Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending the amended proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Decision No 1692/96/EC on Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network (presented by the Commission pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty) {SEC(2003) 1060 }
Date: 2003-10-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: common transport policy, trans-European network, transport network

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 1.10.2003
COM(2003) 564 final

2001/0229 (COD)

Proposal for a

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

amending the amended proposal for a

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

amending Decision No 1692/96/EC on Community guidelines for the development of the
trans-European transport network

(presented by the Commission pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty)

{SEC(2003) 1060 }

Table of Contents

1.

2.

2.1.

2.2.

2.3

3.

4.

4.1.

4.2.

5.

5.1.

5.2.

5.3

Introduction and summary ........................................................................................... 3

Priority projects for an enlarged Union........................................................................ 4

A selective methodology.............................................................................................. 5

A limited number of new projects................................................................................ 5

Declaration of European interest.................................................................................. 6

The mechanism for supporting motorways of the sea ................................................. 7

Increased coordination between Member States.......................................................... 9

European coordinators for individual projects or groups of projects......................... 10

Coordinated procedures prior to the authorisation of projects................................... 11

Components of impact assessment ............................................................................ 13

Funding ...................................................................................................................... 13

Economic, social and environmental impact ............................................................. 14

Outside consultations ................................................................................................. 16

2

1.

INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

A  genuinely  trans-European  transport  network  will  dynamise  the  internal  market,
improve  territorial  cohesion  and,  as  a  result,  boost  the  competitiveness  and  growth
potential  of  the  European  Union.  Extension  of  the  network  to  the  future  Member
States  will  help  to  make  enlargement  a  success  and  provide  a  new  opportunity  to
reduce  congestion  on the  major  routes and  encourage  intermodality  in  the  enlarged
Europe, one condition for sustainable development of transport.

In  order  to  stimulate  the  development  of  such  a  network  by  implementing  projects
with a distinct European dimension, on 2 October 2001 the Commission proposed an
amendment  to  the  Decision  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of
23 July 1996  on  Community  guidelines  for  the  development  of  the  trans-European
transport  network1.  During  the  Plenary  part-session  of  30  May  2002,  the  European
Parliament  approved,  subject  to  several  amendments,  the  main  aspects  of  this
proposal, in particular the addition of six priority projects with high European added
value.  The  Commission  forwarded  an  amended  proposal  to  Parliament  and  the
Council  in  September  2002  indicating  which  of  Parliament's  amendments  it
considered should be included2.

The  Council  has  not  been  able  to  adopt  the  proposal.  Back  in  2001  in  the  White
Paper on European transport policy, the Commission had already pointed to the need
to  add  to  this  initial  proposal  in  order  to  keep  the  focus  on  priority  projects  in  the
context of the enlarged Union.

To this end, the Commission set up a High-Level Group, chaired by Mr Karel  Van
Miert and composed of experts nominated by the Transport Ministers of the current
and  future  Member  States  and  from  the  European  Investment  Bank.  The  report  of
this Group was submitted to the Commission on 30 June 2003 and made public at the
same time3.

Having  examined  the  recommendations  of  the  High-Level  Group  and  the  reactions
received  after  they  were  published,  the  Commission  considers  that  the  latest
information  calls  for  additions  to  be  made  to  the  amended  proposal  forwarded  in
September 2002. These additions to the  amended proposal  aim to make it easier to
reach agreement within the Council and the European Parliament and thus to attain
the objective set by the European Council of adopting these new guidelines quickly,
including  new  priority  projects  in  the  Alps,  the  Pyrenees  and  the  Baltic  Sea.  The
proposed new amendments:

– 

– 

add to the list of priority projects proposed in 2001 the new projects identified
by the High-Level Group, including new forms of support for the development
of transnational projects for motorways of the sea;

grant a  "European interest" label to these projects giving them priority to use
the Community resources available in accordance with the rules  applicable to

1

2

3

COM(2001) 544.
COM(2002) 542.
See http://europa.eu.int/comm/ten/transport/revision/hlg_en.htm.

3

                                                
the Community financial instruments for the networks; in particular, this label
provides  for  the  Member  States  to  carry  out,  prior  to  the  authorisation  of
projects,  coordinated  evaluation  and  public  consultation  procedures  or  a
common transnational enquiry in the case of certain cross-border sections;

introduce a mechanism aimed at closer operational and financial coordination
between the Member States for certain projects or groups of projects declared
to be of European interest, with the designation of "European Coordinators";

extend the deadline for completing the trans-European network to 2020; this is
in view of the time which has passed since the initial proposal was presented in
October 2001 and also the time it will take to build the transport infrastructure.

– 

– 

The Commission stresses that this addition to the proposal goes hand in hand with a
parallel proposal aimed at amending Regulation (EC) No 2236/95 in order to allow
Community co-financing of up to 30% of the cost of the cross-border sections of the
projects declared to be of European interest and identified in this proposal.

These  two  proposals  form  part  of  the  growth  initiative  announced  by  the
Commission  in  July  2003.  In  particular,  the  proposal  for  a  decision  identifies
investments in projects of European interest of in the order of EUR 220 billion up to
2020 – of which EUR 80 billion by 2006 – which could be mobilised efficiently and
rapidly  to  stimulate  the  economy,  if  backed  up  by  the  political  will.  By  proposing
other  longer-term  investments  which  could  improve  future  growth  potential,  it
enables investors, both public and private, to plan ahead for their contributions. An
interim report on the growth initiative is being drafted parallel to these proposals for
the  European  Council  in  October,  while  a  detailed  analysis  of  the  investment
priorities  and  timing  implied  by  this  initiative  will  be  submitted  to  the  European
Council in December 2003 based  on the joint  work by  the  Commission  and  by the
European Investment Bank. Since development of the trans-European network is one
of  the  cornerstones  of  this  initiative,  these  two  proposals,  which  follow  up  the
proposal  submitted  on  23 July 2003  on  taxation  of  heavy  goods  vehicles  (the
"Eurovignette" Directive), are a key component of the system to be put in place.

2.

PRIORITY PROJECTS FOR AN ENLARGED UNION

The  trans-European  network  is  made  up  of  numerous  projects  of  common  interest.
However, some projects stand out as a result of their European dimension, whether
because of their scale or because of their role in developing transnational trade and
significantly contributing to territorial cohesion and to the concentration of traffic on
more environmentally friendly modes of transport.

Special  efforts  are  required  at  Community  level  to  coordinate  and,  if  necessary,
financially support such projects in order to ensure the coherent development of the
network and to promote a common vision of the major routes amongst national and
regional  authorities  and  operators  at  various  levels  on  the  trans-European  network.
This is the aim of the "priority project" label.

4

2.1

A selective methodology

It  is  essential  to  have  a  rigorous  and  clear  methodology  for  choosing  the  priority
projects. The High-Level Group has established a methodology, set out in detail in its
report, which is based on two stages:

– 

– 

The first stage aims to ensure the overall coherence of the projects, the maturity
of  the  projects  and  the  commitment  on  the  part  of  the  Member  States
concerned to carrying them out. This last point is particularly important given
the scale of the territorial and financial impact for the Member States which the
projects cross through.

