natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Commission should adopt a decision on the approval of the financial contribution to the major project within 3 months41. 
Komisija sprejme odločitev o odobritvi finančnega prispevka velikemu projektu najpozneje v treh mesecih41.
38 Article 39 of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006. 
38 Člen 39 Uredbe (ES) št. 1083/2006.
39 Article 41 of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006. 
39 Člen 41 Uredbe (ES) št. 1083/2006.
40 Article 102(6) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013. 
40 Člen 102(6) Uredbe (EU) št.
41 Article 102(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013. 
41 Člen 102(1) in (2) Uredbe (EU) št.
Observations 43 No deadline in cohesion for payment of the public contribution to beneficiaries: a reputational risk 84 As a general rule, cohesion expenditure is eligible for EU co-financing if actually paid by a beneficiary to implement operations during the eligibility period42. 
Opažanja 43 Na področju kohezije ni roka za plačilo javnega prispevka upravičencem: tveganje za ugled 84 Na splošno so odhodki na področju kohezije upravičeni do sofinanciranja EU, če jih je upravičenec dejansko izplačal za izvajanje operacij v obdobju upraviče-nosti42.
Therefore it is not necessary for the beneficiary to have received the corresponding public co-financing before the Member State claims reimbursement from the Commission. 
Zato ni potrebno, da bi upravičenec prejel ustrezno javno sofinanciranje, preden država članica zahteva povračilo od Komisije.
85 Managing authorities must ensure that beneficiaries receive the total amount of the public contribution as quickly as possible and in full43, but there is no specific deadline in the cohesion regulatory framework for 2007-2013 regarding payments to beneficiaries. 
85 Organi upravljanja morajo zagotoviti, da upravičenci čim prej in v celoti prejmejo ves znesek javnega prispevka43, vendar v regulativnem okviru za področje kohezije za obdobje 2007–2013 ni specifičnega roka za plačila upravičencem.
Thus at closure the Member States can seek reimbursement for expenditure which has not yet been paid to the beneficiaries44. 
Tako lahko države članice ob zaključku zahtevajo povračilo odhodkov, ki še niso bili izplačani upravičencem44.
86 We have previously drawn attention to serious delays in the payment of the public contribution to beneficiaries (see Box 2). 
86 Že prej smo opozorili na hude zamude pri izplačevanju javnega prispevka upravičencem (glej okvir 2).
The Commission does not require Member States to report at closure, or subsequently, what part of the public contribution has actually been disbursed. 
Komisija od držav članic ne zahteva, da bi ob zaključku ali pozneje sporočile, kakšen del javnega prispevka je bil dejansko izplačan.
As a result, there is a possibility that beneficiaries will not receive the full contribution at the appropriate time, even if the Commission has paid its contribution in full to the Member State. 
Posledično obstaja možnost, da upravičenci ne bodo v ustreznem času dobili celotnega prispevka, čeprav je Komisija svoj prispevek državi članici izplačala v celoti.
In principle, this could mean, even after closure (in 2018 or later), that beneficiaries may still not have received the EU contribution to their projects. 
Načeloma bi to lahko pomenilo, da upravičenci celo po zaključku (leta 2018 ali pozneje) še ne bodo prejeli prispevka EU za svoje projekte.
42 Articles 56(1) and 78(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006. 
42 Člena 56(1) in 78(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 1083/2006.
43 Article 80 of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006. 
43 Člen 80 Uredbe (ES) št. 1083/2006.
44 Section 5.1.1 of the Cohesion closure guidelines. 
44 Oddelek 5.1.1 smernic o zaključevanju za področje kohezije.
Delayed payment of the EU contribution to beneficiaries In France there were serious delays in the transfer of EU funds from the national authorities to regional bodies acting as beneficiaries: in two cases the delay was longer than 5 months45. 
Zapoznelo plačilo prispevka EU upravičencem V Franciji so nastajale hude zamude pri prenosu sredstev EU od nacionalnih organov na regionalne, ki so bili v vlogi upravičencev: v dveh primerih je bila zamuda daljša od petih mesecev45.
