natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Figure 7.7 — Example of ineligible expenditure or activity The Commission fully supports Member States in their efforts to use whenever possible simplified costs options as a tool to prevent errors, as recognised by the Court in its special report No 23/2014 (see paragraph 86). 
Slika 7.7 – Primer neupravičenih odhodkov ali dejavnosti Komisija v celoti podpira države članice pri prizadevanjih za uporabo poenostavljene možnosti obračunavanja stroškov kot orodja za preprečevanje napak, kadar koli je to mogoče, kar je potrdilo Sodišče v svojem Posebnem poročilu št. 23/2014 (glej odstavek 86).
As regards the Romanian cases, the Commission agrees that there was an error in the calculation of the simplified cost used for the payments. 
Glede primerov v Romuniji se Komisija strinja, da je prišlo do napake pri poenostavljenem obračunavanju stroškov za plačila.
Following the Court’s findings, the Commission launched a conformity clearance procedure in 2016 to establish precisely the amount at risk. 
Na podlagi ugotovitev Sodišča je Komisija leta 2016 uvedla postopek potrditve skladnosti, da bi natančno ugotovila znesek, pri katerem obstaja tveganje.
This may result in the application of a financial correction. 
To lahko privede do uporabe finančnega popravka.
7.27. For 27 transactions examined, the beneficiaries had to 7.27. 
7.27 Pri 27 preučenih transakcijah so morali upravičenci upoštevati pravila javnega naročanja.
These rules ensure important source of errors and intensified its audit work to ensure purchase of goods and services on the most favourable terms, appropriate protection of the EU budget. while guaranteeing equal access to public contracts and compliance with the principles of transparency and non-discrimination. 
Ta pravila zagotavljajo, da se blago in storitve kupijo pod najugodnejšimi pogoji, hkrati pa jamčijo enakopraven dostop do javnih naročil in skladnost z načeloma preglednosti in nediskriminacije.
In six cases one or more of these rules had been breached. 
V šestih primerih je bilo kršeno vsaj eno od teh pravil.
We present an example of such an error in Figure 7.8. 
Na sliki 7.8 je predstavljen primer take napake.
Compliance with public procurement rules is also one of the central elements of the action plans for rural development. 
Skladnost s pravili javnega naročanja je tudi eden od osrednjih elementov akcijskih načrtov za razvoj podeželja.
In-depth audits of that area were carried out in 2015/2016 in four Member States. 
Podrobne revizije na tem področju so bile v letih 2015 in 2016 izvedene v štirih državah članicah.
The practice of in-depth checks on public procurement rules continues in other Member States in 2016. 
Podrobni pregledi pravil javnega naročanja se v letu 2016 nadaljujejo v ostalih državah članicah.
In order to assess the financial risk of public procurement errors, the Commission adopted in December 2013 guidelines for determining financial corrections for non-compliance with public procurement rules in projects implemented under the shared management. 
Za oceno finančnega tveganja napak pri javnem naročanju je Komisija v decembru 2013 sprejela smernice za določanje finančnih popravkov zaradi neskladnosti s pravili o javnih naročilih pri projektih, izvedenih v okviru deljenega upravljanja.
EN 13.10.2016 Official Journal THE COURT’S OBSERVATIONS of the European Union C 375/221 THE COMMISSION’S REPLIES Figure 7.8 — Example of non-compliance with public procurement rules A commune in Italy (Campania) received support for the construction of a monorail: infrastructure to help farmers transport their olives up and down the hills. 
13.10.2016 Uradni list Evropske unije C 375/221 ODGOVORI KOMISIJE SL UGOTOVITVE SODIŠČA Slika 7.8 – Primer neupoštevanja pravil javnega naročanja Občina v Italiji (Kampanija) je prejela podporo za gradnjo enotirne proge, po kateri bi kmetje lažje prevažali svoje olive po pobočjih.
The contract was awarded to a private company through a public procurement procedure. 
