natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
9 as for bulgaria, there is an Eafrd expenditure of 4.8 million € in the 4th quarter of 2011, whose declaration was received by the commission services on 10 January 2012 — deadline for submitting declaration was end of January. the BG authorities intend to transfer more than 80 % of M122 budget to other rdp measures (with the 7th rdp modification indeed some 50 % of M122 initial budget was transferred to other measures, but with the 8th modification of the BG rdp 6 M Eur public expenditure is reserved for the Guarantee fund, which also covers M122, so stay within M122 and are not transferred to other measures). despite the pressing need to improve the economic value of private and municipal forests in BG, measure 122 implementation has been difficult for the following reasons. first, nearly 80 % of bg forests are state‐owned and therefore not eligible for support under M122. then, in the case of the remaining 20 %, the Bulgarian authorities indicate the following reasons for weak interest in this measure: (a) 90 % of forests restored to private owners are less than 1 ha in area and therefore only eligible for a very low level of support; (b) owners usually live far from their forests and as a result show little interest; (c) associations of forest owners covered their major needs when they received support under measure 1.4 of the BG sapard programme; (d) municipalities owning forests have a preference for preparing projects under MM 321 and 322; opportunities under M122 are therefore of less interest to them; (e) the length of time taken to process the few applications received has discouraged other potential beneficiaries from applying. 
Bolgarski organi nameravajo prenesti več kot 80 % proračuna za ukrep 122 na druge ukrepe PRP (s 7. spremembo PRP je bilo približno 50 % prvotnega proračuna za ukrep 122 dejansko prenesenih na druge ukrepe, medtem ko je z 8. spremembo bolgarskega PRP 6 milijonov EUR javnih odhodkov rezerviranih za jamstveni sklad, ki zajema tudi ukrep 122, tako da ta znesek ostaja v okviru ukrepa 122 in ni prenesen na druge ukrepe). Čeprav je nujno treba povečati gospodarsko vrednost zasebnih in občinskih gozdov v Bolgariji, je bilo izvajanje ukrepa 122 težavno iz naslednjih razlogov. Skoraj 80 % bolgarskih gozdov je v državni lasti, zato niso upravičeni do podpore iz ukrepa 122, v primeru preostalih 20 % pa bolgarski organi za pomanjkanje zanimanja za ta ukrep navajajo naslednje razloge: (a) 90 % gozdov, vrnjenih zasebnim lastnikom, ima površino manj kot 1 ha, zaradi česar so upravičeni le do zelo nizke stopnje podpore; (b) lastniki običajno živijo daleč od svojih gozdov in zato ne kažejo prevelikega zanimanja zanje; (c) združenja lastnikov gozdov so pokrila svoje glavne potrebe, ko so prejela podporo iz ukrepa 1.4 bolgarskega posebnega programa podpore za kmetijstvo in razvoj podeželja (SAPARD); (d) občine, ki imajo v lasti gozdove, dajejo prednost pripravi projektov v okviru ukrepov 321 in 322, zaradi česar se manj zanimajo za priložnosti v okviru ukrepa 122; (e) čas, ki je potreben za obdelavo majhnega števila prejetih vlog, je odvrnil druge potencialne upravičence od prijave.
10 romania had indeed not declared any expenditure by the end of 2011. as it is implementing its first post-accession rdp there are several new measures to be implemented. it launched the first call for measure 122 in 2012. 
10 romunija do konca leta 2011 dejansko ni prijavila nobenih odhodkov. Ker izvaja svoj prvi popristopni PRP, mora sprejeti številne nove ukrepe. Leta 2012 je objavila prvi razpis za ukrep 122.
11 on 10 January 2011 a new modification of the greek programme was adopted and Greece opted for not using Eu support for measure 122. Special report No 8/2013 – Support for the improvement of the economic value of forests from the European agricultural fund for rural development 
11 Nova sprememba grškega programa je bila sprejeta 10. januarja 2011, pri čemer se je Grčija odločila, da ne bo uporabila podpore EU za ukrep 122. Posebno poročilo št. 8/2013 – Podpora Evropskega kmetijskega sklada za razvoj podeželja za povečanje gospodarske vrednosti gozdov
34. indeed, this was the case in Hungary prior to 2010. the managing authority changed the eligibility requirements in 2010 to make support proportional to the size of the registered forest areas and decreased the maximum support per application. 
34. To je dejansko veljalo za Madžarsko pred letom 2010. Organ upravljanja je tistega leta spremenil zahteve za upravičenost tako, da je postala podpora sorazmerna z velikostjo registriranih gozdnih površin, največja podpora na vlogo pa je bila zmanjšana.