In  the  second  stage,  the  contribution  of  the  projects  to  three  essential
Community policy  objectives is  assessed: their added value in  facilitating  the
mobility of goods and people between the Member States, their contribution to
territorial  cohesion  and  their  contribution  to  sustainable  development  of
transport.

This  methodology  has  proved  its  worth  in  the  work  of  the  High-Level  Group.
The proposal therefore introduces it in Article 19.

The  priority  projects  on  which  work  is  to  start  before  2010  will  be  adopted  after
examining  these  various  criteria  within  the  framework  of  this  decision,  i.e.  by
codecision of the European Parliament and of the Council, acting on a proposal from
the Commission, in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 251 of the
Treaty.

2.2

A limited number of new projects

The  High-Level  Group  applied  the  methodology  to  examine  about  one  hundred
projects. With the agreement of the vast majority of its members, this resulted in the
Group  accepting  a  limited  number  of  new  priority  projects  on  which  work  should
start before 2010 (list 1 in the Group's report). The High-Level Group also confirmed
the  interest  of  the  projects  endorsed  by  the  Essen  and  Dublin  European  Councils
(list 0 in the Group’s report).

The  Commission  examined  the  results  of  this  work  and  organised  a  public
consultation based on the High-Level Group's report (see Chapter 4). This evaluation
produced  no  new  information  which  is  likely  to  call  the  Group's  choices  into
question, in view of the fact that:

– 

– 

the inclusion of a project in the list of priority projects in no way prejudges the
variant chosen at the end of the environmental impact assessment procedures.
Furthermore, the Commission ensures that the Member  States  correctly apply
the  directives  in  this  field.  In  the  case  of  the  candidate  countries,  the
Commission  considers  that  the  minimum  requirements  provided  for  in  these
directives  should  apply  to  the  trans-European  network  projects,  including  the
priority  projects.  Consequently,  possible  Community  funding  is,  in  practice,
dependent on compliance with these minimum requirements;

the  inclusion  of  a  project  in  the  list  of  priority  projects  in  no  way  prejudges
eligibility  for  possible  Community  funding.  The  priority  projects  are  in  fact
groups of projects located on the same route. The eligibility of these separate

5

parts, which each correspond to a series of economically indivisible tasks with
clearly  defined  objectives,  depends  inter  alia  on  the  confirmation  of  their
potential economic viability.

in
In  addition  to  the  priority  projects  presented  by  the  Commission 
October 2001  and  approved  by  the  European  Parliament  at  first  reading  on
30 May 2002, the Commission therefore proposes all of the projects put on list 1
in the High-Level Group’s report following the application of the above method
as new priority projects in Annex III.

The Commission also considers that three railway projects (No 27, 28 and 29) which
were discussed at length but not selected by the High-Level Group meet the criteria
laid  down  and  should  be  included  on  the  list  in  Annex  III  in  view  of  the  clear
commitment on the part of the States concerned and of their European added value.
Following presentation of the report of the High-Level Group, the Commission has
received solid proof at the highest political level of the commitment on the part of the
Member States concerned to start the work by 2010.

In  order  to  facilitate  cooperation  with  regard  to  monitoring  these  projects,  the  new
projects  are  grouped  together  along  the  main  axes  which  link  the  capitals  of  the
enlarged Union or which extend projects already proposed in October 2001.

This  Annex  therefore  includes  projects  located  in  countries  which  are  about  to
become Member States of the European Union. It should be noted that the Accession
Treaties include the network of these countries in the guidelines, in particular in the
maps in Annex I, but do not identify priority projects in these countries.

2.3

Declaration of European interest

Experience shows that the priority projects face a series of problems stemming from
lack of funding or organisation of the coordination required between Member States
because  of  their  transnational  dimension  or  the  separate  project  authorisation
procedures.

To help to solve them, this decision declares the priority projects to be of European
interest.  In  the  White  Paper  on  European  transport  policy,  the  Commission  had
already  put  forward  the  idea  of  a  Declaration  of  European  Interest  "where  specific
infrastructure is regarded as being of strategic importance to the smooth functioning
of  the  internal  market  and  would  help  reduce  congestion,  but  is  of  less  interest  at
national or local level. Article 19a gives details of the effects of such declarations of
European interest:

1.

Steps must be taken to ensure that the Community puts into action the priorities
which  it  chooses.  Naturally,  therefore,  the  aid  granted  to  the  trans-European
networks,  from  the  cohesion  fund  and  from  the  instrument  for  structural
policies for pre-accession must give priority to these projects, while complying
with the specific rules and criteria for each of these instruments4.

4

The  High-Level  Group  recommended  that  Community  funding  from  the  various  existing  financial
instruments should be concentrated on the priority projects.

6

                                                
2.

3.

4.

Given the adverse impact which delays or abandonment of certain stretches can
have  on  the  profitability  of  the  work  undertaken  by  other  States  on  the  same
route and on the financial interests of the Community, a mechanism should be
introduced  to  give  the  Member  States  an  incentive  to  keep  to  the  timetables
agreed  in  the  guidelines  decision.  Article  19a  therefore  introduces  the
possibility that the Commission could decide to withdraw the declaration as a
project of European interest in the event of  delays, after  hearing the views of
the States concerned on the reasons for the delays.

In order to facilitate future revisions of the guidelines and, if necessary, of the
list  of  priority  projects,  and  also  to  improve  the  procedures  for  evaluating
projects,  Article  19a  therefore  introduces  new  provisions  calling  on  the
Member States to carry out a posteriori evaluations of each priority project and
to inform the Commission of the results.

Considering  the  risks  that  the  separate  national  evaluation  and  public
consultation  procedures  in  the  Member  States  prior  to  the  authorisation  of
projects could create, the Member States are called on to carry out coordinated
or single procedures in the case of cross-border sections (see Chapter 4).

Finally,  the  parallel  proposal  amending  Regulation  (EC)  No  2236/95  opens  up  the
possibility, for  the cross-border sections  of  the  projects declared  to  be  of  European
interest identified in this proposal, of Community co-financing at a rate of up to 30%
of  the  cost  of  projects.  Annex  III  to  this  decision  gives  an  indicative  list  of  the
cross-border sections particularly eligible for higher support of this type.

3.

THE MECHANISM FOR SUPPORTING MOTORWAYS OF THE SEA

The new Annex III includes projects on the development of "motorways of the sea".
The aim is to make new transnational maritime links as important as motorways and
railways  in  the  trans-European  network.  These  maritime  routes  will  improve  links
with  countries  isolated  by  natural  barriers  and  with  island  and  other  peripheral
countries.

