COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 24.07.1996 
COM(96) 335 final 
96/0207 (SYN) 
COMMISSION COMMUNICATION 
concerning an action programme to promote 
the combined transport of goods 
Proposal for a 
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) 
concerning the granting of Community financial assistance 
for actions to promote combined goods transport 
(presented by the Commission) 

COMMISSION COMMUNICATION 
concerning an action programme to promote 
the combined transport of goods 
INTRODUCTION 
1. In order to develop, the European Community needs reliable and integrated transport 
at European level. As a means of carrying on trade and a guarantee of personal 
mobility, the European transport system must both be efficient and meet collective 
economic and social criteria, including environmental protection and safety of users and 
third parties. 
2. Combined transport is broadly speaking the transport of goods on intermodal transport 
equipment through at least two different transport modes without unloading the goods 
during the journey; the road leg should be as short as possible. This transport system 
is a potential key player in an efficient intermodal transport system. In such a system, 
transport modes compete on an equal basis, in that the user pays all the internal and 
external costs of the transport mode he chooses. Modes also cooperate and form the 
intermodal transport chain, each mode being chosen for the part of the journey where 
it is most competitive. As a general rule, this should mean road for the initial and 
terminal haulage, and rail, barge or maritime modes for the long distance part. 
3. However, in practice, combined transport does not yet play this role. The Community's 
combined transport networks are often underutilized. Combined transport is not yet able 
to compete effectively with road on longer distances. The reasons for this are primarily: 
For many journeys, the price of road haulage is not fully aligned with the full 
social costs in terms of congestion, safety record and environmental impact; thus, 
in numerous cases, road transport is able to offer lower prices than combined 
transport. Road transport is also cheaper because it does not require often 
expensive transshipment operations and intermodal equipment, which cannot be 
used in normal road haulage; 
The service quality of combined transport cannot always compete with road. Thus, 
the transshipment requirement of combined transport means a threat to its 
competitiveness in terms of transit time. The information technology required for 
tracking, billing and other advanced customer services in a transport action 
involving different operators and different transport modes, executed by people 
speaking different languages in long haul travel in Europe, is often not yet 
satisfactory when compared to road haulage. Also, combined transport is often 
regarded as less reliable than road. 
4. One step towards a truly intermodal system is to increase the use of combined 
transport. The imputation of real costs to each mode of transport is a long-term goal. 
It can only be achieved gradually, because the transport system and the users need time 
to adapt to this change. In the short term, increased use of combined transport can be 
brought about by improving the performance of this mode within the given framework, 
and taking action against its perceived weaknesses. Member State action in this field 
is clearly useful. However, since combined transport will as a rule cover longer 
distances involving often several countries, an EC initiative was needed to foster 
international co-operation by market participants to improve combined transport. 
5. Therefore, the Commission, in 1992, launched a programme which was to demonstrate 
that even under current regulatory and economic conditions, combined transport could 
well be competitive and shift traffic from road to other modes in an economically 
viable way and with ensuing benefits in terms of safety and the environment. This 
programme was called PACT: pilot actions for combined transport. 
6. This programme now comes to an end. A new PACT programme is proposed, in the 
form of a Council Regulation with a total budget of ECU 35 million from 1997 to 
2001. An internal evaluation of the first PACT programme has recently been conducted 
by the Commission services. The first PACT programme did not contain specific 
objectives; i.e. it did not determine the concrete steps necessary to reach its general 
objective of contributing to the increased use of combined transport. There is also a 
lack of independent data available on the impact of PACT. However, a significant 
number of projects do appear to have had encouraging results. Two of the main 
findings of the internal evaluation of the first PACT programme should be stressed: the 
growing need for public assistance in investments in intermodal transport equipment 
and the need to provide financial assistance for commercial application of research. 
The proposed Regulation attempts to address the difficulties encountered in the 
evaluation of the first PACT programme by ensuring that the new PACT 
has clearly defined specific objectives; 
has an improved framework for monitoring and evaluation. 
Thus, the general objective stays the same: to contribute to the increased use of 
combined transport, where this is economically viable in the long term. The specific 
objectives of the new PACT should counter the disadvantages of the current combined 
transport facilities mentioned above. They may be summarized as follows: 
to increase the competitiveness of combined transport both in terms of price and 
of service quality vis-a-vis road; 
to promote the use of advanced technology in combined transport; 
to improve access to combined transport for enterprises, regardless of their size; 
this will increase competition in the supply of combined transport services and 
thereby also give a boost to its competitiveness. 
7. This communication addresses the existing pilot actions (part A), the content of the 
new PACT which is to take over (part B) and guidelines for future action to promote 
combined transport (part C). This is followed by a proposal for a Council Regulation 
concerning the granting of financial assistance for actions to promote combined goods 
transport. An Annex sets out the main results of projects funded by the pilot actions 
over the years 1992-1995. 
A. THE CURRENT PILOT ACTIONS (PACT) 
8. The pilot actions in the field of combined transport (PACT) were launched in 1992 on 
the basis of a Commission Decision(1). Scheduled for five years, their objective was to 
examine the need for such actions, and they formed part of the work programme in 
favour of combined transport that the Commission had submitted to the Council in 1992 
(COM(92) 230)(2). As it was experimental in nature, PACT was allocated a small 
budget: ECU 1.963 million in 1992, ECU 2.9 million in 1993, ECU 4.395 million in 
1994 and ECU 4.1 million in 1995. ECU 5 million has been allocated for 1996. 
(i) 
(2) Commission Decision 93/45/EEC of 22 December 1992 concerning the granting of 
financial assistance for pilot schemes to promote combined transport; OJ No L 16, 
25.1.1993. 
COM(92) 230 final of 11 June 1992. 
9. The aim of PACT was to contribute to the increased use of combined land transport as 
an alternative to transporting everything by road. It formed part of the general 
programme that the Commission had submitted to the Council,(3) having been designed 
to complement and back up measures to create the trans-European network. In 
preparing this programme, the following weaknesses of combined transport when 
compared to road became evident: 
The reluctance of potential customers to use this mode, mainly because of the 
poor quality of service and the higher price of this mode in comparison with 
road. 
Switching from road transport to combined transport involves investments in 
specialized equipment which cannot be re-utilized in road transport in the event 
of problems with the railways or inland waterways. 
Consequently, the existing combined transport network was and still is underused. 
There was a need to increase its utilization rate while in the longer term putting in 
place the missing links thanks to the adoption by the Council of its decision on the 
trans-European combined transport network(4). 
10. PACT has concentrated on short-term measures designed to improve the quality of the 
combined transport service and complementing infrastructure research or investment. 
In order to meet the European requirement and comply with competition rules, PACT 
financial assistance has been granted to projects in order to improve the performance 
of combined transport on that route. It has been open to any operator wishing to take 
part in the project concerned and prepared to invest in it. 
The programme has covered the territory of the Member States; it has also been 
possible for pilot actions to relate to combined transport routes outside the Community 
where this was justified by significant traffic to or from the Community. 
11. PACT has covered combined rail/road or inland waterway/road transport; where a sea 
crossing constitutes the only possible access to Community territory in a region of the 
Community, it has been covered. This has applied to among others, the northern 
Europe-Italy-Greece route, Ireland-United Kingdom-France (via the Channel Tunnel) 
and the Germany-Finland route. 
12. In four years, PACT has funded 65 projects on 22 routes, of which 11 are rail/road, 
five involve inland waterways and six include a sea crossing. Seventeen related solely 
to Community territory (including Austria, Sweden and Finland before their association) 
and five included a section outside, in Switzerland or the countries of Central and 
Eastern Europe (Poland, Czech Republic and Slovenia). The projects were run by 
public (ministries, rail networks), semi-public (autonomous inland or sea ports) and 
private bodies (combined transport operators, chambers of commerce). In 1995, the 
Commission received 57 projects requesting funding totalling almost ECU 20 million, 
of which it was able to grant only ECU 4.1 million under the PACT budget heading 
and ECU 0.4 million under the budget heading for actions involving transport links 
with third countries. Annex I sets out these elements in greater detail and gives an 
overview of the programme for the last four years. 
(3) Idem. 
(4) Council Decision 93/628/EEC of 29 October 1993 on the creation of a trans-European 
combined transport network; OJ No L 305, 10.12.1993, p. 1. 
13. PACT was deliberately designed as a back-up for enterprises; consequently, an attempt 
has been made as far as possible to leave the initiative for projects to the operators and 
to make procedures rapid and flexible. In return for this flexibility of access, PACT 
organizes information campaigns to publicize its operation and above all has established 
structures for on-going and rigorous controls: verification by the Commission of the 
actual undertaking by applicants to finance the remaining part of the project not 
receiving assistance, compulsory agreement of the Member States concerned and 
consultation of other parties, monitoring of the progress of the project and of actual 
expenditure at the half-way stage, technical and financial audit at the end of each 
annual period for each project (including verification of bills and of the 
measures funded). 
14. PACT was launched as an experimental action. Accordingly, provision was made for 
a fairly large degree of flexibility as to eligible measures. The Commission decision 
authorized three categories of actions: preliminary studies on aspects common to all 
projects eligible for 100% funding after a procedure entailing a call for proposals, 
feasibility studies on a specific pilot route, eligible for 50% funding and innovative 
measures eligible for 30% funding. In fact, PACT has provided funding for only one 
study (on intermodal terminals) at 100% and 32 feasibility studies. 77.86% of the 
budgets for the four years 1992 to 1995 went on direct operations, with the proportion 
of innovative measures compared with studies increasing over the years to reach 97% 
in 1995. 
B. THE NEW PACT 
15. The new PACT will consist of a structural programme based on a regulation. With the 
first PACT programme, there was a strong growth in the number of applications for 
PACT financing. Consequently, from 1994 the budget was never sufficient simply to 
meet the requirements of the soundest projects. In 1995 the Commission even had to 
suspend or defer existing projects to keep some room for manoeuvre to enable it to 
launch at least a few new routes, for example to the new Member States. The new 
PACT will have to try first of all to meet these requirements. 
