natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
III. first indent the commission already has close contacts with the member states and the railway Institutions. It will continue to work closely with them. In addition, as part of its ongoing stakeholder consultation exercise on the ten-t guidelines, the commission is looking for input on how trans-european corridors for which there is significant actual or anticipated demand can best be delivered. 
III., prva alinea komisija že ima tesne stike z državami članicami in železniškimi organizacijami in bo z njimi še naprej tesno sodelovala. poleg tega v okviru tekočih posvetovanj z interesnimi skupinami o smernicah ten-t išče možnosti, kako bi lahko najbolje uresničila transevropske koridorje, po katerih obstaja velika dejanska ali predvidena potreba.
III. second indent the commission agrees that the coordinators play a vital role and it appointed three new ones on 8 june 2010, bringing their number to nine. the commission agrees that further work on defining a bottleneck is needed and will continue to work on this. the european coordinators have analysed the bottlenecks on the priority projects for which they are responsible. the commission has also reported on the bottlenecks in its yearly reports. special report no 8/2010 – Improving transport performance on trans-european rail axes: Have eu rail infrastructure investments been effective? 
III., druga alinea komisija se strinja, da imajo koordinatorji pomembno vlogo in je 8. junija 2010 imenovala tri nove ter s tem povečala njihovo število na devet. komisija se strinja, da je potrebno nadaljnje delo glede ugotavljanja ozkih grl in bo glede tega ukrepala še naprej. evropski koordinatorji so analizirali ozka grla v prednostnih projektih, za katere so odgovorni. komisija je o ozkih grlih poročala tudi v letnih poročilih. posebno poročilo št. 8/2010 – Izboljševanje prevozne zmogljivosti na vseevropskih železniških oseh: ali so bile investicije eU v železniško infrastrukturo uspešne?
64 III. third indent the commission considers that the procedures for approving projects under the cohesion policy for the 2007-2013 programming period are sound. the commission continues to work on their improvement and is investing significant resources to contribute to the improvement of project preparation. the commission welcomes the court’s recognition of the improvements made to ten-t selection procedures; however, it accepts that there is room for improvement as regards the use of cost-benefit analysis. the ten-t executive agency is working to develop this further; nevertheless, given that ten-t financing only co-funds a limited amount of each project compared to that funded by member states, it is logical that the onus for assessing costs and benefits should fall on them, particularly as almost all data and assumptions originate from them. 
64 III., tretja alinea komisija meni, da so postopki za odobritev projektov v okviru kohezijske politike za programsko obdobje 2007–2013 učinkoviti. še naprej jih poskuša izboljševati in vlaga znatna sredstva, da bi prispevala k izboljšanju priprave projektov. komisija pozdravlja dejstvo, da sodišče priznava izboljšave izbirnih postopkov ten-t, vendar se strinja, da bi bilo mogoče še izboljšati uporabo analize stroškov in koristi. Izvajalska agencija ten-t se ukvarja z nadaljnjim razvojem tega vidika, vendar pa se s sredstvi ten-t sofinancira samo omejen znesek vsakega projekta v primerjavi z zneskom, ki ga financirajo države članice, zato je logično, da nalogo ocenjevanja stroškov in koristi prevzamejo države članice same, zlasti, ker so skoraj vsi podatki in domneve njihovi.
III. fourth indent the commission recognises the importance of exchanges of information amongst project promoters. the ten-t executive agency will facilitate this by organising discussions at its regular workshops with current and potential beneficiaries on best practices and knowledge exchange between all project promoters, particularly in the rail sector. 
III., četrta alinea komisija priznava pomembnost izmenjave informacij med pobudniki projektov. Izvajalska agencija ten-t bo pospešila izmenjavo informacij z organiziranjem razprav na svojih rednih delavnicah s sedanjimi in potencialnimi upravičenci o najboljših praksah in izmenjavi znanja med vsemi pobudniki projektov, zlasti v železniškem sektorju.
III. fifth indent by adopting technical specifications for Interoperability the commission has worked, and will continue to work, on these ’practical constraints’. the european coordinators also devote particular efforts to these issues. reply of tHe commIssIon INTroDUCTIoN 11. footnote 6 when presenting figures related to investments in its documents the commission bases itself on the information provided by member states. recognising that the quality of the financial data would benefit from improvement, the commission invested significant efforts which resulted in the information in the commission’s june 2010 report being significantly better than in previous reports. 
