natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S Examples of eligibility error EAFRD Disregard of procurement rules: The Commission will pursue this case through the conformity clearance procedure. 
O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E Primer napake v zvezi z upravičenostjo za EKSRP Neupoštevanje pravil za oddajo javnega naročila: Komisija bo ta primer obravnavala na podlagi postopka potrditve skladnosti.
Non-respect of specific eligibility criteria: The Commission observes that the eligibility condition related to the period of the work seems to have been fixed by the regional authorities without a proper assessment of its justification and impact. 
Neupoštevanje posebnih meril za upravičenost: Komisija ugotavlja, da se zdi, da so regionalni organi določili pogoj za upravičenost v zvezi z obdobjem dela, ne da bi ocenili njegovo utemeljenost in učinek.
It recommends to Member States to establish transparent procedures involving all those concerned when fixing at regional level, in addition to national rules, specific eligibility conditions. 3.22. 
Državam članicam priporoča, da za določanje ne samo nacionalnih predpisov, ampak tudi posebnih pogojev za upravičenost, na regionalni ravni vzpostavijo pregledne postopke, v katere so vključeni vsi, ki jih postopki zadevajo.
The Commission agrees with the Court’s observation, but notes that the 401 million euro advance payments do not represent irregular payments to final beneficiaries. 
3.22 Komisija se strinja z opažanjem Sodišča, vendar ugotavlja, da predplačila v znesku 401 milijon EUR niso nepravilna plačila končnim upravičencem.
The recovery of the amounts in question is ongoing and will be completed by the end of 2011. 
Izterjava zadevnih zneskov je v teku in bo zaključena do konca leta 2011.
EN 10.11.2011 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 81 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S EFFECTIVENESS OF SYSTEMS Policy area agriculture and rural development Systems related to regularity of transactions 3.23. Annex 3.2 contains a summary of the results of the examination of Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS), the main control system to ensure the regularity of EAGF and EAFRD transactions (25). 
10.11.2011 UradnilistEvropskeunije 81 U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A USPEŠNOST SISTEMOV Področje politik kmetijstvo in razvoj podeželja Sistemi, povezani s pravilnostjo transakcij 3.23 Priloga 3.2 vsebuje povzetek rezultatov pregleda inte­ griranega administrativnega in kontrolnega sistema (IAKS), ki je glavni kontrolni sistem za zagotavljanje pravilnosti transakcij EKJS in EKSRP (25).
3.24. Forits2010auditofsixpayingagencies,theCourt found the IACS systems to be effective in ensuring the regu­ larity of payments in four agencies and partially effective in the remaining two. 
3.24 Sodišče je pri svoji reviziji šestih plačilnih agencij za leto 2010 ugotovilo, da sistemi IAKS uspešno zagotavljajo pravilnost plačil v štirih agencijah in delno uspešno v ostalih dveh.
Furthermore, the Court carried out follow-up audits in three paying agencies and found out that there are still weaknesses in the LPIS and in the quality of on-the-spot checks. 
Poleg tega je Sodišče izvedlo nadaljnje revizije v treh plačilnih agencijah in ugotovilo, da so v LPIS in kakovosti pregledov na kraju samem še vedno slabosti.
ConcerningthenineRuralDevelopmentsupervisory and control systems audited, the Court found that two of the control systems implemented were not effective, six of them were partially effective and one was effective in ensuring the regularity of payments. 
O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E 3.25 Zadevetrevidiranihnadzornihinkontrolnihsistemov za razvoj podeželja je Sodišče ugotovilo, da dva uporabljena kontrolna sistema nista bila uspešna pri zagotavljanju pravil­ nosti plačil, šest je bilo delno uspešnih, eden pa uspešen.
3.26. IACSconsists,ineachMemberState,ofadatabaseof holdings and applications, systems for identifying agricultural parcels and registering animals, as well as a register of entitlements in those Member States implementing the SPS. 
3.26 IAKS v vsaki državi članici obsega podatkovno zbirko o kmetijskih gospodarstvih in zahtevkih ter sisteme za identi­ fikacijo kmetijskih zemljišč in registracijo živali, v državah članicah, ki izvajajo SEP, pa tudi register pravic.