The report of the High-Level Group suggests a number of measures which are likely
to encourage the rapid development of such routes by consolidating freight on a few
maritime  routes  starting  from  a  limited  number  of  ports  in  order  to  increase  their
potential viability. These measures include:

– 

– 

– 

simplifying  customs  and  administrative  checks,  as  is  already  the  case  at
intra-Community  borders  on  European  land  motorways,  and  developing
electronic reporting for port authorities5;

providing  port  facilities  preferably  reserved  for  this  activity  (ro-ro  terminals,
logistics  equipment,  parking  spaces,  facilities  for  lorry  drivers)  and  direct
access to ports (including open rail access);

ensuring  navigability  throughout  the  year,  especially  in  the  Baltic  Sea  in
winter.

5

As already provided for in Article 15 of the 1996 Decision.

7

                                                
The map below, which shows the volume of freight (excluding petroleum products)
transported  in  the  maritime  regions  identified  in  Annex  III,  illustrates  the  potential
for consolidating freight.

Freight flows  (excl. Crude Oil) Sea Motorways  Bas eyear 2000
(million tons)

> 300
200 to 300
100 to 200
< 100

In  practice,  incentives  to  develop  new  transnational  maritime  links  should  take  the
form  of  supporting  or  subsidising  the  accompanying  measures  described  above,
including giving aid to start up new services.

Apart  from  the  action  already  begun  under  the  Marco  Polo  programme,  the
new Article 12a includes the legal provisions necessary to allow Community aid
for such incentives in the framework of the trans-European network.

8

The procedure proposed for identifying projects eligible  for  such aid aims to  avoid
distortion of competition. The projects must involve two Member States and should
combine public and private financing in accordance with a procedure which ensures
that  aid  from  national  budgets,  if  necessary  with  Community  aid,  is  granted
following a  tendering  process.  In practice, the  procedure  proposed  involves  several
stages:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

In  order  to  be  eligible  as  projects  of  common  interest,  projects  should  be
proposed by at least two Member States, should concern the launching of new
regular lines between two Member States, should concern the strict minimum
number  of  ports  required  and  should  alleviate  road  traffic  congestion  on  the
major  routes  or,  in  the  case  of  peripheral  or  island  Member  States,  improve
access to them.

The Member States concerned will jointly launch a tendering process (calls for
proposals)  in  order  to  grant  public  aid  to  packages  of  projects  which  include
access infrastructure, port infrastructure, electronic management systems or aid
for the service and which will improve the economic viability of the new lines.

The most difficult step is choosing the ports that could be part of a motorway
of the sea. If the choice at national level proves to be too difficult, the Member
States  concerned  will  be  able  to  organise  a  call  for  proposals  aimed  at  both
ports  and  maritime  companies.  The  ports  will  thus  be  chosen  on  the  basis  of
proposals  made  by  interested  consortia  and  bringing  together  both  maritime
companies  and  port  authorities.  The  call  for  proposals  must  not  specify  the
ports  concerned  but  must  be  designed  for  comparable  ports  so  that  final
selection of the proposals will not be influenced by the location of the ports.

The projects chosen jointly by two Member States at the end of these calls for
proposals  are  submitted  by  the  Member  States  concerned  to  the  Commission
for approval.

After it has examined several things, including the compatibility of the planned
aid with the guidelines on state aid in maritime transport, the Commission will
decide if the project may be designated as a project of common interest. Once
it has been designated as a project of common interest it becomes eligible for
Community co-financing.

4.

INCREASED COORDINATION BETWEEN MEMBER STATES

As well as the importance of the Community targeting its efforts on projects with a
distinct  European  dimension,  coordinating  the  planning  and  investments  of  the
Member  States  is  equally  important  for  the  coherent  development  of  the
trans-European network.

The  Member  States  have  their  own  planning  systems,  provide  most  of  the  public
financing, canvass private investors, manage the complex administrative procedures
prior to construction authorisations, and supervise the awarding of contracts and the
approval of work, etc.

9

The fact that the Member States carry out all these tasks separately and it is difficult
to  coordinate  them  between  several  Member  States,  in  addition  to  the  lack  of
financing,  often  delays  completion  of  the  transnational  links,  in  particular  their
cross-border section. As a result of not making the most of economies of scale, the
is
profitability  of 
diminished.

investment  for  society  (socio-economic  profitability) 

the 

As  stated  in  the  "Charter  of  Naples",  which  was  drawn  up  following  discussions
between Transport Ministers on 5 July 2003, the revision of the guidelines should be
used  as  an  opportunity  to  introduce  new  mechanisms  for  coordination  between  the
Member States.

The  Commission  communication  "Developing  the  trans-European  network"6  and
more recently the report of the High-Level Group have already examined the various
possible options for increasing this coordination, which is made even more difficult
by  the  fact  that  the  principle  of  the  territoriality  of  financing  and  of  project
supervision is deeply entrenched. Following this examination, and after an exchange
of  information  with  the  Member  States  in  the  Committee  referred  to  in  Article  18,
this proposal suggests two responses:

4.1.

European coordinators for individual projects or groups of projects

The  profitability  of  investments,  which  depends  on  future  traffic  flows  and
economies  of  scale,  is  closely  linked  to  the  sequence  of  putting  into  operation  the
various sections on the route in question. Experience shows that the socio-economic
profitability of major projects on the trans-European network has been disappointing
owing  to  delays  in  the  work  on  other  projects  located  on  the  same  trans-European
route,  particularly  projects  in  other  countries.  As  a  result  of  not  knowing  the  exact
intentions of  their neighbours, Member States often postpone investment decisions,
even  those  which  are  most  likely  to  have  high  European  added  value.  Investments
therefore have to be better synchronised along the transnational routes.

For  some  projects  declared  to  be  of  European  interest,  or  groups  of  projects,
located on the major European routes (corridors), it should be possible to create
a coordination team, in which the Community would take part, for the duration
of the priority projects located on the route. Such an approach, to be decided on
a  case-by-case  basis,  will  require  the  cooperation  of  the  Member  States
concerned, as set out in the new Article 17a which this proposal introduces.

Article  155  of  the  EC  Treaty  gives  the  Commission  the  role  of  taking  any  useful
initiatives to promote coordination between Member States. It should therefore be in
the  remit  of  the  Commission  to  designate  a  personality,  in  agreement  with  the
Member States concerned, to be responsible for this coordination.

This  European  coordinator,  designated  for  a  project  or  group  of  projects,  would
encourage  cooperation  with  users  and  operators,  promote  the  projects  amongst
private investors and financial institutions, including the Community, and ensure that
the necessary monitoring is carried out in order to keep the Community informed of
progress  so  that,  if  necessary,  measures  can  be  taken  to  overcome  any  possible

6

COM(2003) 132.

10

                                                
difficulties.  The  European  coordinators  will  act  in  the  name  and  on  behalf  of  the
Commission.

The  European  coordinators  will  be  designated  by  decisions  adopted  by  the
Commission,  after  consulting  the  Member  States  concerned.  These  individual
decisions will specify how the coordinator is to operate. These arrangements will be
decided  case  by  case  and  will  therefore  vary,  depending  on  the  circumstances.
Designation of a coordinator remains only one possibility and will be reserved only
for  certain  projects  or  groups  of  projects,  depending  on  the  coordination  problems
encountered.