III., peta alinea komisija si je s sprejetjem tehničnih specifikacij za interoperabilnost prizadevala odpraviti te „praktične ovire“ in bo s tem tudi nadaljevala. evropski koordinatorji prav tako namenjajo veliko pozornosti tem vprašanjem. oDgovorI komIsIje UvOd 11., opomba 6 komisija se v svojih dokumentih pri predstavitvi številčnih podatkov, povezanih z vlaganji, opira na informacije, ki so jih predložile države članice. ob spoznanju, da bi bilo kakovost finančnih podatkov vredno izboljšati, je sprejela ustrezne ukrepe, kar se je odražalo v poročilu komisije iz junija 2010, saj so bile informacije v primerjavi s prejšnjimi poročili bistveno boljše.
14. the commission underlines that, prior to 2007, cohesion fund projects were adopted on a project-by-project basis and in line with the available budget credits. the legal basis for the priority projects only applied after 2004. special report no 8/2010 – Improving transport performance on trans-european rail axes: Have eu rail infrastructure investments been effective? 
14. komisija poudarja, da so bili pred letom 2007 projekti v okviru kohezijskega sklada sprejeti na podlagi ocene vsakega posameznega projekta in v skladu z razpoložljivimi proračunskimi sredstvi. pravna podlaga za prednostne projekte je začela veljati šele po letu 2004. posebno poročilo št. 8/2010 – Izboljševanje prevozne zmogljivosti na vseevropskih železniških oseh: ali so bile investicije eU v železniško infrastrukturo uspešne?
65 oBsErVaTIoNs 22. the commission understands that the court means by stating that ’the priority projects do not represent definitive descriptions of the main trans-european rail axes’ that there needs to be general agreement on what are the main axes, and that this agreement should remain as stable as possible over time. the commission considers that it is likely to be particularly difficult to provide a definitive description of the main trans-european rail axes, as they are in a constant state of flux as a function of migration, trade patterns and the geopolitical context. the commission, however, also shares the view that the definition of the main network should be based on objective criteria. therefore, in the future, priority projects should continue to be based on political agreement between the council and european parliament, but relying even more on the best available evidence. 
65 OPažanja 22. komisija izjavo sodišča „prednostni projekti ne pomenijo dokončnih opisov glavnih transevropskih železniških osi“ razume kot potrebo po splošnem dogovoru o tem, kaj so glavne osi, in da bi tak dogovor moral biti v daljšem časovnem obdobju čim bolj stabilen. komisija meni, da bo verjetno zelo težko zagotoviti dokončen opis glavnih transevropskih železniških osi, saj se te nenehno spreminjajo glede na migracijo, trgovinske tokove in geopolitični okvir. vendar pa se komisija tudi strinja s stališčem, da bi morala opredelitev glavnega omrežja temeljiti na objektivnih merilih. zato bi morali v prihodnosti prednostni projekti še naprej temeljiti na političnem sporazumu med svetom in evropskim parlamentom, obenem pa se še bolj opirati na najboljše razpoložljive informacije.
22. third indent while the commission acknowledges that connections to some important sea ports are not included in the priority projects, it would underline that many are. on 4 may 2010, as part of its ten-t revision process, it put forward a working document that establishes the methodology for identifying a future ten-t network. this should avoid any future occurrence of the situation described by the court. reply of tHe commIssIon Box 4 the commission acknowledges that the ertms corridors do not 100 % coincide with priority projects. ertms has requirements that need to be met for both infrastructure and rolling stock. the ten-t revision process is designed to tackle this, and one possibility being considered is to include ertms corridors directly into the priority projects. the commission understands that the polish authorities will submit an application for funding for the part of the polish north-south axis from warsaw to gdynia in late 2010, that this will include ertms and that it will have an indicative total cost of 386 million euro. 