The system provides for several eligibility controls: an adminis­ trative check of all claims, cross-checks with databases to prevent the same land/animals from being claimed twice and a minimum rate of 5 % on-farm inspections to be carried out by the paying agencies. _____________ (25) Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1122/2009 (OJ L 316, 2.12.2009, p. 
Sistem določa več kontrol v zvezi z upravičenostjo: administrativni pregled vseh zahtevkov, navzkrižna preverjanja s podatkovnimi zbir­ kami za preprečevanje dvojnih zahtevkov za zemljišča/živali in minimalno 5-odstotno stopnjo inšpekcijskih pregledov, ki jih na kmetijah izvajajo plačilne agencije. _____________ (25) Uredba (ES) št. 73/2009 in Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 1122/2009 (UL L 316, 2.12.2009, str.
3.24. As regards the three follow-up audits carried out by the Court, the Member States concerned (BG, RO and GR) have completed or are about to complete action plans to remedy the deficiencies in their IACS. 
SL 3.24 V zvezi s tremi naknadnimi revizijami, ki jih je izvedlo Sodišče, so zadevne države članice (BG, RO in GR) dokončale ali skoraj dokon­ čale akcijske načrte za odpravo pomanjkljivosti v svojih sistemih IAKS.
As a result, the situation in these Member States has improved considerably. 
Razmere v teh državah članicah so se s tem znatno izboljšale.
As regards the assessment of the IACS in general, see also the reply to paragraph 3.29. 
V zvezi s splošno oceno sistemov IAKS glej tudi odgovor na točko 3.29.
The Commission agrees with the Court regarding the two supervisory and control systems which were assessed as not effective. 
3.25 Komisija se strinja s Sodiščem, ki je dva nadzorna in kontrolna sistema ocenilo kot neuspešna.
As regards the other Member States, the Commission’s audits show that they have put in place systems that are effective or partially effective, with the exception of those for Axis 2 measures in Bulgaria, Portugal and Romania (see AAR 2010 of DG AGRI). 
V zvezi z drugimi državami članicami so revizije Komisije pokazale, da so vzpostavile uspešne ali delno uspešne sisteme, razen tistih za ukrepe iz osi 2 v Bolgariji, na Portugalskem in v Romuniji (glej poročilo o dejavnostih za leto 2010 Generalnega direktorata AGRI).
As regards the six paying agencies which the Court audited in 2010, the Court’s findings represent a significant improvement compared to last year where it considered only one out of eight IACS audited to be effective. 
Ugotovitve Sodišča v zvezi s šestimi plačilnimi agencijami, za katere je leta 2010 izvedlo revizijo, kažejo bistveno izboljšanje v primerjavi s prejšnjim letom, v katerem je Sodišče ugotovilo, da je uspešen le eden od osmih revidiranih sistemov IAKS.
Moreover, the weaknesses which the Court found in two of them were all of a minor nature and, in part, did not imply a risk for the EU budget. 
Poleg tega so bile vse slabosti, ki jih je Sodišče ugotovilo pri dveh sistemih, neznatne in deloma niso pomenile tveganja za proračun EU.
In any case, the control statistics of these paying agencies, which have been validated by the certifi­ cation bodies, show that the potential financial impact of the weak­ nesses was not material at paying agency level. 
Kontrolni statistični podatki teh plačilnih agencij, ki so jih potrdili certifikacijski organi, v vsakem primeru kažejo, da morebitni finančni učinek slabosti na ravni plačilne agencije ni bil bistven.
In the case of EAFRD, and especially for agri-environment and less favoured areas, verifi­ cation of certain key elements such as eligible area and number of animals is made through IACS while other requirements are governed by specifically designed controls (26). 3.28. 
Pri EKSRP, zlasti pri kmetijsko-okoljskih ukrepih in ukrepih za območja z omejenimi možnostmi, se nekateri ključni elementi, kot sta upravičena površina in število živali, preverjajo z IAKS, za druge zahteve pa se uporabljajo posebej zanje zasnovane kontrole (26).
