natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Norwegian authorities will calculate the investment aid for energy saving measures according to section D.1.3 (25) [40] of the Environmental Guidelines in combination with section D.1.7 (32) of the Environmental Guidelines, i.e. the investment costs of the project will be strictly confined to the extra investment costs necessary to meet the environmental objectives.
Norveški organi bodo pomoč za naložbe v ukrepe varčevanja z energijo izračunali v skladu z oddelkom D.1.3 (25) [40] Okoljskih smernic v povezavi z oddelkom D.1.7 (32) Okoljskih smernic, to pomeni, da bodo naložbeni stroški projekta strogo omejeni na dodatne naložbene stroške, ki so potrebni za izpolnitev okoljskih ciljev.
This means that the costs of the energy saving investment will be compared to the costs of a technically comparable investment that does not provide the same degree of environmental protection.
To pomeni, da se bodo stroški naložbe v varčevanje z energijo primerjali s stroški tehnično primerljive naložbe, ki ne zagotavlja enake stopnje varstva okolja.
In cases of investment in additional equipment and procedures with no other function than energy saving, where no alternative comparable investment exists, the comparable investment costs are set at zero.
Pri naložbah v dodatno opremo in postopke, katerih edina funkcija je varčevanje z energijo, se v primeru, da ne obstaja druga primerljiva naložba, primerljivi naložbeni stroški določijo na nič.
Replacement costs of machines to meet Norwegian required standards are not eligible for support.
Nadomestitveni stroški za stroje, ki nastanejo zaradi izpolnjevanja zahtevanih norveških standardov, niso upravičeni do podpore.
The costs will be calculated net of the benefits accruing from any increase in capacity, costs savings engendered during the first five years of the life of the investment and additional ancillary production during that five-year period.
Stroški se bodo izračunali brez upoštevanja ugodnosti, ki izhajajo iz povečanj zmogljivosti, privarčevanih stroškov v prvih petih letih življenjske dobe naložbe in dodatne pomožne proizvodnje v tem petletnem obdobju.
The eligible costs will be confined to investment costs.
Upravičeni stroški bodo omejeni na naložbene stroške.
In that respect, eligible costs will be the same as those listed by the European Commission in its Decision N 75/2002 — Finland [41].
Pri tem bodo upravičeni stroški enaki stroškom, ki jih je Evropska komisija navedla v svoji Odločbi N 75/2002 – Finska [41].
As of 1 January 2005, the Norwegian authorities have only considered such costs as eligible.
Po 1. januarju 2005 norveški organi samo takšne stroške štejejo za upravičene.
The amount of aid will be limited to 40 % of the extra costs, calculated according to the above parameters and no operating aid will be given under that scheme.
Znesek pomoči bo omejen na 40 % dodatnih stroškov, izračunanih v skladu z zgornjimi parametri, pomoč za tekoče poslovanje pa v okviru te sheme ne bo dodeljena.
According to section D.1.5 (30) of the Environmental Guidelines, for small and medium-sized enterprises the aid might be increased by 10 percentage points.
V skladu z oddelkom D.1.5 (30) Okoljskih smernic se lahko pomoč za mala in srednja podjetja poveča za 10 odstotnih točk.
For that purpose, small and medium-sized enterprises will be defined according Chapter 10.2 of the Authority's Guidelines on aid to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises.
V ta namen bodo mala in srednja podjetja opredeljena v skladu s poglavjem 10.2 Smernic Nadzornega organa o pomoči za mikro, mala in srednja podjetja.
The Norwegian Government will ensure that, if combined with other public subsidies, the total aid will not exceed the above mentioned limits.
Norveška vlada bo zagotovila, da ob združitvi z drugimi javnimi subvencijami skupni znesek pomoči ne bo presegel zgoraj navedenih omejitev.
Support for new energy technologies
Podpora za nove energetske tehnologije
The Norwegian authorities state that new technologies projects, as far as renewable energy projects are concerned, are to be supported according to the rules for supporting the production and use of renewable energy production (NPV approach).
Norveški organi navajajo, da je treba projekte novih tehnologij, kar zadeva projekte obnovljivih virov energije, podpreti v skladu s pravili za podporo proizvodnji in uporabi obnovljivih virov energije (metoda neto sedanje vrednosti).
As far as energy efficiency technologies are concerned, the calculation mechanisms for energy saving mechanisms will be applied.
Pri tehnologijah energetske učinkovitosti se bodo uporabili mehanizmi izračunavanja za mehanizme varčevanja z energijo.