Under a project in Italy to draw up a report mapping training needs in various Italian regions, the beneficiary submitted the cost claim to the managing authority in March 2014. 
V okviru projekta v Italiji za pripravo poročila, ki bi opredeljevalo potrebe po usposabljanju v različnih italijanskih regijah, je upravičenec organu upravljanja predložil zahtevek za povračilo stroškov marca 2014.
The costs included in the claim were certified by the national authorities and submitted to the Commission. 
Nacionalni organi so potrdili stroške, navedene v zahtevku, in zahtevek predložili Komisiji.
Although the Commission settled the costs declared in June 2014, the beneficiary received the interim payment only 5 months later, in November 2014. 
Čeprav je Komisija prijavljene stroške poravnala junija 2014, je upravičenec vmesno plačilo prejel šele pet mesecev kasneje, novembra 2014.
Similar cases were found in four more projects in Italy, one in France and six in the Netherlands46. 
Podobni primeri so bili ugotovljeni pri štirih drugih projektih v Italiji, enem projektu v Franciji in šestih projektih na Nizozemskem46.
45 Box 6(3)(a) of the ECA’s annual report for 2013 (OJ C 398, 12.11.2014). 
45 Okvir 6(3)(a) letnega poročila Sodišča za leto 2013 (UL C 398, 12.11.2014).
46 Box 6(5)(a) of the ECA’s annual report for 2014. Box 2 
46 Okvir 6(5)(a) letnega poročila Sodišča za leto 2014. Okvir 2
Observations 44 87 Unlike in cohesion, in rural development only expenditure for which the relevant aid has actually been paid to the beneficiary is eligible for the EU contribution47. 
Opažanja 44 87 Za razliko od področja kohezije so na področju razvoja podeželja za prispevek EU upravičeni samo odhodki, za katere je bila ustrezna pomoč dejansko izplačana upravičencu47.
88 For the 2014-2020 period, the regulation specifies that the public contribution to beneficiaries must be paid within 90 days of the date on which the beneficiary submits a payment claim48. 
88 Za obdobje 2014–2020 uredba določa, da je treba javni prispevek upravičencu izplačati v 90 dneh od dneva, ko je vložil zahtevek za plačilo48.
The regulation also features a back-up clause requiring the Member State to ensure, by the date of closure, that the amount of the public contribution paid to beneficiaries is at least equal to the contribution received from the EU budget49. 
Uredba vsebuje tudi rezervno klavzulo, v skladu s katero mora država članica do datuma zaključka zagotoviti, da je bil upravičencem izplačan znesek javnega prispevka, ki je vsaj enakovreden prispevku, prejetemu od EU49.
Certain requirements in the cohesion guidelines go beyond the regulatory provisions 89 We found that the cohesion guidelines introduced some requirements which went beyond the regulatory provisions. 
Nekatere zahteve iz smernic za področje kohezije presegajo uredbene določbe 89 Ugotovili smo, da so bile v smernicah za področje kohezije uvedene nekatere zahteve, ki so presegale uredbene določbe.
The requirements in question related to financial instruments, non-functioning projects, the phasing of projects and the residual risk rate. 
Zadevne zahteve so se nanašale na finančne instrumente, nedelujoče projekte, delitev projektov v faze in stopnjo preostalega tveganja.
They are presented in Table 5, which also indicates how they are addressed in rural development and whether any changes have been made for 2014-2020. 
Predstavljene so v tabeli 5, v kateri je tudi navedeno, kako se te zahteve obravnavajo na področju razvoja podeželja in ali so bile za obdobje 2014–2020 dodane spremembe.
No additional requirements were introduced by the rural development guidelines. 
V smernicah za področje razvoja podeželja niso bile uvedene dodatne zahteve.
90 Around 19 % of managing authorities and 24 % of audit authorities also noted in their replies to the survey that some requirements in the guidelines went beyond the provisions in the regulations. 
