natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
As it has stated in its reply to the same recommendation in the 2014 Annual report of the Court of Auditors, it considers that, within the mandate given by the European Council in December 2014, the modifications introduced in its closure guidelines were within the scope of Article 78(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006, as amended, and therefore did not require an amendment of the legislative act (see also Commission common reply to paragraph 6.59 to 6.62 above and to Recommendation 5 of the Court’s 2014 annual report). 
Komisija ne sprejme priporočila. Kot je že omenjeno v odgovoru na isto priporočilo v letnem poročilu Računskega sodišča za leto 2014, Komisija meni, da so znotraj pooblastil, ki jih je podelil Evropski svet decembra 2014, spremembe, ki so bile uvedene s smernicami o zaključku, spadale v področje uporabe člena 78(6) Uredbe (ES) št.
The Commission notes that the Council and the European Parliament took note of, but did not support, the recommendation made by the Court in the context of the 2014 discharge. The Commission accepts this recommendation. 
Komisija ugotavlja, da sta se Svet in Evropski parlament seznanila s priporočilom Računskega sodišča v smislu razrešnice za leto 2014, vendar ga nista podprla. Komisija sprejema to priporočilo.
It will provide guidance to Member States to clarify the notion of recoverable VAT in the context of the 2014-2020 programming period, within the policy choice of the co-legislators for value added tax (VAT) eligibility, as provided for in Article 69(3)(c) CPR. 
Nudila bo smernice državam članicam za razjasnitev pojma povračljivega DDV za programsko obdobje 2014–2020 znotraj izbire politike sozakonodajalcev o upravičenosti davka na dodano vrednost (DDV), kot določa člen 69(3)(c) Uredbe o skupnih določbah.
It already clarified in its closure guidelines for 2007-2013 that in order for the audit authorities to have sufficient time to carry out their work for the closure declaration, the application for payment of the final balance and the final statement of expenditure should be submitted to the audit authorities well in advance, at a date to be agreed between authorities for each programme. 
Komisija je že pojasnila v svojih zaključnih smernicah za obdobje 2007–2013, da se revizijskim organom za zagotovitev zadostnega časa za izvedbo svojega dela za zaključno izjavo vloga za plačilo končnega zneska in končen izkaz odhodkov predložita precej vnaprej, na datum, ki je dogovorjen z organi za posamezen program.
For the purpose of the closure declaration, the Commission has already encouraged audit authorities to obtain and provide assurance on the legality and regularity not only of the programme contribution paid into financial instruments but also of the use of this contribution through underlying transactions implemented by the final recipients. 
Za namene zaključne izjave je Komisija že spodbudila revizijske organe, da pridobijo in predložijo zagotovila o zakonitosti in rednosti, ne samo o prispevkih programov, ki so bili vplačani v finančne instrumente, temveč tudi o uporabi tega prispevka na podlagi transakcij, ki so jih izvedli končni upravičenci.
The Commission will on the basis of the closure packages submitted by 31 March 2017 assess if sufficient audit work was carried out on financial instruments as the eligibility of underlying expenditure is determined at closure for such instruments. 
Komisija bo na podlagi svežnjev o zaključku, ki bodo predloženi do 31. marca 2017, ocenila, če so revizijska dela o finančnih instrumentih bila zadostna, saj se upravičenost odhodkov določa ob zaključku teh instrumentov.
13.10.2016 Official Journal of the European Union C 375/197 THE COURT’S OBSERVATIONS ASSESSMENT OF PROJECTS’ PERFORMANCE 6.77. Implementing the EU budget under the principle of sound financial management requires that spending should not only focus on complying with the rules but also on the achievement of intended objectives (54). 
13.10.2016 Uradni list Evropske unije C 375/197 SL UGOTOVITVE SODIŠČA OCENA SMOTRNOSTI PROJEKTOV 6.77 Izvrševanje proračuna EU v skladu z načelom dobrega finančnega poslovodenja pomeni, da poraba ne sme biti osredotočena samo na skladnost s pravili, temveč tudi na doseganje zastavljenih ciljev(54).