Naročilo je bilo s postopkom javnega naročanja dodeljeno zasebni družbi.
In order to assess the various offers, the commune established a set of criteria, with different weightings (measured in points). 
Za oceno različnih ponudb je občina določila merila z različnimi ponderji (v točkah).
The contract notice required the bidders to include, as part of their offers, proposals for additional works concerning new roads, sewage and an aqueduct. 
V obvestilu o javnem naročilu je bil pogoj, da morajo ponudniki v svoje ponudbe vključiti predloge za dodatno gradnjo novih cest, kanalizacije in akvadukta.
These additional works accounted for 75% of the total points on which the commune based the award decision. 
Ta dodatna gradnja je pomenila 75 % točk, na podlagi katerih se je občina odločila za dodelitev naročila.
By comparison, price only accounted for 10 % of the total points. 
Za primerjavo, cena je pomenila le 10 % skupnega števila točk.
Since the EU aid was granted for the construction of the monorail, the beneficiary breached Italian public procurement law by setting up criteria — the construction of roads, sewage and an aqueduct — which were not related to the subject, nature and characteristics of the contract notice. 
Ker je bila pomoč EU dodeljena za gradnjo enotirne proge, je upravičenec z uvedbo meril – gradnja cest, kanalizacije in akvadukta –, ki niso povezana s predmetom, vrsto in lastnostmi naročila v obvestilu o javnem naročilu, kršil italijanski zakon o javnem naročanju.
Such criteria were therefore irregular under Italian public procurement rules. 
Ta merila so bila zato po italijanskih pravilih o javnem naročanju nepravilna.
We also found cases of non-compliance with public procurement rules in Germany (Rhineland-Palatinate), Greece and Romania. 
Primere nespoštovanja pravil o javnem naročanju smo odkrili tudi v Nemčiji (Porenje-Pfalz), Grčiji in Romuniji.
Figure 7.8 — Example of non-compliance with public procurement rules The Commission understands that the award criteria as set in the call for tender were not fully related to the nature of the works. 
Slika 7.8 – Primer neupoštevanja pravil javnega naročanja Komisija razume, da merila za izbor, ki so bila določena v razpisu, niso bila v celoti povezana z naravo del.
However, the Commission underlines that the investment was carried out as planned. 
Vendar Komisija poudarja, da so bile naložbe izvedene po načrtih.
The Italian authorities reviewed the file and instigated recovery procedure for breaches in the public procurement procedures. 
Italijanski organi so preučili dokumentacijo in uvedli postopek izterjave za kršitve postopkov javnega naročanja.
The Italian authorities applied a 10% financial correction. 
Italijanski organi so uporabili 10-odstotni finančni popravek.
The Commission considers that this corrective action helps protect the EU budget. 
Komisija meni, da ta popravljalni ukrep pomaga ščititi proračun EU.
Reservations were made in the 2015 annual activity report to cover public procurement issues, as recognised by the Court in point 7.60. 
V letnem poročilu o dejavnostih za leto 2015 so bili izrečeni pridržki zaradi vprašanj javnega naročanja, kot potrjuje Sodišče v točki 7.60.
7.28. Our sample included 45 transactions for agri-environment payments, which concerned the use of agricultural production methods compatible with the protection of the environment, landscape and natural resources. 
7.28 Vzorec Sodišča je zajemal 45 transakcij za kmetijsko-okoljska plačila, ki so zadevala uporabo metod kmetijske proizvodnje, skladnih z varstvom okolja, krajine in naravnih virov.
We found that in three cases farmers had not met all the conditions for payment. 7.29. 
Sodišče je ugotovilo, da v treh primerih kmetje niso izpolnjevali vseh pogojev za plačilo.
Of the 78 area-related transactions, we found 15 cases (19 %) where the eligible area of land was overstated. 
7.29 Od 78 transakcij, vezanih na površino, je Sodišče v 15 primerih (19%) ugotovilo, da so bile upravičene površine zemljišč previsoko navedene.