The  Commission  plans  to  assess  the  operation  of  these  European  coordinators  as
quickly as possible. In the light of this experience, it could consider developing them
into  one  or  more  common  structures,  responsible  for  promoting  projects  amongst
private and public investors, and even carrying out projects. These structures would
be  similar  to  those  mentioned  by  the  Commission  in  the  abovementioned
communication "Developing the trans-European transport network".

4.2

Coordinated procedures prior to the authorisation of projects

In view of the difficulties, in the case of certain projects, caused by Member States
separately  carrying  out  evaluation  and  public  consultation  procedures  prior  to  the
administrative  authorisations  to  start  a  project,  the  High-Level  Group  raised  the
possibility of allowing a single  enquiry procedure covering several  Member  States,
and not just the Member State promoting the project.

For cross-border sections which often come  up  against difficulties  created  by  these
separate  procedures,  "transnational"  commissions of enquiry  could be set  up  to  run
impact  assessment  studies  and  to  obtain  the  opinion  of  all  interested  parties  in  the
Member States concerned.

The Declaration of European Interest issued pursuant to this decision therefore
calls  on  the  Member  States  concerned  to  carry  out  coordinated  procedures  or
transnational  enquiries  in  the  case  of  cross-border  sections  which  are
technically and financially indivisible (paragraphs 8 and 9 of Article 19a).

Such  procedures,  complying  with  the  Community  directives  on  environmental
impact assessment, would offer several advantages:

– 

– 

A  coordinated  or  transnational  enquiry  organising  the  evaluation  and  public
consultation  procedures  in  the  various  States  concerned  rather  than  parallel
national  procedures which  are not  necessarily  coordinated;  in  particular,  such
an enquiry would offer a clear advantage in cases where a single promoter has
been designated to build a cross-border section.

A  coordinated  or  single  impact  assessment  study  for  the  whole  project.  This
will make it possible to take account of the effects, positive or negative, on all
the Member States concerned with the project in question and not just  on  the
State promoting the project. Such a study will make it very easy, for example,
to check that the traffic management and/or signalling systems on both sides of
the border are the same or at least interoperable.

11

– 

– 

– 

Teamwork  between  independent  experts  (investigators)  from  the  various
Member  States  concerned  who  would  be  responsible  for  drafting  a  single
opinion jointly or in coordinated fashion for the whole route, weighing up the
pros and cons of the project submitted to the enquiry.

Consistent treatment in terms of complying with certain Community directives
on environmental protection (in order to avoid a stack of national transposition
measures)  and  carrying  out  an  assessment  of  the  impact  on  sustainable
development.

Consultation  of  all  populations  concerned  in  several  Member  States,  in
accordance  with  the  various  directives  on  environmental  impact  assessment
and  the  Aarhus  Convention.  This  would  give  the  citizens  of  the  European
Union  equal  rights  to  information  on  a  transnational  project  and  the  same
opportunities to comment on the project in question.

The Member States concerned will be able to decide, subject to compliance with the
relevant Community directives on environmental protection, to develop coordinated
procedures  for  projects  declared  to  be  of  European  interest  plus  transnational
enquiries in the case of cross-border sections.

It must be stressed that the public consultation and evaluation methods used by the
Member  States  should  comply  with  the  Community  acquis  in  the  field  of
environmental impact assessments.

This consists, inter alia, of Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of projects and
the  successive  amendments  thereto7,  Directive  92/43/EC  on  the  conservation  of
fauna  and  flora,  the  Birds  Directive,  Directive  2001/42/EC  on  the  assessment  of
plans  and  programmes  and  Directive  2000/60/EC  establishing  a  framework  for
Community action in the field of water policy.

These directives apply to projects located on the territory of the Member States but
contain no specific provisions for cross-border projects which  would coordinate or,
possibly,  standardise  the  procedures  and  evaluations  carried  out  by  the  Member
States. The Commission intends to examine this issue in connection with application
of these directives and of this decision and, if necessary, to propose the appropriate
amendments.  It  is  therefore  essential  that  the  Member  States  concerned  inform  the
Commission  when  such  coordinated  procedures  or  transnational  enquiries  are
launched and of the results.

7

Including Directive 2003/35/EC which incorporates the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on public
access to environmental information.

12

                                                
5.

5.1

COMPONENTS OF IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Funding

The estimated amount of investment required to carry out all the projects declared to
be  of  European  interest  (projects  already  proposed  in  2001  plus  new  projects
proposed in this  decision) is around EUR  220  billion8,  i.e. close to 40%  more  than
was required to carry out the projects proposed in 2001 (see figure below). However,
this amount corresponds only to the projects declared to be of European interest. By
2020  the  total  cost  of  the  entire  trans-European  network,  including  the  projects  of
common  interest  not  declared  to  be  of  European  interest,  will  amount  to
EUR 600 billion9. The investment effort will be substantial, particularly in the short
and medium term (over EUR 80 billion by 2006).

Remaining Investment -
Remaining Investment -
Projects proposed in 2001 and New Projects
Projects proposed in 2001 and New Projects
(2003-2020, Meuro)
(2003-2020, Meuro)

30 000
30 000

25 000
25 000

20 000
20 000

15 000
15 000

10 000
10 000

New Projects
New Projects

5 000
5 000

2001 Projects
2001 Projects

-
-

20
20
03
03

20
20
04
04

20
20
05
05

20
20
06
06

20
20
07
07

20
20
08
08

20
20
09
09

20
20
10
10

20
20
11
11

20
20
12
12

20
20
13
13

20
20
14
14

20
20
15
15

20
20
16
16

20
20
17
17

20
20
18
18

20
20
19
19

20
20
20
20

8

9

Excluding the motorways of the sea.
2003 prices.

13

                                                
If the declaration of European interest is to be of practical relevance to citizens and
the economy, it will, therefore, be crucial that the States and the Community follow
up the growth initiative by adopting a consistent approach to improve and facilitate
the  investment  needed,  in  both  the  short  and  long  term,  as  indicated  in  the
transport
abovementioned  communication  "Developing 
network".

trans-European 

the 

In addition to participation by financial intermediaries, such as the private sector, to
encourage better management of costs and risks, it will be essential to obtain the best
mix of the three existing sources of funding, i.e. the national budgets, the Community
budget and resources generated by direct contributions from users:

– 

– 

– 

Funding from the national budgets will have a key role to play. The Member
States are therefore called on to adopt a policy in this field which is consistent
with the commitments given  under this  decision. The  Community budget can
exert  strong  leverage  in  this  context.  The  Commission  therefore  plans  to
examine the feasibility of a mechanism to reward projects which obtain a rapid
budget commitment from the Member States.