149 of the 216 projects we examined were completed at the time of the audit. 
Od 216 projektov, ki jih je revidiralo Sodišče, je bilo do začetka revizije zaključenih 149.
All 15 Member States sampled had at least three completed projects that could be assessed (see paragraph 6.9). 6.78. 
Vsaka od 15 držav članic iz vzorca je imela vsaj tri zaključene projekte, ki jih je bilo mogoče oceniti (glej odstavek 6.9).
In addition to checking the regularity of these 149 transactions, we assessed for a second year(55), based on information provided by the beneficiaries, whether and to what extent: — a performance measurement system was in place to assess whether the objectives specified for projects in the project’s approval documents (project application, grant agreement, contract and/or decision for co-financing) were in line with those set out in the OPs and whether appropriate result indicators were set in order to measure the projects’ performance; — projects had achieved those objectives and met the targets set for each indicator. 
6.78 Sodišče je poleg pregledovanja pravilnosti teh 149 transakcij že drugo leto(55) na podlagi informacij, ki so jih zagotovili upravičenci, ocenilo tudi to, ali in v kolikšni meri: — — je bil vzpostavljen sistem za merjenje smotrnosti, s katerim se oceni, ali so bili cilji, določeni v dokumentih o odobritvi projektov (projektni vlogi, sporazumu o dodelitvi nepovratnih sredstev, pogodbi in/ali sklepu o sofinanciranju), skladni s tistimi, ki so bili določeni v operativnih programih, in ali so bili opredeljeni ustrezni kazalniki rezultatov za merjenje smotrnosti projektov, so projekti izpolnili navedene cilje in dosegli ciljne vrednosti, določene za vsak kazalnik.
Our analysis was broader for this year compared to the previous year as we did not focus only on project outputs (56), but also on results in order to measure the projects’ performance in contributing to the OP result objectives. 6.79. 
Naša analiza je bila letos širša kot lani, saj se nismo osredotočali samo na izložke(56) projektov, ampak tudi na rezultate, da bi izmerili smotrnost projektov pri prispevanju k ciljem operativnega programa. 6.79 dokončanih projektov.
Figure 6.10 — The results on the assessment of the completed projects’ performance No of projects for which: Performance assessment Number of projects TOTALS 149 102 (68 %) 41 (28 %) 4 (3 %) 2 (1 %) Both output and result indicators were defined and assessed Outputs were defined and assessed but result indicators were not defined Neither outputs nor result indicators were defined and could not be assessed 90 57 2 52 (58 %) 34 (38 %) 4 (4 %) — 50 (88 %) 7 (12 %) — — — — — 2 (100 %) — — — — Fully achieved Partially achieved Not achieved Cannot be assessed (54) (55) (56) See the 2013 annual report, paragraph 10.10. 
Ocena smotrnosti Število projektov Na sliki 6.10 je povzetek rezultatov ocene smotrnosti Slika 6.10 – Rezultati ocene smotrnosti dokončanih projektov Št. projektov, za katere: so bili opredeljeni in ocenjeni kazalniki izložkov in rezultatov so bili opredeljeni in ocenjeni izložki, kazalniki rezultatov pa niso bili opredeljeni niso bili opredeljeni niti izložki niti kazalniki rezultatov, zato jih ni bilo mogoče oceniti 90 57 2 52 (58 %) 34 (38 %) 4 (4 %) — 50 (88 %) 7 (12 %) — — — — — 2 (100 %) — — — — v celoti dosežena deloma dosežena ni bila dosežena ni bilo mogoče oceniti SKUPAJ 149 102 (68 %) 41 (28 %) 4 (3 %) 2 (1 %) (54) (55) (56) Glej odstavek 10.10 letnega poročila za leto 2013.
See the 2014 annual report, paragraphs 6.80 to 6.86. 
Glej odstavke 6.80 do 6.86 letnega poročila za leto 2014.
See chapter 3, Figure 3.1 for an explanation of the concept of output and results. EN 
Pojma izložek in rezultat sta pojasnjena na sliki 3.1 v poglavju 3.
