natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Third alinea: The Commission can only partially accept this recommendation, as it is not in a position at this stage to make specific commitments in relation to legislative proposals for the post 2020 period. 
Tretja alinea: Komisija lahko le delno sprejme to priporočilo, saj v tej fazi ne more sprejeti posebnih zavez glede zakonodajnih predlogov za obdobje po letu 2020.
The Commission commits to analyse possible ways of strengthening result-orientation of the future CAP, by achieving EU added value whilst reflecting better the needs and aspirations of the territories concerned, as outlined in Commission Communication COM(2017) 713 final. 
Komisija se zavezuje, da bo preučila možne načine okrepitve usmerjenosti k rezultatom prihodnje SKP, da bi dosegala dodano vrednost EU, hkrati pa bolje odražala potrebe in želje zadevnih ozemelj, kot je navedeno v Sporočilu Komisije COM(2017) 713 final.
Fourth alinea: The Commission partially accepts this recommendation. 
Četrta alinea: Komisija delno sprejema to priporočilo.
The recommendation has already been implemented and the enhanced annual implementation reports of 2019 will contain the required information. 
Priporočilo se že izvaja; zahtevane informacije bodo vključene v razširjena letna poročila o izvajanju za leto 2019.
Fifth alinea: The Commission considers this recommendation to be addressed to the Member States. 
Peta alinea: Komisija meni, da je to priporočilo naslovljeno na države članice.
While actual selection procedures and definition of selection criteria remain the competence of the Member States in line with the shared management principle, the Commission will pursue its ongoing efforts to encourage Member States to apply relevant selection procedures. 
Čeprav v skladu z načelom deljenega upravljanja dejanski izbirni postopki in opredelitev izbirnih meril ostajajo v pristojnosti držav članic , si bo Komisija še naprej prizadevala spodbujati države članice k uporabi relevantnih izbirnih postopkov.
The Commission has already started to prepare a new study on support in the energy and other sectors (e.g.: transport), including renewable energy sources. 
Komisija je že začela pripravljati novo študijo o podpori v energetskem in drugih sektorjih (npr. prometnem), vključno z obnovljivimi viri energije.
Under the Energy Union Governance – currently in co-decision – the Commission is monitoring subsidies in the energy sector. 
V okviru uredbe o upravljanju energetske unije, ki je trenutno v postopku soodločanja, Komisija spremlja subvencije v energetskem sektorju.
Detailed analysis and results will be available in the next edition of the Energy Prices and Costs report, to be published in 2018. 
Podrobna analiza in rezultati bodo na voljo v naslednji izdaji poročila o cenah in stroških energije, ki bo objavljeno v letu 2018.
The Commission's position is outlined in the Commission replies to Special Report No 16/2017. 
Stališče Komisije je opisano v odgovorih Komisije na posebno poročilo št. 16/2017.
Rural development policy offers a flexible framework/ toolbox which allows Member States, in line with the principle of subsidiarity and the shared management context, to decide how to best support deployment of renewable energy in line with EU policy objectives and the Member States'/Regions' specific context, potential and needs. 
Politika razvoja podeželja ponuja prilagodljiv okvir/nabor orodij, ki državam članicam v skladu z načelom subsidiarnosti in v okviru deljenega upravljanja omogoča, da odločajo o najboljšem 2
2 27. (i) Linking renewable energy to rural development occurs in two ways. 
27. (i) Povezovanje energije iz obnovljivih virov z razvojem podeželja poteka na dva načina.
On the one hand, the EU renewable energy policy, by creating demand for renewable energy, can indirectly support development in rural areas which become suppliers of renewable energy (e.g. through wind and solar) or biomass raw material (from forestry and agriculture). 
Na eni strani lahko politika EU o energiji iz obnovljivih virov z ustvarjanjem povpraševanja po energiji iz obnovljivih virov posredno podpre razvoj na podeželskih območjih, ki postanejo dobavitelji energije iz obnovljivih virov (npr. vetrne in sončne energije) ali surovin biomase (iz gozdarstva in kmetijstva).
