natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The approving authority took the view that the main purpose of the plant consisted in the production of energy and therefore authorised it — in accordance with Gävle Kraftvärme’s application — to operate as a co-incineration plant.
Pristojni organ je menil, da je glavni namen naprave proizvajanje energije in jo je zato potrdil kot napravo za sosežig, kar je ustrezalo namenu pro�nje, ki jo je vložila Gävle Kraftvärme. Proti tej odločbi se je pritožila državna regionalna uprava (Länsstyrelse i Gävleborgs). Menila je, da je kotel 2 treba uvrstiti med sežigalnice, in ne med naprave za sosežig.
That appeal succeeded at first instance.
Ta pritožba je bila sprva uspe�na.
(2) For the purposes of the interpretation of [the Waste Incineration Directive], is a plant constructed for waste incineration but having as its main purpose the production of energy to be classified as an incineration plant or as a co-inciner-ation plant?’
Ali se pri razlagi Direktive naprava, zgrajena za sežiganje odpadkov, katere glavni namen je proizvodnja energije, uvrsti med sežigalnice ali med naprave za sosežig?
Gävle Kraftvärme’s case is now pending before the referring court.
Predložitveno sodi�če zdaj odloča o pravnem sredstvu, ki ga je vložila Gävle Kraftvärme.
Gävle Kraftvärme objects to classification of the boilers individually.
Nasprotuje ločeni uvrstitvi kotlov v ustrezne skupine. Trdi, da je nasprotno celoten obrat tipa Johannes ena naprava, ki jo je treba obravnavati celovito.
The Republic of Austria, the Kingdom of Sweden and the Commission of the European Communities took part in the written procedure.
V pisnem postopku so sodelovale Republika Avstrija, Kraljevina Švedska in Komisija Evropskih Skupnosti.
Only the Commission took part in the hearing of 17 April 2008.
V ustnem postopku 17. aprila 2008 pa je sodelovala le Komisija.
A — The first question — the concept of ‘plant’
A – Prvo vprašanje – glede pojma naprava
Incineration plants are thus technical units or equipment.
Sežigalnice so torej tehnične enote ali oprema.
The Högsta domstolen asks first whether a co-generation plant with a number of units (boilers) is to be assessed on the basis of each unit or whether the co-generation plant is to be regarded as a whole.
Högsta domstol najprej spra�uje, ali naj se pri napravi za proizvodnjo toplote in elektrike, ki je sestavljena iz več enot (kotlov), vsaka enota presoja kot ločena naprava ali se naprava za proizvodnjo toplote in elektrike presoja kot celota.
In Article 3(5) of the Waste Incineration Directive, however, the different language versions agree on the definition of ‘co-incineration plant’: they are always defined as plants.
Nasprotno se pri opredelitvi „naprave za sosežig“ v členu 3, točka 5, Direktive o sežiganju odpadkov jezikovne različice ujemajo: v vseh primerih je opredeljena kot naprava.
Nevertheless, this cannot be understood as meaning that in relation to a co-incineration plant a different concept of ‘plant’ applies to that which applies to incineration plants.
Vendar to ne sme biti razumljeno tako, da za napravo za sosežig velja drug pojem naprave kot za sežigalnico.
Rather that definition impli -citly builds on the definition of incineration plant.
Nasprotno, ta opredelitev implicitno razvija opredelitev sežigalnice.
The Waste Incineration Directive differentiates between incineration plants and co-incineration plants.
Direktiva o sežiganju odpadkov razlikuje med sežigalnico in napravo za sosežig.
The defin -ition set out in Article 3(4) of the German language version of the directive provides that ‘incineration plant’ was any ‘technische Einheit’ (technical unit) or ‘Anlage’ (equipment).
Sežigalnica je po opredelitvi iz členov 3 in 4 nem�ke različice Direktive katerakoli nepremična ali premična tehnična enota ali oprema [Anlage].
Other language versions avoid the double usage of the term ‘Anlage’.
Druge jezikovne različice se izognejo dvojni uporabi pojma „Anlage“ [naprava, oprema].