22., tretja alinea medtem ko komisija priznava, da povezave z nekaterimi pomembnimi morskimi pristanišči niso vključene v prednostne naloge, obenem poudarja, da številne so. komisija je 4. maja 2010 v sklopu postopka revizije ten-t predložila delovni dokument, ki določa metodologijo za opredelitev prihodnjega omrežja ten-t. to bi moralo v prihodnosti preprečiti pojav takšnega stanja, kot ga opisuje sodišče. oDgovorI komIsIje Okvir 4 komisija priznava, da se koridorji evropskega sistema za vodenje železniškega prometa ne ujemajo popolnoma s prednostnimi projekti. evropski sistem za vodenje železniškega prometa zahteva, da so izpolnjene tako zahteve glede infrastrukture kot zahteve glede tirnih vozil. postopek revizije ten-t je namenjen obravnavanju te zadeve in ena izmed možnosti, ki se proučuje, je, da bi koridorje evropskega sistema za vodenje železniškega prometa vključili neposredno v prednostne projekte. komisija razume, da bodo poljske oblasti konec leta 2010 predložile prošnjo za financiranje dela poljske severno-južne osi od varšave do gdynie, da bo to vključevalo koridorje evropskega sistema za vodenje železniškega prometa in da bodo okvirni skupni stroški znašali 386 milijonov eUr.
23. the commission agrees that there is scope for improving the definition of priority projects. this is something that is being addressed through the ten-t revision process. 
23. komisija se strinja, da je opredelitev prednostnih projektov mogoče še izboljšati. ta zadeva se trenutno obravnava v okviru revizije ten-t.
24. the commission agrees that the definition of the priority projects has not been based on an analysis of the actual and anticipated traffic flows. It is important to note, however, that while such studies have been carried out both for individual projects and the network, they have yet to lead to conclusive results and so could not be used as they stood. special report no 8/2010 – Improving transport performance on trans-european rail axes: Have eu rail infrastructure investments been effective? 
24. komisija se strinja, da opredelitev prednostnih projektov ne temelji na analizi dejanskih in predvidenih prometnih tokov. treba pa je spomniti, da so takšne študije sicer bile izvedene, tako za posamezne projekte kot za omrežje, vendar še niso prinesle zadovoljivih rezultatov in jih zato v prvotni obliki ni bilo mogoče uporabiti. posebno poročilo št. 8/2010 – Izboljševanje prevozne zmogljivosti na vseevropskih železniških oseh: ali so bile investicije eU v železniško infrastrukturo uspešne?
66 as the court has stated, the commission acknowledges the need to review the ten-t policy. this review is currently being carried out and includes an examination of the methodology for defining the future ten-t network. 
66 kot je izjavilo sodišče, komisija priznava potrebo po pregledu politike ten-t. pregled se trenutno izvaja in vključuje presojo metodologije za opredelitev prihodnjega omrežja ten-t.
29. the commission considers that eu financing has had a significant influence on all the ten-t sections reviewed by the court for this audit. this has included improving the projects originally planned or reducing their risk. 
29. komisija meni, da je imelo financiranje eU znaten vpliv na vse odseke ten-t, ki jih je sodišče pregledalo pri tej reviziji. to je vključevalo izboljšanje prvotno načrtovanih projektov ali zmanjšanje tveganja.
30. the commission considers that, in countries covered by the cohesion fund, many rail projects would simply not go ahead without the substantial eu co-financing from the cohesion fund or the erdf including cross-border sections, thereby improving accessibility and performance for all users. the requirement is to give priority to technically and economically mature projects that are feasible within the programming period; otherwise the funds may be lost to the beneficiaries. the definition of major projects in article 39 of regulation (ec) no 1083/2006 has been amended to make it easier for the member states to submit major cross-border projects. 
30. komisija meni, da se v državah, ki jih zajema kohezijski sklad, številni železniški projekti ne bi izvajali brez znatnega sofinanciranja eU iz kohezijskega sklada ali evropskega sistema za vodenje železniškega prometa, vključno s čezmejnimi odseki, kar izboljšuje dostopnost in zmogljivost za vse uporabnike. prednost morajo imeti tehnično in gospodarsko zreli projekti, ki so izvedljivi v okviru programskega obdobja; v nasprotnem primeru lahko upravičenci izgubijo sredstva. opredelitev velikih projektov v členu 39 Uredbe (es) št. 1083/2006 je bila spremenjena z namenom, da se državam članicam olajša predložitev velikih čezmejnih projektov.