On the other hand, renewable energy production in rural areas can be directly supported under the framework of rural development policy, which is, at EU level, chiefly supported through the EAFRD. 
Na drugi strani pa je mogoče proizvodnjo energije iz obnovljivih virov na podeželju neposredno podpreti v okviru politike razvoja podeželja, ki jo na ravni EU podpira predvsem evropski kmetijski sklad za razvoj podeželja (EKSRP).
A reference to rural proofing is included in the Commission Communication on the Future of Food and Farming (see page 22 of COM(2017) 713 final). 
Navedba preverjanja vplivov na podeželska območja je vključena v sporočilo Komisije o prihodnosti preskrbe s hrano in kmetijstva (glej stran 22 COM(2017) 713 final).
In this Communication the Commission commits to promoting a "rural proofing" mechanism, which systematically reviews relevant policies through a "rural lens", considering possible impacts on rural communities. 
V tem sporočilu se Komisija zavezuje, da bo spodbujala mehanizem preverjanja vplivov na podeželska območja, v katerem se pomembne politike sistematično preverjajo „z vidika podeželja“, pri čemer se upoštevajo morebitni učinki na podeželske skupnosti.
A concrete example of rural proofing is the concept of Smart Villages, which is supported by different policies and ESI Funds to favour the creation of villages of the future, well equipped to build on their specific assets (see page 21 of COM(2017) 713 final). 
Nazoren primer preverjanja vplivov na podeželska območja je koncept pametnih vasi, ki ga podpirajo različne politike ter evropski strukturni in investicijski skladi (skladi ESI) za spodbujanje oblikovanja vasi prihodnosti, ki bodo zmožne izkoristiti svoje specifične prednosti (glej stran 21 COM(2017) 713 final).
The risks associated to bioenergy production and use are analysed in the 2016 Impact Assessment on Bioenergy Sustainability1 (SWD(2016) 418 final), prepared for the recast of the Renewable energy directive. 
Tveganja, povezana s proizvodnjo in uporabo bioenergije, so analizirana v dokumentu Impact Assessment on Bioenergy Sustainability1 (SWD(2016) 418 final) (Ocena učinka trajnostne rabe bioenergije) iz leta 2016, ki je bil pripravljen za prenovitev direktive o energiji iz obnovljivih virov.
The carbon impacts of biomass production are analysed also in the 2016 Impact Assessment to the proposal for the LULUCF Regulation (SWD(2016) 249 final)2. 
Učinki ogljika zaradi proizvodnje biomase so analizirani tudi v dokumentu Impact Assessment to the proposal for the LULUCF Regulation (SWD(2016) 249 final)2 (Ocena učinka predloga uredbe LULUCF) iz leta 2016.
The existing and proposed EU sustainability criteria for bioenergy are binding on Member States and economic operators. 
Obstoječa in predlagana trajnostna merila EU za bioenergijo so zavezujoča za države članice in gospodarske subjekte.
The EU sustainability criteria are not a binding condition for placing bioenergy on the EU market. 
Trajnostna merila EU niso zavezujoči pogoj za dajanje bioenergije na trg EU.
In order to avoid excessive administrative burden, the EU sustainability and greenhouse gas saving criteria proposed in the RED II proposal do not apply to small biomass-based heating/cooling and electricity installations, with a fuel capacity below 20 MW in the case of biomass and 0.5 MWel in the case of biogas. 
Da bi se izognili pretiranemu upravnemu bremenu, trajnostna merila EU in merila EU za prihranke toplogrednih plinov, predlagana v predlogu prenove direktive o energiji iz obnovljivih virov, ne veljajo za majhne obrate, ki temeljijo na biomasi in proizvajajo energijo za ogrevanje in hlajenje ter električno energijo, z zmogljivostjo manj kot 20 MW v primeru biomase ter 0,5 MWel v primeru bioplina.