16. The flexibility of pilot actions helps to explain their appeal to the private sector, and 
to small and medium-sized transport enterprises in particular(5). The procedure proposed 
here builds on the one currently applied; this means that any economic operator, private 
or public, including the public authorities, can submit a project direct to the 
Commission. The Commission checks beforehand that the States directly concerned 
with the project are in agreement and prepares an assessment of the proposal. Each year 
a committee of national experts appointed by the governments (Type 11(a) Committee 
in accordance with the Council decision of 13 July 1987) of the fifteen Member States 
analyses the projects received and gives its opinion. The Commission subsequently 
administers the projects it has selected and reports to that committee each year on the 
implementation of the projects in the previous year. As before, the experts have only 
a consultative role, but in fact the Commission has in principle always followed their 
advice. Given the increase in the number of applications received and the need to 
spread expenditure over the year, proposals will henceforth be examined twice a year 
rather than once; the financial statement therefore provides for two meetings per year. 
(5) According to the Commission Communication on small and medium-sized enterprises 
COM(96) 261, the following criteria determine whether an enterprise is regarded as 
an SME: 
fewer than 250 employees; 
annual turnover of less than ECU 40 million or annual balance sheet of less than 
ECU 27 million; 
no more than 25% of capital held by one or more firms which are not SMEs. 
17. By helping to disseminate technologies, or by demonstrating the feasibility of routes 
which are by definition difficult, pilot actions are apt to convince hitherto reluctant 
operators and encourage other projects by a "snowball" effect. It is therefore vital that 
the results of each project should be widely circulated and the programme publicized 
on a large scale. Thus the Commission has taken steps to publicize these actions and 
will step up its public information campaign. Similarly all reports must be public, apart 
from economic information constituting commercial secrets and all projects must be 
open, i.e. any potential partner wishing to play a specific role in a project aided by 
PACT must be able to do so under the same conditions as the operators who are 
already partners in the project, all things being equal of course. Finally, and in order 
not to give a preference which would be contrary to competition rules, any proposal 
submitted which is viable and competes with another project already launched must be 
entitled to the same conditions, which requires the overall PACT programme to be 
adequately funded. 
18. As regards the actions eligible for funding, the proposal for a regulation presented here 
also draws the lessons from the current PACT. This provided for the possibility of 
100% funding for preliminary studies on aspects common to all projects. In reality, 
given the eminently practical objective of the pilot actions, this was applied less and 
less over the years. Accordingly, this measure no longer figures in this proposal. 
It should be pointed out that such studies are still possible in the general framework of 
DG VTI's budget for studies in accordance with the normal call-for-proposal 
procedures(6). On the other hand, feasibility studies on a specific pilot route eligible for 
50% funding have been retained, in order to involve the various parties in the 
intermodal sector in a project from the outset. 
19. The most important part of the programme remains, of course, innovative measures. As 
a rule, these measures can be financed for a duration of up to three years. Following 
on from pilot actions already carried out, the new PACT has therefore the objective to 
improve the competitiveness of combined transport by sponsoring pilot actions. This 
will also translate into a policy aiming at a more balanced intermodal transport system 
than the one currently in place. Consequently, it is proposed that Community assistance 
be granted in the form of subsidies for innovative measures, restricted in time in order 
to be able to limit this assistance to start up investments, and not to subsidize normal 
operation. It is further proposed to simplify the procedures for access to the programme. 
• An analysis of the relationship between the amount of funding and the benefits for the 
Community in terms of safety, the environment and a shift in traffic flows will be a 
vital criterion for assessing proposals and their order of priority, particularly in terms 
of making the best possible use of scarce financial resources. 
20. In the old PACT programme, the innovative measures were funded up to a maximum 
of 30%. The definition of such measures was deliberately left open, the aim of the 
actions being precisely to test what was desired by the market and what was useful. 
The four years of operation in fact show a wide range of needs, but four major 
categories of actions having received funding can be identified: 
(a) investment in equipment (specialized rail or road equipment for combined 
transport) and in transshipment facilities in terminals (gantries, fixed or mobile 
cranes, etc.); 
(b) the commercial operation of new techniques or technologies, in particular those 
tested in national or European research programmes; 
(6) It should be stated that in the present pilot actions, and unlike the other studies or 
measures studies, receiving 100% funding remained subject to the Commission's usual 
procedures, particularly thé obligation to issue a call for proposals. 
(c) participation in costs of access to the infrastructure, provided that such aids do not 
exceed the marginal cost of access to the infrastructure for the combined transport 
service covered by the pilot action; 
(d) all logistical and training measures. 
Thus the proposed regulation continues to allow for a great deal of flexibility of use, 
although the proposed programme will still finance fixed measures and certain variable 
operating costs with the exception of staff costs, energy consumption and the covering 
of financial losses. Finally, the duration of the subsidies will be limited, with each 
project having to achieve its performance objectives and become sufficiently 
competitive by the end of this period at the latest, in order to avoid having to carry 
services which are not economically viable in the long term. 
21. Although the launch of a project can provide lessons on changes to be made to the 
network, the construction and development of the network comes under infrastructures 
policy (trans-European networks) which is funded from another budget. Consequently 
infrastructure construction and development measures(7) are excluded from the scope of 
PACT. The same applies for research for which there is a specific European programme 
for transport^, from which PACT is downstream. 
22. As an alternative to road transport only, PACT seeks to promote combined transport 
which is competitive in terms of quality and, eventually, in terms of price also. The 
previous PACT covered internal modes (rail/road/inland waterways); it took account of 
maritime transport only where this was, for a particular region of the Community, the 
only possible access to the rest of the Community territory. With intermodalify the 
aim, the new regulation extends the categories of actions to include short sea shipping, 
but only if it is in keeping with the objective of PACT which is to establish alternatives 
to road transport. 
23. The previous PACT had annual budgets from ECU 2-5 million. It is proposed to raise 
this budget for the following reasons: 
Recently, project proposals for PACT financing come increasingly from 
non-traditional companies, i.e. transport operators that are new to the combined 
transport market, or even companies setting up to meet these new requirements. 
It is clear that this trend will become even more marked during the next three 
years; this has to be linked to the opening up of access to rail networks brought 
about by Directive 91/440/EEC. However, one of the consequences will be that 
funds for the new PACT will have to be increased significantly. 
(7) 
(8) These infrastructure construction and development measures are covered by 
Council Regulation (EC) No 2236/95 of 18 September 1995; OJ No L 228, 23.9.1995, 
p. 1. 
Council Decision 94/914/EC of 15 December 1994 adopting a specific programme for 
research and technological development, including demonstration, in the field of 
transport (1994-1998); OJ No L 361, 31.12.1994. 
Moreover, the obsolescence of much of the intermodal wagon stock and the 
increasing disinclination of national railway companies to invest in equipment is 
giving rise to an increasing need on the part of intermodal operators for 
specialized wagons to meet the potential growth in traffic. The budget increase 
should make it possible to speed up the introduction of new rolling stock and 
transshipment technologies developed under the fourth framework programme on 
research (1994-1998), particularly the specific European programme for research 
and technological development, including demonstration, in the field of transport^. 
24. Like the previous PACT, the new one authorizes projects outside the Community, 
including those operated by private companies not established on its territory, on the 
dual condition that the route concerned can claim to carry significant traffic to or from 
the Community and that the beneficiary company offers adequate guarantees as to its 
respectability and capital resources. 
25. As regards controls, the proposed regulation, whilst retaining the essential features of 
the existing system, adds a number of safeguards. The principle is to facilitate access 
to the programme (which must be open to all operators, including SMEs) while 
introducing rigorous checks on implementation. In fact, the application procedure has 
been made as simple as possible, and considerable efforts have been made and will be 
stepped up even further regarding publicity for the programme and its transparency; on 
the other hand, once the project has been launched, the Commission checks at least 
every six months on the progress of the project and settles expenditure only when it has 
proof that the work has been carried out. Finally, the proposal fixes a limit on the 
validity of the programme, in order to avoid a situation of permanent funding. The 
general objective of this action is to contribute to the increased use of combined 
transport. At the end of the five-year period stated by the Regulation, one will have to 
see whether the programme has met this objective. 
C. FUTURE CHALLENGES 
26. European intermodal policy seeks, among other goals, to re-balance the current 
commercial disadvantages of combined transport due to insufficient consideration being 
given to social costs in transport tariffs, as part of the lengthy process which should see 
a return to inclusion of the real costs of transport. The measures provided for in the 
PACT and proposed here represent only one of the possible instruments, another being 
the. setting-up of a similar scheme at national level. The Commission has undertaken 
a general review of the principles and guidelines relating to State aid to transport. 
Among other things it is considering possible action on combined transport. 
27. The first question is whether it is right to consider the funding of railway or combined 
transport infrastructures as State aid. Given the principle of free access to the rail 
network laid down in Directive 91/440/EEC(10), this question needs to be asked; this 
might also apply to intermodal terminals where they are the property of a public 
company and provided that this same principle of free access applies. 
(9) 
(10) Council Decision 94/914/EC of 15 December 1994 adopting a specific programme for 
research and technological development, including demonstration, in the field of 
transport (1994-1998); OJ No L 361, 31.12.1994. 
Council Directive 91/440/EEC of 29 July 1991 on the development of the Community's 
railways; OJ No L 237, 24.8.1991. 
8 
28. Another aspect to be considered from the point of view of State aids concerns the costs 
of access to rail infrastructure. In the same way as what is proposed here, the granting 
of public subsidies, in this case national rather than Community, towards the charges 
for access to rail infrastructure is being studied particularly from the standpoint 
of compensation for the disadvantage for rail transport (and thus for rail/road 
combined transport) resulting from the fact that in many cases social costs are not taken 
into account sufficiently in road transport tariffs. This applies only if the amount of aid 
does no more than exactly offset this disadvantage. 
29. Finally, it is also time to consider the problem of mountain crossing. Passing through 
areas whose ecology is often fragile, road routes through the Alps or Pyrenees cannot, 
at present road prices, be rivalled by railways, rendered more expensive by the 
geological conditions. In this specific case, and given the considerable constraints in 
terms of environment and safety, it could become necessary to give a greater stimulus 
to such transport; this raises the question of State aid towards operating costs in these 
extreme cases. It may lead, in the given circumstances, to a modification of the 
State aid rules of the Community concerning the transport sector. 