90 Tudi približno 19 % organov upravljanja in 24 % revizijskih organov je v odgovorih na anketo navedlo, da so nekatere zahteve iz smernic presegale uredbene določbe.
91 The requirements listed in Table 5 were all introduced to address specific shortcomings. 
91 Zahteve, navedene v tabeli 5, so bile uvedene za obravnavo specifičnih pomanjkljivosti.
The requirements concerning non-functioning projects and the reporting of a residual risk rate help to mitigate the risks associated with closure. 
Zahtevi, ki se nanašata na nedelujoče projekte in sporočanje stopnje preostalega tveganja, pomagata manjšati tveganja, povezana z zaključevanjem.
The clarifications related to the phasing of non-major projects are needed, but, as formulated, may complicate the closure exercise. 
Pojasnila, ki se nanašajo na delitev manjših projektov v faze, so nujna, vendar lahko v svoji trenutni obliki zapletejo zaključevanje.
We have previously reported on the extension of the eligibility period for financial instruments through the Commission’s closure guidelines50 which poses a problem of the hierarchy of norms. 
Že v preteklosti smo poročali o podaljšanju obdobja upravičenosti za finančne instrumente v smernicah Komisije o zaključevanju50, zaradi česar se pojavi problem hierarhije pravnih aktov.
The Commission contests this view and has refused to submit a legislative proposal amending Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 so as to provide legal certainty to the Member States51. 
Komisija se s tem stališčem ne strinja in je zavrnila možnost predložitve zakonodajnega predloga o spremembi Uredbe (ES) št. 1083/2006, s čimer bi zagotovila pravno varnost državam članicam51.
47 Article 71(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005. 
47 Člen 71(1) Uredbe (ES) št. 1698/2005.
48 Article 132 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013. 
48 Člen 132 Uredbe (EU) št. 1303/2013.
49 Article 129 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013. 
49 Člen 129 Uredbe (EU) št. 1303/2013.
50 Paragraph 6.45 of the ECA’s annual report for 2015, paragraph 6.52 of the ECA’s annual report for 2014 and paragraph 43 of SR No 19/2016. 
50 Glej odstavek 6.45 letnega poročila Sodišča za leto 2015, odstavek 6.52 letnega poročila Sodišča za leto 2014 in odstavek 43 Posebnega poročila št. 19/2016.
51 Commission reply to paragraph 6.52 of the ECA’s annual report for 2014, paragraph 6.45 of the ECA’s annual report for 2015 and paragraph 43 of Special Report No 19/2016 ‘Implementing the EU budget through financial instruments — lessons to be learnt from the 2007-2013 programme period’(http://eca. europa.eu). 
51 Odgovor Komisije na odstavek 6.52 letnega poročila Sodišča za leto 2014, odstavek 6.45 letnega poročila Sodišča za leto 2015 in odstavek 43 Posebnega poročila št. 19/2016 – Izvrševanje proračuna EU s finančnimi instrumenti – izkušnje, pridobljene v programskem obdobju 2007–2013 (http://eca.europa. eu).
Observations 45 Requirements in the cohesion guidelines which go beyond the regulations Topic Eligibility period for expenditure under financial instruments1 Description of the issue in cohesion Approach in rural development Approach in 2014-2020 period Phasing of major projects4 vs. non-major projects. 
Opažanja 45 Zahteve v smernicah za področje kohezije, ki presegajo uredbe Tema Obdobje upravičenosti za odhodke v okviru finančnih instrumentov1 Opis težave na področju kohezije Pristop na področju razvoja podeželja Pristop v obdobju 2014–2020 Delitev velikih projektov v faze4 v primerjavi z delitvijo manjših projektov v faze V letnem poročilu za leto 2015 smo navedli, da je v členu 56(1) Uredbe (ES) št.
In our 2015 annual report we noted that Article 56(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 established 31 December 2015 as final date of eligibility for payments. 
1083/2006 kot končni datum upravičenosti plačil določen 31. decem­ ber 2015.
