Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council determining the general rules for the granting of Community financial aid in the field of the trans-european transport networks and energy and amending Council Regulation (EC) n° 2236/95
Date: 2004-07-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU aid, aid system, energy grid, financial aid, trans-European network, transport network

COMMISSION OF EUROPEAN COMMUNITY 

Brussels, 14.7.2004 
COM(2004) 475 final 

2004/0154 (COD) 

Proposal for a 

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 

determining the general rules for the granting of Community financial aid in the field of 
the trans-european transport networks and energy and amending Council Regulation 
(EC) n° 2236/95  

(presented by the Commission) 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
I 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

TRANS-EUROPEAN  TRANSPORT  NETWORKS,  THE  DRIVERS  OF  GROWTH  AND 
COHESION 

Without  performing  transport  and  energy  networks,  competitive  economies  do  not 
exist. The building and efficient working of trans-European networks in the sectors 
of  transport,  energy  and  telecommunications  which  for  more  than  ten  years  have 
been  recognises  as  a  Community  policy  represent  an  essential  condition  for  the 
success of the internal market, to guarantee sustainable mobility, and for the security 
of energy supply in the enlarged Union. Despite this, the network is still faced with 
strong  but  uneven  traffic  growth  which  reinforces  the  need  for  sustainable 
development and the  necessity to integrate the networks of transport  and energy of 
the new Member States is an unavoidable imperative.  

Completing  the  knitting  together  of  the  networks  at  Community  level  will  require 
significant  investment.  The  total  amount  of  investments  for  realising  the  trans-
European transport network (TEN-T) in the enlarged Union, as was approved by the 
Council and the Parliament on 29th April 2004, comes to more than €600 billion up 
to 2020. However, transport infrastructure and, in certain cases, that of energy falls 
short  because  of  a  lack  of  sufficient  financing  and  a  favourable  framework  of 
investments.  

The  amount  necessary  to  complete  the  trans-European  energy  network  (TEN-E)  is 
estimated at about €28 billion for the priority projects alone. Although the transport 
network is largely financed by public funds, the trans-European energy network can 
normally call on financing from the operators in the sector.  

In  contrast  to  the  telecommunications  sector,  where  the  emphasis  is  above  all  on 
applications,  the  trans-European  transport  and  energy  networks  still  require  the 
building of important base infrastructure; in particular, missing links at the level of 
cross  border  interconnections  remain  in  the  networks.  It  is  in  this  context  that  the 
European Council of December 2003 places the trans-European transport and energy 
networks at the centre of its Action for Growth.  

5. 

In  light  of  this  evolution  and  in  view  of  more  efficient  management  it  seems 
opportune to consider a regulation specifically for the transport and energy networks.  

II. 

INSUFFICIENT FINANCING FOR THE TRANS-EUROPEAN TRANSPORT NETWORKS.  

1. 

6. 

A contrasting situation. 

Already  in  2001,  the  Commission’s  White  Paper  on  the  Common  Transport  Policy 
sounded the alarm on the delays in the completion of the network. In effect, in spite 
of the engagements made by the Member States at the Essen Council in December 
1994 to complete the priority projects by the end of 2010, by the end of 2003, only 3 
of these projects had been completed. Less than a quarter of the funding for the cross 
border  sections  of  these  projects  had  been  found.  At  the  current  rhythm  of 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
7. 

8. 

9. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

investment,  more  than  20  years  will  be  needed  to  complete  the  trans-European 
transport network as revised in 2004.  

The  necessary financing  for the major projects in the transport infrastructure sector 
are  national  receipts,  the  Community  budget,  private  investment,  or  a  combination 
the three.  

Concerning the national budgets, the Member States are often faced with budgetary 
constraints for financing their infrastructure linked to, amongst other things, respect 
for  the  stability  and  growth  pact.  National  financing  is  however  the  most  often 
subject to pressing national priorities and clearly shows its limits by giving priority to 
domestic sections of to the detriment of projects whose benefits fall on other states. 

To  complete  its  sources  of  financing,  users  are  also  increasingly  called  upon  to 
finance infrastructure as was foreseen by the Commission proposal on the pricing of 
heavy goods vehicles (the ‘Eurovignette’ directive)1. 