With regard to the particular case of slovenia: the slovenian rdp includes a requirement that the support to investments in construction or reconstruction of forest roads must comply with the applicable forest management plan and the support to investments in felling and extraction of wood and for forest tracks must comply with the silvicultural plan. in austria, beneficiaries of measure 122 are defined in the rdp as forest owners, their associations and communes. in case of support for associations of forest owners the association as such might not own any specific area of forest. 
12 V zvezi s posebnim primerom Madžarske glej odgovor na odstavek 37. V zvezi s posebnim primerom Slovenije slovenski PRP vključuje zahtevo, da mora biti podpora za naložbe v gradnjo in rekonstrukcijo gozdnih cest v skladu z načrtom za gospodarjenje z gozdovi, ki se uporablja, podpora za naložbe v sečnjo in pridobivanje lesa ter gozdne vlake pa v skladu z gozdnogojitvenim načrtom.
However, each member of the association must be a forest owner as stipulated in art. 27 of reg. 
Vendar mora biti vsak član združenja lastnik gozda, kot je določeno v členu 27 Uredbe (ES) št.
(Eu) 1698/2005. the type of beneficiaries was further clarified, deleting ‘other beneficiaries’ at the occasion of the second programme modification. the coM notification on the approval of this programme amendment was sent to at on 27 april 2009 (arEs (2009) 79362. 
1698/2005. Vrsta upravičencev je bila dodatno pojasnjena, pri čemer so bili v okviru druge spremembe programa črtani „drugi upravičenci“. Uradno obvestilo Komisije o odobritvi te spremembe programa je bilo Avstriji poslano 27. aprila 2009 (ARES(2009) 79362).
Reply of the CoMMISSIoN 35. it (tuscany): the observation has been taken into account. the rural development programme for tuscany 2007–13 has been modified accordingly on 11/12/2012. 
OdgOvOri KOmisije 35. Opažanje v zvezi z Italijo (Toskano) je bilo upoštevano. Program razvoja podeželja Toskane za obdobje 2007–2013 je bil ustrezno spremenjen 11.
36. the commission considers that investments need not serve exclusively the purposes of a specific forest holding in order to be eligible for support — though they would have to serve at least partly that holding. see also reply to paragraph 24. as for Hungary, M122 only supports the purchase of machinery to forest holders who run forestry activities on the basis of a forest management plan on at least 50 ha of forest. in the commission’s understanding the beneficiaries used the machines for their forest areas although maybe not exclusively, but there should be a link to a forest area. 
Komisija meni, da ni nujno, da so naložbe namenjene izključno za specifično gozdno posest, da bi bile upravičene do podpore, čeprav morajo biti vsaj delno namenjene za zadevno posest.
47 38. the commission notes that many items of machinery can be used for both forestry and farming. the commission considers that such items should not be excluded from investment support simply because they have an agricultural application beside a silvicultural application. (on the other hand, investments in machines which can only be used for agriculture should not be supported through measure 122.) 
Komisija ugotavlja, da je veliko strojev mogoče uporabljati v gozdarstvu in tudi v kmetijstvu. Komisija meni, da taki stroji ne bi smeli biti izključeni iz podpore za naložbe zgolj zaradi tega, ker se poleg gozdnogojitvenih uporabljajo tudi za kmetijske dejavnosti. (Po drugi strani pa se naložbe v stroje, ki se lahko uporabljajo le v kmetijstvu, ne bi smele podpirati iz ukrepa 122.)
With regard to the particular case of Hungary: in 2010 the Hungarian authorities decided to adjust the list of eligible machines, restricting them to items which are ‘forestry-specific’. 
V zvezi s posebnim primerom Madžarske so se madžarski organi leta 2010 odločili spremeniti seznam upravičenih strojev, pri čemer so ga omejili na stroje, ki so „značilni za gozdarstvo“.
39. in general terms, the commission notes that difficulties of legal interpretation have arisen regarding the demarcation between measures 122 and 123. it has proposed that these two measures be merged in the post-2013 period. 
Komisija upošteva opažanje Sodišča in bo dodatno pojasnila stanje. 39. Komisija na splošno ugotavlja, da so se pojavile težave glede pravne razlage razmejitve ukrepov 122 in 123.
41. some machinery can be used both for forestry and agriculture. the fact that a machine could also be used for agriculture should not make its purchase ineligible for support under measure 122 if it can be used in forestry work. taking this approach could force some operators to buy two machines instead of one, which would be inefficient. 