30. There is another area where Community assistance and State aid might prove 
necessary: investments in combined transport equipment. Specific intermodal equipment 
(containers, swap bodies, platforms, semi-trailers) cannot be reused in road transport 
in the event of a problem, save at prohibitive cost, and many companies simply do not 
have the financial capacity to take this risk. Changes to the tax arrangements applying 
to such equipment are currently being studied. 
31. It is also necessary to step up research and development actions; PACT has shown that 
the new techniques need financial assistance if they are to be applied to combined 
transport since apart from the large rail networks, firms in this sector are not large 
enough and do not have the proper resources to engage in this work on their own. 
Apart from the Fourth framework programme already mentioned in paragraph 23, the 
Commission has set up in the field of research "research/industry" operational units 
(Task Forces), (one concerns intermodality (SEC(95) 1824), is proposing to focus on 
certain research topics in this area (COM(96) 12) and is considering a communication 
on the environmental aspects of goods transport by road, as announced in its action 
programme for transport)01). This work must be continued; the new PACT proposed 
here accords with all these actions, since it will provide new financial means to increase 
the impact of these programmes by helping the subsequent phase of marketing and 
commercial trials. 
32. Lastly, we should look beyond the Union. The opening of the Iron Curtain has changed 
trade patterns but has also given rise to traffic flows towards the East which 
are beginning to saturate the networks of Central and Eastern Europe. Faced with an 
urgent need to develop alternative modes of transport, these countries have a number 
of handicaps to overcome: little or no intermodal equipment (both transshipment and 
transport) and few funds available for investment, very fragmented road transport 
market, and inflexible and inefficient rail structures. The development of intermodal 
routes is one of the responses but the creation of infrastructures must be accompanied 
by measures to promote their use. In this connection, the experiment carried out with 
PACT in the European Union is a good example of what is possible. The current 
PACT programme has already funded actions on routes from the Community to Eastern 
Europe (see above, point 12), and the Regulation proposed here will also offer this 
possibility. Moreover, the Commission is now studying the possibility of promoting 
combined transport within Central and Eastern Europe (eg. East/East connections) and 
the appropriate instruments for implementing such actions. It will report on what 
measures are required in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, and which actions 
(ii) COM(95) 302. 
would be most cost-effective. Where appropriate, the Commission will draw up 
proposals by the end of 1996. 
In order to guarantee long-term mobility and establish an efficient transport system, the 
Union must now concentrate its efforts on an intermodal approach to goods transport. 
As the choice of mode must continue to lie with users, it is essential to keep listening 
to operators and provide them with the necessary means to turn to combined transport 
by removing all obstacles, legal as well as economic, handicapping the most 
environmentally-friendly modes. The success of such a policy which is ever more 
crucial will depend on the Union's ability to persuade and help economic operators to 
follow this trend and to develop a global, coherent programme of actions to promote 
intermodal transport which takes account of and involves our neighbours. 
10 
Proposal for a 
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) 
concerning the granting of Community financial assistance 
for actions to promote combined goods transport 
11 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 
General aim of the proposal 
1. The general aim of this proposal is to continue and broaden the scope of the 
current scheme to grant financial assistance for pilot actions to promote combined 
transport (PACT(1)). PACT was launched in 1992 for a five-year experimental period. 
Now that these pilot actions have been operating for four years, this proposal converts 
the schemes into a programme to run for five years starting in 1997. Since the 
programme is now entering a fully operational phase the proposal extends the range of 
budgetary possibilities. 
2. In its resolution of 30 October 1990 on setting up a European combined transport 
network(2), the Council emphasized the need to make the best possible use of the 
Community's transport resources while respecting the need to protect the environment. 
One implication would be increased use of combined transport. It is now accepted that 
transport prices in all modes of transport do not fully reflect the social costs of 
individual journeys in terms of environmental acceptability, the safety of users and third 
parties and congestion. This situation seriously disadvantages combined transport and 
it has therefore become necessary to implement policies to compensate this by helping 
this sector to improve its performance, particularly in terms of organization and 
logistics. 
3. This was the thinking behind the Commission's decision to launch the PACT 
programme in 1992. The present proposal retains the features of the existing pilot 
actions but extends the geographical scope to sea transport. In the light of experience 
over the last four years, it shifts the emphasis of financial assistance slightly. It 
discontinues the possibility of 100% subsidies for preliminary studies, provides for the 
funding of concrete feasibility studies at 50% and defines the basis for innovative 
measures more clearly at 30%. It improves the procedures for selecting and monitoring 
projects and provides for an enhanced framework for evaluation. 
4. Finally, it is important to stress that the development of combined transport is intended 
to encourage the transfer of actual or potential traffic from roads to more 
environmentally acceptable modes like rail, inland waterway and maritime transport. 
This new programme may also contribute to reduction of damage caused by transport 
to the environment in terms of the use of natural resources, pollution of air, water and 
soil, and effects on human health and safety. It will also contribute towards the 
sustainable regional development of Europe, as it will foster the integration of 
peripheral regions into Europe by promoting combined transport. 
5. From the point of view of subsidiarity, the actions envisaged by the Community in this 
proposal can be analysed by answering four basic questions. 
(i) 
(2) PACT: Pilot Actions for Combined Transport. Commission Decision 93/45/EC of 
22 December 1992 concerning the granting of financial assistance for pilot schemes to 
promote combined transport; OJ No L 16, 25.1.1993, p. 55. 
Note from the General Secretariat of the Council No 9832/90 of 12 November 1990. 
12 
(a) What are the aims of the programme in terms of the Community's obligations? 
The Union is required to set up and maintain an efficient goods transport system 
which is capable of meeting users' mobility requirements. Combined transport 
plays a key role in this system since it allows transport capacity to be used more 
efficiently. However, its development is seriously handicapped on account of the 
reasons mentioned above. In the short term these problems can be solved only by 
schemes of financial assistance. 
The Commission introduced such a scheme on an experimental basis in 1992. The 
aim of the proposed programme is to give the scheme more stability by making 
the changes which have proved to be necessary from the experience gained over 
the last four years. 
(b) Does the Community have sole responsibility for this proposal, or is this 
responsibility shared with the Member States? 
The programme relates to the development of combined transport at European 
level and is therefore concerned mainly with international routes, which is why 
it seems most appropriate to take action at Community level. For this reason the 
proposal is submitted on the basis of Article 75 of the Treaty and is hence the sole 
responsibility of the Community. 
(c) What means of action are available to the Community? 
The Community already has schemes for supporting infrastructure 
(trans-European networks) (Council Regulation 2236/95) and research 
(Council Decision 94/914/EC). The proposed programme should help to 
supplement both, since, although it excludes infrastructure measures, priority must 
be given to routes which form part of the trans-European combined transport 
network. Similarly, although the programme may not support research projects, 
it can provide assistance for the subsequent stage which is the commercial 
operation for the first time of technologies which have already been tested for 
technical feasibility in the context of Community R&TD activities under the fourth 
framework programme (1994 to 1998)(3). The proposed programme will thus be 
an additional means of establishing the necessary synergies with existing 
Community instruments. 
(d) Is uniform regulation required or would a directive be sufficient? 
A regulation is the best solution where Community financial assistance, managed 
by the Commission only, is concerned. 
Explanation of individual Articles 
1. Article 1 specifies the general and specific objectives of the actions financed under the 
proposed Regulation. 
2. Article 2 gives definitions of the terms used in the Regulation and defines its scope. 
If there is a demonstrable Community interest, projects which begin or end outside 
Community territory may also be taken into account. 
(3) Particularly by the intermodality task force, or under the specific programme for 
research and technological development, including demonstration in the field of 
transport (1994 to 1998) adopted by Council Decision 94/914/ECof 15 December 1994 
(OJNoL361, 31.12.1994), and the Research-Industry Task Force on 
Intermodal Transport (SEC(95) 1824). 
13 
3. Article 3 lays down the conditions of eligibility for proposals. Measures which are 
intended to fulfill the specific objectives of the Regulation are eligible. They must 
intend to increase the competitiveness of combined transport both in terms of price and 
service quality vis-a-vis road; or to promote the use of advanced technology in 
combined transport; or to improve access to combined transport for enterprises, 
regardless of their size. 
Proposals may be accepted only if the states on whose territory projects will take place 
have given approval. 
4. Article 4 sets out the rules on the extent of financial assistance. This may be granted 
for feasibility studies on a route and for innovative measures, i.e. specific investments 
and certain variable operating costs with the exception of staff expenditure, energy and 
making up losses. Investment in combined transport equipment, for access to rail and 
inland waterway infrastructure, for the commercial operation of techniques, technologies 
or equipment previously tested and approved, and for schemes relating to logistics, staff 
training and advertising of the programme, are covered by the Regulation. 
Article 4 also lays down maximum percentages for Community assistance. It also 
allows the Member States, provided they comply with the relevant Community 
legislation, and especially Articles 77, 92, and 93 of the Treaty and the implementing 
legislation(4), to grant financial assistance for measures already assisted under the 
current Community programme. 
5. Article 5 describes the application procedure. This is based on three principles: 
(i) making the programme easily accessible, particularly for small and 
medium-sized enterprises; 
(ii) ensuring that each application is given the same treatment by laying down rules 
on content and presentation; 
(iii) give the Commission sufficent information to select only those projects which 
contribute to achieving the objectives of the PACT programme. 
6. Article 6 sets out the procedure and selection criteria for granting financial assistance. 
7. Article 7 deals with the decision-making procedure. For this purpose it creates an 
advisory committee of national experts operating in accordance with Article 2,11(a), of 
the Council Decision of 13 July 1987 laying down the procedures for the exercise of 
implementing powers conferred on the Commission(5). 
8. Article 8 sets out the financial provisions. 
9. Article 9 governs the financial control of actions already initiated. 
10. Article 10 concerns monitoring and evaluation procedures. 
11. Article 11 requires that two years after the coming into force of the Regulation, the 
Commission should draw up a progress report on the programme to be sent to 
Parliament, the Council, theEconomic and Social Committee and the Committee of the 
Regions. The Article also states that the programme shall be evaluated in line with 
Commission evaluation principles. 