In April 2015, the Commission decided to extend the eligibility period until 31 March 2017. 
Aprila 2015 se je Komisija odločila, da bo obdobje upravičenosti podaljšala do 31. marca 2017.
It did this unilaterally, through a Commission decision amending the closure guidelines, instead of asking the Council and Parliament to amend the regulation. 
To je storila enostransko, s sklepom Komisije o spremembi smernic o zaključevanju, namesto da bi Svet in Parlament prosila za spremembo uredbe.
Since there is still no legislation of sufficient hierarchy we consider disbursements made after 31 December 2015 to be irregular2. 
Ker še vedno ni zakonodaje, ki bi bila v hierarhiji zakonodaje dovolj visoko, menimo, da so izplačila po 31. decembru 2015 nepravilna2.
The regulation provides for the phasing of major projects5 (splitting them into separate stages to be carried out in different programme periods), but the guidelines6 contain further rules on phasing covering the financing of non-major projects over two programme periods (2007-2013 and 2014-2020). 
Uredba določa, da se veliki projekti delijo v faze5 (se razdelijo v ločene faze, ki se izvajajo v različnih programskih obdobjih), vendar smernice6 vsebujejo dodatna pravila o delitvi v faze, ki se nanašajo na financiranje manjših projektov v dveh programskih obdobjih (2007–2013 in 2014–2020).
The requirements governing the financing of projects over two programme periods are more complicated and restrictive in cohesion than in rural development. 
Zahteve, ki urejajo financiranje projektov v dveh programskih obdobjih, so na področju kohezije bolj zapletene in restriktivne kot na področju razvoja podeželja.
No change to the eligibility period, which remains 31 December 2015 as for all other expenditure. 
Obdobje upravičenosti se ni spre­ menilo, kot pri drugih odhodkih rok ostaja 31. december 2015.
The regulation does not provide for the division of projects into phases. 
Uredba ne vsebuje določb o delitvi projektov v faze.
Unfinished projects are generally eligible7 (without a requirement relating to the total cost of the project) for further co-financing in the new period based on the transitional rules. 
Nedokončani pro­ jekti so na splošno upravičeni7 (brez zahteve, ki bi se nanašala na skupne stroške projekta) do nadaljnjega sofinanciranja v novem obdobju na podlagi prehodnih pravil.
The cut-off point is the date of payment of expenditure. 
Presečni datum je datum plačila odhodkov.
In both policy areas, the expenditure under financial instruments generally has to have been actually paid or, in the case of guarantees, committed within the eligibility period3. 
Na obeh področjih morajo biti odhodki v okviru finančnih instrumentov dejansko plačani ali, v primeru jamstev, odobre­ ni v obdobju upravičenosti3.
As with the 2007-2013 period, the regulations for the 2014-2020 period cover only the phasing of major projects. 
Enako kot v obdobju 2007– 2013 uredbe za obdobje 2014– 2020 zajemajo samo delitev velikih projektov v faze.
1 Payments from a financial instrument to final recipients, the reimbursement of management costs and the issuance of guarantees. 
1 Plačila iz finančnega instrumenta končnim prejemnikom, povračilo stroškov upravljanja in izdajanje jamstev.
2 Paragraph 6.45 of the ECA’s annual report for 2015 (OJ C 375, 13.10.2016). 
2 Odstavek 6.45 letnega poročila Sodišča za leto 2015 (UL C 375, 13.
3 Article 42(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013: ‘at closure of a programme, the eligible expenditure of the financial instrument shall be the total amount of programme contributions effectively paid or, in the case of guarantees, committed by the financial instrument within the eligibility period’. 
3 Člen 42(1) Uredbe (EU) št. 1303/2013: „Ob zaključku programa so upravičeni izdatki finančnega instrumenta skupni znesek prispevkov iz programa, ki jih je finančni instrument dejansko izplačal ali, v primeru jamstev, odobril v obdobju upravičenosti”.
