COMMISSION COMMUNICATION concerning an action programme to promote the combined transport of goods
Date: 1996-07-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU financing, action programme, carriage of goods, combined transport, common transport policy

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. 

2. 

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. 

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. 

5. 

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. 

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) 

(4) 

Idem. 
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 
the 
measures  funded). 

(including  verification  of  bills  and  of 

for  each  project 

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) 

infrastructure  construction  and  development  measures  are  covered  by 
These 
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 

( i i) 

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. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

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. 

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. 

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. 

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? 

already  has 

supporting 
2236/95) 

for 
schemes 
(Council  Regulation 

The  Community 
infrastructure 
(trans-European  networks) 
research 
to 
(Council  Decision  94/914/EC).  The  proposed  programme  should  help 
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. 

and 

(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. 

2. 

(3) 

Article  1 specifies  the general  and specific  objectives  of the actions financed  under the 
proposed  Regulation. 

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. 

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 
( O J N o L 3 6 1, 
on 
Intermodal  Transport  (SEC(95)  1824). 

the  Research-Industry  Task  Force 

31.12.1994), 

and 

13 

3. 

4. 

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. 

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. 

Article 6 sets out the procedure and  selection  criteria for granting  financial  assistance. 

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). 

Article  8 sets  out  the  financial  provisions. 

Article  9 governs  the  financial  control  of  actions  already  initiated. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

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) 

(5) 

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. 
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) 

O J N oL  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 
to  in  Council  Decision  94/914/EC  of 
15 December  1994  adopting  a  specific  programme  for 
technological 
research  and 
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; 

that  referred 

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) 

O J N o L 2 2 8,  23.9.1995,  p.  1. 
O J N oL  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 
inland 
a road  vehicle;  however,  the  term  does  not  cover  a  maritime  or 
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. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

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. 

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. 

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). 

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) 

O J N oL  228,  9.9.1996,  p.  1. 
O J N oL  143, 27.6.1995,  p.  70. 
O J N oL  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, 
considering  other  modes; 

including  existing  services  or  technologies,  also 

(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. 

The evaluation  and monitoring procedures referred  to in Article  10 shall be  determined 
by  the  decisions  provided  for  in  paragraph  1 of this  Article. 

These  decisions  are  addressed  to  the  beneficiaries  and  the  Member  States  in  whose 
territory  the  combined  transport  routes  are  situated. 

6. 

7. 

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. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

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. 

Financial  assistance  shall  not  cover  expenditure incurred  before  the  date  on which  the 
Commission  received  the  application. 

Commitments  and  payments  shall  be  expressed  and  paid  in  ecus. 

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. 

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. 

3. 

If  work  on  an  action  does  not  seem  to justify  some  or  all  of  the  financial  assistance 
granted,  the  Commission  shall  conduct  appropriate  investigations. 

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 

Year 

Route 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

1992 

1992 

1993 

1993 

1993 

1993 

1993 

1993 

1993 

Northern  Europe  - Italy  -
Greece via  Brindisi/Patras 

Germany  - France  -  Spain 
-  Portugal  via  Port 

Bou/Cerbère 

France  (Le Havre)  -
Central  Europe 

Nordic  countries  -
continental  Europe 

Modes 

Type  of  PACT 

rail  -  sea  - road 

studies  +  action 

rail  -  road 

studies  +  action 

rail  - road 

studies  +  action 

rail  -  sea  - road 

studies  +  action 

Netherlands  -  Austria 
(Rotterdam  -  Vienna) 

inland  waterway 
-  road 

action 

United  Kingdom  -
Belgium  - Germany  - Italy 

sea  - rail  - road 

action 

United  Kingdom  -
(Glasgow  -  Folkestone) 
Continental  Europe  via 
Channel  Tunnel 

Germany  - Poland 
(Hanover  -  Poznan) 

Ireland  - United  Kingdom 
-  Continental  Europe 

rail  -  road 

studies 

rail  -  road 

studies 

sea  -  rail  -  road 

studies 

10 

1993 

Netherlands  -  Switzerland 
(Rotterdam  -  Basle) 

inland  waterway 
-  road 

studies 

11 

1994 

Germany  -  Italy 
(Munich  -  Verona) 

12 

1994 

13 

1994 

Netherlands  - France 
(Rotterdam  - Lille) 