The resources available up to 2006 from the financial instruments for the trans-
European networks (TEN budget, Cohesion Fund and instrument for structural
policies for pre-accession) will have to focus on the projects declared to be of
European interest. In the case of the cross-border sections, the parallel proposal
opening up the possibility of aid of up to 30% of the cost of the project from
the trans-European networks budget should make it  easier  to  put  together  the
funding package.

The  contributions  from  users  are  inextricably  linked  to  the  charges  made  for
the  use  of  the  infrastructure  and  to  the  Community  rules  on  this  subject.
Beyond that, the amendments proposed on 23 July 2003 to Directive 99/62/EC
on taxation on heavy goods vehicles provide a basis for cross-financing under
certain circumstances.

Preliminary  simulations  by  the  Commission  based  on  the  characteristics  of  the
individual  projects  indicate  that  users  (including  the  abovementioned  regulatory
changes  on  charging  for  use10)  have  the  capacity  to  contribute  in  the  order  of
EUR 40 billion out of the total investment needed, i.e. this amount could potentially
be mobilised from private investors. In view of the inherent risks with projects of this
kind, granting loan guarantees will play a key role in mobilising this capital.

In any event, the  rest, i.e. almost EUR  180  billion,  will have to be financed by  the
national  and  Community  budgets.  This  gives  an  idea  of  the  scale  of  the  resources
which  will  be  needed,  notably  within  the  framework  of  the  forthcoming  financial
perspectives for the Community for the period after 2006.

5.2.

Economic, social and environmental impact

The High-Level Group has already carried out an initial examination of the projects
included in this proposal as projects declared to be of European interest as well as the
benefits to be expected from closer coordination between Member States.

10

Including cross-financing.

14

                                                
According  to  this  preliminary  analysis,  these  priority  projects  offer  strong
socio-economic  advantages  in  terms  of  lower  costs  (internal  and  external),  higher
quality transport and regional development. The report's technical annex gives details
of  the  characteristics,  expected  benefits  and  progress  of  each  of  the  new  projects
included in this proposal11.

In  the  course  of  the  impact  assessment  made  by  the  Commission12,  one  of  the
studies13  conducted  suggested  that  carrying  out  these  projects,  if  coordinated  with
measures  to  promote  intermodality  and  charging  for  the  use  of  infrastructure,  as
proposed in the White Paper on European transport policy, would produce significant
time  savings  for  inter-regional  traffic  flows  alone,  particularly  in  the  candidate
countries, which could add up to almost EUR 8 billion per year.

The  package  of  measures  could  reduce  CO2  emissions  generated  by  inter-regional
traffic  flows  by  17  million  tonnes  per  year  compared  with  the  trend  scenario  and
reduce emissions of other pollutants, such as NOX.

There are also other advantages such as a reduction in road congestion by up to 14%
and improved safety reducing the number of road accidents. The package would also
contribute  to  more  balanced  spatial  development  since  access  to  all  the  candidate
countries,  the  Iberian  peninsula,  the  Nordic  countries,  northern  Greece  and  Ireland
would be significantly increased14.

These  projects  would  contribute  to  the  sustainable  development  of  transport  at
Community  level  by  promoting  intermodality.  According  to  the  abovementioned
study, these projects, accompanied by the measures mentioned above, would stabilise
the share of road transport in the enlarged Union of 27 countries.

Moreover,  based  on  the  abovementioned  study,  the  Commission  noted  that  the
priority projects were located on major routes of the trans-European network, which
will  probably  experience  a  high  volume  of  international  traffic.  Their  European
added value, as they boost connections between national networks and transnational
trade  and  thereby  dynamise  the  internal  market,  may  therefore  be  considered
particularly high.

Unlike  many  other  sectors,  investment  projects  in  the  transport  sector  have  a  life
span of many decades and will benefit future generations. Since these projects boost
the growth potential in the long term, dynamise the internal market and contribute to
sustainable  development,  they  can  be  regarded  as  productive  investments  with
positive repercussions for the whole Union and its competitiveness.

Other studies to estimate the macroeconomic impact, under way in connection with
the growth initiative, already suggest that completion of the priority projects would
lead  to  a  significant  increase  in  general  prosperity,  making  productivity  gains

11

12

13

14

See http://europa.eu.int/comm/ten/transport/revision/hlg_en.htm
See SEC(2003) 1060.
See  the  study  “Scenarios,  traffic  forecast  and  analysis  of  corridors  of  the  trans-European  transport
network” study, Phase I, currently being published. See http://www.nea.nl/ten-stac.
See  the  study  “Scenarios,  traffic  forecast  and  analysis  of  corridors  of  the  trans-European  transport
network”, Phase I, currently being published. See http://www.nea.nl/ten-stac.

15

                                                
possible, as well as the creation of new permanent jobs in addition to the temporary
jobs created directly by the construction works.

5.3.

Outside consultations

As  soon  as  it  was  available,  the  Commission  published  the  High-Level  Group’s
report and invited interested parties to make their point of view known. In addition to
the  opinion  given  by  the  Energy  and  Transport  Forum  on  10  September,  the
Commission  received  76  contributions  from  organisations  representing  operators,
infrastructure managers, industries, regional associations and environmental groups.
To sum up, on the whole the contributions show significant support for15:

– 

– 

– 

the  objective  of  the  sustainable  development  of  transport,  particularly  by
promoting the infrastructure required for intermodality in the railways, inland
waterways and maritime transport, without, however, neglecting the quality of
the road network in the process;

the  idea  of  developing  the  motorways  of  the  sea,  which  implies  defining
procedures for putting these projects into practice;

the idea of closer cooperation between the Member States along corridors and
of  monitoring  projects,  improving  evaluation  procedures  and  increasing  the
financial support  available from the  Community,  particularly for  cross-border
projects.

The reactions received generally underline the complementary nature of investments
under the trans-European network policy and of the transport management measures
under  the  Common  Transport  Policy,  such  as  opening  up  the  railway  networks  to
competition and charging for the use of infrastructure.

With  regard  to  certain  sections  of  the  priority  projects,  some  non-governmental
organisations  have  expressed  their  dissatisfaction  to  the  Commission  regarding  the
way  in  which  environmental  impact  assessment  procedures  are  carried  out  by  the
Member  States  concerned,  particularly  on  natural  sites.  Several  regions  have  also
proposed  additional  priority  projects  not  proposed  to  the  High-Level  Group  by  the
States or not selected by the High-Level Group.

15

See http://europa.eu.int/comm/ten/transport/revision/revision_1692_96_en.htm

16

                                                
2001/0229 (COD)

Proposal for a

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

amending the amended proposal for a

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

amending Decision No 1692/96/EC on Community guidelines for the development of the
trans-European transport network

(Text with EEA relevance)

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the first
paragraph of Article 156 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission1

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee2

Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions3,

Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 251 of the Treaty4,

Whereas:

(1) 

Decision No 1692/96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council5, as amended
by  Decision  No  1346/2001/EC6, 
the
trans-European transport network, identifying projects of common interest which must
contribute  to  development  of  the  network  and,  in  Annex  III,  identifying  the  specific
projects to which the European Council attached particular importance at its meetings
in Essen in 1994 and in Dublin in 1996.

laid  down  Community  guidelines  for 

(2) 

The  forthcoming  enlargement  of  the  Union  and  the  objective  of  shifting  the  balance
between modes plus the fact that it could take over ten years to complete some of the

1

2

3

4

5

6

OJ C
OJ C
OJ C

OJ L 228, 9.9.1996, p. 1.
OJ L 185, 6.7.2001, p. 1.