This is subject to the exceptions in Article 42(2) and (3). 
Pri tem veljajo izjeme iz člena 42(2) in (3).
4 Article 39 of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 defines a major project as an operation whose total cost exceeds 50 million euros. 
4 V členu 39 Uredbe (ES) št. 1083/2006 je veliki projekt opredeljen kot operacija, katere skupni stroški presegajo 50 milijonov EUR.
5 Article 40(d) of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006. 
5 Člen 40(d) Uredbe (ES) št. 1083/2006.
6 Sections 3.3 and 3.4 of the Cohesion closure guidelines. 
6 Oddelka 3.3 in 3.4 smernic o zaključevanju za področje kohezije.
Observations 46 Topic Definition and requirements for non-functioning projects Description of the issue in cohesion Approach in rural development Approach in 2014-2020 period Requirement to calculate a residual risk rate No legal requirement for operations to be functioning by closure, hence a risk that operations receiving EU co-financing may never be completed. 
Opažanja 46 Tema Opredelitev nedelujočih projektov in zahteve zanje Opis težave na področju kohezije Pristop na področju razvoja podeželja Pristop v obdobju 2014–2020 Zahteva, da se izračuna stopnja preostalega tveganja Ni pravne zahteve, da bi operacije v času zaključe­ vanja delovale, zato obstaja tveganje, da operacije, ki dobivajo sofinanciranje EU, morda ne bodo nikoli končane.
This requirement is introduced in the guidelines8. 
Ta zahteva je uvedena v smernicah8.
However, as an exception and under certain conditions, non-functioning projects can be co-financed. 
Izjemoma in pod določenimi pogoji pa je mogoče sofinancirati tudi nedelujoče projekte.
They have to be completed by 31 March 2019; otherwise the Commission will proceed with a financial correction. 
Končani morajo biti do 31. marca 2019, sicer bo Komisija izvedla finančni popravek.
The guidelines9 expand the regulatory requirement of calculation of an annual error rate to a requirement for the audit authorities to disclose a residual risk rate in the closure declaration for each OP. 
V smernicah9 je zahteva o izračunu letne stopnje napake razširjena na zahtevo, da revizijski organi v izjavi o zaključitvi za vsak operativni program razkrijejo stopnjo preostalega tveganja.
The residual risk rate at closure is defined as the sum of the annual residual risk amounts (taking account of withdrawals and recoveries) divided by the sum of the total expenditure declared at closure. 
Stopnja preostalega tveganja ob zaključku je opredeljena kot vsota zneskov, ki ustrezajo preostalemu letne­ mu tveganju (ob upoštevanju umikov in izterjav), deljena z vsoto skupnih odhodkov, prijavljenih ob zaključku.
The audit authorities should take into consideration the residual risk rate when formulating their audit opinion at closure. 
Revizijski organi bi morali stopnjo pre­ ostalega tveganja upoštevati pri oblikovanju svoje­ ga revizijskega mnenja ob zaključku.
While this may mean a good deal of additional work for some audit authorities, it provides the Commission with additional assurance that the remaining level of error for a programme is below materiality at closure. 
Ta zahteva bi lahko sicer za nekatere revizijske organe pomenila veliko dodatnega dela, vendar pa daje Komisiji dodatno zagotovilo, da je stopnja preostale napake programa ob zaključku pod pragom pomembnosti.
Unfinished projects are generally eligible as explained above. 
Nedokončani projekti so na splošno upravičeni, kot je pojasnjeno zgoraj.
The regulations do not require certification bodies to submit an audit opinion or a report for the whole period, or to calculate a residual risk rate for the programme at closure. 
Uredbe ne zahtevajo, da bi certifika­ cijski organi predložili revizijsko mne­ nje ali poročilo za celotno obdobje ali da bi izračunali stopnjo preostalega tveganja za program ob zaključku.
Still no requirement for operations to be functioning at closure. 
Še vedno ni zahteve, da bi operacije v času zaključevanja delovale.