(4) Council Regulation No 1107/70 of 4 June 1970 on the granting of aids for transport by 
rail, road and inland waterway; OJ No L 130, 15.6.1970. 
(5) Council Decision 87/373/EEC of 13 July 1987; OJ No L 197, 18.7.1987. 
14 
12. Article 12 requires those receiving assistance under the programme to give the 
Community as much publicity as possible. 
13. Article 13 states that the programme will run until 31 December 2001. 
14. Article 14 determines the date of entry into force of the Regulation. 
15 
Proposal for a 
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) 
concerning the granting of Community financial assistance 
for actions to promote combined goods transport 
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular 
Article 75(1) thereof, 
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission(1), 
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee(2), 
Acting in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 189c of the Treaty, in cooperation 
with the European Parliament^, 
Whereas the present situation and the expected development of transport in the Community 
make it necessary to manage the Community's transport resources to optimum effect while 
respecting the need to protect the environment; whereas this implies encouraging the use of 
combined transport, as stated by the Council in its resolution of 30 October 1990 on the 
setting up a European combined transport network; 
Whereas the establishment of a combined transport network should be supplemented by 
Community measures concerning the organization of combined transport chains; 
Whereas, following the abovementioned Council Resolution of 30 October 1990, the 
Commission, by Decision 93/45/EEC(4), launched an experimental five-year scheme for the 
granting of financial assistance for pilot schemes to promote combined transport; whereas this 
scheme comes to an end on 31 December 1996; 
Whereas, therefore, Community action in this area is clearly useful; whereas this 
experimental scheme should be converted into a proper framework for actions of Community 
interest in the field of combined goods transport which takes account of the experience gained 
since 1992; 
Whereas the purpose of these actions is to foster the advantages to society of combined 
transport in terms of reducing congestion, improving safety and in particular respecting the 
environment, and also in contributing towards the sustainable regional development of Europe; 
Whereas the ultimate aim of these actions is to help develop an effective European transport 
system by supporting the introduction of alternatives to long-distance road transport which 
are acceptable to the market; whereas therefore the actions supported by this Regulation 
should not have the effect of restoring road routes; 
Whereas these actions relate to Community combined transport, including transport outside 
Community territory; whereas it is therefore necessary to be able to take into account routes 
which include some non-Community territory, provided that traffic volumes confirm 
demonstrable Community interest; 
(i) 
(2) 
(3) 
(4) OJNoL 16, 25.1.1993, p. 55. 
16 
Whereas, in accordance with the principle of the free choice of transport mode, these actions 
include financial assistance for investment in combined transport equipment, for access to rail 
and inland waterway infrastructure, for the commercial operation of techniques, technologies 
or equipment previously tested and approved, and for schemes relating to logistics, staff 
training and advertising of the actions, with the exception of transport infrastructure 
construction or development projects or technological research projects - in the form either 
of feasibility studies, or of a financial contribution to innovative schemes aimed at improving 
the competitiveness of combined transport; 
Whereas, however, the basis for the financial assistance covered by this Regulation is 
different from that referred to in Council Regulation (EC) No 2236/95 of 18 September 1995 
laying down general rules for the granting of Community financial aid in the field of 
trans-European networks(5) and that referred to in Council Decision 94/914/EC of 
15 December 1994 adopting a specific programme for research and technological 
development, including demonstration in the field of transport (1994 to 1998)(6); whereas it 
is therefore possible to authorize funding for different measures on the same pilot route, since 
this can generate useful synergies; whereas therefore this Community assistance can 
provide additional assistance for Community research activities and for completion of the 
trans-European networks; 
Whereas for the same reason, considering the European interest of the projects selected and 
the fact that they are continually monitored by the Commission, the Member States may 
grant financial assistance for the measures included in an action, provided that they comply 
with Articles 77, 92 and 93 of the Treaty and the pertinent legislation; 
Whereas the financial assistance should be provided for a limited period and act as a special 
incentive to encourage operators to develop services of this kind; 
Whereas the application of this Regulation should be monitored on a regular basis; whereas 
to this end the Commission should, two years after its entry into force, report on this progress 
to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the 
Committee of the Regions; 
Whereas the purpose of the actions covered by this Regulation is to help start up combined 
transport projects; whereas such actions should therefore be of limited duration, 
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 
Article 1 
Purpose 
This Regulation specifies the conditions, rules and procedures for granting Community 
financial assistance to projects, which contribute to the increased use of combined goods 
transport through: 
(a) increasing the competitiveness of combined transport, both in terms of price and of 
service quality, as against road transport; or 
(b) promoting the use of advanced technology in combined transport; or 
(c) improving access to combined transport for undertakings, regardless of their size. 
(5) 
(6) OJNoL228, 23.9.1995, p. 1. 
OJNoL 361, 31.12.1994, p. 56. 
17 
Article 2 
Definitions 
1. For the purposes of this Regulation: 
(a) intermodal transport equipment means a container, a platform, a swap body or 
a road vehicle; however, the term does not cover a maritime or inland 
waterway vessel; 
(b) combined transport means any transport of goods between Member States using 
intermodal transport equipment, without unloading the goods from such equipment 
during the entire journey, using at least two different modes of transport which 
may be road, rail, inland waterway or sea, and keeping the road sections as short 
as possible; 
(c) operator means any undertaking operating combined goods transport services 
using its own or leased equipment for all or part of the service; but using a 
different undertaking for the rail, maritime or inland water haulage. 
2. Within the territory of the Community combined transport actions shall as a matter 
of priority relate to international combined transport corridors specified in the 
European Parliament and Council Decision No 1692/96/EC(7). A corridor on which one 
or more of the combined transport actions referred to in this Regulation are to take 
place is called a "pilot route". 
These actions may also cover combined transport routes outside Community territory 
where this is justified by a large volume of traffic going to, or coming from, 
the Community. 
Article 3 
Eligible actions 
1. Community financial assistance may be granted for combined transport actions on 
existing pilot routes or on pilot routes still to be established, the purpose of which is 
to try out measures to achieve the objectives listed in Article 1. 
2. Any application for an action shall first be approved by the Member States on whose 
territory the combined transport route covered by the action is situated. 
3. As from 27 June 1997, Community financial assistance shall not be granted for 
measures to cover the costs of access to rail infrastructure or the costs of rail haulage 
if the railway undertaking does not hold a licence within the meaning of Article 2 of 
Council Directive 95/18/EC(8). 
4. Community financial assistance for the innovative measures described in points (a), (b) 
and (c) of Article 4(2) shall not be granted to "infrastructure managers" as defined in 
Article 3 of Directive 91/440/EEC(9), nor to the "railway undertakings" defined therein, 
with the exception of those railway undertakings envisaged in Article 10(2) thereof. 
(7) 
(8) 
(9) OJNoL 228, 9.9.1996, p. 1. 
OJNoL 143, 27.6.1995, p. 70. 
OJNoL 237, 24.8.1991, p. 25. 
Article 4 
Extent of financial assistance 
1. Community financial assistance may be provided for: 
(a) feasibility studies on a specific pilot route; 
(b) innovative measures, namely specific investments and certain variable operating 
costs with the exception of measures concerning staff costs, energy consumption 
and the covering of financial losses. 
2. Community financial assistance shall be limited to 50% for feasibility studies and 30% 
for innovative measures. These should primarily consist of: 
(a) investment in intermodal transport equipment, provided that the beneficiary or 
beneficiaries undertake to keep the equipment on the route concerned for a 
minimum of five years; 
(b) the investment in transshipment equipment for any mode; 
(c) participation in the costs of access to rail and inland waterway infrastructure; 
(d) the commercial operation of techniques, technologies or equipment previously 
tested and approved, in particular under European research programmes, including 
the telematics programme; 
(e) measures relating to logistics, staff training and advertising of the actions covered 
by this Regulation. 
3. Member States may grant the beneficiaries of Community financial assistance funding 
for the same actions, provided that they comply with Articles 77, 92 and 93 of the 
Treaty and with Community legislation on State aid and public procurement. 
Article 5 
Submission of projects 
1. Projects for combined transport actions may be submitted to the Commission by a 
Member State, or by a private or public undertaking established inside or outside the 
Community. Projects may be submitted jointly by a number of States or undertakings. 
2. The submission shall describe the project, taking into account the following elements: 
(a) type of project 
innovative project 
feasibility study (including objective, methods and cost of the study); 
(b) description of project 
modes and operators involved 
reason for envisaged project (customer requests, congestion, market 
potential, remoteness of area, etc.) 
innovative features in comparison with current situation 
19 
intensity and type of cooperation 
duration of project 
need for assistance (other assistance granted or envisaged, financial 
resources of applicants, etc.) 
amount of assistance requested, in ecus; 
(c) route/axis of the project 
importance of route for the Community economy (volume carried by 
different modes; further potential) 
importance of route in terms of the Community transport policy (inclusion 
of pilot route in the Community's trans-European combined transport 
network, importance of pilot route having regard to major multimodal 
transport corridors in third states) 
market conditions, including existing services or technologies, also 
considering other modes; 
(d) the type of Community assistance requested, in accordance with Article 4(2). 
In their submission, the applicants shall define their project objectives as well as the 
means to achieve the objectives. The submission shall contain all elements necessary 
to enable the Commission to carry out its selection task according to Article 6(1) to (4). 
So that it can be evaluated, every application for a combined transport action shall, in 
addition to the items listed in paragraphs 2 and 3, include: 
(a) a letter of intent from the applicants of the project including an undertaking by 
the applicants to implement the project if the financial assistance applied for 
is granted; 
(b) financial statement itemizing all the costs in ecus and all the other proposed 
' funding for the project; 
(c) the annex listing the partners in the project and describing their legal status and 
financial capacity. 
As soon as the Commission receives an applicantion, it shall check that it is eligible 
under Articles 2, 3 and 4. 
Article 6 
Selection of projects - Granting of financial assistance 
Decisions on the granting of financial assistance under this Regulation shall be adopted 
in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 7. They shall be based on a 
selection process determining whether the project contributes to an increased use of 
combined transport. 