The support will, inter alia, include projects which earlier have only been tested in laboratories, have limited exploitation or are developed for conditions different from that in Norway and need adaptation.
Pomoč bo med drugim vključevala projekte, ki so se predhodno testirali samo v laboratorijih, imajo omejeno uporabo ali so bili razviti za razmere, ki se razlikujejo od razmer na Norveškem, in jih je zato treba prilagoditi.
Pre-competitive projects, falling under the Authority's State Aid Guidelines for Research and Development, will be notified individually.
Predkonkurenčni projekti, ki sodijo v okvir Smernic o državni pomoči za raziskave in razvoj Nadzornega organa, bodo priglašeni posamično.
Projects which are an upgrading of existing products or production line will not be supported.
Projekti, ki so nadgradnja obstoječih proizvodov ali proizvodne linije, ne bodo prejeli podpore.
The same goes for projects which have already started or for which the start up decision has been made.
Enako velja za projekte, ki so se že začeli ali je bila odločitev o njihovem začetku že sprejeta.
Information and education measures in the field of energy efficiency
Informacijski in izobraževalni ukrepi na področju energetske učinkovitosti
The Norwegian authorities confirmed that the programmes for teaching material and learning concepts, education courses for technical personnel and on-site follow-up ended on 1 January 2005.
Norveški organi so potrdili, da so se programi za učno gradivo in koncepte učenja, izobraževalni tečaji za tehnično osebje in nadaljnje spremljanje na kraju samem končali 1. januarja 2005.
If these or similar projects are to be taken up in the future, they will be notified in advance to the Authority.
Če se bodo ti ali podobni projekti začeli izvajati v prihodnje, bodo vnaprej priglašeni Nadzornemu organu.
The Norwegian authorities further confirmed that the training programme for public entities only relates to the public function of the local municipalities (see also section I.5.6 of this Decision).
Norveški organi so tudi potrdili, da se program usposabljanja za osebe javnega prava nanaša samo na javno funkcijo lokalnih občin (glej tudi oddelek I.5.6 te odločbe).
The Norwegian authorities further confirmed that the support is applied in a non-discriminatory manner also to foreign investors and that they will regularly report to the Authority on the application of the scheme.
Nadalje so norveški organi potrdili, da se pomoč nediskriminatorno uporablja tudi za tuje vlagatelje in da bodo Nadzornemu organu redno poročali o izvajanju sheme.
The Norwegian authorities submitted a list to the Authority showing eight examples of foreign operators having received support under the Energy Fund.
Norveški organi so Nadzornemu organu predložili seznam osmih primerov tujih izvajalcev, ki so prejeli podporo v okviru energetskega sklada.
Grounds for initiating the formal investigation procedure
Podlaga za začetek formalnega postopka preiskave
In its decision to open the formal investigation procedure, the Authority took the view that the measures concerning energy saving, the support of new energy technologies and the support for the investment in renewable energy production constituted State aid within the meaning of Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement.
Nadzorni organ je v svoji odločbi o sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave menil, da ukrepi glede varčevanja z energijo, podpora novim energetskim tehnologijam in podpora za naložbe v proizvodnjo obnovljivih virov energije pomenijo državno pomoč v smislu člena 61(1) Sporazuma EGP.
As for the information and educational measures (including advisory and consultancy services) the Authority noted that with the exception of the information helpline and possibly the on-site visits, the Fund enjoyed ample discretion.
Glede informacijskih in izobraževalnih ukrepov (vključno s svetovalnimi in posvetovalnimi storitvami) je Nadzorni organ opozoril, da je razen pri telefonu za brezplačne informacije in eventualno pri obiskih na kraju samem sklad imel zelo široko prosto presojo.
It, moreover, found that this discretion turned the support measures into selective, rather than general, measures.
Poleg tega je ugotovil, da podporni ukrepi zaradi takšne proste presoje niso bili splošni, ampak so postali selektivni.
All the measures were found to distort or threaten to distort competition and affect trade between the Contracting Parties.
Ugotovljeno je bilo, da so vsi ukrepi izkrivljali ali bi lahko izkrivljali konkurenco in da so vplivali na trgovino med pogodbenicami.
Since the aid in relation to the Energy Fund was not notified in time to the Authority, it constituted unlawful aid within the meaning of Article 1(f) in Part II of Protocol 3 to the Surveillance and Court Agreement.