The Court’s IACS audit covered compliance with the provisions of the relevant regulations and an assessment of the effectiveness of the systems in ensuring regularity of trans­ actions. 
3.28 Revizija Sodišča v zvezi z IAKS je zajela skladnost z določbami ustreznih uredb in oceno uspešnosti sistemov pri zagotavljanju pravilnosti transakcij.
In particular, the following elements were examined: (I) administrative procedures and controls to ensure correct payment including quality of databases; (II) control systems based on on-the-spot checks; (III) systems to ensure implementation and control of cross compliance. 
Pregledani so bili predvsem naslednji elementi: (I) administrativni postopki in kontrole za zagotavljanje pravilnih plačil, vključno s kakovostjo podatkovnih zbirk; (II) kontrolni sistemi, ki temeljijo na pregledih na kraju samem; (III) sistemi, ki zagotavljajo izvajanje in kontroliranje navz­ križne skladnosti.
Failing to abide by cross compliance requirements affects the full payment of EU direct aid as the recipients are under legal obligation to respect such requirements (see paragraph 3.6). 3.29. 
Neupoštevanje zahtev navzkrižne skladnosti vpliva na polno plačilo neposredne pomoči EU, ker imajo prejemniki zakonsko obveznost spoštovanja takih zahtev (glej odstavek 3.6).
TheCourt’sannualIACSsystemsauditscarriedoutin recent years showed that the effectiveness of IACS is adversely affected by inaccurate data in the databases, incomplete cross checks or incorrect or incomplete follow up of anomalies. 
3.29 Letne revizije sistemov IAKS, ki jih je v zadnjih letih izvedlo Sodišče, so pokazale, da na uspešnost IAKS negativno vplivajo netočni podatki v podatkovnih zbirkah, nepopolno navzkrižno preverjanje ali nepravilno ali nepopolno nadaljnje ukrepanje pri odstopanjih.
The Court has observed these weaknesses in certain paying agencies. 
Sodišče je te slabosti ugotovilo v nekaterih plačilnih agencijah.
In particular, two key controls, the cross-check of parcels claimed with the LPIS and the on-the-spot checks of those parcels were found to be affected by weaknesses in several of the paying agencies audited by the Court. 
Zlasti za dve ključni kontroli, navzkrižno preverjanje parcel, prijavljenih v LPIS, in preglede na kraju samem, opravljene na teh parcelah, je bilo ugoto­ vljeno, da nanju v več plačilnih agencijah, ki jih je revidiralo Sodišče, vplivajo slabosti.
T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S _____________ (26) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1975/2006 of 7 December 2006 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005, as regards the implementation of control procedures as well as cross compliance in respect of rural development support measures (OJ L 368, 23.12.2006, p. 
O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E _____________ (26) Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 1975/2006 z dne 7. decembra 2006 o določitvi podrobnih pravil za izvajanje Uredbe Sveta (ES) št.
3.28. (III) The Commission recalls that respect of cross-compliance criteria by farmers does not constitute an eligibility criterion and, therefore, the controls of these criteria do not pertain to the legality and the regularity of the underlying transactions. 
3.28 (III) Komisija opozarja, da upoštevanje merila navzkrižne skladnosti s strani kmetov ni merilo za upravičenost in zato preverjanja teh meril niso povezana z zakonitostjo in pravilnostjo povezanih transakcij.
Farmers not respecting these criteria are entitled to receive payments, but are sanctioned on the basis of the severity, extent, permanence and repetition of the non-compliance found as well as negligence or intent of the beneficiary concerned. 3.29. 
Kmetje, ki ne upoštevajo teh meril, so upravičeni do prejemanja plačil, vendar so kaznovani na podlagi resnosti, obsega, trajnosti in ponovitev ugotovljenih neskladnosti ter malomarnosti ali namere zadevnega upravičenca.
The Commission considers that the IACS is generally an effective control system for limiting the risk of error or irregular expenditure. 
3.29 Komisija meni, da je IAKS na splošno uspešen kontrolni sistem za omejevanje tveganja napak ali nepravilnih odhodkov.