The Commission shall assess whether the project is likely to meet its objectives as 
mentioned in Article 5(3) and whether it meets the general and specific objectives set 
out in Article 1. To this end, the Commission shall give priority to the criteria 
mentioned in paragraphs (3) and (4) of this Article. 
20 
3. In assessing whether the project is likely to meet its objectives, the following indicators 
shall be given priority and shall be measured against the applicants' own estimates: 
(a) customer potential for combined transport; 
(b) price and service performance (accessibility, reliability, time gains) in comparison 
with competing road or other services (at time of submission and after 
implementation of the project); 
(c) envisaged receipts; 
(d) cost factors (especially elements for evaluating the marginal cost of access to the 
infrastructure, particularly rail, for the service covered by the pilot action and any 
further information enabling a judgment to be made as to whether aid towards the 
costs of infrastructure access is justified); 
(e) timetable for viability. 
4. In assessing whether the project is likely to meet Community transport policy goals, the 
following indicators shall be given priority: 
(a) traffic shift forecast (as percentage of total traffic on route or axis); 
(b) effects on other transport services in the relevant market and possible new entrants; 
(c) relevance of project results for other ventures, routes or market participants; 
(d) benefits to environment and safety when compared with existing services. 
5. The Commission shall also ensure that the submission complies with the further 
conditions laid down in this Regulation, namely: 
(a) the consent of States on whose territory the action is carried out; 
(b) the exclusion of infrastructure measures; 
(c) the exclusion of research measures; 
(d) a guarantee that, as from 27 June 1997, the railway undertakings taking part in the 
project hold a licence within the meaning of Article 2 of Directive 95/18/EC. 
6. The evaluation and monitoring procedures referred to in Article 10 shall be determined 
by the decisions provided for in paragraph 1 of this Article. 
7. These decisions are addressed to the beneficiaries and the Member States in whose 
territory the combined transport routes are situated. 
Article 7 
Committee 
The Commission shall be assisted by the committee set up in accordance with Article 17(2) 
of Regulation (EC) No 2236/95, meeting in the composition corresponding to the 
transport sector. 
The Commission representative shall submit to the committee a draft of the measures to be 
taken. The committee shall deliver its opinion on the draft within a time-limit which the 
chairman may impose according to the urgency of the matter. The opinion shall be delivered 
by the majority laid down in Article 148(2) of the Treaty in the case of decisions which the 
21 
Council is required to adopt on a proposal from the Commission. The votes of the 
representatives of the Member States within the committee shall be weighted in the manner 
set out in that Article. The chairman shall not vote. 
The Commission shall adopt measures which shall apply immediately. However, if these 
measures are not in accordance with the opinion of the committee, they shall be 
communicated by the Commission to the Council forthwith. 
The Commission may defer application of the measures which it has decided for a period of 
not more than one month from the date of such communication. 
The Council, acting by a qualified majority, may take a different decision within the 
time-limit referred to in the previous paragraph. 
Article 8 
Financial provisions 
1. Financial assistance may be granted for expenditure on the implementation of actions 
carried out by the beneficiaries or by third parties who have been made responsible 
for implementation. 
2. Financial assistance shall not cover expenditure incurred before the date on which the 
Commission received the application. 
3. Commitments and payments shall be expressed and paid in ecus. 
4. As a general rule, payments shall be made in the form of advances and a final payment. 
The first advance shall be paid once the application for financial assistance has been 
approved. Subsequent payments shall be made on the basis of requests for payment and 
taking into account progress with the project. 
5. The Commission shall make the final payment after approval of an activity report on 
the study or other measure submitted by the beneficiary and itemizing all the 
expenditure actually incurred. 
Article 9 
Financial control 
1. Without prejudice to inspections carried out by Member States in accordance with 
national laws, regulations and administrative provisions, to the provisions of 
Article 188a of the Treaty, and to inspections carried out under point (c) of Article 209 
of the Treaty, Commission officials or other staff may visit the sites of supported 
actions to carry out spot checks. 
2. If work on an action does not seem to justify some or all of the financial assistance 
granted, the Commission shall conduct appropriate investigations. 
3. Following the investigations referred to in paragraph 2, the Commission may reduce, 
suspend or withdraw financial assistance for the action if the investigation confirms that 
there is some irregularity or that the conditions set out in the decision granting the 
financial assistance have not been met, particularly if there is an important change 
which affects the nature or conditions of implementation of the action and for which 
the Commission's approval has not been requested. 
22 
Article 10 
Monitoring and evaluation 
1. The. Commission shall monitor implementation of projects during and after their 
completion. For these purposes it should also rely, whenever necessary, on external 
expertise. The time frame for monitoring after completion of the project shall be 
determined by the Commission in the decision mentioned in Article 6 with regard to 
the specific circumstances of the project. On completion of a project, and before final 
payment, the Commission shall carry out an evaluation of it. 
2. Up to one per cent of the budget provided for in this Regulation shall be set aside for 
independent monitoring and evaluation. 
Article 11 
Report 
Two years after the entry into force of this Regulation, the Commission shall submit a report 
on the activities carried out under it to the European Parliament, the Council, the 
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. The Commission 
shall take as much account as possible of the comments made by the other institutions on 
the report. 
The application of this Regulation shall be evaluated in line with Commission evaluation 
principles. The result of this evaluation shall be available before 1 October 2001. 
Article 12 
Publicity 
The beneficiaries shall ensure that proper publicity is given to the assistance granted under 
this Regulation to make the public aware of the role played by the Community in 
implementing these projects. They shall consult the Commission on how this is to be done. 
Article 13 
Duration 
The granting of financial assistance for combined transport under this Regulation shall be 
authorized from 1 January 1997 to 31 December 2001. By 31 December 2001 at the latest, 
the Council, acting on a Commission proposal in accordance with the provisions of the 
Treaty, shall decide as to the continuation of that financial assistance after that date. 
Article 14 
Entry into force 
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the 
Official Journal of the European Communities. 
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States: 
Done at Brussels, For the Council 
The President 
23 
ANNEX TO THE COMMUNICATION 
A. DESCRIPTION OF PACT 1992 - 1995 
1. In four years, PACT funded 65 projects on 22 routes, with 11 including road/rail, 
five an inland waterway section and six a sea crossing. 17 concerned only Community 
territory (including Austria, Sweden and Finland) and five involved a section outside, 
through Switzerland, Norway or the countries of Central and Eastern Europe 
(Poland, Czech Republic and Slovenia). The projects were led by public 
(ministries, rail networks), semi-public (autonomous ports, whether inland or sea) or 
private bodies (combined transport operators, chambers of commerce). In 1995, the 
Commission received 57 projects applying for funding totalling almost ECU 20 million 
of which it was able to grant only ECU 4.1 million under the PACT budget heading 
and ECU 0.4 million under the heading for actions linked with third countries. 
List of pilot routes already funded (1992-1995) 
No 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 Year 
1992 
1992 
1993 
1993 
1993 
1993 
1993 
1993 
1993 
1993 
1994 
1994 
1994 Route 
Northern Europe - Italy -
Greece via Brindisi/Patras 
Germany - France - Spain 
- Portugal via Port 
Bou/Cerbère 
France (Le Havre) -
Central Europe 
Nordic countries -
continental Europe 
Netherlands - Austria 
(Rotterdam - Vienna) 
United Kingdom -
Belgium - Germany - Italy 
United Kingdom -
(Glasgow - Folkestone) 
Continental Europe via 
Channel Tunnel 
Germany - Poland 
(Hanover - Poznan) 
Ireland - United Kingdom 
- Continental Europe 
Netherlands - Switzerland 
(Rotterdam - Basle) 
Germany - Italy 
(Munich - Verona) 
Netherlands - France 
(Rotterdam - Lille) 
Belgium - Germany 
(Zeebrugge - Aachen) Modes 
rail - sea - road 
rail - road 
rail - road 
rail - sea - road 
inland waterway 
- road 
sea - rail - road 
rail - road 
rail - road 
sea - rail - road 
inland waterway 
- road 
rail - road 
inland waterway 
- road 
rail - road Type of PACT 
studies + action 
studies + action 
studies + action 
studies + action 
action 
action 
studies 
studies 
studies 
studies 
action 
action 
action 
24 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 1994 
1994 
1994 
1995 
1995 
1995 
1995 
1995 
1995 Netherlands - Belgium 
(Rotterdam - Antwerp) 
Germany - France - Spain 
- Portugal via Irun 
Atlantic route) 
Ireland - United Kingdom 
- Germany (Rostock -
Dresden) 
Germany - Franco-Spanish 
frontier 
(Koblenz - Perpignan) 
Germany (Dresden) -
South-East Europe 
France - Belgium 
(Lille - Antwerp) 
Finland - Sweden 
(Port of Turku) 
Spain - United Kingdom 
via Channel Tunnel 
Northern Europe -
Germany - Austria -
Slovenia (Ljubljana) inland waterway 
- road 
rail - road 
sea - rail - road 
rail - road 
rail - road 
inland waterway 
- road 
sea - rail - road 
rail - road 
rail - road action 
studies + action 
studies 
studies + action 
action 
action 
action 
action 
studies + action 
The content of the projects on these routes was very varied, corresponding to the 
wide range of situations and user demands. Thus, on certain routes the concept of 
quality proved to be the most important, which led to measures to promote the 
development of advanced computer technologies. For example the French company 
CNC (Compagnie Nouvelles de Conteneurs) is currently testing the installation on 
several thousand of its load units (containers, swap-bodies and semi-trailers) of a badge 
which then allows those consignments to be monitored and is adapting its terminals on 
the Le Havre-Central Europe route to take equipment for the automatic reading of those 
badges. This is a first in Europe, since hitherto this technology had been tested only on 
the wagons and for the specific needs of the railway networks, whereas this system is 
operated by a combined transport company on the basis of its own user needs; the 
Commission funded 30% of the necessary investments for this project, but on condition 
that the latest computer standards are observed to ensure compatibility with future 
developments of the system and keep access to these technologies open to other 
operators. Of all the projects funded, a few examples are given below. 