The French language version defines an ‘installation’ as ‘équipement’ or ‘unité technique’; in English a ‘plant’ is described as a ‘technical unit’ or ‘equipment’.
Tako je v francoski različici „installation“ opredeljena kot „équipement“ ali „unité technique“, medtem ko v angle�ki različici „plant“ označuje „technical unit“ ali „equipment“. Švedska različica sledi obema zadnjima jezikovnima različicama,
That interpretation corresponds to certain provisions relating to inciner -ation plants laid down in Article 6(1) of the Waste Incineration Directive, since they can be applied only to an individual boiler.
Ta razlaga je v skladu z določenimi ureditvami v zvezi s sežigalnicami v skladu s členom 6(1) Direktive o sežiganju odpadkov, ki se jih lahko uporabi le za posamezne kotle.
The first subparagraph of Article 6(1) requires a level of incineration such that the slag and bottom ashes total organic carbon content is less than 3% or their loss on ignition is less than 5% of the dry weight of the material.
V členu 6(1), prvi pododstavek, je predpisano, da mora biti pri stopnji sežiga delež skupnega organskega ogljika v žlindri in pepelu manj kot 3 % in žarilna izguba manj kot 5 %.
An analysis which related to several boilers at the same time would not permit a conclusion regarding the level of incineration to be drawn.
Me�ane obravnave za več kotlov ne bi dovolile nobenih izjem glede stopnje sežiga.
wording of the specific definition of both types of plant in the second subparagraph of Article 3(4) and the third subparagraph of Article 3(5) of the Waste Incineration Directive.
drugi pododstavek, in točka 5, tretji pododstavek, Direktive o sežiganju odpadkov, kjer se opisa obeh tipov naprav skoraj povsem ujemata.
Under those provisions, the definition extends to the site of the inciner -ation or co-incineration plant and the plant as a whole, including all incineration lines, waste reception, storage, on-site pretreatment facilities, waste, fuel- and air-supply systems, boiler, facilities for the treatment of exhaust gases, on-site facilities for treatment or storage of residues and waste water, stack, devices and systems for controlling incineration operations, recording and monitoring incineration conditions.
V skladu z zgoraj omenjenima členoma obsega opredelitev pojma kraj sežigalnice oz. naprave za sosežig in celotno napravo, vključno z vsemi linijami za sežiganje, sprejemom odpadkov, skladi�čem, napravami za predobdelavo na kraju samem, sistemi za oskrbo z odpadki, gorivom in zrakom, kotlom, napravami za či�čenje odpadnih plinov, napravami za obdelavo ali skladi�čenje ostankov in odpadne vode na kraju samem, odvodnikom, napravami in sistemi za nadziranje postopkov sežiganja, zapisovanje in spremljanje pogojev sežiganja.
In accordance with the third and fourth subparagraphs of Article 6(1) of the Waste Incineration Directive, incineration plants must also have an auxiliary burner.
V skladu s členom 6(1), tretji in četrti pododstavek, Direktive o sežiganju odpadkov mora biti sežigalnica opremljena z vsaj enim pomožnim gorilnikom.
6Thus every boiler needs its own auxiliary burner.
6Vsak kotel potrebuje lasten pomožni gorilnik.
Thus, in essence, it is necessary to verify whether each individual boiler — with the
Tako je treba načeloma pri vsakem posameznem kotlu – skupaj s pripadajočo
There is no mention, in that specific definition of the concept of ‘plant’, of several boilers; it refers to only one boiler.
Opis pojma naprave ne govori o več kotlih, temveč o enem samem.
That implies that a plant normally has only one 5boiler.
To govori za trditev, da pojem naprava navadno kaže na to, da gre samo za en 5 kotel.
6 — See, with regard to auxiliary burners as the best available technique for waste incineration plants, the Reference Document on the Best Available Techniques for Waste Inciner -ation, August 2006, p. 269 et seq. (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/environment/ippc/brefs/wi_bref_0806.pdf).
6 – Glede pomožnih gorilnikov kot najbolj�e dostopne metode za sežigalnice na gorivo iz odpadkov glej Reference Document on the Best Available Techniques for Waste Incineration, avgust 2006, str.