41. Določena mehanizacija se lahko uporablja v gozdarstvu in tudi v kmetijstvu. Dejstvo, da je stroj mogoče uporabljati tudi v kmetijstvu, ne sme vplivati na to, da njegov nakup ni upravičen do podpore iz ukrepa 122, če ga je mogoče uporabljati za dela v gozdu.
Reply of the CoMMISSIoN 43. the indicators are not established only through guidelines, but are included in the implementing regulation (annex Viii of regulation 1974/2006). result indicators are not set at measure level, but at axis level, reflecting the fact that it is the combined action of a range of measures which causes the result. 
Kazalniki niso določeni le s smernicami, ampak so vključeni v izvedbeni uredbi (Priloga VIII k Uredbi (ES) št. 1974/2006). Kazalniki rezultatov niso določeni na ravni ukrepa, ampak na ravni osi, kar izraža dejstvo, da je rezultat posledica skupnega delovanja različnih ukrepov.
44. the objectives are defined at axis level,13 it is a combination of measures (including measure 122) which, in fine, will allow the achievement of the objectives set. output indicators are not meant to measure achievement of objectives. they are used to measure activities directly realised at measure level. at axis level, result indicators measure the direct and immediate effects of interventions and are fed by several measures. at rdp level, the objective achievements are measured by evaluators using notably the common impact indicators completed with a broad range of analysis and approaches (additional indicators, counterfactual methodologies, samples ...). 
Uporabljajo se za merjenje dejavnosti, ki se neposredno izvajajo na ravni ukrepa. Na ravni osi kazalniki rezultatov merijo neposredne in takojšnje učinke posegov in temeljijo na več ukrepih. Na ravni PRP doseganje ciljev merijo ocenjevalci, ki pri tem uporabljajo predvsem skupne kazalnike učinkov, dopolnjene z veliko različnimi analizami in pristopi (dodatnimi kazalniki, hipotetičnimi metodologijami, vzorci itd.).
13 the objective of axis 1 is ‘competitiveness of agriculture and forestry by supporting restructuring, development and innovation’. Special report No 8/2013 – Support for the improvement of the economic value of forests from the European agricultural fund for rural development 
13 Cilj osi 1 je „konkurenčnost kmetijstva in gozdarstva s podporo za prestrukturiranje, razvoj in inovacije“. Posebno poročilo št. 8/2013 – Podpora Evropskega kmetijskega sklada za razvoj podeželja za povečanje gospodarske vrednosti gozdov
With regard to investments which supposedly concerned ‘agriculture’, the commission is of the view that an investment related to chestnuts need not necessarily be considered ‘agricultural’ and may improve the value of a forest — as chestnuts grow on trees and these trees may form part of a forest. 
V zvezi z naložbami, ki so se domnevno nanašale na „kme-tijstvo“, Komisija meni, da ni nujno, da se naložba v zvezi s kostanji obravnava kot „kmetijska“, in da lahko taka naložba poveča vrednost gozda, saj kostanji rastejo na drevesih, ta drevesa pa so lahko del gozda.
However, if the chestnuts in question come from an orchard rather than a forest, the investment would indeed be ‘agricultural’. the commission will assess what additional guidance is needed on this and similar issues in future. it will also investigate with the council and the European parliament to what extent these issues could be solved through a definition of ‘forest’ in the relevant legal acts. 
Če pa zadevni kostanji izvirajo iz nasada in ne iz gozda, bi bila naložba dejansko„kmetijska“. Komisija bo ocenila, katera dodatna navodila so potrebna v zvezi s tem in podobnimi vprašanji v prihodnosti. Poleg tega bo skupaj s Svetom in Evropskim parlamentom proučila, v kolikšni meri bi bilo ta vprašanja mogoče rešiti z opredelitvijo pojma „gozd“ v ustreznih pravnih aktih.
Reply of the CoMMISSIoN With regard to processing and marketing, the commission notes that in some cases it is difficult to draw a clear dividing line between what activities related to thinning/fell-ing and activities related to processing/marketing. for example, the purchase and use of wood-chipping equipment can help to provide organic matter for the soil and reduce the risk of fire and pests which would increase the value of the forest. if the equipment is suited for these purposes, it is considered eligible. 
OdgOvOri KOmisije V zvezi s predelavo in trženjem Komisija ugotavlja, da je v nekaterih primerih težko jasno razlikovati med dejavnostmi, povezanimi z redčenjem/sečnjo, in dejavnostmi, povezanimi s predelavo/trženjem. Nakup in uporaba opreme za izdelavo lesnih sekancev lahko na primer pomagata zagotavljati organsko snov za prst ter zmanjšati nevarnost požara in škodljivcev, kar povečuje vrednost gozda.