Germany/Benelux - Italy - Greece 
Via Milan - Bari - Brindisi - Patras 
This project was launched in 1992 as one of the first two PACT routes. The partners 
in the project are Uniontrasporti, which forms part of the association of Chambers of 
Commerce, the companies of UIRR, the Ferrovie dello Stato, Assointerporti 
(association of Italian interports) and Combimare (Italian transport company), the 
national technical university of Athens (NTUA), Greek Railways and Greek consultants 
ADKTriton, Impetus and FORTH (Crete regional foundation for research and 
technology). Since 1994, Greek shipowners have been involved in the project. The 
German combined transport company Kombiverkehr participates indirectly in the 
project through the UIRR (Rail/Road International Union) and German railways are 
represented by the Italian Ferrovie dello Stato. 
25 
The partners undertook to develop a new combined transport service by rail/road/sea 
improving the quality of service. The project succeeded in introducing one shuttle train 
a day in both directions at a competitive price compared with transport entirely by road. 
It began in 1992 with a feasibility study. Following the conclusions of that study, the 
partners decided to launch a second experimental phase in 1993/94 which involved 
testing the validity of the project by launching a service of an inferior quality to that 
planned in the long term, but with less capital expenditure. This involved the use of 
existing trains and of a combined (passengers/goods) vessel between Brindisi and Patras 
and "pioneer" customers. The service has operated from 1994 with rented equipment 
in order to limit the risk and for renewable periods of two months, with a journey time 
of around 16 hours between Milan and Brindisi. . 
The encouraging results from this experimental phase prompted the partners in the 
project to go on to a third, more advanced phase: introduction of a direct train between 
Milan and Brindisi, changes to shipping timetables with the aim of using a freight-only 
vessel between Brindisi and Patras, investments in transshipment and computer 
equipment. This phase began in 1995. That same year the partners moved to one 
direct train a day and are considering extending the service further. The Commission 
financed 50% of the feasibility study and 30% of most actions in the second and third 
phases. An extension of the route to Crete is also being studied, with 50% funding 
from the Commission. 
Northern Europe - France - Spain - Portugal 
4. Initially, the route from Germany to the Iberian peninsula, via the eastern frontier of 
the Pyrenees (Port Bou), was launched. 
The first phase finished in October 1993 and consisted mainly of the development of 
certain infrastructures. At Port Bou, a new gantry crane was installed which improved 
the quality of the service by significantly reducing transshipment times from one train 
to another - made necessary by the switch from French to Spanish gauges - and 
increasing transshipment capacity by 35%. Management in the terminals was also 
improved by installing a computer system for greater coordination of loading, transit 
and unloading operations. The project also covered the purchase of wagons specially 
adapted for combined transport, the introduction of electronic billing and ticket 
reservation services and a series of complementary studies on improvement of service 
quality on the route. 
The second phase involved investment to eliminate the final obstacles to transport on 
this route as well as a study on the link up of the various communication services 
between the four transport operators on the route to improve communication between 
operators and provision of information to customers and users of combined transport. 
The partners in the project are: Spanish (RENFE), Portuguese (CP) and French (SNCF) 
railways, UIRR combined transport companies, ICF (Intercontainer - Interfrigo) and 
the CNC. 
The Commission 30% cofinanced the innovative measures and 50% cofinanced the 
feasibility studies. 
In 1995, the route saw the advent of two new projects, one Spanish and the other 
Portuguese, testing bimodal techniques (use of road semi-trailers specially reinforced 
and adapted to be placed directly on a rail bogie to form a wagon) adapted to the 
change in gauge between France and Spain. 
5. In 1994, a second corridor was added, using the Atlantic arc, from Benelux to Spain 
via the western frontier of the Pyrenees (Hendaye). This project involved the granting 
of 50%> subsidies for a study on the black spot of the frontier crossing and 30% 
subsidies for measures to improve the capacity of the Hendaye-Irun frontier complex. 
26 
The project partners are the Belgian, French, Spanish and Portuguese railways together 
with the two main French combined transport companies (Novatrans and CNC). 
6. A third corridor was launched in 1995, between Germany and south-east France to 
continue subsequently to Spain. This is another bimodal project but using a different 
technique from the others. In order not to favour one bimodal technique over another, 
with them all being new to the market, the Commission decided to give equal 
assistance to any viable project aimed at testing one of these techniques in Europe on 
a commercial basis. The partner in the project is a German company, ITINERA. 
Alps crossing 
Munich - Verona 
7. Pursuant to this principle, PACT also aided a project run by another German company 
(BTZ) to develop a third bimodal technique between Munich and Verona. This project 
is important in that it covers a route where road traffic is severely restricted and where 
consequently it is necessary to find complementary solutions to classical combined 
transport which are more geared to traditional road transport enterprises; bimodal 
transport allows them to keep their road equipment and avoids the construction of 
terminals for transhipment onto rail. 
Other technological innovation projects 
8. PACT also seeks to aid the commercial development of new techniques. In 1993, it 
aided the Piggyback Consortium (an association of enterprises interested in using the 
Channel Tunnel) to develop new equipment adapted to the Channel Tunnel and to 
loading gauge restrictions on UK railways, while maintaining sufficient loading capacity 
to remain competitive. 
Similarly, apart from bimodal techniques already used, PACT has since 1995 also aided 
the installation of computerized and modular transhipment systems in Germany in order 
to test the commercial viability of these new technologies. 
Linking up of isolated or peripheral regions 
9. The programme was designed to cover the whole of Europe and in particular to link 
up peripheral or isolated regions. One of the most ambitious projects concerned Greece 
and involved the establishment of safe, high-performance links with the rest of the 
Union (cf. point 3). Another pilot route connected the Nordic countries to Germany via 
Jutland on the initiative of the Danish company NTU in collaboration with the railways. 
The project is continuing. 
In 1995, PACT received a fresh impetus to integrate the new Member States. By way 
of example, mention may be made of the project between Finland and Sweden which 
lays particular stress on improving intermodal capacity at Turku (Finland). 
Combined waterway transport 
10. The aim of PACT is to promote the development of combined transport but this is not 
restricted to rail/road, quite the contrary. Since 1993, the programme has financed a 
number of projects using the inland waterways. 
27 
Netherlands - Germany - Austria 
Rotterdam - Vienna route 
The first project was launched in 1993 and continued in 1994 and 1995. The aim is to 
develop a combined road/inland waterway transport service between Rotterdam and a 
number of ports along the Rhine and Danube. The objectives of the project are to offer 
a low cost but high quality service and to increase the use of inland waterways in 
combined transport. The partners are the Rhine inland waterways transport companies. 
Netherlands - Belgium - France 
Rotterdam - Lille route 
Launched in 1994 by the port of Lille, this project has been a great success and is 
progressing as planned. It has been possible to use existing boats of medium capacity 
which shows that even these vessels can operate combined transport on infrastructures 
judged too small at the outset. The conditions for success were the remarkable 
reliability of the service and the fact that the port of Lille, a public body, bore the 
initial risks; the port has undertaken to transfer the service to the private sector as soon 
as it becomes profitable. 
11. Another interesting example is the Rotterdam/Antwerp/Renory project, launched on the 
initiative of a Belgian company specializing in the packaging and transport of 
metallurgical products which decided to invest in intermodal transport, so far 
successfully. This shows that PACT can be a useful tool for small and medium-sized 
enterprises by helping them to gain access to a market which is significant but too risky 
given their limited capital resources. 
12. In 1995, the Commission published a comprehensive brochure on all the projects 
funded. An updating covering 1995 projects is being prepared and will come out in 
mid 1996. 
B. EVALUATION OF THE PACT PROGRAMME SO FAR 
1. Introduction 
13. For PACT to be continued on a legal basis in 1997 an internal evaluation was 
undertaken by the Commission services with a view to improving Community pilot 
actions in general. In order to plan follow-up initiatives, the purpose of this assessment 
is to determine the overall effectiveness of PACT so far and to indicate possible 
measures for improving pilot actions. 
2. Assessment 
14. Due to constraints on time and resources, the assessment has examined actions almost 
exclusively by comparing the project contracts with the reports submitted by the 
contractors to the Commission. Another problem of the assessment has been that, due 
to the experimental nature of PACT, no specific objectives were formulated for the 
pilot actions. Projects were selected and monitored essentially on the basis of the 
general objectives of Commission Decision 93/45/EEC. 
15. The assessment has examined a representative sample of 22 proiect contracts 
(comprising 14 pilot actions and 8 renewed contracts) out of a total oi 77 contracts 
completed during the period 1992-1996. The sample is described below. 
16. The sample covers 10 major axes: Greece-Italy (3 projects), Germany-Italy, Germany-
Spain, UK-Germany-Italy, Rotterdam-Austria (inland waterways), Rotterdam-Liege 
(inland waterways), Germany-Baltic Sea-UK, UK-Channel tunnel, UK-Ireland, 
Nordic connections (Denmark-Sweden-Norway); 
28 
It represents 22 contracts out of a total of 77 in the period 1992-1996, that is 28%; 
It represents contracts worth a total of ECU 2 833 124, that is 21% of the total budget 
from 1992-1996; 
The sample includes 12 studies and 10 innovative schemes; 
The 9 innovative schemes (receiving a 30% contribution) account for ECU 1 671 735, 
that is 59% of the sample in terms of value; 
Studies (receiving a 50% contribution) represent 41% of the sample in terms of 
value. 
3. Results 
17. On the basis of the available information, the results of the assessment can be 
summarized as follows: 
18. Only one of the 14 examined pilot actions produces unsatisfactory results, both in terms 
of unclear methodology and vague results. All other projects have been largely 
consistent with the general objectives and meet the conditions set out in their contracts; 
19. Pilot actions appear to have gathered useful information on the feasibility of measures 
to organize transport chains and in describing measures to improve the organization of 
specific combined transport operations; 
20. 10 of the 14 projects appear to have led to follow-up actions or studies; only three seem 
to have had no or very little Tollow-up; one data-gathering exercise (study) was not 
intended as an incentive action; 
21. All projects appear to have raised the awareness of the examined intermodal options 
among transport decision-makers through promotion campaigns or publications related 
to their projects; this has been particularly evident in the PACT project meetings with 
the Member States' representatives. 