The risks associated to bioenergy production and use and the related EU policy framework are analysed in the Commission Impact Assessment on Bioenergy Sustainability, prepared for the recast of the Renewable energy directive. 
Tveganja, povezana s proizvodnjo in uporabo bioenergije, in zadevni okvir politike EU so analizirani v dokumentu Komisije z oceno učinka trajnostne rabe bioenergije, ki je bil pripravljen za prenovitev direktive o energiji iz obnovljivih virov.
The carbon impacts of biomass production are also analysed in the 2016 Impact Assessment to the LULUCF Regulation (SWD(2016) 249 final)3. 
Učinki ogljika zaradi proizvodnje biomase so analizirani tudi v dokumentu z oceno učinka uredbe LULUCF (SWD(2016) 249 final)3 () iz leta 2016.
The RED II will, when adopted, reinforce the EU sustainability criteria to minimize significant risks of negative environmental impacts associated to biomass for energy. 
Prenovljena direktiva o energiji iz obnovljivih virov bo okrepila trajnostna merila EU za zmanjšanje večjih tveganj negativnih okoljskih vplivov, povezanih z biomaso za energijo.
In particular, the proposal aims to minimise the risk of adverse environmental impacts associated with increased forest biomass harvesting. 
Cilj predloga je zlasti zmanjšati tveganje škodljivih okoljskih vplivov, povezanih s povečanim pridobivanjem gozdne biomase.
In addition, it requires that the impact of biomass harvesting on soil quality and biodiversity are minimised. 
Poleg tega se zahteva čim manjši vpliv pridobivanja biomase na kakovost tal in biotsko raznovrstnost.
Evidence of compliance can include legislation in place in the country of biomass origin, or in case this is not available, evidence at the forest holding level. 
Dokazi o izpolnjevanju zahtev lahko vključujejo zakonodajo v državi izvora biomase ali, če ta ni na voljo, dokaze na ravni gozdnih posestev.
These criteria should be seen in connection with other relevant EU policies. 
Ta merila je treba razumeti v povezavi z drugimi zadevnimi politikami EU.
(LULUCF Regulation), includes emissions or removals related to the production of biomass for energy, and provides for the maintenance of the EU LULUCF carbon stock ("no debit rule"). 
Poleg tega predlog Komisije glede uredbe o vključitvi emisij toplogrednih plinov in odvzemov zaradi rabe zemljišč, spremembe rabe zemljišč in gozdarstva v okvir podnebne in energetske politike do leta 2030 (uredba LULUCF) vključuje emisije ali odvzeme, povezane s proizvodnjo biomase za energijo, in zagotavlja vzdrževanje zaloge ogljika na podlagi LULUCF v EU („pravilo o nepresežku emisij“).
The Commission believes that both the current RED and the RED II proposal discourage unsustainable bioenergy. The Commission believes that the RED II proposal considerably reinforces the EU sustainability framework for bioenergy and ensures that bioenergy use in the EU post-2020 delivers optimal GHG savings while minimizing the risks of adverse environmental impacts associated to increased forest biomass harvesting. 
Komisija meni, da predlog prenove direktive o energiji iz obnovljivih virov močno krepi okvir EU za trajnostno rabo bioenergije in zagotavlja optimalne prihranke emisij toplogrednih plinov zaradi uporabe bioenergije v EU v obdobju po letu 2020, hkrati pa zmanjšuje tveganja škodljivih okoljskih vplivov, povezanih s povečanim pridobivanjem gozdne biomase.
The Commission's proposal on LULUCF – currently in co-decision – provides an additional sustainability safeguard. 
Predlog Komisije o LULUCF, ki je trenutno v postopku soodločanja, zagotavlja dodaten ukrep za zaščito trajnosti.