The overall effectiveness and constant improvement of the IACS is confirmed by the results of the conformity audits which the Commission has carried out over the past years in all Member States, by the low error rate indicated in the control statistics which it receives from Member States and which are verified and validated by the certification bodies as well as by the Court’s own DAS findings for 2010, which for direct payments indicate an error rate of 1 %. 
Splošno uspešnost in stalno izboljševanje sistemov IAKS potrjujejo rezultati revizij skladnosti, ki jih je Komisija izvedla v preteklih letih v vseh državah članicah, nizka stopnja napake, navedena v kontrolnih statističnih podatkih, ki jih predložijo države članice ter preverijo in potrdijo certifikacijski organi, ter ugotovitve Sodišča v okviru DAS za leto 2010, ki za neposredna plačila navajajo 1-odstotno stopnjo napake.
Remaining deficiencies are generally of a lesser nature and do not render the IACS ineffective but, rather, perfectible. 
Preostale pomanjkljivosti so na splošno manj pomembne, pri čemer sistem IAKS zaradi njih ni neuspešen, temveč izpopolnljiv.
All these defi­ ciencies are followed up through conformity clearance procedures which ensure that the risk to the EU budget is adequately covered. 
Vse te pomanjkljivosti se nadalje spremljajo v okviru postopkov potrditve skladnosti, kar zagotavlja, da je tveganje za proračun EU ustrezno pokrito.
See also the Commission’s reply to point 3.24. 
Glej tudi odgovor Komisije na točko 3.24.
EN 10.11.2011 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 83 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S (I) Administrative procedures and controls to ensure correct payment including quality of databases 3.30. Payingagenciesmustcarryoutadministrativechecks to establish whether claims have met the requirements of the scheme (27). 
SL 10.11.2011 UradnilistEvropskeunije 83 U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A (I) Administrativni postopki in kontrole za zagotavljanje pravilnih plačil, vključno s kakovostjo podatkovnih zbirk 3.30 Plačilne agencije morajo izvajati administrativne preglede, da ugotovijo, ali zahtevki ustrezajo zahtevam sheme (27).
The administrative checks must include cross-checks wherever possible and appropriate, inter alia with IACS databases. 
Administrativni pregledi morajo vključevati navz­ križno preverjanje, kadar je to možno in primerno, med drugim s podatkovnimi zbirkami IAKS.
The Court verified whether databases were complete and reliable, whether checks identified anomalies and whether action was taken to correct errors. 
Sodišče je preverilo, ali so podatkovne zbirke popolne in zanesljive, ali so bila pri pregledih ugotovljena odstopanja in ali so bili izvedeni ukrepi za odpravljanje napak.
The major systems weaknesses found are set out below. 
Glavne slabosti sistemov so navedene v nadaljevanju.
The Land Parcel Identification System (LPIS) is a database in which all the agricultural area (reference parcels) of the Member State is recorded including the optional use of ortho-photos (28). 
EKJS 3.31 Identifikacijski sistem za zemljišča (LPIS) je podatkovna zbirka, vključno z neobveznimi ortografskimi posnetki, v kateri so evidentirane vse kmetijske površine (referenčne parcele) države članice (28).
In three Member States (Greece, Romania and Spain), the Court found cases where ‘permanent pasture’ (29) reference parcels were recorded in the LPIS to be 100 % eligible despite the fact that they were partially covered with dense forest or other ineligible features and therefore only partially eligible (see example 3.2). 
Sodišče je v treh državah članicah (v Grčiji, Romuniji in Španiji) odkrilo primere, ko so bile referenčne parcele „trajnih pašnikov“ (29) evidentirane v LPIS kot stoodstotno upravičene, čeprav jih je delno pokrival gost gozd ali so bile na njih druge neupravičene značilnosti, zaradi česar so bile le delno upravičene (glej primer 3.2).
T H E C O M M I S S I O N ’ S R E P L I E S Where audits found that land has received direct aid in non-compliance with the legal provisions, conformity clearance procedures have been launched. 3.31. 