However, the purchase of equipment for the purpose of producing wood chips for fuel should not be supported under measure 122. the commission has proposed to combine the current measures 122 and 123 after 2013. 
Če je oprema ustrezna za te namene, se obravnava kot upravičena. Vendar nakup opreme za izdelavo lesnih sekancev za gorivo ne bi smel biti podprt iz ukrepa 122.
With regard to operating costs and consumables, the commission refers the court to its reply to paragraph 35. 
V zvezi s poslovnimi stroški in potrošnim materialom Komisija opozarja Sodišče na svoj odgovor na odstavek 35.
52. decisions about which specific categories of private owners to support belongs to the process of formulating/ negotiating a given rdp, on the basis of a sWot analysis related to the programme area in question. common reply to paragraphs 52 and 53. the combination of a number of measures from the current period into one measure — as proposed by the commission — provides a clearer overview. in particular, measures 122 and 123 from the current period will be combined into a single ‘sub-measure’ with one set of maximum aid intensities rather than two. 
52. Odločanje o tem, katere posamezne kategorije zasebnih lastnikov bi bilo treba podpreti, je del postopka oblikovanja danega PRP in/ali pogajanja o njem na podlagi analize SWOT, povezane z zadevno programsko površino.
Reply of the CoMMISSIoN 55. the commission considers that, where problems exist, they can be addressed primarily through guidance, through the combination of the current measures 122 and 123 and through greater attention to certain issues during the programming process. 
OdgOvOri KOmisije 55. Komisija meni, da je težave, kjer obstajajo, mogoče obravnavati predvsem z navodili, združitvijo trenutnih ukrepov 122 in 123 ter namenjanjem večje pozornosti nekaterim vprašanjem med postopkom priprave programa.
However, it will investigate with the council and the European parliament to what extent certain issues could be addressed in the relevant legal acts through a definition of ‘forest’ as well as a clearer explanation of the relationship between investments in equipment and improvements to the economic value of forests. 
Vendar bo skupaj s Svetom in Evropskim parlamentom proučila, v kolikšni meri bi bilo v ustreznih pravnih aktih mogoče nekatera vprašanja obravnavati z opredelitvijo pojma „gozd“ ter jasnejšo razlago razmerja med naložbami v opremo in povečanjem gospodarske vrednosti gozdov.
56. the commission analysed the situation of the forest sector in the 2005 commission staff Working document, which formed an annex to the communication on the implementation of the Eu forestry strategy (document reference sEc(2005) 333), which identified needs and strategic objectives. the commission is in the process of reviewing the 1998 Eu forestry strategy. the adoption of the ‘communication from the commission to the European parliament, the council, the European Economic and social committee and the committee of the regions; together with our for-ests: a new Eu forest strategy’ is intended for 2013 and the communication and a staff Working document annexed to the communication will provide an Eu-level analysis of the Eu forestry sector. 
Komisija je proučila razmere v gozdarskem sektorju v delovnem dokumentu služb Komisije iz leta 2005, ki je priložen sporočilu o izvajanju gozdarske strategije EU (referenčni dokument SEC(2005) 333), v katerem so bile opredeljene potrebe in strateški cilji.
50 57. in forest science and practice the concept of ‘economic value of forests’ is well recognised, and a set of operations leading to a likely increase in value in the long term is also well recognised. 
50 57. V gozdarstvu in gozdarski praksi je zamisel „gospodarske vrednosti gozdov“ dobro znana, pri čemer enako velja tudi za niz operacij, ki prispevajo k verjetnemu dolgoročnemu zvišanju vrednosti.
58. the commission will pay the necessary attention to this issue in the negotiation of future rdps and will provide guidance as necessary. 
58. Komisija bo namenila ustrezno pozornost temu vprašanju pri pogajanju o prihodnjih PRP in po potrebi zagotovila navodila.
However, additional guidance in this matter should be provided. the commission will also investigate with the council and the European parliament to what extent the desired relationship between investments in equipment and improvements to the economic value of forests could be clarified in the relevant legal acts. 
Vendar bi bilo treba v zvezi s tem zagotoviti dodatna navodila. Komisija bo skupaj s Svetom in Evropskim parlamentom tudi proučila, v kolikšni meri bi bilo v ustreznih pravnih aktih mogoče pojasniti želeno razmerje med naložbami v opremo in povečanjem gospodarske vrednosti gozdov.