The proposal foresees the continuation of the Kyoto Protocol "no debit rule" for the EU LULUCF sector, meaning that the EU LULUCF carbon sink is to be protected, or at least maintained. 
Predlog predvideva nadaljnji obstoj „pravila o nepresežku emisij“ iz Kjotskega protokola za sektor LULUCF v EU, kar pomeni, da je treba ponor ogljika na podlagi LULUCF v EU zaščititi ali vsaj vzdrževati.
Rural development policy is based on the principles of shared management and subsidiarity. 
Politika razvoja podeželja temelji na načelih deljenega upravljanja in subsidiarnosti.
Thus it is the competence of Member States/ Regions to determine how investments in renewable energy supported under EAFRD can best meet rural development objectives in line with their specific context, potential and needs. 
Zato države članice same odločajo o tem, kako lahko naložbe v energijo iz obnovljivih virov, ki so podprte v okviru EKSRP, najbolje dosežejo cilje razvoja podeželja v skladu z njihovim specifičnim okvirom, potencialom in potrebami.
In order to ensure that there is no overcompensation, maximum aid intensities and other conditions are set out in the horizontal State aid rules, notably the General Block Exemption Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 (see Section 7) and the Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy 2014-2020. 
Da bi se izognili prekomerni kompenzaciji, so največja intenzivnost pomoči in drugi pogoji določeni v pravilih horizontalne državne pomoči, zlasti v uredbi o splošnih skupinskih izjemah (EU) št. 651/2014 (glej oddelek 7) in v smernicah o državni pomoči za varstvo okolja in energijo za obdobje 2014–2020.
Common Commission reply to paragraphs 45 and 46: Thematic objectives under ESIF are intentionally set at a broader level and are not covering single parts of interlinked aspects as the deployment of renewable energy alone. 
Skupni odgovor Komisije na odstavka 45 in 46: Tematski cilji v okviru evropskih strukturnih in investicijskih skladov so namenoma določeni širše in ne zajemajo posameznih delov med seboj povezanih vidikov, kot je zgolj uporaba energije iz obnovljivih virov.
However, target indicator T 16 is well reflecting planned investments in renewable energy production under EAFRD (Focus Area 5C, see also paragraph 68). 
Kljub temu pa ciljni kazalnik T16 dobro odraža načrtovane naložbe v proizvodnjo energije iz obnovljivih virov v okviru EKSRP (prednostno področje 5C, glej tudi odstavek 68).
The Commission does not share the view that alleged difficulties related to the programming of focus areas have resulted in significant delays in programme implementation for renewable energy. 
Komisija se ne strinja z navedbo, da so domnevne težave, povezane z načrtovanjem prednostnih področij, povzročile precejšnje zamude pri izvajanju programa za energijo iz obnovljivih virov.
These delays are inter alia caused by the time needed by Member States to launch calls and select projects, as well as for the realisation of those investment projects on the ground. 
Te zamude so med drugim posledica časa, ki so ga države članice potrebovale za razpise in izbiro projektov ter za izvedbo navedenih naložbenih projektov na terenu.
The Commission has provided comprehensive set of guidance documents on strategic programming, guiding Member States on how to develop a sound intervention logic for contributing to EU priorities and targets (such as the renewable energy target), and rural development objectives in line with the Member States'/ Regions' specific context, potentials and needs. 
Komisija je pripravila obsežen sklop smernic o strateškem načrtovanju, ki so državam članicam v pomoč pri razvijanju trdne intervencijske logike glede prispevanja k uresničevanju prednostnih nalog in ciljev EU (kot je cilj energije iz obnovljivih virov) ter ciljev glede razvoja podeželja v skladu s posebnim okvirom, potenciali in potrebami držav članic/regij.
This intervention logic (choice of relevant objectives, target setting, combination of relevant measures, respective funding allocation etc.) is set out in the RDPs and thoroughly assessed by the Commission during the negotiation of the programmes. 