O D G O VO R I KO M I S I J E V primerih, v katerih je bilo na podlagi revizij ugotovljeno, da je bila zemljišču dodeljena neposredna pomoč ob neupoštevanju pravnih določb, so se začeli postopki potrditve skladnosti.
Example 3.2 In Spain (Castilla-La Mancha and Extremadura) the Court observed cases of permanent pasture reference parcels which were recorded in the LPIS as being fully eligible although they were only partly covered with grass and the remainder with ineligible elements such as rocks, bush land, dense forest, etc. In Greece, there were cases where entire forests were regarded as permanent pasture and were therefore considered eligible for SPS payments. 
3.31 Primer 3.2 V Španiji (Kastilija in Manča ter Estremadura) je Sodišče ugotovilo primere referenčnih parcel za trajne pašnike, ki so bile evidentirane v LPIS kot v celoti upravičene, čeprav so bile le delno pokrite s travo, na preostanku pa so bili neupravičeni elementi, kot so skale, grmovje, gost gozd itd. V Grčiji so obstajali primeri, kjer so cele gozdove šteli za trajne pašnike in so bili zato upravičeni do plačil SEP.
As a result, the eligible area recorded in LPIS and used for the cross-checks was often overstated. 
Zato je bila v LPIS pogosto evidentirana prevelika upravičena površina, ki se uporablja tudi za navzkrižna preverjanja.
This adversely affected the quality of such cross-checks. 
To je negativno vplivalo na kakovost takšnih navzkrižnih preverjanj.
Example 3.2 The Commission is aware of the situation in Greece and has requested the Greek authorities to remedy the problems. 
Primer 3.2 Komisija se zaveda razmer v Grčiji in je grške organe pozvala, da odpravijo težave.
As regards the situation in Spain, the Commission has found similar problems to those referred to by the Court in other autonomous communities. 
V zvezi z razmerami v Španiji je Komisija ugotovila težave, podobne tistim, na katere je Sodišče opozorilo v drugih avtonomnih skupnostih.
However, the problems found in both Member States do not always systematically lead to irregular payments and where they have done so, the Commission is pursuing the matter through conformity clearance procedures. _____________ (27) Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 1975/2006 and Article 24 of Regulation (EC) No 796/2004. 
Vendar težave, ugotovljene v obeh državah članicah, ne privedejo vedno sistematično do nepravilnih plačil, kadar pa se to zgodi, Komisija obravnava zadevo na podlagi postopkov potrditve skladnosti. _____________ (27) Člen 11 Uredbe (ES) št. 1975/2006 in člen 24 Uredbe (ES) št.
(28) Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 provides that the system for agricultural parcels shall be established on the basis of maps or land registry documents or other cartographic references. 
(28) Člen 17 Uredbe (ES) št. 73/2009 določa, da se identifikacijski sistem za enote rabe ali poljine vzpostavi na podlagi zemljevidov in katastrskih dokumentov ali drugih kartografskih virov.
Use shall be made of computerised geographical information system tech­ niques, including preferably aerial or spatial orthoimagery, with a homogenous standard guaranteeing accuracy at least equivalent to cartography at a scale of 1:10 000. 
Pri tem se uporabljajo tehnike računalniškega geografskega informacijskega sistema, vključujoč po možnosti zračne ali prostorske ortopos­ netke z enotnim standardom, ki zagotavlja natančnost, ki ustreza kartografskemu merilu najmanj 1:10 000.
(29) Article 2 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1120/2009 (OJ L 316, 2.12.2009, p. 
(29) Člen 2 Uredbe Komisije (ES) št. 1120/2009 (UL L 316, 2.12.2009, str.
1) provides that permanent pasture means land used to grow grasses or other herbaceous forage naturally or through cultivation. 
1) določa, da trajni pašnik pomeni zemljišče, ki se uporablja za naravno gojenje trave ali druge zelnate krme ali za gojene trave ali druge zelnate krme.
This means that areas without grass/ herbaceous vegetation cover, such as woods, rocks, ponds, paths are not part of the permanent pasture area and as a result, are to be eliminated from the eligible area as defined by Article 34(2) and Article 2(h) of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009. 