Ker pomoč v zvezi z energetskim skladom ni bila pravočasno priglašena Nadzornemu organu, je pomenila nezakonito pomoč v smislu člena 1(f) dela II Protokola 3 K Sporazumu o nadzornem organu in sodišču.
As to the compatibility assessment, the Authority made a distinction between the Energy Fund as notified and a system with the amendments suggested by the Norwegian authorities.
Pri presoji združljivosti je Nadzorni organ razlikoval med priglašenim energetskim skladom in sistemom s spremembami, ki so jih predlagali norveški organi.
The system as notified
Priglašeni sistem
The Authority expressed doubts in the decision to open the formal investigation procedure as to whether the investment support for renewable energy production could be justified under the Environmental Guidelines.
Nadzorni organ je v odločbi o sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave dvomil, da se podpora za naložbe v proizvodnjo obnovljivih virov energije lahko utemelji na podlagi Okoljskih smernic.
In particular, the Authority noted that the support was not based on the ‘extra cost’ methodology of section D 1.3 (27) and section D.1.7 (32) of the Environmental Guidelines.
Zlasti je navedel, da podpora ni temeljila na metodologiji „dodatnih stroškov“ iz oddelka D.1.3 (27) in oddelka D.1.7 (32) Okoljskih smernic.
Rather, it identified the need for aid by carrying out a net present value calculation of the project.
Namesto tega je potrebo po pomoči opredelil na podlagi izračuna neto sedanje vrednosti projekta.
The Authority found that there were no sufficient guarantees that only costs related to the investment would be supported.
Nadzorni organ je ugotovil, da ni bilo zadostnih jamstev, da bi se podprli samo stroški, povezani z naložbo.
Further, there was no mechanism to preclude any overcompensation.
Poleg tega tudi ni bilo mehanizma, ki bi izključeval prekomerno nadomestilo.
For energy saving measures, the Authority noted that contrary to renewable energy projects, the Environmental Guidelines stuck strictly to a support of 40 % of eligible investment costs.
Glede ukrepov varčevanja z energijo je Nadzorni organ opozoril, da se v nasprotju s projekti obnovljivih virov energije Okoljske smernice strogo držijo podpore v višini 40 % upravičenih naložbenih stroškov.
With the net present value calculation applied by the Norwegian authorities it was not certain that this threshold would be respected.
Z izračunom neto sedanje vrednosti, ki ga uporabljajo norveški organi, ni bilo zagotovljeno upoštevanje tega praga.
For energy technology projects as well as for energy audits, the Authority required more information.
Pri projektih energetske tehnologije in energetskih pregledov je Nadzorni organ zahteval več podatkov.
On the information and educational support measures, the Authority noted that the aid scheme in this respect was not limited to de minimis support (although support for some of the projects might have stayed below the threshold) or limited to small or medium-sized enterprises.
Glede informacijskih in izobraževalnih podpornih ukrepov je Nadzorni organ navedel, da shema pomoči v zvezi s tem ni bila omejena na de minimis podporo (čeprav bi podpora za nekatere projekte lahko ostala pod pragom) ali na mala in srednja podjetja.
On that basis, the Authority came to the initial conclusion in the decision to open the formal investigation procedure that the system as notified was not compatible with the EEA State aid provisions.
Na podlagi tega je Nadzorni organ v odločbi o sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave prvotno sklenil, da priglašeni sistem ni bil združljiv z določbami o državni pomoči EGP.
The system with the amendments suggested by the Norwegian authorities
Sistem s spremembami, ki so jih predlagali norveški organi
In the decision to open the formal investigation procedure, the Authority also dealt with the amendments suggested by the Norwegian authorities.
V odločbi o sprožitvi formalnega postopka preiskave je Nadzorni organ obravnaval tudi spremembe, ki so jih predlagali norveški organi.
It stated that it would investigate further whether the Norwegian approach to base the support on a net present value calculation of the project concerned could be accepted, if the Norwegian authorities decided to limit the support to the difference between the market price and the production costs, see section D.3.3.1 (54) of the Environmental Guidelines.
Navedel je, da bo nadalje raziskal, ali se norveška metoda, po kateri podpora temelji na izračunu neto sedanje vrednosti zadevnega projekta, lahko sprejme, če bi se norveški organi odločili za omejitev podpore na razliko med tržno ceno in proizvodnimi stroški, glej oddelek D.3.3.1 (54) Okoljskih smernic.
The Authority was also concerned about how the requirement of section D.3.3.1 (54), third sentence of the Environmental Guidelines was going to be applied in practice by the Norwegian authorities.