EN C 375/198 Official Journal of the European Union 13.10.2016 THE COURT’S OBSERVATIONS For all but two of the projects we examined there was a performance measurement system in place linking the project to the OP objectives 6.80. For 147 of the 149 projects (99 %) we conclude that there was a performance measurement system in place based on which an assessment of whether the output indicators are in line with the operational programme indicators can be made (as specified for each priority axis). 
C 375/198 Uradni list Evropske unije 13.10.2016 SL UGOTOVITVE SODIŠČA ODGOVORI KOMISIJE Vsi projekti, ki jih je preučilo Sodišče, razen dveh, so imeli vzpostavljen sistem za merjenje smotrnosti, ki je projekte povezoval s cilji operativnega programa 6.80 Sodišče je zaključilo, da je bil pri 147 od 149 projektov (99 %) vzpostavljen sistem za merjenje smotrnosti, s katerim je mogoče oceniti, ali so kazalniki izložkov skladni s kazalniki operativnega programa (kot so določeni za vsako prednostno os).
6.81. For the remaining two cases (1 %), we could not assess the output of the projects either because specific targets in the output objectives were not set at the stage of the approval of the project or the managing authority/intermediate body could not provide appropriate documentation to us to substantiate that such targets had been specified and communicated to the beneficiary (57). 
6.81 V preostalih dveh primerih (1%) Sodišče izložkov projektov ni moglo oceniti, bodisi ker specifične ciljne vrednosti za cilje glede izložkov niso bile določene v fazi odobritve projekta bodisi ker organ upravljanja/posredniški organ Sodišču ni mogel predložiti ustrezne dokumentacije, s katero bi dokazal, da so bile ciljne vrednosti določene in da so bili upravičenci o njih obveščeni (57).
Therefore, we cannot assess whether or to what extent these projects contributed to the achievement of the OP objectives. 
Zato ne moremo oceniti, ali in v kolikšni meri so ti projekti prispevali k uresničitvi ciljev operativnega programa.
Almost all of the 90 projects with both output and result objectives defined had fully or partially met them 6.82. For the 2007-2013 programming period there was a legal requirement obliging beneficiaries to define and report on outputs but not on results. 
Skoraj vseh 90 projektov z opredeljenimi cilji glede izložkov in rezultatov je te cilje v celoti ali deloma doseglo 6.82 V programskem obdobju 2007–2013 je za upravičence veljala pravna zahteva, da morajo opredeliti izložke in poročati o njih, za rezultate pa se to ni zahtevalo.
Performance had to be monitored at the level of the priority axes of the OP and not at project level. 6.83. 
Smotrnost je bilo treba spremljati na ravni prednostne osi operativnega programa, ne pa tudi na ravni projektov.
However, the Member State authorities still had the possibility to define result indicators. 
6.83 Države članice pa so lahko kljub temu opredelile kazalnike rezultatov.
This allows linking the projects’ results to the priority axis and determining the contribution of the projects to the achievement of the objectives of the operational programme. 
Tako so lahko rezultate projektov povezale s prednostno osjo in ugotovile prispevek projektov k doseganju ciljev operativnega programa.
Result indicators were defined for 90 of the 149 (60 %) completed ERDF/CF and ESF projects. 
Kazalniki rezultatov so bili opredeljeni za 90 od 149 (60 %) dokončanih projektov ESRR/ Kohezijskega sklada in ESS.
THE COMMISSION’S REPLIES Although the structural funds legislative framework for 2007-2013 did not oblige national authorities to define result indicators at project level, the Commission encouraged this whenever relevant. 
6.82–6.83 Čeprav zakonodajni okvir strukturnih skladov za obdobje 2007–2013 ni zahteval od nacionalnih organov, da določijo kazalnike rezultatov na ravni projekta, je Komisija to spodbujala, kadar je bilo ustrezno.
Some result indicators could indeed not be meaningfully measured at the level of a single project. 6.82-6.83. 
Določenih kazalnikov rezultatov res ni bilo mogoče smiselno izmeriti na ravni enega projekta.
(57) These two projects were in Spain and Germany. 