To pomeni, da površine brez travišča/zelnate vegetacije, kot so gozd, skale, ribniki in poti, niso del površine trajnega pašnika, zato se izločijo iz upravičene površine, kot je opredeljeno v členu 34(2) in členu 2(h) Uredbe (ES) št. 73/2009.
EN 84 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 10.11.2011 T H E C O U R T ’ S O B S E R VA T I O N S 3.32. In five Member States (Bulgaria, Netherlands(30), Greece, Romania and Spain) the Court identified weaknesses in keeping the LPIS up to date. 
SL 84 UradnilistEvropskeunije 10.11.2011 U G O T O V I T V E S O D I Š Č A 3.32 V petih državah članicah (v Bolgariji, na Nizozem­ skem (30), v Grčiji, Romuniji in Španiji) je Sodišče ugotovilo slabosti pri posodabljanju LPIS.
3.33. Asregardsthenon-IACScontrolsystemforthe measure ‘restructuring of the sugar industry’ in France, the Court found the system to be partially effective only (see example 3.3). 
3.33 Za kontrolni sistem ne-IAKS za ukrep „prestrukturi­ ranje industrije sladkorja“ v Franciji je Sodišče ugotovilo, da je le delno uspešen (glej primer 3.3).
For Greece a new, up-to-date LPIS was completed by the end of 2008. 
Konec leta 2008 je bil dokončan nov, posodobljen LPIS za Grčijo.
For Romania, a remedial action plan was adopted in 2009 and completed at the beginning of 2011. 
Leta 2009 je bil za Romunijo sprejet akcijski načrt za odpravo nepravil­ nosti, ki je bil zaključen v začetku leta 2011.
For Bulgaria, a remedial action plan was adopted in 2009 and will be completed by the end of 2011. 
Leta 2009 je bil za Bolgarijo sprejet akcijski načrt za odpravo nepravilnosti, ki se bo zaključil do konca leta 2011.
Spain has an updating plan, but has been requested to enhance its efforts in this respect in the course of 2011. 
Španija izvaja načrt posodabljanja, vendar je bila pozvana, da v letu 2011 okrepi svoja prizadevanja v zvezi s tem.
Example 3.3 Under an EU restructuring plan sugar producers giving up all or part of their quota receive an aid per tonne of sugar quota in 2008/2009 renounced ranging from 218,75 euro (simple renunciation) to 625 euro (in the case of a full dismantling of a production facility). 
Primer 3.3 Po načrtu prestrukturiranja EU proizvajalci sladkorja, ki delno ali v celoti opustijo svojo kvoto, prejmejo pomoč na tono opuščene kvote za sladkor, ki je leta 2008/2009 znašala od 218,75 EUR (navadna opustitev) do 625 EUR (pri odstranitvi proizvodnih obratov).
The producer must assign the abandoned quota to production facilities up to a maximum of the production capacity of those facilities. 
Proizvajalec mora dodeliti opuščeno kvoto proizvodnim obratom do njihove največje proizvodne zmogljivosti.
10 % of the aid must be paid to the growers who as a result lose their delivery rights for sugar beet to the sugar producer. 
10 % pomoči je treba izplačati pridelovalcem, ki zaradi tega izgubijo pravico do dobave sladkorne pese proizvajalcu sladkorja.
In France a sugar producer was granted aid for dismantling a production facility equivalent to 93 500 tonnes of quota renounced. 
Proizvajalcu sladkorja v Franciji je bila odobrena pomoč za odstranitev proizvodnega obrata, enakovredna 93 500 tonam opuščene kvote.
However, immediately before applying for the aid, the beneficiary had applied for upgrading the production capacity of this facility from 72000 to 93500 tonnes and his request had been approved. 
Vendar je upravičenec takoj pred vložitvijo zahtevka za pomoč vložil zahtevek za povečanje proizvodnih zmogljivosti tega obrata z 72 000 ton na 93 500 ton.
However, the actual production of the plant had never exceeded 60 000 tonnes. 
Povečanje je bilo odobreno, vendar dejanska proizvodnja v obratu nikoli ni presegla 60000 ton.