17

                                                
(3) 

(4) 

priority  projects  call  for  re-examination  of  the  list  of  projects  in  Annex  III  to
Decision No 1692/96/EC.

2001 

2  October 

On 
to
Decision No 1692/96/EC to replace Annex III by a list of priority projects containing
the  specific  projects  not  yet  completed  to  which  the  European  Council  attached
particular importance at its meetings in Essen and in Dublin, plus six new projects.

the  Commission 

amendment 

proposed 

an 

In its report submitted to the Commission on 30 June 2003, the High-Level Group on
the trans-European transport network (hereinafter "the High-Level Group") identified
a limited number of priority projects by using a methodology based on criteria which
include,  in  particular,  examining  their  potential  economic  viability,  the  degree  of
commitment  on  the  part  of  the  Member  States  concerned  to  keeping  to  a  timetable
agreed in advance, their impact on the mobility of goods and persons between Member
States,  and  their  impact  on  cohesion  and  sustainable  development.  The  priority
projects  identified  by  the  High-Level  Group  include  the  projects  proposed  by  the
Commission  on  2  October  2001,  plus  new  projects,  including  projects  in  the  new
Member States which will join the Union on 1 May 2004.

(5) 

There is a need for limited extension of the list of priority projects, for declaring them
to be of European interest and for introducing mechanisms to encourage coordination
between Member  States  in  order  to facilitate  completion  of  those projects within the
desired timetable.

(6)  Mechanisms should be put in  place to support  the development  of motorways of the
sea between Member States in order to reduce road congestion and improve access to
peripheral  and  island  countries.  Establishment  of  such  mechanisms  backed  up,
inter alia, by tendering procedures must in no way prejudice the Community rules on
competition or on public procurement.

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

Closer  coordination  between  the  States  involved  in  projects  on  the  same  route  is
necessary to improve the return  on  investments  and  to  make  it  easier  to  synchronise
them and to put together the funding package.

A  posteriori  evaluation  of  the  priority  projects  will  facilitate  future  revisions  of  the
guidelines  and  of  the  list  of  priority  projects  and  will  help  to  improve  the  a  priori
evaluation methods practised by the Member States.

A  situation  where  national  procedures  for  the  assessment  of  the  environmental  and
socio-economic impact of a project are carried out separately by Member States may
prove to be inappropriate to the transnational dimension of the projects declared to be
of  European  interest.  In  order  to  resolve  this,  coordinated  evaluation  and  public
consultation  procedures  or  transnational  enquiry  procedures  covering  the  different
Member  States  concerned  and  focusing  on  the  socio-economic  and  environmental
aspects  should  be  developed,  in  addition  to  joint  evaluation  methods.  These
coordinated  or  transnational  enquiry  procedures  must  apply  without  prejudice  to  the
obligations imposed by the Community legislation on environmental protection.

(10)  The  Commission  has  conducted  an  analysis  of  the  impact  of  the  recommendations
made  by  the  High  Level  Group.  The  results  show  that  carrying  out  the  projects
identified  by  the  Group,  combined  with  several  of  the  measures  under  the  Common
Transport  Policy,  such  as  charging  for  the  use  of  infrastructure  and  opening  up  rail

18

freight  to  competition,  would  produce  significant  benefits  in  terms  of  time  savings,
lower  emissions  and  less  congestion,  better  access  to  peripheral  countries  and  to  the
new Member States, and greater general well-being.

(11)  The  amended  proposal  for  a  Decision  amending  Decision  No  1692/96/EC  should

therefore be amended accordingly,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Decision No 1692/96/EC is amended as follows:

(1)

(2)

In Article 2(1), the date "2010" is replaced by "2020".

In Article 3, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

"2. The  transport  infrastructure  shall  comprise  road,  rail  and  inland  waterway
networks, motorways  of the  sea,  seaports  and  inland  waterway  ports,  airports
and other interconnection points between modal networks."

(3)

The following Article 12a is inserted:

"Article 12a
Motorways of the sea

1.

2.

3.

The trans-European network of motorways of the sea shall aim to concentrate
flows  of  freight  on  a  few  sea  routes  in  order  to  establish  new  viable,  regular
and frequent maritime links for the transport of goods between Member States
in order to reduce road congestion and improve access to peripheral and island
States.

The trans-European network of motorways of the sea shall consist of facilities
and infrastructure concerning at least two ports in two different Member States.
These  facilities  and  infrastructure  shall  include  the  port  facilities,  electronic
logistics  management  systems  and  administrative  and  customs  procedures,  as
well as infrastructure for direct land and sea access, including winter access, to
the ports used by the links referred to in paragraph 1.

The projects of common interest of the trans-European network of motorways
of  the  sea  shall  be  proposed  by  at  least  two  Member  States.  The  projects
proposed  shall  combine  the  public  and  private  sectors  in  accordance  with
procedures  allowing,  before  aid  is  granted  from  the  national  budgets
supplemented, if necessary, by aid from the Community, a tendering process in
one of the following forms:

(a)

a  public  call  for  proposals  organised  jointly  by  the  Member  States
concerned, intended to establish new links from the category A port, as
defined  in  Article  12(2),  which  they  select  in  advance  within  each
maritime region, as defined in project No 21 in Annex III;

19

(b)

insofar  as  the  location  of  the  ports  is  comparable,  a  public  call  for
proposals  organised  jointly  by  the  Member  States  concerned  and
targeting  consortia  bringing  together  at  least  shipping  companies  and
ports located in one of the maritime regions, as defined in project No 21
in Annex III.

4.

The  projects  of  common  interest  shall  focus  on  facilities  and  infrastructure
which  make  up  the  network  of  motorways  of  the  sea  and  may  include,  if
necessary, start-up aid for shipping companies operating the links referred to in
paragraph 1. Start-up aid shall be limited to two years and shall be granted only
if there are financial obstacles to starting up a project. The aid may not exceed
the minimum estimated amount required to start up the links concerned.

5.

The  projects  of  common  interest  shall  be  submitted  to  the  Commission  for
approval."

(4)

The following Section 10a is inserted:

"SECTION 10a
COORDINATION BETWEEN THE MEMBER STATES

Article 17a
European Coordinator

1.

2.

3.