The Commission prepared that document in collaboration with experts from the Member States on the basis of Directive 96/61.
Komisija je ta dokument izdelala v sodelovanju s strokovnjaki iz držav članic na podlagi Direktive 96/61.
5 — The manner in which plants without their own incineration boilers are to be treated is the subjectmatter of Case C-317/07 Lahti Energia, shortly to come before the Court (see notice in OJ 2007 C 211, p. 26).
5 – Vpra�anje, kako obravnavati naprave brez lastnega sežigalnega kotla, bo Sodi�če kmalu preverilo, saj je predmet sodbe v zadevi Lahti Energia, C-317/07 (glej sporočilo v UL 2007, C 211, str. 26).
GÄVLE KRAFTVÄRME equipment that goes with it — constitutes an incineration plant or a co-incineration plant.
GÄVLE KRAFTVÄRME skozi skupen odvodnik, se �teje, da je kombinacija takih naprav ena enota.
common stack, the combination formed by such plants shall be regarded as a single unit’.
opremo – preučiti, ali gre pri njem za sežigalnico ali napravo za sosežig.
As the Commission correctly points out, however, that rule concerns a different dir -ective with different objectives.
Vendar se ta ureditev – kot pravilno opozarja Komisija – nana�a na drugo Direktivo z drugimi cilji.
Its application to incineration plants and co-inciner-ation plants is therefore only conceivable after careful consideration.
Uporaba te opredelitve za sežigalnice in naprave za sosežig je tako mogoča le po temeljitem preizkusu.
However, the submissions of the Austrian and Swedish Governments raise the question to what extent a number of boilers can be included in one plant.
Navedbe avstrijske in �vedske vlade pa odpirajo vpra�anje, koliko kotlov je lahko združenih k eni napravi.
The definition of ‘combustion plants’ in the third subpara -graph of Article 2(7) of Directive 2001/80/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2001 on the limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from large combustion plants states: 7‘Where two or more separate new plants are installed in such a way that, taking technical and economic factors into account, their waste gases could, in the judgement of the competent authorities, be discharged through a
V prid temu govori opredelitev iz člena 2, točka 7, tretji pododstavek, Direktive 2001/80/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 23. oktobra 2001 o omejevanju emisij nekaterih onesnaževal v zrak iz velikih kurilnih naprav 7: Kadar se dve ali več ločenih novih naprav namesti tako, da bi se ob upo�tevanju tehničnih in ekonomskih dejavnikov njihovi odpadni plini po mnenju pristojnih organov lahko izpu�čali
It would, therefore, in essence, be possible to treat a number of co-incineration plants as a single unit for the application of emission values, since, by virtue of Annex II.2 to the Waste Incineration Directive, those values become stricter with increases in size of the plants.
Tako bi si bilo načeloma mogoče predstavljati, da se v zvezi z vrednostmi za emisije več naprav za sosežig obravnava kot celota, saj Priloga II.2 z nara�čanjem velikosti naprave predpisuje čedalje strožje vrednosti za emisije.
However, this is not a question which the Court is currently being asked to decide.
Vendar o tem ni nujno odločiti.
However, it is possible to treat a number of mutually linked plants as a single plant for the purposes of application of certain provisions of the Waste Incineration Directive if doing so does not circumvent the provisions on avoidance of negative effects on the environment and risks to human health.
Pri uporabi posameznih določb Direktive o sežiganju odpadkov pa je mogoče več povezanih naprav obravnavati kot eno napravo, če pri tem ne pride do kr�itve določb o preprečevanju negativnih učinkov na okolje in tveganja za zdravje ljudi.
In any event, environmental protection provisions may not be circumvented by combining parts of plants.
Nikakor pa se s kombinacijo delov naprav ne sme obiti okoljskih določb.
That would be contrary to the objective laid down in Article 1 of the Waste Incineration Direct- ive that negative effects on the environment and risks to human health should be avoided.