Belgium  -  Germany 
(Zeebrugge  -  Aachen) 

rail  -  road 

action 

inland  waterway 
-  road 

action 

rail  -  road 

action 

24 

14 

1994 

Netherlands  -  Belgium 
(Rotterdam  -  Antwerp) 

inland  waterway 
-  road 

action 

15 

1994 

16 

1994 

17 

1995 

Germany  - France  -  Spain 
-  Portugal  via  Irun 
Atlantic  route) 

Ireland  - United  Kingdom 
-  Germany  (Rostock  -

Dresden) 

Germany  - Franco-Spanish 
frontier 
(Koblenz  -  Perpignan) 

18 

1995 

Germany  (Dresden)  -
South-East  Europe 

19 

1995 

20 

1995 

France  -  Belgium 
(Lille  -  Antwerp) 

Finland  -  Sweden 
(Port  of  Turku) 

rail  -  road 

studies  +  action 

sea  - rail  - road 

studies 

rail  -  road 

studies  +  action 

rail  - road 

action 

inland  waterway 
-  road 

action 

sea  - rail  -  road 

action 

21 

1995 

Spain  - United  Kingdom 
via  Channel  Tunnel 

rail  - road 

action 

22 

1995 

Northern  Europe  -
Germany  - Austria  -
Slovenia  (Ljubljana) 

rail  - road 

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. 

8. 

9. 

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 

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 

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 
tunnel,  UK-Ireland, 
(inland  waterways),  Germany-Baltic  Sea-UK,  UK-Channel 
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. 

in 

Investment 
transshipment  facilities  play  an  important  role 
combined  transport  and  the  smooth  interconnection  of  modes  (15%); 

transshipment  facilities,  constant 

improved 
in  improving  service  quality  of 

importance,  as 

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 

1997 

1998 

1999 

2000 

2001 

Total 

Investment  in  equipment 

Cost  of  accès  to 
infrastructure 

Investment  in  transshipment 
facilities 

Commercial  operation  of 
R&D 

Logistics,  staff  training  and 
dissemination  of  results 

2.0 

1.0 

2.0 

1.5 

1.8 

1.5 

1.25 

1.0 

1.0 

1.25 

1.0 

1.0 

1.0 

1.25 

1.0 

1.8 

1.5 

1.0 

1.0 

1.0 

1.15 

1.5 

8.75 

7.0 

1.0 

5.25 

10 

5.25 

1.0 

5.25 

Feasibility  studies 

External  monitoring 

Total 

0.8 

0.07 

7.  37 

0.75 

0.07 

7.57 

0.6 

0.07 

6.97 

0.5 

0.07 

6.87 

0.5 

0.07 

6.22 

3.15 

0.35 

35.0 

7.3  Schedule  to be  filled  in  for  multiannual  operations 

Commitment 
appropriations 

Payment  appropriations 

1997 
1998 
1999 
2000 
2001 

1997 

1998 

1999 

2000 

2001 

2002 

Total 

6.0 

7.5 

8.0 

7.5 

6.0 

35.0 

ECU  million 

7.2 

6.3 

5.8 

3.8 

35.0 

5.4 

5.4 

6.5 

5.0 
1.5 

3.4 
3.8 

3.6 
2.7 

4.3 
1.5 

5.8 

3.8 

3.8 

35.0 

TOTAL 

5.4 

6.5 

7.2 

6.3 

8. 

PLANNED  ANTI-FRAUD  MEASURES 
IMPLEMENTATION) 

(AND  RESULTS  OF  THEIR 

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 
new  entrants; 

transport  services  in 

the  relevant  market  and  possible 

(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 
regulatory  environment. 

forecasts, 

price 

of 

competing  mode, 

(road), 

change 

of 

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 

Staff  to  be  assi 
management  oJ 

gned  to 
f the  operation 

Of  which 

Duration 

Permanent 
posts 

Temporary 
posts 

By  using 
additional 
resources 

By  using 
existing 
resources 
witliin  the 
DGor 
department 
concerned 

Officials  or 
temporary 
staff 

A 
B 

C 

Other  resources 

TOTAL 

1 
1 

y2 

2'/2 

1 
1 

'/2 

2>/2 

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 
(No  and  title) 

Amounts  Method  of  calculation 

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 

previous  programme: 

the 

launch  of 

the 

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