(57) Ta projekta sta bila v Španiji in Nemčiji.
EN 13.10.2016 Official Journal THE COURT’S OBSERVATIONS 6.84. 52 of the 90 completed projects (58 %) which could be assessed at both output and result objectives level had fully achieved both the output and the result objectives set by the managing authorities (see Figure 6.11). 
13.10.2016 Uradni list Evropske unije C 375/199 ODGOVORI KOMISIJE SL UGOTOVITVE SODIŠČA 6.84 52 od 90 dokončanih projektov (58 %), ki jih je bilo mogoče oceniti na ravni ciljev glede izložkov in rezultatov, je v celoti doseglo oboje cilje, ki so jih določili organi upravljanja (glej sliko 6.11).
Another 34 (38 %) of these 90 projects had partially achieved their output and result objectives. of the European Union C 375/199 THE COMMISSION’S REPLIES 6.84. 
34 (38%) od teh 90 projektov je deloma doseglo svoje cilje glede izložkov in rezultatov.
The Commission notes that 86 projects out of the 90 examined which have defined output and result indicators have reached (either fully or partially) or exceeded their corresponding targets. 
6.84 Komisija ugotavlja, da je 86 od 90 pregledanih projektov, ki so opredelili učinke in kazalnike rezultatov, (v celoti ali delno) doseglo ali preseglo svoje ustrezne cilje.
The Commission notes that, in the first place, it is the Monitoring Committees that are required to ensure that projects with EU added value are selected and approved. 
Komisija ugotavlja, da morajo predvsem odbori za spremljanje zagotoviti, da so izbrani in potrjeni projekti z dodano vrednostjo EU.
Performance evaluation of programmes will be reinforced for the 2014-2020 period: as foreseen in the 2014-2020 regulatory framework (Article 22(6) and (7) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013), the Commission will be able to sanction Member States in case of serious underachievement of a priority axis in a programme, as a result of the performance review (Article 22(6) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/ 2013) and at closure (Article 22(7)). 
Ocenjevanje uspešnosti programov bo za obdobje 2014–2020 še dodatno okrepljeno: kot je predvideno v regulativnem okviru za obdobje 2014–2020 (člen 22(6) in (7) Uredbe (EU) št. 1303/2013), bo lahko Komisija v primeru resnega nedoseganja prednostne osi programa, ugotovljenega pri pregledu uspešnosti (člen 22(6) Uredbe (EU) št.
Figure 6.11 — Example of a project which fully achieved its objectives The project met its output and result objectives: An ESF project in Romania consisted of the organisation and delivery of training courses in the field of construction in order to provide participants with new skills that would improve their employment prospects. 
Slika 6.11 – Primer projekta, ki je v celoti dosegel svoje cilje Projekt je dosegel svoje cilje glede izložkov in rezultatov: Projekt ESS v Romuniji je obsegal organizacijo in izvedbo usposabljanj na področju gradnje, da bi udeleženci pridobili nova znanja in spretnosti, ki bi izboljšale njihove zaposlitvene možnosti.
The grant agreement of the project defined five output and eight result indicators which were in line with the OP indicators at priority axis level. 
V sporazum o dodelitvi nepovratnih sredstev projektu je bilo določenih pet kazalnikov izložkov in osem kazalnikov rezultatov, ki so bili skladni s kazalniki operativnega programa na ravni prednostne osi.
The project achieved all indicators within the deadline set in the grant agreement. 
Projekt je vse kazalnike dosegel v roku, določenem v sporazumu o dodelitvi nepovratnih sredstev.
The project even exceeded its targets in terms of participation of long-term unemployed women and young-sters. 
Ciljne vrednosti glede udeležbe dolgotrajno brezposelnih žensk in mladih je celo presegel.
The remaining four projects (4 %) did not achieve any of their objectives. 
6.85 Preostali štirje projekti (4 %) niso dosegli nobenega od svojih ciljev.
One of those four projects was withdrawn by the national authorities following our audit (see Figure 6.12). 6.85. 