Most of the overstatements we identified were relatively small, and thus had only a limited impact on the overall estimated level of error. 
Večina previsokih navedb, ki jih je ugotovilo, je bila relativno majhnih, zato so imele samo omejen učinek na skupno ocenjeno stopnjo napake.
See also paragraph 7.18. 
Glej tudi odstavek 7.18.
7.28. The Commission would like to emphasise that all three beneficiaries had a wide range of different agri-environmental commitments to observe and implemented successfully the majority of them. 
7.28 Komisija želi poudariti, da so vsi trije upravičenci morali spoštovati velik nabor različnih kmetijsko-okoljskih obveznosti, ki so jih večinoma uspešno izvedli.
7.29. The Commission takes note that most of the over-declaration errors detected by the Court were relatively small errors and welcomes the Court’s assessment on the improvement of the reliability of LPIS data (see paragraph 7.17). 
7.29 Komisija ugotavlja, da je večina napak, povezanih s previsoko navedbo, ki jih je ugotovilo Sodišče, razmeroma majhnih, in pozdravlja oceno Sodišča o izboljšanju zanesljivosti podatkov v sistemu LPIS (glej odstavek 7.17).
In 24 investment projects, the national authorities had not checked this adequately. 
Pri 24 naložbenih projektih nacionalni organi tega niso ustrezno preverili.
We reported these cases as errors. 
Sodišče je o teh primerih poročalo kot o napakah.
However, it is generally not possible to determine the amount of ineligible expenditure, in which case we cannot quantify the error. 
Toda običajno ni mogoče ugotoviti zneska neupravičenih odhodkov in v teh primerih napake ni mogoče količinsko opredeliti.
We include additional information on the reasonableness of costs in the section ‘testing of performance criteria’ (see paragraph 7.71). 
Sodišče je vključilo dodatne informacije o razumnosti stroškov v oddelek o preizkušanju meril za smotrnost poslovanja (glej odstavek 7.71).
Examination of annual activity reports and other elements of internal control systems DG AGRI’s systems related to the regularity of transactions in agriculture 7.31. The Commission and Member States share the management of almost all agricultural expenditure. 
Preučitev letnih poročil o dejavnostih in drugih elementov sistemov notranje kontrole Sistemi GD AGRI, povezani s pravilnostjo transakcij na področju kmetijstva 7.31 Komisija in države članice si delijo upravljanje skoraj vseh odhodkov na področju kmetijstva.
Some 80 paying agencies in the Member States disburse the aid to farmers and other beneficiaries; the Commission reimburses the Member States for these costs each month (for the EAGF) or each quarter (for the EAFRD). 
Okoli 80 plačilnih agencij v državah članicah izplačuje pomoč kmetom in drugim upravičencem, Komisija pa državam članicam te stroške vsak mesec (za EKJS) ali vsako četrtletje (za EKSRP) povrne.
Systems weaknesses detected may lead to financial corrections, imposed on Member States by way of conformity decisions. 
Ugotovljene sistemske slabosti lahko privedejo do finančnih popravkov, ki se državam članicam naložijo s sklepi o skladnosti.
Financial corrections are often made on a flat-rate basis and cover expenditure relating to several budgetary years. 
Finančni popravki se pogosto obračunajo pavšalno in zajemajo odhodke, ki se nanašajo na več proračunskih let.
They rarely result in recoveries of payments from final beneficiaries and are thus paid from national budgets (27). of the European Union THE COMMISSION’S REPLIES 13.10.2016 (27) See paragraph 1.32 of the 2012 annual report. 
Redko privedejo do izterjave plačil od končnih upravičencev in se torej plačajo iz državnih proračunov (27).
See Commission’s reply to point 7.71. 
7.30 Glej odgovor Komisije na točko 7.71.
While it is true that the majority of corrections in the past were flat rate, in the new legal framework the Member States are encouraged to provide a calculation for the risk to the Fund. 