Ta intervencijska logika (izbira in določitev relevantnih ciljev, kombinacija relevantnih ukrepov, ustrezno razporejanje 4 sredstev itd.) je opredeljena v programih razvoja podeželja in Komisija jo je med pogajanji glede programov temeljito proučila.
Facilitating the supply and use of renewable energy is only one of a wide range of objectives of the EAFRD. 
Spodbujanje dobave in uporabe energije iz obnovljivih virov je le eden od številnih ciljev EKSRP.
The coordination between different ESIF and other funding instruments is set out in the Partnership Agreements which are assessed by the Commission. 
Usklajevanje med evropskimi strukturnimi in investicijskimi skladi ter drugimi finančnimi instrumenti je opredeljeno v partnerskih sporazumih, ki jih oceni Komisija.
The quantification of financial needs is reflected by the budget allocated to relevant measures and the target values set for the relevant indicators. 
Količinska opredelitev finančnih potreb se odraža v proračunu, dodeljenemu zadevnim ukrepom, in v ciljnih vrednostih, določenih za zadevne kazalnike.
However, the Commission acknowledges that there is scope for further improving the link between identified needs and the strategic approach. 
Komisija pa priznava, da je mogoče povezavo med ugotovljenimi potrebami in strateškim pristopom še dodatno izboljšati.
Box 5 – Changes to the initial approach to renewable energy funding set out in the RDPs First alinea: 4 In the case of Bulgaria, lessons learnt from the implementation in the 2007-2013 programming period, including a higher error rate and financial corrections had been taken into account for the current programming period. 
Okvir 5 – Spremembe prvotnega pristopa k financiranju energije iz obnovljivih virov, določenega v programih razvoja podeželja Prva alinea: V primeru Bolgarije so bile izkušnje, pridobljene z izvajanjem v programskem obdobju 2007–2013, vključno z višjo stopnjo napak in finančnimi popravki, upoštevane v trenutnem programskem obdobju.
For the 2014-2020 rural development programme, Bulgaria has decided to only support projects linked to on-farm consumption in order to mitigate the risk of future errors. 
V programu razvoja podeželja za obdobje 2014–2020 se je Bolgarija odločila, da bo podprla samo projekte, povezane s porabo na kmetijah, da se zmanjša tveganje za napake v prihodnje.
Second alinea: Adaptations of budget allocations may occur for different reasons during the programming period. 
Druga alinea: Prilagoditve dodelitve proračunskih sredstev so med programskim obdobjem mogoče iz različnih razlogov.
In the case of France (Basse-Normandie) the EAFRD financial allocation to the renewable energy objectives was decreased as the Region decided to change the source of funding for some of the types of projects for which originally the EFARD funding was planned. 
V primeru Francije (Spodnja Normandija) se je dodelitev finančnih sredstev EKSRP za cilje energije iz obnovljivih virov zmanjšala, saj se je regija odločila spremeniti vir financiranja za nekatere vrste projektov, za katere je bilo prvotno načrtovano financiranje EKSRP.
Justifications for the proposed change were communicated to the Commission prior to the amendment. 
Utemeljitve za predlagano spremembo so bile Komisiji sporočene pred spremembo.
Changes consisted in moving financing of wood-based energy production and boilers-related schemes to national funding from the Agency for the Environment and Energy Management (ADEME) and supporting biogas projects (anaerobic digestion) through capital contributions or bank guarantees with the help of the Normandy Development Agency (ADN). 
Spremembe so vključevale premik financiranja proizvodnje energije na osnovi lesa in shem, povezanih s kotli, na nacionalno financiranje s strani agencije za okolje in upravljanje energije (ADEME) ter podpiranje projektov na področju bioplina (anaerobna razgradnja) s kapitalskimi prispevki ali bančnimi jamstvi s pomočjo normandijske razvojne agencije (ADN).
Strategic programming under EAFRD seeks to find the balance between different needs and objectives rather than implement a complete strategy for renewable energy in rural areas. 