To bi bilo v nasprotju s členom 1 Direktive o sežiganju odpadkov, ki kot cilj določa preprečevanje negativnih učinkov na okolje in tveganja za zdravje ljudi.
Thus, for example, an incineration plant comprising different boilers must have an auxiliary burner for each of those boilers.
Zato mora, denimo pri sežigalnicah, sestavljenih iz več kotlov, imeti vsak kotel lasten pomožni gorilnik.
B — The second question — classification of a plant
B – Drugo vprašanje – glede uvrstitve naprave
The protection provisions would be unlawfully circumvented in particular if incineration plants and co-incineration plants were to be combined in such a way that the resulting plant as a whole were subject only to the in part less strict 8 requirements applying to a co-incineration plant.
Nesprejemljiva kr�itev okoljskih določb bi nastopila, če bi se sežigalnice in naprave za sosežig kombiniralo tako, da bi za celotno končno napravo veljale le deloma manj stroge 8zahteve, ki sicer veljajo za napravo za sosežig.
Accordingly, all parties are in agreement that incineration plants and co-incineration plants should not be aggregated.
Zato vsi udeleženci postopka zavračajo združevanje sežigalnic in naprav za sosežig.
By its second question, the Högsta domstolen asks whether a plant constructed for waste incineration but having as its main purpose the production of energy is to be classified as an incineration plant or as a co-incineration plant under the Waste Incineration Directive.
Z drugim vpra�anjem se Högsta domstol spra�uje o tem, ali je pri razlagi Direktive napravo, ki je zgrajena za sežig odpadkov, vendar je njen glavni cilj proizvajanje energije, treba uvrstiti med sežigalnice ali med naprave za sosežig.
Thus the application of the Waste Incineration Directive to a co-generation plant with a number of units (boilers) is to be undertaken on the basis that each unit, that
Zato je Direktivo o sežiganju odpadkov treba razlagati tako, da se pri napravi za proizvodnjo toplote in elektrike, ki je sestavljena iz več enot (kotlov), vsaka enota, t.j.
Differentiation of the two types of plant is of central importance to the Waste Incineration Directive, since it lays down different requirements for each type of plant. The
Razlikovanje med obema vrstama naprav je ključnega pomena za Direktivo o sežiganju
8 — See the detailed arguments set out in point 39 below.
8 – V zvezi s tem glej tudi točko 39.
GÄVLE KRAFTVÄRME possibility that a plant is both an incineration plant and a co-incineration plant is therefore excluded.
GÄVLE KRAFTVÄRME odpadkov, kajti v skladu s tem so določene različne zahteve za obe vrsti naprav. Tako ni mogoče, da bi bila naprava lahko hkrati sežigalnica in naprava za sosežig.
11Co-incineration plants are admittedly defined, in accordance with Article 3(5) of the Waste Incineration Directive, by reference to their main purpose, that is to say the generation of energy or production of material products.
11Te pa so po členu 3, točka 5, Direktive o sežiganju odpadkov opredeljene predvsem z glavnim namenom uporabe, to je proizvodnjo energije ali izdelkov.
However, they must also be used or intended for the thermal treatment of waste and therefore for incineration.
Vendar se morajo naprave za sosežig prav tako uporabljati oz. biti namenjene za termično obdelavo odpadkov, kar pa dejansko pomeni sežiganje.
Otherwise they would not be co-incineration plants, but other combustion plants.
V nasprotnem primeru ne bi �lo za naprave za sosežig, temveč za preostale kurilne naprave.
The necessary differentiation between the two types of plant is instead to be found — as the Commission submits — in the second subparagraph of Article 3(5) of the Waste Incineration Directive.
Potrebna določitev razlike med obema vrstama naprav je razvidna – kot zatrjuje Komisija – iz člena 3, točka 5, drugi pododstavek, Direktive o sežiganju odpadkov.
According to that provision, a plant is to be regarded as an incineration plant if co-incineration takes place in such a way that the main purpose of the plant is not the generation of energy or production of material products but rather the thermal treatment of waste.