Special report No 8/2013 – Support for the improvement of the economic value of forests from the European agricultural fund for rural development 
Posebno poročilo št. 8/2013 – Podpora Evropskega kmetijskega sklada za razvoj podeželja za povečanje gospodarske vrednosti gozdov
51 recommendation 2 the commission notes that the principle of subsidiarity hands considerable discretion to Member states and regions in respect of the points raised — in line, for example, with the European parliament’s ‘report on the implementation of a European union forestry strategy’ (a6-0015/2006). 
51 priporočilo 2 Komisija ugotavlja, da načelo subsidiarnosti omogoča državam članicam in regijam znatno diskrecijo v zvezi z izpostavljenimi točkami, na primer v skladu s poročilom Evropskega parlamenta o izvajanju gozdarske strategije Evropske unije (A6-0015/2006).
With regard to ‘disproportionately high’ aid, it must be borne in mind that certain types of machinery are very expensive and provide a return on investment only in the long term — a fact accepted in the forest sector. this makes it difficult to set rigid rules about proportionality at Eu level. it should be decided in the programme negotiation process whether a limit on funding in proportion to holding size is appropriate, taking into account the characteristics of the programme area. 
V zvezi z „nesorazmerno visoko“ pomočjo je treba upoštevati, da so nekatere vrste mehanizacije zelo drage in zagotavljajo le dolgoročno donosnost naložbe, kar je priznano dejstvo v gozdarskem sektorju. Zaradi tega je težko določiti stroga pravila glede sorazmernosti na ravni EU. V okviru pogajanja o programu bi bilo treba določiti, ali je omejitev financiranja primerna glede na velikost posesti, ob upoštevanju značilnosti programske površine.
With regard to felling, because of the primarily economic nature of the operations refered to by the court, state aid clearance in respect of measure 122 is sought not under the set of state aid guidelines cited by the court but rather under the Guidelines on national regional aid (2006/c 54/08), commission regulation 800/2008 (the so-called ‘Block exemption regulation’) or commission regulation 1998/2006 (the so-called ‘de minimis regulation’). 
V zvezi s sečnjo se zaradi primarno gospodarske narave operacij, na katere se sklicuje Sodišče, odobritev državne pomoči v zvezi z ukrepom 122 ne zahteva v skladu s smernicami o državni pomoči, ki jih navaja Sodišče, ampak v skladu s Smernicami o državni regionalni pomoči (2006/C 54/08), Uredbo Komisije (ES) št.
66. the commission considers that where measure 122 was the correct measure to use, the economic value of forests was indeed increased. 
66. Komisija meni, da se je v primerih, ko je bil ukrep 122 pravilen ukrep, ki ga je bilo treba uporabiti, gospodarska vrednost gozdov dejansko povečala.
53 recommendation 4 the commission accepts that beneficiaries should be required to provide data. 
53 priporočilo 4 Komisija se strinja, da je treba od upravičencev zahtevati, da predložijo podatke.
However, these data may be of a very basic nature and require significant processing to allow conclusions about increases in value. to compile result indicators such as ‘increase of GVa’, Ms have been invited14 to capture relevant information on GVa from the supported holdings when the application is approved and 2 years after the investment completion in order to integrate as much as possible the long-term effect of the investments. in practice, it has been difficult for Mas to compile the necessary data and conduct the analysis required to establish values for these types of result indicators as part of their regular monitoring activities. therefore, for the next programming period, this task the establishment of values for this indicator will rather be undertaken by the programme evaluators. the commission considers this a feasible and adequate approach. 
Vendar so lahko ti podatki zelo osnovni in zahtevajo znatno obdelavo, da bi bilo mogoče priti do sklepnih ugotovitev glede zvišanja vrednosti. Da bi se zbrali kazalniki rezultatov, kot je „zvišanje bruto dodane vrednosti“, so bile države članice pozvane14, da zberejo informacije o bruto dodani vrednosti od podprtih posestev, ko je vloga odobrena in dve leti po zaključku naložb, da bi se čim bolj upošteval dolgoročni učinek naložb.
14 WorkingdocumentprovidingguidancetoMsfortheresultindicator ‘increase of GVa’: http://enrd.ec.europa.eu/app_templates/filedownload. cfm?id=84053593-c697-ff89-Ed5c-51797d9754fd Reply of the CoMMISSIoN Special report No 8/2013 – Support for the improvement of the economic value of forests from the European agricultural fund for rural development 
Komisija meni, da je to izvedljiv in ustrezen pristop. 14 Delovni dokument, ki vsebuje navodila državam članicam glede kazalnika rezultatov „zvišanje bruto dodane vrednosti“, na voljo na naslovu: http://enrd.ec.europa.eu/app_templates/filedownload. cfm?id=84053593-C697-FF89-ED5C-51797D9754FD OdgOvOri KOmisije Posebno poročilo št.