino med pogodbenicami [53].
The final amount of compensation to be granted was thus subject to negotiations between the parties.
Nadzorni organ zato meni, da bi na trgovino med pogodbenicami lahko vplivalo tudi letno nadomestilo.
Therefore, the Authority cannot conclude that the amount of compensation granted was determined on the basis of an analysis of the costs of a well-run and adequately equipped undertaking.
Nadzorni organ še meni, da enaki premisleki smiselno veljajo tudi za šolske prevoze [54] in za projekt ATP.
Thus, the Authority concludes that the fourth Altmark condition has not been fulfilled.
Sklepna ugotovitev glede prisotnosti državne pomoči v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP
Conclusion on the Altmark test
Nadzorni organ je v odločbi o začetku postopka sklenil, da nadomestilo, ki ga je okrožje Aust-Agder pred letom 2004 dodelilo petim avtobusnim prevoznikom za lokalne redne in šolske prevoze, pomeni državno pomoč v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
Since the four conditions laid down by the Court in Altmark judgement must be met cumulatively, it is not necessary to examine whether the other two conditions have been satisfied.
Nadalje Nadzorni organ ugotavlja, da nadomestilo, ki ga je okrožje Aust-Agder od leta 2004 do danes dodelilo petim avtobusnim prevoznikom za lokalne redne in šolske prevoze, pomeni državno pomoč v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
Based on the information submitted, the Authority concludes that the compensation awarded since 2004 for the local scheduled and school bus transport service obligations in Aust-Agder does not comply with all the Altmark conditions.
Nadzorni organ še ugotavlja, da financiranje podjetja Nettbuss Sør AS s strani države od leta 2004 naprej na podlagi projekta ATP pomeni državno pomoč v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
The compensation has therefore conferred an advantage on the recipient undertakings within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA agreement.
RAZVRSTITEV METODE ALFA, NJENE INDEKSACIJE IN PROJEKTA ATP KOT NOVE ALI OBSTOJEČE POMOČI
Advantage — ATP Project
V odločbi o začetku postopka je Nadzorni organ sklenil, da je bila v okrožju Aust-Agder do konca leta 2003 vzpostavljena veljavna shema pomoči za lokalne redne in šolske avtobusne prevoze.
In the opening decision the Authority did not exclude the possibility of the ATP project (see recitals 56 to 58) providing an economic advantage to Nettbuss Sør AS, which it is unlikely that it would have obtained under normal market conditions.
Vendar pa je Nadzorni organ izrazil dvom o tem, da je zaradi uvedbe metode ALFA in njene indeksacije nadomestilo, ki ga je okrožje Aust-Agder dodelilo petim avtobusnim prevoznikom za lokalne redne in šolske prevoze od leta 2004 do danes, bistveno spremenilo veljavno shemo pomoči.
In reference to the Altmark conditions, the Authority notes that ATP project refers to public service transport routes and is thus governed by the same legal provisions as the compensation for local scheduled and school bus transport.
Nadzorni organ je še izrazil dvom o tem, da obstaja nova pomoč v zvezi z morebitnim nadomestilom za lokalne redne in šolske prevoze zunaj tistega, kar je bilo dovoljeno po veljavni shemi pomoči (do leta 2004 oziroma do danes, če z uvedbo metode ALFA in njeno indeksacijo ni bila spremenjena narava pomoči).
It can therefore be said that the first Altmark condition is met.
Nadzorni organ je še zanimalo, ali so zneski v zvezi s projektom ATP povezani z dodelitvijo nadomestila s strani okrožja Aust-Agder ali pa so del ločene sheme.
However, the Authority has not received any further information as regards the application of the remaining Altmark conditions.
Zakonske določbe
Applying ex officio the fourth Altmark condition, the Authority takes note of the fact that Nettbuss Sør AS provided the transport routes envisaged under the ATP project without any public procurement procedure having been carried out.
V skladu s členom 1(c) dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču „nova pomoč“ pomeni:
Further, the Norwegian authorities have not provided any information to show that the compensation granted has been based on an analysis of the costs of a typical, well-run and adequately equipped undertakings.