The hope, often embraced, to see the growth of the participation of private investors 
remains for the moment, with a few rare exceptions, in vain. The rate of maximum 
co-financing  authorised  by  the  TEN  regulation  sets  the  rules  for  granting  financial 
aid to the trans-European network2, a rate which was recently once again limited to 
10%. Community aid cannot therefore play a real role as a catalyst for Public Private 
Partnerships (PPP). As was signalled by the European Council of December 2003 in 
the framework of the initiative for growth, aiding this type of PPP also requires the 
elimination  of  certain  administrative  obstacles,  notably  the  shortcomings  of  the 
company accounts rules relating to PPP concessionaires.  

However, the Van Miert Report considered that the private sector could contribute up 
to  20%  of  the  total  cost  of  these  projects  but  under  certain  conditions.  This  would 
represent a major contribution for national budgets which are under heavy pressure 
to  complete  the  network.  In  particular,  this  level  of  contribution  is,  however, 
dependant  upon  an  increase  in  the  rate  of  Community  co-financing  and  that  the 
financial  instruments  brought  into  play  through  the  TEN  financial  regulation  are 
adapted to cover specific post-construction risks. 

It needs, nevertheless, to be emphasised that the completion of these trans-European 
transport  infrastructures  is  not  just  a  policy  for  ‘major  projects’  that  has  been  the 
subject of criticism in some quarters. The aim, rather, is to stimulate trade and bolster 
the single market, reinforce cohesion and contribute to sustainable development. As 
was  shown  in  the  impact  analysis  undertaken  in  2003,  this  programme  is  directly 
related  to  the  objectives  of  sustainable  development  established  by  the  Gothenburg 
European  Council.  80%  of  the  major  projects  relate  to  non-road  mode.  They  will 
reduce  CO2  emissions  by  4%  as  well  as  atmospheric  pollution,  particularly  in 
sensitive mountain regions. They will reduce road congestion by 14% and make time 
savings  in  interregional  transport  allowing  significant  economic  benefits.  These 
projects will contribute to stabilising the modal split and may even turn it in favour 
of  more  environmentally  friendly  transport  modes  on  the  major  international  axes. 

1 COM (2003)448 final of 23.7.2003 
2 Regulation 1655/99 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2. 

13. 

14. 

15. 

3. 

16. 

17. 

Overall,  through  their  contribution  to  trade  through  the  Member  States  and 
improving  accessibility,  there  should  be  an  increase  in  growth  of  0.2-0.3%  GDP 
corresponding to the creation or retention of 1 million permanent jobs3. 

New Needs 

With the arrival of 10 new Member States in the Union, international traffic on often 
obsolete  infrastructure  networks  will  virtually  double  by  2020  and  put  further 
pressure  on  already  over  stressed  capacity.  The  lack  of  effective  trans-European 
connections  to  meet  this  new  demand  runs  the  risk  of  seriously  handicapping  the 
competitiveness of the Union, and the states, and the peripheral regions which can no 
longer – or will no longer - fully benefit from the advantages of the internal market.  

The  Commission,  faced  with  this  worrying  prediction  decide  to  draw  up  a  precise 
inventory of the situation and identify the missing links which should be completed 
as  a  missing  priority.  The  report  of  the high level group  chaired  by Mr.  Karel Van 
Miert published in June 2003 only confirmed the urgency of implementing a much 
more ambitious programme at the level of the Union. It recommends in particular to 
reinforce  the  level  of  Community  financial  support  and  to  concentrate  actions  on  a 
series of priority corridors.  

On  the  basis  of  the  group’s  work,  the  Commission  presented  in  October  2003,  a 
proposal to revise the TEN-T guidelines and in particular update the list of priority 
projects henceforth 30 in number, including the 14 already identified at Essen. This 
proposal  was  adopted  by  the  Parliament  and  Council  on  29th  April  2004.  These 
projects were evaluated in detail by the Van Miert Group, then by the Commission in 
its detailed impact study. The timetables, the costs and the main characteristics of the 
projects  are  therefore  now  known,4  even  if  their  precise  routes  and  impact  on  the 
local environment requires further examination. 

The value added of communnity financial support 

Although,  the  Community  is  competent  for  the  planning  of  the  trans-European 
network, these powers have not been accompanied by an adequate financial structure 
to support the construction of the network. 