Nadzorni organ je bil zaskrbljen tudi glede tega, kako bodo norveški organi zahtevo iz tretjega stavka oddelka D.3.3.1 (54) Okoljskih smernic uporabili v praksi.
This section prescribes that once supported, any further energy produced by the plant would no longer qualify for any further assistance.
Ta oddelek določa, da po dodelitvi podpore dodatna energija, ki jo proizvede obrat, ne bi bila več upravičena do nadaljnje pomoči.
The Authority also expressed doubts about the support of projects whose net present value would still be negative, due to high operating costs, after having received support from Enova.
Nadzorni organ je tudi podvomil o podpori projektom, katerih neto sedanja vrednost bi bila zaradi visokih stroškov poslovanja tudi po prejetju podpore organa Enova še naprej negativna.
The Authority could not form a final view on the support for new energy technologies and on educational measures, as well as on the advisory and consultancy services (energy audits).
Nadzorni organ ni mogel oblikovati dokončnega stališča o podpori za nove energetske tehnologije in izobraževalnih ukrepih ter svetovalnih in posvetovalnih storitvah (energetskih pregledih).
The Authority received one comment from third parties to its opening decision.
Nadzorni organ je k svoji odločbi o uvedbi postopka prejel eno pripombo tretjih strank.
The German Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear safety states that there is no possibility of clearly identifying the relevant market and establishing whether the supported undertakings would indeed be in competition with non supported undertakings and would receive an advantage.
Nemško ministrstvo za okolje, ohranjanje narave in jedrsko varnost navaja, da ni mogoče jasno opredeliti zadevnega trga in dokazati, da bi podprta podjetja zares konkurirala nepodprtim podjetjem in bila deležna ugodnosti.
Further, the German Ministry states that the principle of establishing the extra costs of renewable energy production is not very suitable for determining the aid amount, as long as there is no general applicable and clearly defined definition of the concept of extra costs.
Nemško ministrstvo tudi navaja, da načelo ugotavljanja dodatnih stroškov proizvodnje obnovljivih virov energije ni najbolj primerno za določitev zneska pomoči, če ni splošno veljavne in jasno določene opredelitve pojma dodatnih stroškov.
With regard to the 40 % threshold for aid intensities, the German Ministry finds that this will often not give a sufficient incentive for a private investor to act, as he would have to take over 60 % of the costs.
V zvezi s 40-odstotnim pragom za intenzivnosti pomoči nemško ministrstvo meni, da to pogosto ne bo zadostna spodbuda za ukrepanje zasebnega sektorja, saj bi ta moral nositi 60 % stroškov.
One might therefore consider whether the support should be based rather on a proportion of the total investment costs.
Veljalo bi torej razmisliti, ali ne bi podpora raje temeljila na deležu skupnih naložbenih stroškov.
The German Ministry states that some shortcomings of the Environmental Guidelines in this respect have been overcome by the Commission's case practice.
Nemško ministrstvo navaja, da je nekatere pomanjkljivosti Okoljskih smernic v zvezi s tem odpravila sodna praksa Komisije.
Comments by the Norwegian authorities
Pripombe norveških organov
As to the existence of State aid, in their reply of 15 July 2006, the Norwegian authorities take the view that the Authority applies a too strict selectivity test, which does not leave an opening for any discretion for programmes which are basically open for all companies.
Glede obstoja državne pomoči norveški organi v svojem odgovoru z dne 15. julija 2006 menijo, da Nadzorni organ uporablja prestrog preskus selektivnosti, ki ne pušča prostora za kakršno koli prosto presojo pri programih, ki so v bistvu na voljo vsem podjetjem.
As to the support for teaching material, Enova enjoyed discretion to dismiss only such projects which did not meet the objectives of the programme or could ensure sufficient quality.
Pri podpori za učno gradivo je Enova imel prosto presojo, da je lahko zavrnil samo tiste projekte, ki niso izpolnjevali ciljev programa ali niso mogli zagotoviti zadostne kakovosti.
These minimum criteria were therefore of an objective character.
Ta minimalna merila so bila torej nepristranska.
The Norwegian authorities further claim in the above letter that the Authority should have made a compatibility assessment of the Energy Fund directly under Article 61(3)(c) of the EEA Agreement, as the Commission did in the UK WRAP lease fund scheme [42].As to the compatibility assessment of the investment support for renewable energy production, the Norwegian authorities state that for renewable energy production as notified, the system's element of competition between different projects excludes any overcompensation.