Čeprav je res, da je bila večina popravkov pavšalnih, so države članice v novem zakonskem okviru spodbujene, da predložijo izračun tveganja za sklad.
Where undue payments, which can be directly linked to a beneficiary, are identified as a result of the Commission’s conformity clearance procedures, Member States are required to launch the necessary recovery actions against the final beneficiaries. 
7.31 Ko se na podlagi postopka potrditve skladnosti Komisije ugotovijo neupravičena plačila, ki so neposredno povezana z določenim upravičencem, morajo države članice uvesti potrebne postopke izterjave od končnih upravičencev.
EN 13.10.2016 Official Journal of the European Union C 375/223 THE COURT’S OBSERVATIONS 7.32. To check that the Commission’s conformity audits complied with international auditing standards (28) and the main regulatory provisions, we carried out desk reviews of a sample of 24(29) out of 120 conformity audits(30) reported by DG AGRI in 2015. 
13.10.2016 Uradni list Evropske unije C 375/223 SL UGOTOVITVE SODIŠČA ODGOVORI KOMISIJE 7.32 Za preverjanje, ali so revizije skladnosti, ki jih izvaja Komisija, v skladu z mednarodnimi revizijskimi standardi (28) in glavnimi regulativnimi določbami, je Sodišče izvedlo pregled dokumentacije vzorca 24(29) od 120 revizij skladnosti(30), o katerih je poročal GD AGRI v letu 2015.
We also re-performed six of these 24 audits (31). 
Šest od teh 24 revizij je ponovno izvedlo(31).
In 2015, the Commission updated its audit procedures following a self-assessment of its audit methodology and quality assurance policy. 
Komisija je leta 2015 po samooceni svoje revizijske metodologije in politike zagotavljanja kakovosti posodobila svoje revizijske postopke.
We reviewed the updated procedures and took them into account for our assessment. 
Sodišče je pregledalo posodobljene postopke in jih upoštevalo pri svoji oceni.
7.33. The Commission’s conformity audits are overall compliant with the relevant standards. 
7.33 Revizije skladnosti, ki jih izvaja Komisija, so na splošno skladne z ustreznimi standardi.
However, when the Commission does not raise any findings, it needs to improve the way it documents the audit work supporting such conclusion. 7.34. 
Kadar pa Komisija ne navaja nobenih ugotovitev, mora izboljšati svoje evidentiranje revizijskega dela v podkrepitev takega zaključka.
In previous annual reports(32), we have drawn attention to the problem that conformity procedures were too lengthy, resulting in a significant backlog of open files (33). 
7.34 V prejšnjih letnih poročilih (32) je Sodišče opozarjalo na problem časovno predolgih postopkov preverjanja skladnosti, zaradi česar prihaja do bistvenih zaostankov pri nezaključenih spisih (33).
In 2015, the Commission significantly reduced the number such old open files: from 192 to 34. 
Komisija je leta 2015 znatno zmanjšala število takih nezaključenih spisov: s 192 na 34.
Changes in legislation for the 2014-2020 period, which took effect for the CAP on 1 January 2015, were designed to streamline the conformity clearance procedure by introducing legal deadlines. 
Spremembe v zakonodaji za obdobje 2014–2020, ki so za skupno kmetijsko politiko začele veljati 1. januarja 2015, so bile zasnovane za racionalizacijo postopka potrditve skladnosti z uvedbo zakonskih rokov.
As a result, the Commission now monitors the audit cycle more closely in order to comply with the internal and external deadlines. 
Zato Komisija zaradi upoštevanja notranjih in zunanjih rokov zdaj natančneje spremlja ciklus revizij.
The audit reports of each mission are the basis for the findings raised by the Commission. 
7.33 Podlaga za ugotovitve, ki jih je opredelila Komisija, so revizijska poročila o vsakem obisku.
When no findings are raised (e.g. there was no issue to report, the weaknesses detected were not material), this is stated in the audit report. 