The regulations do not require audit authorities or certification bodies to submit an audit opinion or a report for the whole period, or to calculate a residual risk rate for the programme at closure. 
Uredbe ne zahtevajo, da bi revizijski ali certifikacijski organi predložili revizijsko mnenje ali poročilo za celotno obdobje ali da bi izračunali stopnjo preostalega tveganja za program ob zaključku.
8 Section 3.5 ‘Non-functioning projects’: ‘at the time of the submission of the closure documents, Member States have to ensure that all projects included in the programme closure are functioning, meaning completed and in use, so considered as eligible’. 
8 Oddelek 3.5 – Nedelujoči projekti: ob predložitvi dokumentov o zaključku morajo države članice zagotoviti, da vsi projekti, ki so zajeti v zaključek programa, delujejo, torej da so končani in se uporabljajo ter so posledično razumljeni kot upravičeni.
9 Annex VI of the Cohesion closure guidelines (Guidance on preparation for the final control report and closure declaration). 
9 Priloga VI k smernicam o zaključevanju na področju kohezije (smernice za pripravo končnega poročila o kontroli in izjave o zaključitvi).
Observations 47 Member States are satisfied with the Commission’s support, but coordination between national and regional authorities is essential 92 The Commission should help the authorities in the Member States to prepare for closure by providing timely and appropriate support in the form of training and ongoing clarification as and when issues arise. 
Opažanja 47 Države članice so zadovoljne s podporo Komisije, toda usklajevanje med nacionalnimi in regionalnimi organi je bistveno 92 Komisija bi morala pomagati organom v državah članicah pri pripravah na zaključevanje, tako da bi jim zagotavljala pravočasno in ustrezno podporo v obliki usposabljanja in sprotnega razjasnjevanja vprašanj, ko se ta pojavijo.
Member States should start their preparations well in advance and organise closure activities nationally and regionally at the appropriate time. 
Države članice bi morale dovolj zgodaj začeti priprave in ob ustreznem času organizirati dejavnosti zaključevanja na nacionalni in regionalni ravni.
Member States are satisfied with the Commission’s support; overall, they consider themselves prepared for closure 93 Our analysis showed that the Commission had provided adequate support, in the form of training, conferences, seminars, meetings and Q&A documents with a bearing on both policy areas. 
Države članice so zadovoljne s podporo Komisije in na splošno menijo, da so pripravljene za zaključevanje 93 Naša analiza je pokazala, da je Komisija zagotovila ustrezno podporo, in sicer v obliki usposabljanj, konferenc, seminarjev, sestankov ter dokumentov z vprašanji in odgovori, ki se nanašajo na obe področji.
All the responsible authorities had access to these documents and were invited to attend a series of training sessions organised by the Commission. 
Vsi pristojni organi so imeli dostop do teh dokumentov in so bili povabljeni, da se udeležijo sklopa usposabljanj, ki ga je organizirala Komisija.
94 Most authorities that participated in our survey, from both policy areas, found the Commission’s training and support to be useful and reported that their questions were answered at the appropriate time. 
94 Večini organov z obeh področij, ki so sodelovali v naši anketi, sta se usposabljanje in podpora Komisije zdela koristna. Poročali so, da so odgovore na vprašanja dobili v ustreznem času.
The majority of respondents were also satisfied with the type of support provided by the Commission, with just one tenth of all authorities expressing a preference for support to be given in some other way. 
Večina anketirancev je bila zadovoljna tudi z vrsto podpore, ki jo je zagotovila Komisija. Samo desetina organov je izrazila željo, da bi se pomoč zagotavljala v drugačni obliki.
95 Nearly one third of respondents (29 %) found the Commission’s support for the 2007-2013 closure exercise to be an improvement on the 2000-2006 period (see Figure 6). 
95 Skoraj tretjina anketirancev (29 %) je menila, da se je podpora Komisije pri zaključevanju za obdobje 2007–2013 izboljšala v primerjavi z obdobjem 2000–2006 (glej sliko 6).