Nadalje norveški organi v zgoraj navedenem dopisu trdijo, da bi moral Nadzorni organ izvesti presojo združljivosti energetskega sklada neposredno na podlagi člena 61(3)(c) Sporazuma EGP, kot je Komisija storila pri shemi sklada za zakup WRAP iz Združenega kraljestva [42].Glede presoje združljivosti podpore za naložbe v proizvodnjo obnovljivih virov energije norveški organi navajajo, da pri priglašeni proizvodnji obnovljivih virov energije element sistema o konkurenci med različnimi projekti izključuje kakršno koli prekomerno nadomestilo.
Further, the agreement between Enova and the Ministry states that any aid given has to be compatible with the EEA Agreement.
Nadalje sporazum med organom Enova in ministrstvom določa, da mora biti vsaka dodeljena pomoč združljiva s Sporazumom EGP.
As to the inclusion of costs which might not have been eligible, the Norwegian authorities state that this would only concern a small fraction of the costs.
Glede vključitve stroškov, za katere je mogoče, da niso bili upravičeni, norveški organi navajajo, da naj bi se to nanašalo samo na majhen del stroškov.
Throughout the preliminary investigation phase and in their reply of 15 July 2006, the Norwegian authorities point out that Norway faces a different energy situation than most European states as more than 99 % of its domestic electricity production stems from hydropower.
Norveški organi med celotno fazo predhodne preiskave in v svojem odgovoru z dne 15. julija 2006 poudarjajo, da je Norveška v drugačnem energetskem položaju kot večina evropskih držav, saj 99 % njene domače proizvodnje električne energije izhaja iz vodne energije.
Hydropower has a different cost structure and different cost levels than the traditional energy production in the rest of Europe based on coal, gas and nuclear energy.
Vodna energija ima drugačno stroškovno strukturo in drugačne stroškovne ravni kot tradicionalna proizvodnja energije v drugih delih Evrope, ki temelji na premogu, plinu in jedrski energiji.
A comparison with hydropower for calculating the extra costs of new renewable energy production under the Guidelines is, in the Norwegian authorities’ view, not feasible.
Primerjava z vodno energijo za izračun dodatnih stroškov proizvodnje novih obnovljivih virov energije na podlagi Smernic po mnenju norveških organov ni možna.
There are further important advantages in applying the chosen methodology.
Uporaba izbrane metodologije ima še druge pomembne prednosti.
Firstly, the net present value method is the commonly used methodology in the energy sector as well as in other industrial sectors.
Prvič, metoda neto sedanje vrednosti je metodologija, ki se običajno uporablja v energetiki in drugih industrijskih sektorjih.
By referring to the market price, objective and easily available criteria are chosen.
Z upoštevanjem tržne vrednosti se izberejo nepristranska in lahko dostopna merila.
Using this method for all projects applying for support, Enova can compare different projects competing for State support on an equal basis and grant support to those projects which have the best aid/environmental benefit ratio.
Z uporabo te metode pri vseh projektih, ki zaprosijo za podporo, lahko Enova na enaki podlagi primerja različne projekte, ki se potegujejo za državno podporo, ter dodeli podporo projektom z najboljšim razmerjem med pomočjo in okoljskimi koristmi.
Secondly, the method will ensure that a project will only be granted the amount necessary to enable the project to get to the market.
Drugič, s to metodo bo zagotovljeno, da bo projektu dodeljen samo znesek, ki je potreben za prodor projekta na trg.
Norway states that if one were to follow verbatim the Environmental Guidelines, the Norwegian authorities would have to supplement the investment aid scheme with an operating aid scheme, for which the aid would also be decided, in the end, on the basis of a net present value calculation.
Norveška navaja, da bi morali norveški organi v primeru, da bi bilo treba dosledno upoštevati Okoljske smernice, shemo pomoči za naložbe dopolniti s shemo pomoči za tekoče poslovanje, pri kateri bi se o pomoči na koncu tudi odločalo na podlagi neto sedanje vrednosti.
The operating aid so given would de facto be an investment aid scheme where the grant would be paid in instalments rather than in a lump sum, without any significant difference in the possibility of support, but with less transparent and, administratively, a more complicated system [43].
Tako dodeljena pomoč za tekoče poslovanje bi bila dejansko shema pomoči za naložbe, pri kateri bi se subvencija izplačala po delih in ne v enkratnem znesku, brez občutne razlike pri možnosti za podporo, vendar z manj preglednim in upravno zahtevnejšim sistemom.