Ko ugotovitve niso opredeljene (na primer niso bile ugotovljene nepravilnosti, o katerih bi se poročalo, ugotovljene slabosti niso pomembne), se to navede v revizijskem poročilu.
The Commission follows up closely the closure of backlog audits (‘old open files’): their number has been further reduced from 34 to 20 in June 2016. 
7.34 Komisija skrbno spremlja zaključevanje revizij v zaostanku („stari nezaključeni spisi“): njihovo število se je junija 2016 dodatno znižalo s 34 na 20.
The Commission’s objective is to close all remaining backlog audits (‘old open files’) by the end of 2016. 
Cilj Komisije je zaključiti vse revizije v zaostanku („stari nezaključeni spisi“) do konca leta 2016.
(28) ISSAI 4100 (International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions) — Compliance Audit Guidelines — For Audits Performed Separately from the Audit of Financial Statements. 
(28) MSVRI 4100 (Mednarodni standardi vrhovnih revizijskih institucij) – Smernice za revizijo skladnosti – za revizije, ki se izvajajo ločeno od revizije računovodskih izkazov.
(29) 12 for EAGF and 12 for EAFRD. 
(29) 12 za EKJS in 12 za EKSRP.
(30) It comprises 72 audits for EAGF and 48 for EAFRD carried out between 1 July 2014 and 30 June 2015. 
(30) 72 revizij za EKJS in 48 za EKSRP, izvedenih med 1. julijem 2014 in 30. junijem 2015.
(31) Germany (Schleswig-Holstein), Spain (Catalonia), Lithuania, Malta, Finland, UK (Northern Ireland). 
(31) Nemčija (Schleswig-Holstein), Španija (Katalonija), Litva, Malta, Finska, Združeno kraljestvo (Severna Irska).
(32) See paragraph 7.64 of the 2014 annual report, paragraph 4.27 of the 2013 annual report, paragraph 4.31 of the 2012 annual report. 
(32) Glej odstavek 7.64 letnega poročila za leto 2014, odstavek 4.27 letnega poročila za leto 2013 in odstavek 4.31 letnega poročila za leto 2012.
(33) The Commission considers as a backlog an audit which has not been closed within two years after being carried out. 7.33. 
(33) Komisija za revizijo v zaostanku šteje revizijo, ki ni zaključena v dveh letih po tem, ko je bila opravljena.
We reviewed whether the Commission correctly validated and used the Member States’ data by examining the Commission guidance and checking six financial corrections adopted or prepared in 2015. 7.36. 
Sodišče je pregledalo, ali je Komisija pravilno potrdila in uporabila podatke držav članic, s preučitvijo smernic Komisije in preverjanjem šestih finančnih popravkov, sprejetih ali pripravljenih v letu 2015.
The Commission audit manual does not include detailed audit procedures and documentation requirements for the verification of the data supplied by the Member States. 
7.36 Revizijski priročnik Komisije ne vsebuje podrobnih revizijskih postopkov in zahtev v zvezi z dokumenti za preverjanje podatkov, ki jih predložijo države članice.
For four of the six financial corrections examined, we found that the Commission carried out audit visits to verify the data received from the Member States concerned. 
Za štiri od šestih preučenih finančnih popravkov je Sodišče ugotovilo, da je Komisija izvedla revizijske obiske za preverjanje podatkov, prejetih od zadevnih držav članic.
For the other two financial corrections the Commission did not provide us with sufficient and appropriate evidence of their checks or verifications. 
Za ostala finančna popravka Komisija Sodišču ni predložila dovolj ustreznih dokazov o svojih pregledih ali preverjanjih.
For one of these cases, the financial correction was relatively small. 
Pri enem od teh primerov je bil finančni popravek razmeroma majhen.
The use of non-verified data creates a financial risk to the EU budget, as it is in the Member States’ interest to reduce financial corrections. of the European Union 13.10.2016 THE COMMISSION’S REPLIES 7.35-7.36. 