In  order  to  facilitate  the  coordinated  implementation  of  certain  projects  or
sections  of  projects  amongst  the  projects  declared  to  be  of  European  interest
referred to in Article 19a, the Commission may designate, after consulting the
Member  States  concerned,  a  person  called  the  "European  Coordinator".  The
Coordinator  shall  act  in  the  name  and  on  behalf  of  the  Commission.  The
mission  of  the  Coordinator  shall  normally  cover  a  single  project  but  may,  if
necessary, be extended to other projects located on the same route.

The  European  Coordinator  shall  be  chosen,  in  particular,  on  the  basis  of
experience of the European institutions and knowledge of issues relating to the
financing  and  the  socio-economic  and  environmental  evaluation  of  major
projects.

The Commission decision designating the European Coordinator shall specify
how the Coordinator is to perform his tasks.

4.

The European Coordinator shall:

(a)

(b)

promote  joint  methods  for  the  evaluation  of  projects,  advise  project
promoters  on  the  financial  package  for  the  projects,  canvass  potential
private  investors  and  may  give  an  opinion  on  issues  relating  to  the
operation of the networks;

draw  up  a  report  every  year  for  the  Commission  regarding  progress
achieved in the implementation of the projects for which the Coordinator
is responsible, new regulatory or other developments which could affect
the characteristics of the projects and any difficulties and obstacles which

20

may  result  in  a  significant  delay  in  relation  to  the  dates  indicated  in
Annex III;

(c)

contribute  to  the  dialogue  with  operators,  transport  users,  regional  and
local  authorities  and  representatives  of  civil  society  with  a  view  to
gaining  fuller  knowledge  of  demand  for  transport  services,  of  the
constraints and of the service parameters required to optimise the use of
the infrastructure being financed.

5.

6.

The Member States concerned shall cooperate with the European Coordinator
and  give  the  Coordinator  the  information  required  to  carry  out  the  tasks
referred to in paragraph 4.

The Commission may  request the opinion  of the  European Coordinator when
examining  applications  for  Community  funding  for  projects  or  groups  of
projects for which the European Coordinator is responsible."

(5)

In Article 18, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

"1. The  Member  States  shall  inform  the  Commission  of  the  draft  national  plans
and programmes which they are drawing up with a view to development of the
trans-European  transport  network,  in  particular  with  regard  to  the  projects
declared  to  be  of  European  interest  referred  to  in  Article  19a,  as  well  as  the
national  plans  and  programmes  which  have  been  adopted.  Once  adopted,  the
Member  States  shall  send  the  national  plans  and  programmes  to  the
Commission for information."

(6)

Article 19 is replaced by the following:

"Article 19
Priority projects

1.

The  priority  projects  shall  be  projects  of  common  interest  referred  to  in
Article 7 where examination confirms that they:

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

aim to eliminate a bottleneck or complete a missing link on a major route
of the trans-European network, in particular projects which cross natural
barriers;

are  on  such  a  scale  that  long-term  planning  at  European  level  provides
significant added value;

demonstrate,  in  terms  of  the  overall  project,  potential  socio-economic
profitability  and  other  socio-economic  advantages,  as  well  as  a
commitment on the part of the Member States concerned to carrying out
the  studies  and  evaluation  procedures  in  time  to  complete  the  work  in
accordance with a date agreed in advance;

provide significant added value in facilitating the mobility of goods and
the
persons  between  Member  States, 
interoperability of national networks;

including  contributing 

to 

21

(e)

(f)

contribute  to  the  territorial  cohesion  of  the  Union  by  integrating  the
networks of the new Member States and improving connections with the
peripheral regions;

contribute  to  sustainable  development  of  transport  by  improving  safety
and reducing environmental damage caused by transport, in particular by
promoting  a  modal  shift  towards  railways,  intermodal  transport,  inland
waterways and maritime transport.

2.

3.

The  priority  projects  on  which  work  is  due  to  start  before  2010,  the  sections
thereof  and  the  dates  agreed  for  completing  the  work  referred  to  in
paragraph 1(c) are identified in Annex III.

By  2010  the  Commission  shall  draft  a  progress  report  and,  if  necessary,
propose  amendments  to  the  list  of  priority  projects  identified  in  Annex  III  in
line with paragraph 1 of this Article."

(7)

The following Article 19a is inserted:

"Article 19a
Declaration of European interest

1.

The  priority  projects  identified  in  Annex  III  are  declared  to  be  of  European
interest.

2. When submitting  their  projects  under  the  Cohesion  Fund,  in  accordance  with
Article 10 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1164/94*, the Member States shall
give appropriate priority to the projects declared to be of European interest.

3. When  submitting  their  projects  under  the  budget  for  the  trans-European
networks,  in  accordance  with  Articles  9  and  10  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)
No 2236/95**, the Member States shall give appropriate priority to the projects
declared to be of European interest.

4.

5.

6.

The  Commission  shall  encourage  the  Member  States  to  take  into  account  the
projects declared to be of European interest when planning the programming of
the Structural Funds, in particular in regions covered by Objective 1.

The  Commission  shall  ensure  that  the  countries  qualifying  for  the  instrument
for  structural  policies  for  pre-accession  give  appropriate  priority,  when
submitting  their  projects  under  that  instrument  in  accordance  with  Articles  2
and 7 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1267/1999***, to the projects declared to
be of European interest.

If there is or will be a significant delay in starting work on one of the projects
declared  to  be  of  European  interest  in  relation  to  the  deadline  of  2010,  the
Commission shall ask the Member States concerned to give the reasons for the
delay  within  three  months.  After  receiving  and  examining  the  reply  from  the
Member  States  concerned,  the  Commission  may,  in  order  to  protect  the
financial  interests  of  the  Community  and  with  due  regard  to  the  principle  of
proportionality, decide to withdraw the classification of the project as a project
declared to be of European interest.

22

7.

8.

9.

Five years after the completion of a project declared to be of European interest
or of one of the sections thereof, the Member States concerned shall carry out
an assessment of its socio-economic impact and its impact on the environment,
including  its  impact  on  trade  between  Member  States,  on  territorial  cohesion
and on sustainable development. Member States shall inform the Commission
of the results of this assessment.

If a project is declared to be of European interest the Member States concerned
shall  carry  out,  for  each  section  of  the  project  in  question,  coordinated
evaluation  and  public  consultation  procedures  prior  to  granting  planning
permission.

If a project which is declared to be of European interest includes a cross-border
section which is technically and financially indivisible, the two Member States
concerned shall conduct a transnational enquiry with a view to evaluating the
cross-border  section  and  consulting  the  public  prior  to  granting  planning
permission.

10. The coordinated or transnational enquiry procedures referred to in paragraphs 8
and  9  shall  apply  without  prejudice  to  the  obligations  imposed  by  the
Community 
legislation  on  environmental  protection,  particularly  on
environmental impact assessment. The Member States concerned shall inform
the  Commission  when  such  coordinated  or  transnational  enquiry  procedures
are launched and of the results.

______________
*
**
***

OJ L 130, 25.4.1994, p. 1.
OJ L 228, 23.9.1995, p. 1.
OJ L 161, 26.6.1999, p. 73."