Community  financing  offers,  nevetheless,  significant  advantages  over  national 
financing.  It  offers  stability  of  financing  over  a  time  frame  that  many  national 
budgets, which are subject to the vagaries of the economy and changing preferences, 
cannot  offer  and  plays  a  role  in  prompting  the  Member  States  to  invest  in  projects 
with  a  high  Community  Value  added  while  cooperating  much  more  between 
themselves. They contribute to the implementation of transport policy, in particular 

3  Figures  taken  from  SEC(2003)1060,  ‘Scenarios,  Traffic  and  Corridor  Analysis  of  TEN-Transport  (TEN 

STAC)’ 

4  See  chapter  II  of  the  Van  Miert  Report  published  on  the  ‘Europa’  website  as  well  as  the  document 
SEC(2003)1060  of  01.10.2003  ‘Extended  Impact  Statement  of  the  Proposal  to  Modify  Decision  EC 
1692/96 on the Development of the trans-European transport network’.  

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
18. 

19. 

20. 

21. 

by favouring the most sustainable modes, notably cross-border railway connections5, 
and they can also serve as a catalyst for building Public Private Partnerships. 

A  final  key  point  argues  not  only  for  an  increase  in  the  rate  of  Community 
participation  but  also  for  the  adoption  as  soon  as  possible  of  the  overall  financial 
envelope covering TEN-T major projects. Effectively, the principal priority projects 
with  commencement  dates  between  2006  and  2008  (Brenner,  Lyon-Turin-Venice-
Triest-Ljubljiana-Budapest)  or  even  those  already  underway  (Perpignan–Figueras) 
will  need  assurances  concerning  the  availability  of  Community  financing  for  the 
period  2007-2013.  If  the  amounts  and  the  application  rules  for  Community  aid  are 
only  known  at  the  last  minute  this  will  have  very  negative  consequences  on  the 
Projects  and  lead  to  many  years’  delay  in  their  inception.  As  the  Community  has 
become,  for  these  projects,  an  irreplaceable  partner  in  the  creation  of  the  financial 
plans, the absence of clarity would make this very difficult to finalise. This situation 
would  be  in  total  contradiction  to  the  political  decision  taken  by  the  Community 
acting  together  and  in  particular  to  the  imperative  need  to  complete  the  major 
projects rapidly as has been underlined by the European Parliament and Council on 
many occasions.  

In  spite  of  all  these  benefits,  the  resources  allocated  to  TEN-T  up  to  2006  appear 
derisory in comparison to the costs of completing the network. The current Financial 
Regulation  which  sets  out  the  general  rules  to  award  Community  financial  aid  to 
trans-European networks, has for the period 2000-2006 a budget envelope of 4,600 
million € (4.170 million € for transport6), hardly more than 600 million € per year for 
the period, a sum which is completely inadequate in relation to the needs identified 
and to the Member States requests for financial aid which represent many times this 
amount. 

Even if 1,9 billion € is added by the Cohesion Fund, plus additional support from the 
European  Regional Development  Fund (ERDF), these two instruments only benefit 
certain  countries  or  peripheral  regions  and  not  the  infrastructure  of  central  regions 
where  congestion  is  concentrated.  Contrary  to  general  opinion  most  of  the  major 
projects  on  the  trans-European  networks  are  located  in  the  countries  which  are  not 
eligible for the two instruments. 

In addition to this funding the European Investment Bank also contributes to network 
financing  through  loans.  These  have  to  be  reimbursed  and  are  essentially 
concentrated on projects with low risk rather than on more complicated rail or cross-
frontier schemes which have lower short term profitability. 

22. 

In practice the worst delays concern rail projects and cross-frontier links which limits 
the  possibilities  created  by  the  opening  of  the  railway  market7,  none  of  the  major 

5  

More than 65% of the TEN budget is allocated to rail projects, 20% to intelligent transport systems (ITS) such as 

rail  interoperability  or  air  traffic  control.  Particular  stress  is  placed  on  the  development  of  major  cross-frontier 
projects for freight which benefit from financial assistance. 

6 255M€ has been added for the period 2004-2006 to allow for enlargement 
7 Totally open for freight in 2007 and international passengers in 2010. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
 
 
 
23. 

24. 

4. 

25. 

Alpine crossings such as the Brenner or Lyon-Turin, which have been spoken about 
since the 1980’s, and which aim to relieve routes congested by heavy vehicles have 
been undertaken and their completion is not forecast, at the best, before 2015. They 
have  in  fact  become  one  of  the  principle  sources  of  congestion  and  imbalance 
between modes of transport on the major routes. 