Enega od teh štirih projektov so nacionalni organi po reviziji Sodišča preklicali (glej sliko 6.12).
The Commission uses all possible measures at its disposal to ensure sound and efficient financial management in the use of EU funds. 
6.85 Komisija uporabi vse možne ukrepe, ki so ji na voljo, da zagotovi trdno in učinkovito finančno upravljanje pri uporabi sredstev EU.
Moreover, it is only at the stage of the closure of the programme that the performance of projects financed by Operational Programmes will be evaluated. 
Vendar bo ocena uspešnosti projektov, financiranih v okviru operativnih programov, izvedena šele v fazi zaključka.
Figure 6.12 — Example of a project which did not achieve its objectives For an ERDF project in Poland related to the development of a new method for burning brown coal, the beneficiary’s technical capability to undertake the project relied on the involvement of external contractors. 
Slika 6.12 – Primer projekta, ki ni dosegel svojih ciljev Pri projektu ESRR na Poljskem, ki se je nanašal na razvoj nove metode za sežiganje rjavega premoga, so bile tehnične zmogljivosti upravičenca za izvedbo projekta odvisne od sodelovanja zunanjih izvajalcev.
Some of these contractors did not finally participate to the project. 
Nekaj od teh izvajalcev na koncu ni sodelovalo pri projektu.
This contributed to the project not achieving its intended objectives. 
To je prispevalo k temu, da projekt ni dosegel zastavljenih ciljev.
The intermediate body decided to cancel the project following our audit. 
Posredniški organ je po reviziji Sodišča sklenil, da bo projekt preklical.
EN C 375/200 Official Journal THE COURT’S OBSERVATIONS Result indicators were not defined for 38 % of the projects 6.86. For 57 of the 149 (38%) completed projects the Member State authorities implemented a performance measurement system to allow the monitoring of project outputs but did not define any result indicators or targets in the project’s approval documents. 
C 375/200 Uradni list Evropske unije 13.10.2016 ODGOVORI KOMISIJE SL UGOTOVITVE SODIŠČA Kazalniki rezultatov niso bili opredeljeni pri 38 % projektov 6.86 Organi držav članic so za 57 od 149 (38 %) dokončanih projektov uporabili sistem merjenja smotrnosti, da bi omogočili spremljanje izložkov projektov, vendar v dokumentih za odobritev projektov niso opredelili nobenih kazalnikov rezultatov ali ožjih ciljev.
For these projects, we could not measure if and to what extent they contributed to the achievement of the OP result objectives. 6.87. 
Pri teh projektih Sodišče ni moglo izmeriti, ali in v kolikšni meri so ti prispevali k doseganju ciljev glede rezultatov operativnega programa.
Our assessment in 15 Member States sampled showed that such cases were identified in 13 of them. 
6.87 Z našo oceno v 15 državah članicah v vzorcu smo take primere ugotovili v 13 državah članicah.
However, the issue is particularly prevalent in Czech Republic, Spain, France, Italy, Latvia and Austria for ERDF/CF and Czech Republic, Germany, Spain and Poland for ESF. 
Zlasti pa so pogosti v zvezi z ESRR/Kohezijskim skladom na Češkem, v Španiji, Franciji, Italiji, Latviji in v Avstriji ter v zvezi z ESS na Češkem, v Nemčiji, Španiji in na Poljskem.
In these countries result indicators were not defined for more than half of the completed projects examined. 6.88. 
V teh državah kazalniki rezultatov niso bili opredeljeni pri več kot polovici zaključenih projektov, ki jih je preučilo Sodišče.
However, 50 of these 57 completed ERDF/CF and ESF projects (88 %) had fully achieved their output objectives set by the managing authorities. 
6.88 50 od teh 57 dokončanih projektov ESRR/Kohezijskega sklada in ESS (88 %) pa je v celoti doseglo svoje cilje glede izložkov, ki so jih določili organi upravljanja.
The remaining seven (12 %) projects had partially achieved their output objectives. 
Preostalih sedem (12 %) je deloma doseglo svoje cilje glede izložkov.