„vsako pomoč, sheme pomoči in individualno pomoč, ki ni obstoječa pomoč, vključno s spremembami obstoječe pomoči.“
Even if the assessment mentioned above under recitals 143 to 150 were to be applied mutandis mutandis, the conclusion would be the same, i.e. that the fourth Altmark condition is not satisfied.
Zadevne določbe, člen 1(b)(i) dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču določa, da „obstoječa pomoč“ pomeni:
Therefore, the Authority concludes that the annual amounts of NOK 800000 (as from 2004), increased to NOK 2 million (as from 2010) and reduced again to NOK 1,5 million (as from 2011) that were granted in order to increase the frequency of bus departures on the route Lillesand-Kristiansand and Kristiansand-Arendal, conferred an advantage on Nettbuss Sør AS.
„vso pomoč, ki je v zadevnih državah Efte obstajala pred začetkom veljavnosti Sporazuma EGP, to je sheme pomoči in individualno pomoč, ki so se začele izvajati pred začetkom veljavnosti Sporazuma EGP in se uporabljajo tudi po začetku njegove veljavnosti; […]“
Distortion of competition and effect on trade between Contracting Parties
ter
The Authority must examine whether the contested aid measures are liable to affect trade and to distort competition [50].
„pomoč, za katero se šteje, da je veljavna, ker je mogoče ugotoviti, da takrat, ko se je začela izvajati, ni bila pomoč, pozneje pa je postala pomoč zaradi razvoja Evropskega gospodarskega prostora in je država Efte ni spremenila […]“
The aid beneficiaries compete with other transport operators in markets that are open to competition [51].
Postopkovna ureditev za obstoječo pomoč
The Authority thus concludes that the annual compensation has been liable to distort competition by strengthening the commercial position of the aid beneficiaries in the given markets.
Nadzorni organ bo najprej pojasnil svoje stališče v zvezi s postopkom v skladu s Sporazumom EGP in Protokolom 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču glede ukrepov, ki so po ugotovitvah obstoječa pomoč.
With respect to the effect on trade and the fact that the present case concerns a local market for scheduled and school bus transport in Aust-Agder, the Authority recalls that in the Altmark judgment, which also concerned regional bus transport services, the Court held that:
Sporazum EGP določa različne postopke glede na to, ali gre za obstoječo ali novo pomoč.
‘A public subsidy granted to an undertaking which provides only local or regional transport services and does not provide any transport services outside its State of origin may none the less have an effect on trade between Member States [… ].
V skladu s členom 1(1) dela I Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču „Nadzorni organ Efte v sodelovanju z državami Efte redno preverja vse sisteme pomoči, ki obstajajo v teh državah.
The second condition for the application of Article 92(1) of the Treaty, namely that the aid must be capable of affecting trade between Member States, does not therefore depend on the local or regional character of the transport services supplied or on the scale of the field of activity concerned.’ [52].(160) This means that even if — as in the present case — only a local or regional bus transport market (Aust-Agder) may be concerned, public funding made available to one operator in that market is still liable to affect trade between Contracting Parties [53].
Tem državam predlaga vse ustrezne ukrepe, ki so potrebni zaradi postopnega razvoja ali delovanja Sporazuma EGP“.
Consequently, the Authority considers that the annual compensation is liable to affect trade between Contracting Parties.
Obstoječa pomoč se lahko torej ustrezno izvede, če Nadzorni organ ni ugotovil, da je nezdružljiva z delovanjem Sporazuma EGP [55].
Moreover, the Authority takes the view that the same considerations apply, mutatis mutandis, both to the school transport activities [54] and to the ATP project.
Po drugi strani pa člen 2(1) dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču določa, da „[…] zadevna država Efte Nadzorni organ Efte pravočasno obvesti o tem, da namerava dodeliti novo pomoč“.
Conclusion on the presence of State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement
Zato je treba vsako novo pomoč Nadzornemu organu vnaprej priglasiti in je ni mogoče izvesti brez končne odločitve Nadzornega organa.
In the opening decision the Authority considered that the compensation awarded prior to 2004 by Aust-Agder to the five bus operators for local scheduled and school bus transport constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.
Nadalje je obstoječa pomoč lahko predmet zgolj odločitve o nezdružljivosti v prihodnosti.
Furthermore, the Authority concludes that the compensation awarded by Aust-Agder from 2004 until today to the five bus operators for local scheduled and school bus transport constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA agreement.