The  completion  of  cross  border  sections  –  by  means  of  appropriate  Community 
Support  –  in  conjunction  with  national  sections  will  lead  to  increases  in  the 
profitability of these schemes to the benefit of other parts of the network. In practice, 
many  major  priority  projects,  such  as  the  rail  projects  Paris-Brussels-Cologne-
Amsertdam-London (PBKAL), have in the past suffered from the lack of continuity 
of the network. 

In  order  to  minimise  such  risks  countries  which  are  not  directly  concerned  by  the 
works  but  which  receive  benefits  should  be  encouraged  to  provide  financing  for 
projects.  This  principle  is  already  applied  in  the  case  of  the  agreement  of  5  May 
2004, between France and Italy, to construct the base tunnel on the Lyon-Turin route 
which will be financed 63% by Italy against 37% by France in order to rebalance the 
investment in the project overall taking account of the fact that the access routes to 
be built are largely in France. 

Significant financial needs 

The  financial  requirements  of  the  30  priority  projects  identified  in  annex  III  of  the 
guidelines for trans- European transport networks by the Council and the Parliament8 
alone  account  for  225  billion  €  the  largest  part  of  which  falls  in  the  period  2007-
2013- about 140 billion €. The following table provides an estimate of the costs and 
annual support – between 2007 and 2013 - for three major priority projects which are 
among the best documented. 

Investment needed in the period 2007-2013 and annual support based on 
a rate of 50% (estimates in M €) 

Project 

Investment 
2007-2013 

2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  Total 

PP6,Lyon-
Turin 
(international 
section)9 

PP1, Brenner 
Base  Tunnel 

2900 

100 

100 

150 

200 

300 

300 

300 

1450 

2200 

50 

75 

125 

150 

150 

250 

300 

1100 

8 Decision EC 884/2004 of 30/04/2004 
9 Support allocated in the previous years is not included 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
(2007-2013) 

PP3, 
Perpignan- 
Figueras10 

260 

55 

50 

25 

0 

0 

0 

0 

130 

26. 

27. 

28. 

III. 

1. 

29. 

Total  

5360 

205 

225 

300 

350 

450 

550 

600 

2680 

If Community aid is attractive during the study phase because the maximum rate of 
support can be as high as 50% of costs, a fact which has been a contributory aspect in 
the start up of some of the priority projects, it is much less so during the construction 
phase.  Since  the  total  amount  of  Community  aid  cannot  exceed  10%  of  the  total 
investment cost, it means that works co-financed following a study phase do not even 
benefit from aid at the maximum level of 10%. 

The adoption of the new Regulation for the granting of Community financial aid in 
the  field  of  trans-European  networks11  already  represents  a  very  real  advance  as  it 
allows  aid  to  be  concentrated  on  projects  which  have  the  greatest  need  (priority 
cross-frontier projects, or those crossing natural obstacles) and has the largest impact 
in  terms  of  leverage,  through  doubling  the  maximum  rate  of  support  to  20%12. 
However,  this  situation  still  appears  to  be  insufficient  where  some  of  the  priority 
projects  which  are  key  components  of  the  network  are  concerned  and  whose  cost 
burden on the Member States is considerable (see table above). 

The latest changes to the Regulation only concerned the maximum rate applicable to 
projects  on  the  basis  of  a  financial  envelope  within  the  existing  financial 
perspectives. The financial impact and resources are therefore limited. In addition, it 
would appear necessary to  complement national  financing sources, both public and 
private,  with  an  increase  in  Community  funding  in  terms  of  the  amounts  of  aid 
granted as well as in the rate of the intervention. This would strengthen the effect of 
Community  aid  in  terms  of  leverage  and  allow  the  priority  projects  contained  in 
annex  III  of  the  recently  adopted  Decision  of  the  Parliament  and  Council  on  the 
TEN-Transport guidelines to be carried out according to the timetables foreseen. 

THE  NEW  CONTEXT  FOR  TRANS-EUROPEAN  ENERGY  NETWORKS  LEADING  TO  NEW 
NEEDS  

The internal energy market and the external dependance 

In the energy sector, the Directives opening up electricity and gas markets in Europe 
are  fundamentally  changing  energy  markets  and  the  energy  sector.  By  2007,  the 
electricity and gas markets in all Member States will be fully open. It is essential that 
effective competition gets established quickly and that consumers have a real choice 
of  service  suppliers;  that  the  quality  of  services,  including  supply  security,  remains 
high,  with  no  black-outs;  and  that  established  European  goals,  notably  on 
renewables, are achieved.  