V skladu z navedenim členom je naprava sežigalnica, če sosežiganje poteka tako, da glavni namen naprave ni proizvodnja energije ali izdelkov, ampak toplotna [termična] obdelava odpadkov.
The German and probably also the Swedish versions of the definition of ‘incineration plant’ under Article 3(4) of the Waste Incineration Directive are formulated relatively widely: a plant is an incineration plant if the plant is dedicated (‘eingesetzt’ in German 9or ‘avsedd’ 10in Swedish) to the thermal treatment of wastes.
V nem�ki in bržkone tudi �vedski jezikovni različici člena 3, točka 4, Direktive o sežiganju odpadkov je opredelitev sežigalnice razmeroma odprta: v skladu z opredelitvijo je naprava sežigalnica, če se uporablja [eingesetzt] za toplotno obdelavo odpadkov (nem�ka različica 9) oz. je temu namenjena [bestimmt] (�vedska različica 10).
At first sight, a plant constructed for the incineration of waste would be an incineration plant according to those definitions.
Na prvi pogled bi bila po tej opredelitvi naprava, ki je bila zgrajena za sežig odpadkov, sežigalnica.
The Swedish Government accordingly proposes that incineration plants and co-incineration plants be delimited on the basis of that def -inition.
V skladu s tem �vedska vlada predlaga, da se razliko med sežigalnicami in napravami za sosežig določi na podlagi te opredelitve.
Co-incineration plants within the meaning of the directive would be, according to its understanding, plants which are not incineration plants.
Naprave za sosežig v smislu Direktive bi bile po njenem mnenju naprave, ki niso sežigalnice.
9 — The German language version is in that regard apparently based, unlike other language versions, on the text of Article 2(2) of Council Directive 94/67/EC of 16 December 1994 on the incineration of hazardous waste (OJ 1994 L 365, p. 34).
9 – Nem�ka jezikovna različica se v tem smislu navidez razlikuje od drugih jezikovnih različic besedila člena 4, točka 2, Direktive Sveta 94/67/ES z dne 16. decembra 1994 o sežiganju nevarnih odpadkov (UL L 365, str. 34).
11 — See the Opinion of Advocate General Jacobs in Case C-228/00 Commission v Germany [2003] ECR I-1439, point 80, who took the view that the earlier directives on waste incineration, which contained a definition similar to that of the German language version of the Waste Incineration Directive, were also applicable to the recycling of waste.
80), ki izhaja iz tega, da so se prej veljavne direktive o sežiganju odpadkov, ki so vsebovale podobno opredelitev sežigalnice kot nem�ka jezikovna različica Direktive o sežiganju odpadkov, uporabljale tudi za naprave za recikliranje odpadkov.
That case concerned Council Directive 89/369/EEC of 8 June 1989 on the prevention of air pollution from new municipal waste incineration plants (OJ 1989 L 163, p.
Pri tem je �lo za Direktivo Sveta 89/369/EGS z dne 8. junija 1989 o preprečevanju onesnaževanja zraka iz novih sežigalnic komunalnih odpadkov (UL L 163, str.
32), Council Directive 89/429/EEC of 21 June 1989 on the reduction of air pollution from existing municipal waste incineration plants (OJ 1989 L 203, p.
32), Direktivo Sveta 89/429/EGS z dne 21. junija 1989 o zmanj�evanju onesnaževanja zraka iz delujočih sežigalnic komunalnih odpadkov (UL L 203, str.
50) and Directive 94/67 (cited in footnote 9).
50), in Direktivo 94/67 (navedena v opombi 9 zgoraj).
Thus the two types of plant are to be distinguished according to their main purpose: if that is the thermal treatment of waste, the plant is an incineration plant, but if the main purpose is the generation of energy or production of material products, the plant is a co-incineration plant.
Tako je treba obe vrsti naprav razlikovati glede na njun glavni namen: če je to termična obdelava odpadkov, gre za sežigalnico, če pa je glavni namen proizvodnja energije ali izdelkov, gre za napravo za sosežig.
The reference to the main purpose is, moreover, more obvious in the French language version of the definition of incineration plant under Article 3(4) of the Waste Incineration Directive than in the German or Swedish language versions: according thereto the plant must be expressly intended for the thermal treatment of waste (‘destiné spécifiquement’).
