WRITTEN QUESTION E-3648/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Desire of international rail freight operators to replace national rail safety systems with the European standard ECTS.
Date: 2003-12-09
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: common transport policy, financing method, investment cost, rail transport, trans-European network, transport company, transport infrastructure, transport network, transport safety

C 78 E/620

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2004)

1.
The Commission is aware of the Grensmaas project that has as objectives ecological development,
gravel extraction and flood control. The Commission is equally aware of the fact that this project foresees,
inter alia, dredging works to be carried out in the Maas River.

2.
On the basis of a large number of complaints, the Commission has opened an infringement
procedure with regard to the Grensmaas project and has sent a letter of formal notice to the Dutch
government on 2 May 2003. In this letter of formal notice, the Commission explains that it considers that
the relationship between the Dutch authorities and those who are going to execute works in the
framework of the Grensmaas project gives rise to a public works contract in the meaning of the applicable
Union public procurement directives: such a contract should consequently be awarded in conformity with
Union legislation. The Commission does not dispose of any data according to which one can conclude that
the Grensmaas project has been delayed because of the ongoing infringement procedure. On the basis of
the information available, it rather appears that this project is scheduled to be completed by 2022 and that
the competent authorities do not foresee its execution to start before 2005. A tendering procedure as
foreseen by European public procurement legislation usually takes no more than six months.

3.
As said in point 2, the Commission’s concerns relate to the modalities of awarding the works at
stake. In the above-mentioned letter of formal notice, the Commission considers that the Grensmaas
project entails a public works contract which should be awarded in conformity with European public
procurement directives. Furthermore, the Commission underlines that, even if the contract were to be
considered as a concession, it should be awarded to the private partner in accordance with European law,
i.e.
in full compliance with the Treaty principles of non-discrimination, transparency and equality of
treatment which impose on any awarding body the duty to carry out tendering procedures in a transparent
manner, by ensuring adequate publicity thereof.

4.
The Commission does not dispose of any specific elements allowing it to respond to this question.
However, the aim of tendering procedures is to guarantee that public contracts are awarded to the tenderer
submitting the best bid, i.e. to ensure better (cid:1) and not worse (cid:1) value for public money.

5.
The Commission refers to the response to point 2. The Commission equally underlines that, even if a
delay would occur because of the ongoing infringement procedure, such delays are not attributable to the
Commission. Article 226 of the EC Treaty foresees such procedures in the case where a Member State has
failed to fulfil an obligation under the EC Treaty, this Member State consequently bearing the responsibility
for the consequences of this failure.

6.
Since the dispatch of the letter of formal notice, the Commission has already met the Dutch
authorities twice with a view to finding a solution compatible with public procurement law and taking due
account of the importance of the project. Further contacts are due to take place in the near future.

(2004/C 78 E/0656)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3648/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(9 December 2003)

Subject: Desire of international rail

freight operators to replace national rail safety systems with the

European standard ECTS

1.
Can the Commission confirm that, in the context of its efforts to encourage a growth in the number
of international rail freight operators, it assumes that the new rail safety system ECTS is in general use at
least on sections of track which cross national borders and in the international corridors which EU
Member States are to make available for such transport first?

2. What is the Commission’s view of the statement by the director of the private rail company
Shortlines, quoted in the Dutch newspaper Rotterdams Dagblad on 21 November 2003, that he fears that
separate old safety systems such as ATB in the Netherlands, Memor in Belgium and Indusi in Germany will
be ‘strongly protected’
in each Member State, and he calls for ‘an emergency scenario in case the
equipment for reconciling the safety systems with one another is not ready and available in time’?

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/621

How much extra would it cost per Member State to switch to ECTS before the existing safety systems

3.
have reached the end of their service life or depreciation period?

4. Will the Member States bear the cost of this investment as track operators? In what cases will these
costs or part thereof be charged to the businesses which benefit or will they be borne by the Trans-
European Networks?

Does the Commission fear that it may be impossible for the modernisation to be carried out within
5.
the period it has in mind and that it may be a long time before a unified safety system is available? In that
case, what are the consequences? What is the Commission’s response to this state of affairs?

Source: Rotterdams Dagblad, 21 November 2003.

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(27 January 2004)

The Commission’s efforts to revitalise the rail freight industry in Europe are not confined to harmonising
the control and command systems, but also cover safety issues and the regulations relating to the railways.

1.
The safety of the existing railway network is ensured by means of signalling systems of which some
were installed very recently. It is obviously unrealistic to want to replace these systems from one day to the
next. Secondly, it is not necessary to install the European Train Control System (ETCS) throughout the
network or along the whole length of a corridor for trains to be able to continue their journey without
stopping. The ETCS system has been designed to operate alongside other systems thanks to the use of
intelligent interfaces. Lastly, the ETCS technology is available and is being installed in connection with
several projects.

2.
To be able to estimate the cost of equipping the entire network and rolling stock, a migration
strategy is needed. This strategy is being developed on the basis of the national plans which the Member
States have notified pursuant to Commission Decision 2002/731/EC of 30 May 2002 concerning the
technical specification for interoperability relating to the control-command and signalling subsystem of the
trans-European high-speed rail system (1). A communication from the Commission due in 2004 will set out
a coherent European plan for the introduction of the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS)
(ETCS and Global Standard for Mobile Communication/Rail (GSM-R)) and propose the related funding
arrangements.

3.
To finance the deployment of this system, each of the players involved would have to participate.
There is no standard solution: each specific project would be funded under its own package, which would
depend on the size of the project, the type of project (infrastructure or rolling stock, new equipment or
refurbishment, etc.), and above all the state of the system in which it was being incorporated, as ETCS does
not operate independently but together with the trackside signalling systems (interlocking, points, track
circuits, etc.) and the on-board systems (driver’s cab, braking system, odometry, etc.). Co-funding under the
budget for the trans-European networks is possible and, for some projects, is already a reality.

4.
Control-command and signalling systems have a service life of 10 to 30 years, depending on the
technology used. The modernisation of these systems on such an extensive and sprawling system as the EU
network has to be a continuous process, with several generations coexisting. Coexistence does not prevent
the network from being interoperable or trains from continuing their journey without stopping at borders.

(1) OJ L 245, 12.9.2002.