10 Cost 2007-2009 
11 Regulation 807/2004 – 21/04/2004. O.J. L. 143 – 30/04/2004 
12 The increased support rate also applies to priority projects in the energy sector 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
30. 

31. 

32. 

33. 

34. 

35. 

Successive  European  Councils  (Stockholm  (2001),  Barcelona  (2002),  Brussels13 
(2003))  have  recognised  that  inadequate  infrastructure  could  undermine  completely 
progress made on the energy market and regulatory framework. 

The next years will be a challenging time for Europe, as external dependence grows 
and  global  energy  markets  remain  turbulent.  The  Community’s  external  gas 
dependence is projected to grow from 50% now to over 80% in 2030. The challenges 
involved were examined in the Green Paper on energy supply security14.  

Internal and external infrastructural developments must be considered together. The 
European  Council  in  Brussels  (2003)  noted  that  the  development  of  energy 
infrastructures  will  ensure  the  full  involvement  of  the  new  EU’s  neighbours  and 
partner countries in the European market. Neighbouring countries play a vital role in 
the Community’s energy policy, supplying a major part of the Community’s natural 
gas  requirements  and  transiting  primary  energy  to  the  Community.  They  will 
progressively  become  important  players  in  the  Community’s  internal  gas  and 
electricity markets15. 

The  development  of  renewable  energy  in  Europe  may  require  new  investments  in 
existing  energy  systems,  notably  electricity  grids.  Strengthening  the  necessary  grid 
infrastructure would be an essential part of an off-shore wind policy for the EU, for 
example16.  This  has  already  been  recognised  in  the  TEN-Energy  Guidelines,  in 
which several of the priority projects include offshore connections. 

All  of  this  has  major  implications  for  energy  infrastructures.  The  use  of  existing 
infrastructures  must  shift  to  supporting  new  energy  flows  for  which  they  were  not 
originally designed. There will be a continuing need for new infrastructures over the 
next  years.  For  the  energy  sector,  Community  Guidelines  defining  objectives, 
priorities and projects of common interest in trans-European energy networks (TEN-
Energy)17 have been adopted by the European Parliament and the Council. 

Community financial support from the dedicated TEN-Energy budget line currently 
amounts to some 22 million € p.a. in the current period. So far, financial support has 
been  given  mainly  to  feasibility  studies.  Evaluations18  conclude  that  these  studies 
have  been  useful  in  stimulating  cooperation,  constructing  options  and  getting 
authorisations.  In  financial  terms,  TEN-Energy  support  has  typically  amounted  to 
less than 1% of total investment costs of projects. Some other EU instruments, each 
with  their  own  focus19,  have  been  used  to  support  energy  network  development 
(structural funds, external cooperation programmes, European Investment Bank). 

13 Endorsed the European Initiative for Growth. 
14 Green Paper “Towards a European strategy for the security of energy supply” COM(2000)769 
15 Development of Energy Policy for the Enlarged EU, its Neighbours and Partner Countries, COM(2003)262 
16 As indicated in “The share of renewable energy in the EU” COM(2004)366 
17 Decision 1254/96/EC, Decision No 1229/2003/EC 
18 Mid-term evaluation of TEN-E programme, 2004 
19 1996-2000: Structural funds,  subventions for about € 2  billion; EIB, loans for approximately €  3 billion. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2. 

36. 

37. 

38. 

39. 

40. 

41. 

The added value of the European action 

As the internal energy market develops, the benefits of infrastructure investments are 
more  widely  shared  than  before.  In  concrete  terms,  an  electricity  interconnector 
which enables effective competition to develop across several markets, is of benefit 
to all those markets. A new Liquefied Natural Gas terminal will have an impact on 
security  of  supply  and  competition  beyond  the  Member  State  in  which  it  is  built. 
While this increases the value of Europe-wide energy infrastructures, it changes the 
incentives  for  investments  at  Member  State  level.  A  European  approach  becomes 
more necessary as well as more valuable. 

In  the  case  of  an  electricity  interconnector,  for  example,  national  Transmission 
System Operators would normally make the investment and the costs would be taken 
into  account  in  the  setting  of  regulated  tariffs.  However,  their  assessments  of  the 
interest  of  investments  and  of  how  much they can reasonably  recoup via consumer 
tariffs  are  still  essentially  national.  Thus,  the  European  benefit  from  such 
interconnection investments may have to be specifically recognised and supported.  