33. the commission agrees that further work on defining a bottleneck is needed and will continue to work on this. the european coordinators have analysed the bottlenecks on the priority projects they are responsible for. the commission also reported on the bottlenecks in its yearly reports. reply of tHe commIssIon 34. the commission for the 2007-2013 period improved its approval procedures for major projects co-funded by the erdf and the cohesion fund. large projects co-financed under the cohesion fund in the 2000-2006 period were often approved section by section for budgetary reasons. 
33. komisija se strinja, da je potrebno nadaljnje delo glede ugotavljanja ozkih grl in bo glede tega ukrepala še naprej. evropski koordinatorji so analizirali ozka grla v prednostnih projektih, za katere so odgovorni. komisija je o ozkih grlih poročala tudi v letnih poročilih. oDgovorI komIsIje 34. komisija je za obdobje 2007–2013 izboljšala svoje postopke za odobritev velikih projektov, sofinanciranih iz evropskega sistema za vodenje železniškega prometa in kohezijskega sklada. veliki projekti, ki so bili v obdobju 2000–2006 sofinancirani iz kohezijskega sklada, so bili iz proračunskih razlogov pogosto odobreni po posameznih odsekih. v tem smislu kakovost priprave posameznih odsekov morda ne odraža kakovosti priprave in razvoja celotne osi.
Internal consultation of the relevant commission services (’inter-service con-sultation’) has been and still is a crucial element in the appraisal and approval process. 
Interno posvetovanje ustreznih služb komisije („notranje posvetovanje“) je še vedno ključni element v postopku ocenjevanja in odobritve.
In the 2007-2013 programming period the commission has established jaspers, which provides technical assistance to the new member states in order to contribute to the improvement of quality of projects at an early stage. 
Da bi pripomogla k izboljšanju kakovosti projektov v zgodnji fazi, je komisija v programskem obdobju 2007–2013 ustanovila jaspers, ki zagotavlja tehnično pomoč novim državam članicam.
It also has a contract with outside experts for technical advice in the appraisal of major projects. under shared management, the project promoter is responsible for adequately defining the technical specifications of projects. the adoption of technical specifications (see annex I) makes a significant contribution to improving the technical quality of rail infrastructure. the madrid-levante project was approved in stages, section-by-section, for budgetary reasons, and not in its totality, as the network involves a total of 940 km of high-speed rail. the eIb was consulted and its recommendations were progressively taken on board in this project. the eIb considered the financing of this projects justified and itself is providing substantial loans for it, in addition to the cohesion fund support. special report no 8/2010 – Improving transport performance on trans-european rail axes: Have eu rail infrastructure investments been effective? 
Ima tudi pogodbo z zunanjimi strokovnjaki za tehnično svetovanje pri ocenjevanju velikih projektov. pri deljenem upravljanju je pobudnik projekta odgovoren za ustrezno opredelitev tehničnih specifikacij projektov. sprejetje tehničnih specifikacij (glej prilogo I) pomeni znaten prispevek k izboljšanju tehnične kakovosti železniške infrastrukture. projekt madrid–levante je bil iz proračunskih razlogov odobren postopoma, po posameznih odsekih, in ne v celoti, saj omrežje obsega skupno 940 km železniške povezave visokih hitrosti. opravljeno je bilo posvetovanje z evropsko investicijsko banko in njena priporočila so bila postopoma upoštevana pri tem projektu. eIb je menila, da je financiranje tega projekta upravičeno in je poleg podpore kohezijskega sklada tudi sama zagotovila znatna posojila zanj. posebno poročilo št. 8/2010 – Izboljševanje prevozne zmogljivosti na vseevropskih železniških oseh: ali so bile investicije eU v železniško infrastrukturo uspešne?
67 the commission disagrees with the implication that subsequent cost escalations were all linked to the eIb’s concerns. It considers that as explained in reply to 46 other factors were responsible. 
67 komisija se ne strinja, da je bilo naknadno povišanje stroškov povezano s pomisleki eIb. meni, da so bili pri tem odločilni drugi dejavniki, kot je navedla v odgovoru na točko 46.
37. first indent the commission would like to emphasise that external experts are at the heart of the ten-t project selection process. there is also an external observer who provides comprehensive feedback to the ten-t executive agency on the whole external evaluation process. 