(8)

Annex III is amended as follows:

(a)

the title is by “Priority projects on which work is due to start before 2010”;

(b)

the content is amended as set out in the Annex to this Decision.

This Decision shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its  publication in
the Official Journal of the European Union.

Article 2

Article 3

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, […]

For the European Parliament
The President
[…]

For the Council
The President
[…]

23

ANNEX

The  list  of  priority  projects  contains,  in  addition  to  the  priority  projects  included  in  the
October  2001  Commission  proposal1  and  approved  by  the  European  Parliament  at  first
reading on 30 May 2002, the following new priority projects:

Extension  of  project  No  1  along  the  railway  axis  Berlin-Verona/Milano-
Bologna-Napoli-Messina-Palermo

– 

Rail/road bridge over the Strait of Messina (2015).

Extension  of  project  No  3  along  the  high-speed  railway  axes  of  south-west
Europe

– 

– 

– 

Lisboa/Porto-Madrid (2011);

Dax-Bordeaux (2020);

Bordeaux-Tours (2015).

Extension of project No 6 along the railway axis Lyon-Trieste/Koper-Ljubljana-
Budapest-Ukrainian border2

– 

– 

Venezia-Trieste/Koper-Divaca (2015);

Ljubljana-Budapest (2015).

Extension  of project No 7 along  the  motorway  axis  Igoumenitsa/Patra-Athina-
Sofia-Budapest

– 

Sofia-Kulata-Greek/Bulgarian border motorway (2010), with Promahon-Kulata
as cross-border section;

– 

Nadlac-Sibiu motorway (branch towards Bucuresti and Constanta) (2007).

Extension of project No 16 along the freight railway axis Sines-Madrid-Paris

– 

Railway line Sines-Badajoz (2010).

Extension  of  project  No  17  along  the  railway  axis  Paris-Strasbourg-Stuttgart-
Wien-Bratislava

– 

Strasbourg-Stuttgart (2015) with the Kehl bridge as cross-border section;

–  Wien-Bratislava (2010), cross-border section.

1

2

COM(2001) 544.
Parts of this route correspond to pan-European Corridor V.

24

                                                
Extension  of  project  No  18  along  the  Rhine/Meuse-Main-Danube  inland
waterway axis3

– 

Rhine-Meuse (2019) with the lock of Lanaye as cross-border section;

–  Wien-Bratislava (2015), cross-border section;

– 

– 

Palkovicovo-Mohàcs (2014);

Bottlenecks in Romania and Bulgaria (2011).

Extension of project No 20 along the Fehmarn Belt railway axis

– 

– 

– 

Railway line for access in Denmark from Öresund (2015);

Railway line for access in Germany from Hannover (2015);

Railway line Hannover-Hamburg/Bremen (2015).

Project No 21: Motorways of the sea

Projects of common interest identified in accordance with Article 12a and concerning
one of the following motorways of the sea:

–  Motorway  of  the  Baltic  Sea  (linking  the  Baltic  Sea  Member  States  with

Member States in Central and Western Europe) (2010);

–  Motorway of the sea of western Europe (leading from the Iberian peninsula via

the Atlantic Arc to the North Sea and the Irish Sea) (2010);

–  Motorway of the sea of south-east Europe (connecting the Adriatic Sea to the

Ionian Sea and the Eastern Mediterranean to include Cyprus) (2010);

–  Motorway  of 

the  sea  of  south-west  Europe  (western  Mediterranean),
connecting  Spain,  France,  Italy  and  including  Malta,  and  linking  with  the
motorway of the sea of south-east Europe (2010)4.

Project  No 
Nürnberg/Dresden5

22:  Railway 

axis  Athina-Sofia-Budapest-Wien-Praha-

– 

– 

– 

– 

Railway line Greek/Bulgarian border-Kulata-Sofia-Vidin/Calafat (2015);

Railway line Curtici-Brasov (towards Bucuresti and Constanta) (2010);

Railway line Budapest-Wien (2010), cross-border section;

Railway  line  Brno-Praha-Nürnberg  (2010),  with  Nürnberg-Praha  as  cross-
border section.

3

4

5

Part of this route corresponds to the definition of pan-European Corridor VII.
Including to the Black Sea.
This major route largely corresponds to the definition of pan-European Corridor IV.

25

                                                
Project No 23: Railway axis Gdansk-Warszawa-Brno/Bratislava-Wien6

– 

– 

– 

Railway line Gdansk-Warszawa-Katowice (2015);

Railway line Katowice-Brno-Breclav (2010);

Railway line Katowice-Zilina-Nove Mesto n.V. (2010).

Project No 24: Railway axis Lyon/Genova-Basel-Duisburg-
Rotterdam/Antwerpen

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

Lyon-Mulhouse-Mülheim7  (with  Mulhouse-Mülheim  as  cross-border  section)
(2018);

Genova-Milano/Novara-Swiss border (2013);

Basel-Karlsruhe (2015);

Frankfurt-Mannheim (2012);

Duisburg-Emmerich (2009);8

"Iron Rhine" Rheidt-Antwerpen (2010).

Project No 25: Motorway axis Gdansk-Brno/Bratislava-Wien9

– 

– 

– 

Gdansk-Katowice motorway (2010);

Katowice-Brno/Zilina motorway (2010), cross-border section;

Brno-Wien motorway (2009), cross-border section.

Project No 26: Railway/road axis Ireland/UK/continental Europe

– 

– 

– 

– 

Road/railway corridor linking Dublin with the North (Belfast-Larne) and South
(Cork) (2010)10;

Road/railway corridor Hull-Liverpool (2015);

Railway line Felixstowe-Nuneaton (2011);

Railway line Crewe-Holyhead (2008).

Project No 27: "Rail Baltica" railway axis Warszawa-Kaunas-Riga–Tallinn

–  Warszawa - Kaunas (2010);

– 

Kaunas - Riga (2014);

6

7

8

9

10

This major route largely corresponds to the definition of pan-European Corridor VI.
Including the “TGV Rhin-Rhône” minus the western branch.
Project No 5 (Betuwe line) links Rotterdam and Emmerich.
This major route largely corresponds to the definition of pan-European Corridor VI.
Including Essen project No 13 - road link Ireland/UK/Benelux.

26

                                                
– 

Riga - Tallinn (2016).

Projet  No 28:  Eurocaprail  on  the  Bruxelles-Luxembourg-Strasbourg  railway
axis

– 

Bruxelles-Luxembourg-Strasbourg (2012).

Projet No 29: Railway axis on the Ionian/Adriatic intermodal corridor

– 

– 

Kozani-Kalambaka-Igoumenitsa (2012);

Ioannina-Antirrio-Rio-Kalamata (2014).

The  date,  agreed  in  advance,  for  completing  the  work  is  shown  in  brackets.  The  dates  for
completing the work for projects 1 to 20 and the details of the sections are as indicated in the
High-Level Group’s report where these have actually been identified.

27