Sklicevanje na glavni namen je sicer bolj jasno kot v nem�ki ali �vedski jezikovni različici razpoznavno v francoski različici opredelitve iz člena 3, točka 4, Direktive o sežiganju odpadkov; v tej različici je izrecno navedeno, da mora biti naprava namenjena termični obdelavi odpadkov („destiné spécifiquement“).
As the Austrian Government submits, an interpretation based on the main purpose also reflects the caselaw relating to the distinction between waste disposal and waste recycling.
Kot zatrjuje avstrijska vlada, ustreza razlaga glede na glavni namen poleg tega tudi sodni praksi, in sicer v zvezi z razlikovanjem med odstranjevanjem in recikliranjem odpadkov.
According to that caselaw, the principal characteristic of a recycling measure is, by virtue of Article 3(1)(b) of the Waste Framework Directive 13and under the fourth recital in the preamble thereto, that its principal objective is that the waste serve a useful purpose by replacing other materials which would have had to be used for that purpose, thereby conserving natural resources.
Odločilna lastnost postopka predelave odpadkov je – v skladu s členom 3(1)(b) Direktive Sveta 91/156/EGS z dne 18. marca 1991 o spremembi Direktive 75/442/EGS o odpadkih (v nadaljevanju: Okvirna direktiva o odpadkih) 13in četrto uvodno izjavo te Direktive – v tem, da je njegov glavni cilj, da odpadki lahko izpolnijo koristno funkcijo, s tem da nadomestijo uporabo drugih materialov, ki bi jih bilo treba uporabiti za izpolnitev te funkcije, kar omogoča ohranitev naravnih virov.
14 The combustion of waste therefore constitutes a recovery operation where its main purpose is to enable the waste to be used as a means of generating energy, replacing the use of a source of primary energy which would have had to have been used to fulfil that function. 15
14Zlasti sežiganje odpadkov je tako postopek predelave odpadkov, če je njegov glavni namen smiselno uporabiti odpadke, to je za proizvodnjo energije – s tem se nadomesti glavni energetski vir, ki bi ga sicer morali uporabiti v ta namen. 15
Since different language versions of a Community text must be given a uniform interpretation, and the provision in question must be interpreted by reference to the purpose and general scheme of the rules of which it forms part, 12Article 3(4) of the Waste Incineration Directive must be interpreted in accordance with the French language version in such a way that there is
Med seboj različne jezikovne različice je treba s pomočjo splo�ne sistematike in namena določbe razlagati enotno 12; zato je treba člen 3, točka 4, Direktive o sežiganju odpadkov, opirajoč se na francosko različico,
13 — That caselaw is based on Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (OJ 1975 L 194, p.
14 – Sodbe z dne 27. februarja 2002 v zadevi ASA (C-6/00, Recueil, str.
39), as amended by Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991 (OJ 1991 L 78, p.
I-1961, točka 69); z dne 19. junija 2003 v zadevi Mayer Parry Recycling (C-444/00, Recueil, str. I-6163, točka 63), in z dne 7. oktobra 2004 v zadevi Komisija proti Italiji (C-103/02, ZOdl., str.
That directive was repealed by Directive 2006/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2006 on waste (OJ 2006 L 114, p.
15 – Sodbe z dne 13. februarja 2003 v zadevi Komisija proti Nemčiji (C-228/00, Recueil, str.
9) and replaced without changes to its content by a consolidated version.
I-1439, točka 46); z dne 13. februarja 2003 v zadevi Komisija proti Luksemburgu (C-458/00, Recueil, str.
14 — Case C-6/00 ASA [2002] ECR I-1961, paragraph 69; Case C-444/00 Mayer Parry Recycling [2003] ECR I-6163, paragraph 63; and Case C-103/02 Commission v Italy [2004] ECR I-9127, paragraph 62.
I-1553, točka 37), in z dne 3. aprila 2003 v zadevi SITA (C-116/01, Recueil, str. I-2969, točka 53).