37., prva alinea komisija želi poudariti, da so zunanji strokovnjaki v središču postopka izbire projektov ten-t. sodeluje tudi zunanji opazovalec, ki izvajalski agenciji ten-t zagotavlja celovite povratne informacije o celotnem zunanjem postopku ocenjevanja.
In the future, the ten-t executive agency will develop a more systematic approach to cost-benefit analysis taking into account existing work. In order to do this it will work with the projects selected in priority 3 of the 2010 annual call to improve project preparation, including by developing consistent approaches to cost-benefit analysis. nevertheless, given that ten-t financing only co-funds a limited amount of each project when compared to that funded by member states, it is logical that the onus for assessing costs and benefits should fall on them, particularly as almost all data and assumptions originate from them. reply of tHe commIssIon as far as the coherent model of european rail traffic flows is concerned, the commission remains to be convinced that the additional insights it would provide would justify the potentially significant level of resources needed in order to bring it to fruition. 
38. komisija pozdravlja dejstvo, da sodišče priznava izboljšave izbirnih postopkov, in se strinja, da bi bilo mogoče še izboljšati uporabo analize stroškov in koristi. v prihodnosti bo izvajalska agencija ten-t oblikovala bolj sistematičen pristop k analizi stroškov in koristi ter ob tem upoštevala obstoječe delo. za dosego tega bo delala z izbranimi projekti 3. prednostnega področja iz letnega razpisa za leto 2010, da bi izboljšala pripravo projektov, vključno z oblikovanjem skladnih pristopov k analizi stroškov in koristi. glede na to, da se s sredstvi ten-t sofinancira le omejen znesek vsakega projekta v primerjavi z zneskom, ki ga financirajo države članice, je logično, da nalogo ocenjevanja stroškov in koristi prevzamejo države članice same, zlasti, ker so skoraj vsi podatki in domneve njihovi. oDgovorI komIsIje glede skladnega modela evropskih železniških prometnih tokov komisija ni prepričana, da bi dodatna spoznanja, ki bi jih zagotovil, upravičila morebitna znatna sredstva, potrebna za njegovo reali-zacijo.
44. a memorandum of understanding was adopted on 8 june 2010, setting out the steps to remedy this situation. the three member states concerned by pp3 (france, spain and portugal) have signed it. 
44. 8. junija 2010 je bil sprejet memorandum o soglasju, ki določa ukrepe za izboljšanje tega stanja. podpisale so ga tri države članice, ki jih zadeva prednostni projekt 3 (francija, španija in portugalska).
45. the commission would like to emphasise that cost escalations are typical for large infrastructure projects. 
45. komisija želi poudariti, da je povišanje stroškov značilno za velike infrastrukturne projekte.
46. the commission agrees on the benefits of thorough and detailed project preparation; however, as the court states in the previous paragraph, cost escalations in the cases studied generally arose for reasons linked to unforeseeable factors. concerning the madrid-levante section (but also other equally complex projects), the cost increases mentioned by the court could be due to a variety of factors, some of which are unforeseeable. for example, high inflation in construction projects in spain and an unforeseen increase in costs due to difficult geological conditions have had a significant effect on the madrid-levante project cited by the court. special report no 8/2010 – Improving transport performance on trans-european rail axes: Have eu rail infrastructure investments been effective? 
46. komisija se strinja glede prednosti temeljite in podrobne priprave projekta, vendar, kot sodišče navaja v prejšnjem odstavku, so se stroški v proučenih primerih na splošno povečali iz razlogov, povezanih z nepredvidljivi dejavniki. pri odseku madrid–levante (pa tudi drugih enako zahtevnih projektih) bi bilo povišanje stroškov, ki ga navaja sodišče, mogoče pripisati različnim razlogom, med katerimi nekaterih ni bilo mogoče pred-videti: visoka inflacija pri gradbenih projektih v španiji in nepredvideno povišanje stroškov zaradi težkih geoloških pogojev sta na primer znatno vplivala na projekt madrid–levante, ki ga navaja sodišče. posebno poročilo št. 8/2010 – Izboljševanje prevozne zmogljivosti na vseevropskih železniških oseh: ali so bile investicije eU v železniško infrastrukturo uspešne?