Pri drugem pa je znašal 5,8 milijona EUR. Zaradi uporabe nepreverjenih podatkov pride do finančnega tveganja za proračun EU, saj je v interesu držav članic, da zmanjšajo finančne popravke.
As recommended by the Court in previous years, the Commission has developed a framework that is intended to increase the number of calculated financial corrections and thereby apply less flat rate corrections. 
Kot je Sodišče že priporočalo v preteklih letih, je Komisija razvila okvir, ki je namenjen povišanju števila izračunanih finančnih popravkov in tako uporabi manj pavšalnih popravkov.
Taking into account the inherent difficulty in cases where numerous transactions are concerned, appropriate legal provisions have been inserted in the basic act, including the principles of Member States’ responsibility to provide the necessary information and of proportionate effort. 
Ob upoštevanju značilnih težav v primerih z veliko transakcijami so bile v temeljni akt vgrajene ustrezne zakonske določbe, vključno z načeloma odgovornosti držav članic, da zagotovijo potrebne informacije in vložijo sorazmeren napor.
The delegated act contains detailed provisions on the calculated and extrapolated financial corrections. 
Delegirani akt vsebuje podrobne določbe o izračunanih in ekstrapoliranih finančnih popravkih.
The Commission’s detailed guidelines on financial corrections have been updated accordingly, notably regarding the criteria and methodology to be used by the Commission to accept or not the Member States’ calculation or extrapolation of the risk to the EU budget. 
Podrobne smernice Komisije o finančnih popravkih so bile ustrezno posodobljene, zlasti glede meril in metodologije, ki jih bo uporabljala Komisija, da sprejme ali zavrne izračun ali ekstrapolacijo tveganja za proračun EU s strani države članice.
The Commission considers that the audit manual includes information on the verification of data supplied by Member States. 
Komisija meni, da revizijski priročnik vključuje informacije o preverjanju podatkov, ki so jih predložile države članice.
Communication C(2015) 3675 attached to the audit manual sets out clearly the minimum requirements that Member States have to meet when they submit additional data to the Commission for the calculation of the financial corrections and the criteria and methodology to be used by the Commission to accept or not the calculation or extrapolation of the financial correction. 
Sporočilo Komisije C(2015) 3675, ki je priloženo revizijskemu priročniku, jasno opredeljuje minimalne zahteve, ki jih države članice morajo izpolniti, ko Komisiji predložijo dodatne podatke za izračun finančnih popravkov, kot tudi merila in metodologijo, ki jih uporablja Komisija, da sprejme ali zavrne izračun ali ekstrapolacijo finančnega popravka.
It is standard procedure for the Commission to do thorough checks on the data provided by Member States. 
Standardni postopek je, da Komisija temeljito pregleda podatke, ki so jih predložile države članice.
This is indeed confirmed by the findings of the Court for four of the six financial corrections examined. 
To potrjujejo ugotovitve Sodišča za štiri pregledane finančne popravke od šestih.
As regards the two other financial corrections mentioned: — for one, the amount involved was relatively small and additional information was requested from the Member State, — for the 5,8 million euro financial correction, the Commission checked the validity of the data given by the Member State although this process was not properly documented. 
Glede drugih dveh omenjenih finančnih popravkov: — pri enem je zadevni znesek razmeroma nizek in od države članice so bile zahtevane dodatne informacije, — pri finančnem popravku v višini 5,8 milijona EUR je Komisija pregledala veljavnost podatkov, ki jih je predložila država članica, četudi ta postopek ni bil pravilno evidentiran.
The Commission would like to underline that the efforts to check the figures provided by Member States should be proportionate to the potential financial consequences. 
Komisija želi poudariti, da bi morala biti prizadevanja pri pregledu podatkov, ki jih predložijo države članice, sorazmerna z morebitnimi finančnimi posledicami.
The Commission can also rely on the work of the certification bodies. 
Komisija se lahko opre tudi na delo certifikacijskih organov. 7.35–7.36