Namen strateškega načrtovanja v okviru EKSRP ni izvajati celovito strategijo za energijo iz obnovljivih virov na podeželskih območjih, ampak najti ravnovesje med različnimi potrebami in cilji.
Modifications of budget allocation like in the case of the RDP Basse-Normandy have to be justified in the request for programme amendments. 
Spremembe v dodelitvi proračunskih sredstev, kot v primeru programa razvoja podeželja Spodnje Normandije, morajo biti utemeljene v zahtevku za spremembo programa.
Moreover, a change of more than 50% of a quantified target linked to a focus area, i.e. by significant budget shifts, requests a change in the programme strategy, resulting in a Commission decision by means of implementing acts according to Article 11 (a) of Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013. 
Poleg tega več kot 50-odstotna sprememba količinsko opredeljenega cilja, povezanega s prednostnim področjem, tj. z znatnimi spremembami v proračunu, zahteva spremembo programske strategije, katere rezultat je odločitev Komisije s sprejetjem izvedbenih aktov v skladu s členom 11(a) Uredbe (EU) št.
During the negotiations of the Partnership Agreements and relevant programmes the Commission has actively promoted the establishment of synergies and complementarities in the use of the European Structural and Investment Funds while taking also into account existing national or other EU funding schemes. 
Med pogajanji o partnerskih sporazumih in zadevnih programih je Komisija dejavno spodbujala uvedbo sinergij in dopolnjevanja pri uporabi evropskih strukturnih in investicijskih skladov, pri čemer je upoštevala tudi obstoječe nacionalne in druge programe financiranja EU.
However, implementation choices fall under the responsibility of the Member States. Common Commission reply to paragraphs 56 and 57: Within the strategic programming approach Member States can choose which focus area they consider most adequate for programming a specific measure in line with the specific purpose of the measure. 
Skupni odgovor Komisije na odstavka 56 in 57: Države članice lahko v okviru pristopa strateškega načrtovanja izberejo prednostno področje, ki se jim zdi najprimernejše za načrtovanje posameznega ukrepa v skladu s posebnim namenom ukrepa.
It is a logical consequence that a single measure can thus appear under different focus areas. 
Logična posledica je, da se lahko posamezen ukrep pojavi na različnih prednostnih področjih.
In addition, the concept of secondary effects reflects well the multiple characters of many RD measures, which often do not serve one objective alone. 
tega so koncept sekundarnih učinkov dobro odraža raznolike značaje številnih ukrepov za razvoj podeželja, ki pogosto ne izpolnjujejo samo enega cilja.
Box 6 – Assignment of renewable energy projects to different focus areas First alinea: The attribution of measures to different focus areas in the rural development programmes reflect also a quantification of the expected outcomes of the measure, which may vary between programmes. 
Okvir6 – Uvrščanje projektov na področju energije iz obnovljivih virov na različna prednostna področja Prva alinea: Iz dodelitve ukrepov na različna prednostna področja v programih razvoja podeželja je razvidna tudi količinska opredelitev pričakovanih izidov ukrepa, ki se lahko med programi razlikuje.
Measures are attributed to focus areas according to their primary effect, whereas secondary effects are not decisive for this decision. 
Ukrepi so dodeljeni na prednostna področja glede na njihov primarni učinek, sekundarni učinki pa pri tem niso odločilni.
Second alinea: Also the comparison of the RDPs of Romania and Bulgaria demonstrates the different ranking of objectives: Bulgaria pursues the production of renewable energy for own consumption as primary objective of the measure and therefore attributes it to focus area 5C. 
Druga alinea: Tudi iz primerjave programov razvoja podeželja Romunije in Bolgarije je razvidno, da so cilji različno razvrščeni: primarni cilj ukrepa Bolgarije je proizvodnja energije iz obnovljivih virov za lastno porabo, zato ga je uvrstila na prednostno področje 5C.