Zato sme Nadzorni organ „[…] v okviru stalnega nadzora obstoječih pomoči zgolj naložiti odpravo ali spremembo takih pomoči v roku, ki ga določi“ [56].
Finally, the Authority concludes that the State financing of Nettbuss Sør AS as from 2004 onwards on the basis of the ATP project constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA agreement.
Ustaljena sodna praksa tudi pravi, da je s tem, da Nadzorni organ redno preverja in nadzoruje pomoči, namen Sporazuma EGP ta, „[…] da ugotovitev morebitne nezdružljivosti pomoči z notranjim trgom temelji, pod nadzorom Sodišča, na ustreznem postopku, za izvedbo katerega je odgovorna Komisija“ [57].
THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE ALFA-METHOD AND ITS INDEXATION AND OF THE ATP PROJECT AS NEW OR EXISTING AID
Na podlagi navedenega Nadzorni organ ugotavlja, da lahko le na podlagi postopka za obstoječo pomoč iz členov od 17 do 19 dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču oceni, ali je obstoječa pomoč združljiva z delovanjem Sporazuma EGP.
In the opening decision, the Authority concluded that there was an existing aid scheme at place in Aust-Agder for local scheduled and school bus transport until the end of 2003.
V nadaljevanju je proučeno vprašanje nove ali obstoječe pomoči v zvezi z metodo ALFA, njeno indeksacijo in projektom ATP.
However, the Authority expressed doubts as to whether the introduction of the ALFA-method and its indexation entailed that the compensation awarded by Aust-Agder to the five bus operators for local scheduled and school bus transport from 2004 until today has materially altered the existing aid scheme.
Opredelitev sheme pomoči
The Authority furthermore doubted whether any new aid may be present regarding potential compensation for local scheduled and school bus transport services outside of what was allowed for under the existing aid scheme (until 2004, or alternatively, until today, if the nature of the aid was not altered by the introduction of the ALFA-method and its indexation).
Člen 1(d) dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču določa, da „shema pomoči“:
Also, the Authority questioned whether the amounts related to the ATP project are connected to the award of compensation by Aust-Agder, or whether they constitute, or form part of a separate scheme.
„[…] pomeni vsak akt, na podlagi katerega je mogoče brez nadaljnjih izvedbenih ukrepov dodeliti individualno pomoč podjetjem, opredeljenim v aktu na splošen in abstrakten način, in kateri koli akt, na podlagi katerega je mogoče dodeliti pomoč, ki ni povezana z določenim projektom, enemu ali več podjetjem za nedoločen čas in/ali v nedoločenem znesku.“
The legal provisions
Člen 1(e) dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču določa, da „individualna pomoč“:
According to Article 1(c) in part II of Protocol 3 SCA; ‘new aid’ shall mean:
„[…] pomeni pomoč, ki ni dodeljena na podlagi sheme pomoči, in pomoč, ki jo je treba uradno prijaviti, dodeljena na podlagi sheme pomoči.“
‘All aid, that is to say, aid schemes and individual aid, which is not existing aid, including alterations to existing aid.’
Ta razlika je zlasti pomembna v okviru obstoječe pomoči, saj se s Protokolom 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču na Nadzorni organ prenaša pristojnost za stalno pregledovanje obstoječih sistemov pomoči [58].
The relevant provisions, Article 1(b)(i) and (v) in Part II of Protocol 3 SCA provide that ‘existing aid’ shall mean:
Podobno se oddelek V dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču nanaša samo na obstoječe sheme pomoči [59].
‘All aid which existed prior to the entry into force of the EEA Agreement in the respective EFTA States, that is to say, aid schemes and individual aid which were put into effect before, and are still applicable after, the entry into force of the EEA Agreement;[…]’
Nadzorni organ je v odločbi o začetku postopka podal več informacij o utemeljitvi koncepta veljavne sheme pomoči ter o tem, kako je ta koncept tolmačil v svoji praksi primerov in kako ga je tolmačila Komisija [60].
and
Nadzorni organ je v odločbi o začetku postopka sklenil, da je bila v okrožju Aust-Agder shema pomoči vzpostavljena od leta 1994 [61].