22. The main impediment to the development of combined transport remains the 
comparatively lower transport price of road haulage; technical and organizational issues 
are less problematic; 
23. One feasibility study (No 13) has had a decisive impact on the prospects of introducing 
piggyback services in the UK - this could imply a major boost to combined transport 
on a national and European scale; 
24. In general, innovative schemes (including funding of equipment) have produced more 
tangible results than feasibility studies and - as could be expected - have been more 
successful in actually developing intermodal traffic; 
25. Due to the focus on specific operations, innovative schemes cannot always provide 
conclusions for the development of combined transport in general; 
26. The final project reports vary greatly in volume, structure and content (e.g. reports 
range in length from 5 to 250 pages); 
27. Project monitoring procedures were occasionally complicated by unforeseen changes 
in railway operations or transport (road haulage) prices; 
28. On the whole, the projects contain a wealth of complementary information which is 
potentially very useful for the development of new services. At present, however, this 
information remains confidential and cannot be used by the market. 
29 
29. In terms of general objectives, the success of pilot actions can be summarized as 
follows: 
GENERAL OBJECTIVES 
Information to establish usefulness of Community policy? 
3 projects N/A 
3 projects correspond fully to criterion 
5 projects correspond partly to criterion 
3 projects do not correspond to criterion 
Information on the feasibility of measures to organize transport chain? 
1 project N/A 
8 projects correspond fully to criterion 
5 projects correspond partly to criterion 
0 projects do not correspond to criterion 
GENERAL OPERATIONAL OBJECTIVES 
Measures to improve the operation/organization of transport chains? 
0 projects N/A 
9 projects correspond fully to criterion 
5 projects correspond partly to criterion 
0 projects do not correspond to criterion 
Measures to enhance co-operation of operators in the logistics chain? 
1 project N/A 
6 projects correspond fully to criterion 
7 projects correspond partly to criterion 
0 projects do not correspond to criterion 
Economic viability and competitiveness against road haulage? 
0 projects N/A 
7 projects correspond fully to criterion 
4 projects correspond partly to criterion 
3 projects do not correspond to criterion 
Incentive of the PACT project? 
2 projects N/A 
7 projects correspond fully to criterion 
4 projects correspond partly to criterion 
1 project does not correspond to criterion 
30 
4. Conclusion 
30. Given the fact that the programme lacked specific objectives, the lack of independent 
data available on the impact of PACT as well as the fact that impacts inevitably take 
time to materialize, it is at present difficult to pronounce authoritatively on PACT'S 
effectiveness. However, the current programme is experimental in nature, and a 
significant number of projects do seem to have had encouraging results. Many pilot 
actions appear to have gathered useful information on the feasibility of measures to 
organize transport chains in combined transport. Several pilot actions also appear to 
have led to follow-up actions or studies, and there is a general sentiment that the 
programme has raised the awareness of the combined transport options amongst 
decision makers. 
31. In order further to enhance the development of combined transport and to build upon 
the encouraging results of PACT, the Commission therefore proposes to launch the pilot 
actions for a second period, albeit with a number of modifications regarding project 
selection and evaluation. The main recommendations are the following: 
32. The monitoring system of PACT needs to be further developed on order to allow 
Commission services to obtain independent information on project outputs and impacts; 
33. The general objectives for future pilot actions should be supplemented by a set of 
specific, verify able objectives against which individual actions can be assessed. 
34. Different selection and evaluation criteria (deliverables) need to be developed for 
feasibility studies and innovative schemes to take into account the very different nature 
of these types of projects; 
35. Criteria for selecting feasibility studies should be sufficiently narrow to ensure that 
results are as applicable (operational) as possible; it is worth considering a further 
reduction of the proportion of funds allocated to feasibility studies in relation to 
innovative schemes; 
36. Contracts should include terms of reference for final reports (structure of reports, 
need for executive summary) - differentiated according to feasibility studies and 
innovative schemes; 
37. Contracts for feasibility studies need to specify whether data is merely collected 
(data compilation study) or also analysed and evaluated; 
38. Contractors need to specify if the services/systems under study are open to other 
operators or limited to their own business; 
39. Contractors examining joint-venture opportunities should ideally provide an assessment 
of the commercial risks for the different partners involved; 
40. Pilot actions running for several years require an on-going monitoring of the market 
in order to prevent potential conflicts with competition rules (e.g. with emerging 
operators or services not receiving PACT assistance). 
31 
FINANCIAL STATEMENT 
1. TITLE OF OPERATION 
Action programme to promote the combined transport of goods. 
2. BUDGET HEADING INVOLVED 
Heading B2-7060. 
3. LEGAL BASIS 
Article 75 of the EC Treaty. Council Resolution of 31 October 1990 on Community 
action to promote the development of combined transport routes. 
Council Regulation (EEC) No (attached proposal). 
4. DESCRIPTION OF OPERATION 
To substantially improve the competitiveness of combined transport services on 
major European routes. 
This programme takes over the main points of the existing pilot actions, launched 
in 1992, and due to end in 1996. 
4.1 General objective of operation 
For several years, the Commission has pursued a policy of promoting intermodal 
transport. As regards goods transport, measures to encourage those modes or 
combinations of modes representing the best option for the Community, i.e. taking 
account of social as well as economic costs, are being taken. 
It is now acknowledged that different types of transport are not uniform in terms of the 
costs they entail for society; it is also clear that a return to the real cost of transport 
will have to be done in stages. This implies that the shift towards those modes which 
are least harmful to the environment is based on measures, both regulatory and, above 
all, financial, which make those modes more competitive with roads and more attractive 
to the user. 
The general objective of this programme is therefore to contribute to the increased use 
of combined transport as a sustainable mode. To meet this general objective, the 
proposal is for Community action to improve the competitiveness of combined transport 
vis-a-vis road, especially concerning service quality and price, and to improve access 
to combined transport for enterprises. 
4.2 Duration of operation and arrangements for its renewal 
Five years (1997-2001). Before the end of the period, the Council must decide on 
whether to terminate or renew the programme. 
32 
5. CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENDITURE OR REVENUE 
5.1 Non-compulsory 
5.2 Differentiated 
5.3 Type of revenue involved: none. 
6. TYPE OF EXPENDITURE OR REVENUE 
Subsidy for cofinancing with other sources in the public and/or private sector up 
to a maximum rate of 50%. 
Should the operation prove an economic success, is there provision for all or part 
of the Community contribution to be reimbursed? No. 
Will the proposed operation cause any change in the level of revenue? No. 
7. FINANCIAL IMPACT 
7.1 Method of calculating total cost of operation (link between individual costs and 
total costs): 
feasibility studies: cost of study - 50% funding; 
innovative measures: estimate based on hypothesis of a maximum contribution 
of 30%> to total eligible costs (excluding new infrastructures and research actions) 
of demonstration actions. 
Experience shows that the cost of proposed projects can vary greatly. Some projects 
required a funding of less than ECU 20 000, as they aimed only at improving existing 
services or installations. Other projects, such as setting up new services with compatible 
equipment and technology, including feasibility studies, asked for assistance of 
sometimes several million ecus. The average subsidy disbursed over the years 1992 to 
1995 was around ECU 200 000 per project. The mix of small and large project changes 
from year to year and is thus difficult to predict. Nevertheless, some conclusions can 
be drawn from the experience with the existing programme in estimating the 
required budget. 
The number of applications has increased from year to year since 1992; with 
increasing emphasis on intermodality both in politics and in the commercial sector 
all over Europe, it is likely that the Commission will receive an ever growing 
number of projects. This should also lead to a higher number of eligible projects. 
Access to rail infrastructure is being liberalised. It is therefore to be expected that 
more businesses will try to start combined transport operations. As start-up costs, 
especially investment expenditure and infrastructure access charges, are high and 
may even be prohibitive for small and medium enterprises, an increased demand 
for funding should follow. 
There is a growing reticence on the part of railroad operators to invest in new 
intermodal rolling stock. Further, some of the existing rolling stock is technically 
obsolete. Combined transport operators will therefore increasingly need to invest 
in this kind of expensive equipment. 
A substantial number of new intermodal techniques and technologies is being 
developed under the current R&D framework programme. Extra funding will be 
needed to turn the results of this research into commercially viable operations. 
33 
7.2 Breakdown into individual elements of operation 
For the reasons mentioned in 7.1. above, it is difficult to predict the sums which will 
be alloted to specific types of projects. However, certain predictions may be made at 
this stage concerning the development of the different types of measures funded, as 
defined in Article 4 of the Regulation. The ranking and the percentual allocation 
(average 1997-2001) foreseen is as follows: 
1. Investment in intermodal tratisport equipment: increasing importance, as railways 
are less willing to invest in this equipment, and combined transport operators will 
have to fill this gap; on the other hand, given the relative smallness of the 
programme's budget and the relative magnitude of costs per item, the budget must 
not be swallowed by this type of expenditure to the detriment of measures which 
are equally useful (25%). 
2. Costs of access to rail and inland waterway infrastructure; increasing importance, 
as experience shows that access charges are for the time being on a high level. 
With railways turning into commercial operations, access charges are likely to 
remain high (20%). 
3. Investment in transshipment facilities, constant importance, as improved 
transshipment facilities play an important role in improving service quality of 
combined transport and the smooth interconnection of modes (15%); 
4. Commercial operation of techniques, technologies or equipment previously tested 
and approved, in particular under European research programmes; constant 
importance; transport research has been given a boost under the Fourth R&D 
framework programme, and more techniques are available to be proven in the 
market; on the other hand, a certain consolidation of application of research is 
necessary in order not to endanger the competitiveness of new and still fragile 
technologies (15%). 
5. Measures relating to logistics, staff training and advertising of the programme 
covered by this Regulation; constant funding, although the dissemination of 
programme results may become more prominent than hitherto (15%). 
6. Feasibility studies: decreasing importance, with the possible exception of some 
Eastern European routes (9%); 
34 
7. External monitoring: necessary to ensure the good management of the 
programme (1%). 