6.89. As regards the 2014-2020 programming period, we note that there is no legal requirement in the common provision regulation for Member States to define result indicators at project level. 
6.89 Sodišče opozarja, da za programsko obdobje 2014– 2020 v uredbi o skupnih določbah ni pravne zahteve, ki bi določala, da morajo države članice opredeliti kazalnike rezultatov na ravni projektov.
Nevertheless, we consider it good practice that managing authorities and intermediate bodies should whenever possible define relevant result indicators at project level that measure the contribution of the project to the achievement of the objectives set for the priority axis of the OP. of the European Union 13.10.2016 THE COMMISSION’S REPLIES 6.86. 
Kljub temu meni, da bi bila dobra praksa, če bi organi upravljanja in posredniška telesa, kadar je to mogoče, opredelili relevantne kazalnike rezultatov na ravni projektov, ki merijo, koliko je projekt prispeval k doseganju ciljev, določenih za prednostno os operativnega programa.
The Commission and Member States assess to which extent OP result objectives have been achieved primarily through ex post evaluations, building on the monitoring and reporting of a series of output and result indicators. 6.89. 
6.86 Komisija in države članice ocenijo, v kolikšni meri so bili doseženi cilji rezultatov operativnih programov, zlasti z naknadnimi ocenami, s spremljanjem in poročanjem o sklopu kazalnikov za učinke in rezultate.
The Commission notes that there is a major improvement for 2014-2020 with a comprehensive system of obligatory indicators for outputs and results at programme level. 
6.89 Komisija ugotavlja bistveno izboljšanje za obdobje 2014– 2020 s celovitim sistemom obveznih kazalnikov za učinke in rezultate na ravni programa.
The achievement of the objectives is measured by a result indicator (with a baseline — the starting point — and target). 
Doseganje ciljev se izmeri s kazalniki rezultatov (z osnovo – začetno točko – in ciljem).
Programmes will systematically measure and report progress of result indicators. 
Programi bodo sistematično ocenili napredek kazalnikov rezultatov in o njih poročali.
Projects within a programme are selected to deliver outputs and contribute towards the results to be achieved at programme level. 
Projekti znotraj programa so izbrani, da proizvedejo učinke in prispevajo k rezultatom, ki naj se dosežejo na ravni programa.
Their progress is measured with output indicators. 
Njihov napredek se izmeri s kazalniki učinka.
EN 13.10.2016 Official Journal of the European Union C 375/201 ANNEX 6.1 RESULTS OF TRANSACTION TESTING FOR ‘ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND TERRITORIAL COHESION’ SIZE AND STRUCTURE OF THE SAMPLE Total transactions ESTIMATED IMPACT OF QUANTIFIABLE ERRORS Estimated level of error Upper Error Limit (UEL) Lower Error Limit (LEL) 2015 2014 223 331 5,2 % 5,7 % 7,6 % 2,8 % 
SL 13.10.2016 Uradni list Evropske unije C 375/201 PRILOGA 6.1 REZULTATI PREIZKUŠANJA TRANSAKCIJ ZA PODROČJE EKONOMSKA, SOCIALNA IN TERITORIALNA KOHEZIJA VELIKOST IN STRUKTURA VZORCA Transakcije skupaj OCENJENI UČINEK KOLIČINSKO OPREDELJIVIH NAPAK Ocenjena stopnja napake Zgornja meja napake Spodnja meja napake 2015 2014 223 331 5,2 % 5,7 % 7,6 % 2,8 %
EN C 375/202 Official Journal of the European Union 13.10.2016 Year Court Recommendation Being implemented N/A under the current framework Commission reply 2013 Chapter 5, recommendation 3: analyse the underlying reasons R for the high number of cases of non-compliance with EU state aid rules. 
SL C 375/202 Uradni list Evropske unije 13.10.2016 Leto Priporočilo Sodišča izvedeno v celoti ni relevantno v sedanjem okviru nezadostni dokazi Odgovor Komisije 2013 Poglavje 5, priporočilo 3: analizira, kakšni so osnovni vzroki za R visoko število primerov neupoštevanja pravil EU o državni pomoči.