‘Aid which is deemed to be an existing aid because it can be established that at the time it was put into effect it did not constitute an aid, and subsequently became an aid due to the evolution of the European Economic Area and without having been altered by the EFTA State […]’.
Predpisi, ki so določali navedeno shemo pomoči, so bili ZKP, UKP ter Zakon o izobraževanju v povezavi z ustrezno upravno prakso v okrožju Aust-Agder.
The procedural regime for existing aid
Nadzorni organ je ugotovil, da je bilo nadomestilo za izvajanje lokalnih rednih avtobusnih prevozov v okrožju Aust-Agder pred začetkom veljavnosti Sporazuma EGP na Norveškem 1. januarja 1994 določeno na podlagi ZKP in UKP (in na zadevnih predpisih, ki so veljali pred njima).
The Authority will first clarify its position as regards the procedure followed pursuant to the EEA Agreement and Protocol 3 SCA, for measures found to constitute existing aid.
Že pred začetkom veljavnosti Sporazuma EGP je bilo nadomestilo za izvajanje storitev šolskega prevoza dodeljeno na področju Zakona o izobraževanju (in zadevnih zakonov, ki so veljali pred njim).
The EEA Agreement establishes different procedures according to whether the aid is existing or new.
Nadzorni organ je v odločbi o začetku postopka preveril, ali pravni okvir za financiranje rednih in šolskih avtobusnih prevozov v okrožju Aust-Agder izpolnjuje tri merila iz člena 1(d) dela II Protokola 3 k Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču: (i) akt, na podlagi katerega je mogoče dodeliti pomoč, (ii) akt, ki ne zahteva nikakršnih dodatnih izvedbenih ukrepov, ter (iii) akt, ki na splošen in abstrakten način opredeljuje potencialne upravičence do pomoči [62].
Under Article 1(1) in Part I of Protocol 3 SCA, ‘the EFTA Surveillance Authority shall in cooperation with the EFTA States, keep under constant review all systems of aid existing in those States.
Vendar pa je, kar zadeva projekt ATP, Nadzorni organ v odločbi o začetku postopka izrazil dvom o tem, ali je projekt povezan z dodelitvijo nadomestila s strani okrožja Aust-Agder ali pa je del ločene sheme.
It shall propose to the latter any appropriate measures required by the progressive development or by the functioning of the EEA Agreement’.
Kljub temu, da je projekt ATP projekt sodelovanja med različnimi občinami ter okrožji Vest-Agder in Aust-Agder, in kljub dejstvu, da so plačila izhajala iz različnih virov, zadevni prevozi spadajo v področje sheme v okrožju Aust-Agder.
Thus, existing aid may be duly implemented as long as the Authority has not found it incompatible with the functioning of the EEA Agreement [55].
Nadzorni organ ugotavlja, da avtobusni progi iz projekta ATP, tj. Kristiansand–Lillesand in Kristiansand–Arendal, kot je opisano v uvodnih izjavah 57 in 58, že delujeta v okviru veljavne sheme v okrožju Aust-Agder.
On the other hand, under Article 2(1) in Part II of Protocol 3 SCA, ‘[…] any plans to grant new aid shall be notified to the EFTA Surveillance Authority in sufficient time by the EFTA State concerned’.
Za večji obseg prevozov v okviru projekta ATP na teh progah je bilo dodeljeno nadomestilo v skladu z istimi predpisi kot za lokalne redne in šolske prevoze.
Thus, any new aid must be notified in advance to the Authority and cannot be implemented without the Authority's final decision.
Izračun nadomestila za večji obseg prevozov v okviru projekta je temeljil na istih načelih kot za lokalne redne in šolske prevoze, tj. stroški javne storitve z odbitkom prihodkov od vozovnic pri neto pogodbah in pribitkom razumnega dobička.
Further, existing aid can be the subject only to a decision finding it incompatible as to the future.
Nadzorni organ na podlagi navedenega ugotavlja, da je projekt ATP del sheme, za katero je Nadzorni organ že v odločbi o začetku postopka ugotovil, da je v okrožju Aust-Agder vzpostavljena od leta 1994.
Therefore, the Authority ‘[…] is, as part of its constant review of existing aid, only empowered to require the elimination or modification of such aid within a period which it is to determine’ [56].
Opredelitev obstoječe pomoči