ECU million 
Breakdown 
Investment in equipment 
Cost of accès to 
infrastructure 
Investment in transshipment 
facilities 
Commercial operation of 
R&D 
Logistics, staff training and 
dissemination of results 
Feasibility studies 
External monitoring 
Total 1997 
2.0 
1.0 
1.25 
1.25 
1.0 
0.8 
0.07 
7. 37 1998 
2.0 
1.5 
1.0 
1.0 
1.25 
0.75 
0.07 
7.57 1999 
1.8 
1.5 
1.0 
1.0 
1.0 
0.6 
0.07 
6.97 2000 
1.8 
1.5 
1.0 
1.0 
1.0 
0.5 
0.07 
6.87 2001 
1.15 
1.5 
1.0 
10 
1.0 
0.5 
0.07 
6.22 Total 
8.75 
7.0 
5.25 
5.25 
5.25 
3.15 
0.35 
35.0 
7.3 Schedule to be filled in for multiannual operations 
ECU million 
Commitment 
appropriations 
Payment appropriations 
1997 
1998 
1999 
2000 
2001 
TOTAL 1997 
6.0 
5.4 
5.4 
5.4 1998 
7.5 
6.5 
5.0 
1.5 
6.5 1999 
8.0 
7.2 
3.4 
3.8 
7.2 2000 
7.5 
6.3 
3.6 
2.7 
6.3 2001 
6.0 
5.8 
4.3 
1.5 
5.8 2002 
3.8 
3.8 
3.8 Total 
35.0 
35.0 
35.0 
8. PLANNED ANTI-FRAUD MEASURES (AND RESULTS OF THEIR 
IMPLEMENTATION) 
Committee made up of representatives of Member States to select proposals and 
evaluate the results; 
payment of subsidy in three stages, each one conditional upon completion of the 
previous phase; 
controls possible at all times by the Commission and the Member States; 
evaluation at the end of each action, where terms of reference of contract are 
measured against achievements of projects. 
35 
9. ELEMENTS OF COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS 
9.1 Specific and quantifiable objectives; target population 
Specific objectives: 
to increase the competitiveness of combined transport both in terms of price 
and service quality vis-a-vis road; 
to promote the use of advanced technology in combined transport; 
to improve access to combined transport for enterprises, regardless of their 
size; this will increase competition in the supply of combined transport 
services and thereby also give a boost to its competitiveness. 
Target population: The target population comprises combined transport 
operators (including railways) and economic operators (public and private) 
wishing to become involved in intermodal transport. 
9.2 Grounds for the operation 
Need for Community financial assistance: Community assistance is necessary for 
a number of reasons: 
the routes are trans-European; 
as part of the opening up of markets and freedom of access to railway 
networks, Community action is essential to ensure equal treatment of all 
operators whatever their nationality; 
financial assistance is needed to compensate during a transitional period for 
the disadvantage of modes of transport which are more environmentally 
friendly than roads, in terms of taking account of costs of infrastructure use 
and social costs for the Community (particularly environment and safety); 
the 1992-96 trial phase (pilot actions) has shown that effective measures fall 
into four categories: investment in transport equipment and transshipment 
facilities, commercial development of new technologies, aid towards 
infrastructure access costs and logistical and training measures. 
Choice of ways and means 
* Advantages over possible alternatives (comparative advantages). The 
programme provides an easily accessible way for combined transport 
operators to improve their competitiveness vis-a-vis road. Since the knock-
on effect of measures and the dissemination of results is an important part 
of the programme, it should contribute to a shift to a more sustainable 
transport system with a relatively small budget. There is therefore a very 
good ratio between means and ends. The programme should also contribute 
to give the Commission useful information of what is working in the market 
place. Ultimately, this will feed back into a general policy for intermodal 
transport, which is practicable and addresses concrete problems. The 
political information value of the programme is therefore an important 
element for affirming its advantages. 
Criteria for selection of projects: the projects funded must meet the general 
objective of increased use of combined transport through attaining a series of 
specific objectives, which are mentioned in 9.1. 
36 
In this connection, the following criteria are taken into account: 
(a) customer potential for combined transport; 
(b) price and service performance (accessibility, reliability, time gains) in comparison 
with competing road or other services (at time of submission and after 
implementation of the project); 
(c) envisaged receipts; 
(d) cost factors (esp.elements for evaluating the marginal cost of access to the 
infrastructure, particularly rail, for the service covered by the pilot action and any 
further information enabling a judgment to be made as to whether aid towards the 
costs of infrastructure access is justified); 
(e) timetable for viability; 
(f) traffic shift forecast (as percentage of total traffic on route/axis); 
(g) effects on other transport services in the relevant market and possible 
new entrants; 
(h) relevance of project results for other ventures/routes/market participants; 
(i) benefits to environment and safety when compared with existing offer. 
Main factors of uncertainty which could affect the specific results of the operation. 
Traffic forecasts, price of competing mode, (road), change of 
regulatory environment. 
9.3 Monitoring and evaluation of the operation 
Performance indicators: 
Traffic shift, prices and transport times. 
Details and frequency of planned evaluations: 
Observation of the impact of the new pilot service on the transport market; 
External evaluation through independent expert; 
Possible on-spot checks through anti-fraud expert of the Commission; 
Annual ex-ante evaluation by the decision-making committee of national 
experts (Article 7 of Regulation); 
Evaluation at the end of each annual instalment of aid for each action; 
Overall evaluation of the programme through a Commission report to 
Parliament and the Council which will form a basis for the revision of 
funding priorities by the Commission. 
37 
10. ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE (PART A OF THE BUDGET) 
The actual mobilization of the necessary administrative resources will be determined 
by the annual Commission decision on the allocation of resources, having regard in 
particular to the additional staff and amounts that will have been granted by the 
budget authority. 
Additional requests may under no circumstances prejudge the decision to be taken by 
the Commission on the allocation of resources. 
10.1 Effect on the number of posts 
Types of post 
Officials or 
temporary 
staff A 
B 
C 
Other resources 
TOTAL Staff to be assi 
management oJ 
Permanent 
posts 
1 
1 
y2 
2'/2 gned to 
f the operation 
Temporary 
posts Of which 
By using 
existing 
resources 
witliin the 
DGor 
department 
concerned 
1 
1 
'/2 
2>/2 By using 
additional 
resources Duration 
5 yrs 
5 yrs 
5 yrs 
5 yrs 
(1996-2001) 
10.2 Overall financial impact of additional human resources 
Amounts Method of calculation 
Officials 
Temporary staff 
Other resources 
(give budget heading) 
Total 1 1 1 
The annual cost of staff assigned to the management of the operation from existing 
resources is ECU 250 000 (2.5 officials, or ECU 1 250 000 for the five-year period. 
38 
10.3 Increase in other operating expenditure arising from the operation 
Budget heading Amounts Method of calculation 
(No and title) 
A - 2510 104 250 Cost for period of 5 years: average cost per 
participant (government expert) for one meeting 
= ECU 695 
Estimated cost of 1 further annual meeting:^ 
1 (meeting) x 30 (number of participants) x 
ECU 695 (average cost) = ECU 20 850 
A - 1300 100 000 Cost for 5 yrs: 12 to 15 missions per year for 1 
. or two persons 
I Total 1 204 250 | | 
o It is planned that this committee will meet twice a year. Hitherto there was only 
a group of experts which met once a year, the costs of which were charged to 
Article A-250. 
39 
IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM 
THE IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL ON BUSINESS WITH SPECIAL 
REFERENCE TO SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED ENTERPRISES (SMEs) 
Title of proposal: Proposal for a Council Regulation concerning the granting of 
Community financial assistance for actions to promote combined 
goods transport. 
The proposal 
1. The proposal aims to establish a programme of financial assistance for actions to 
promote combined goods transport. The objective is to increase the use of combined 
transport. It therefore seeks to set up combined transport services which are 
trans-European, economically viable once the start-up phase is over and competitive in 
terms of quality with transport entirely by road. The action follows on from the 
Council Resolution of 30 October 1990 on setting up a European combined transport 
network and meets the expectations voiced by businesses in the high level group on 
combined transport which comprises representatives of the Member States and of 
European associations involved in intermodal transport (including users). 
As the idea is to launch trans-European projects consistent with the development of the 
trans-European combined transport network, the proposed action has to be carried out 
at Community level. In order to test the validity of this programme, the Commission 
carried it out on a trial basis from 1992 to 1996. 
Only action at Community level makes it possible to coordinate the projects, launch 
them at trans-European level, ensure that firms are able to develop effective cooperation 
with partners from other States and develop new techniques on a commercial basis at 
European level. 
The impact on business 
2. Who will be affected by the proposal? 
Firms engaged in transport by rail, road, inland waterway or sea; 
Businesses using transport services; 
Managers of intermodal terminals; 
Manufacturers of transport or transhipment equipment; 
Designers and manufacturers of new technologies. 
A significant proportion of these operators will be SMEs. 
3. What will business have to do to comply with the proposal? 
There is no compulsion. If a firm wishes to propose a project, it will simply have to 
follow the application procedures. 
40 
4. What economic effects is the proposal likely to has^e? 
Positive effects on the comparative utilization of transport modes. 
Positive effects for all the businesses mentioned above, except those continuing to use 
only road transport. 
5. Does the proposal contain measures to take account of the specific situation of small and 
medium-sized firms (reduced or different requirements, etc.)? 
No. The procedure for participating in the programme was deliberately left flexible in 
order not to disadvantage SMEs compared with larger firms. 
Consultation 
6. The following organizations had been consulted before the launch of the 
previous programme: 
UIRR (International Union of Combined Road/Rail Transport) 
CCFE (Community of European Railways) 
UNIFE (Union of European Railway Industries) 
UNICE (Union of Industrial and Employers' Confederations of Europe) 
UINF (International Union for Inland Navigation) 
CCNR (Central Commission for the Navigation of the Rhine) 
ECS A (European Community Shipowners' Association) 
Their opinion was favourable, with a reservation from UNIFE which did not want the 
programme to adversely affect transport entirely by road. However, assistance for the 
development of combined transport as an alternative to road transport is one of the key 
elements of the common transport policy, reaffirmed by the Council in its Resolution of 
30 October 1990 and by the Commission in its transport White Paper. 
41 

ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(96) 335 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 07 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-96-413-EN-C 
ISBN 92-78-07843-3 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg 
42