In  the  external  gas  supply  case,  investments  are  normally  made  by  private  sector 
energy  companies20.  Investors  in  gas  supply  infrastructure  will  have  to  deal  with 
evolving political and economic situations, both externally and in the internal market 
(e.g.  demand  side  security).  The  public  European  interest  in  secure  gas  supplies  to 
the European market over the next couple of decades could warrant not only political 
support and the development of adequate frameworks for investments but also some 
sharing of the risks of early investments. 

The  establishment  of  an  internal  market  in  electricity  and  gas  has  increased  the 
importance of adaptations to Europe’s energy infrastructure to enable it to sustain the 
development  of  a  competitive  market  in  Europe  and  ensure  secure  supplies  from 
neighbours.  The  liberalisation  and  integration  of  markets  has  also  changed  the 
incentives for investments. Inter alia, it draws new attention to investments which are 
essentially in the European interest. It also means that public support for investments 
in infrastructures must not distort competition. 

The  Community  has  already  agreed  on  a  list  of  energy  infrastructure  projects  of 
common  interest  in  this  context,  in  the  TEN-Energy  Guidelines.  Within  this  list, 
priority projects are identified. They are projects which, along with being compatible 
with  sustainable  development,  are  particularly  important  for  the  competitive 
operation of the internal market in Europe or for strengthening European security of 
supply. 

These priority projects, already agreed as having definite European interest, warrant 
stimulation  and  support.  Normally,  support  of  studies  up  to  and  including  early 
developmental  work  may  provide  sufficient  stimulus.  In  exceptional  cases,  a 
contribution  to  construction  may  be  needed,  essentially  related  to  the  European 
interest  which  cannot  reasonably  be  paid  for  by  consumers  in  only  one  or  two 
Member States. 

20 At least for the extra-EU parts of networks 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
42. 

3. 

43. 

44. 

45. 

4. 

46. 

IV. 

47. 

In the past, with support focused mainly on studies, TEN-Energy support amounted 
to some 1% of investment costs of projects. In the new context, if 1.7% is taken as a 
guide,  and  applied  to  the  total  investment  costs  in  Europe  of  the  priority  projects 
identified in the TEN-Energy Guidelines – 20 billion €, this would mean an average 
annual budget of some 50 million € for the period 2007-2013. 

Interconnecting electricity networks 

TEN-E support would be focused on those projects or parts of projects identified in 
the  TEN-E  Guidelines21  where  the  greatest  value  could  be  added  by  European 
support,  encouraging  progress  in  their  implementation.  TEN-E  support  would  be 
granted  only  to  economic  projects  aknowledged  to  be  facing  major  difficulties  in 
being  financed  by  private  investors  alone.  These  are  likely  to  be  projects  in  which 
benefits are widely shared.  

The  Barcelona  European  Council  in  2002  stressed  the  importance  of  completing 
missing  links  in  electricity  networks  and  set  a  concrete  target  for  electricity 
interconnections of at least 10% of installed domestic electricity generation capacity. 
This  level  has  not  yet  been  met  in  several  Member  States.  The  electricity  traded 
across  borders  in  Europe  is  still  only  some  8%  of  consumption.The  European 
Council also recognised that the 10% target may not be enough in cases where there 
is high market concentration.  

Inadequate  electricity  interconnectors  will  also  limit  operational  security  of  supply 
on  networks,  undermining  efforts  to  prevent  and  manage  electricity  black-outs.  An 
example  is  Italy,  where  reinforcement  of  electricity  connections  with  neighbouring 
countries,  especially  Austria  and  Slovenia,  would  increase  reliability  and  provide 
greater  diversity.  The  coordinated  operation  of  energy  networks  in  the  Community 
and neighbouring countries can contribute substantially to security of supply. In the 
longer  term,  inadequate  electricity  interconnection  capacity  will  limit  the  efficient 
use of energy resources in Europe.  

Strengthening gas supply 

The  Community’s  external  gas  dependence  is  projected  to  grow  from  50%  now  to 
over 80% in 2030. Given the time normally necessary for major projects involving 
investments  in  several  countries,  a  prudent  approach  would  imply  that  very 
substantial investments should be made now in new and improved networks to bring 
gas  supplies  to  Europe  from  3rd  countries,  including  Russia,  Algeria,  the  Caspian 
region, also Mashreq.  

THE  NEED  FOR  A  NEW  FRAMEWORK  FOR  TRANSEUROPEAN  TRANSPORT  AND 
ENERGY NETWORKS 

Beyond  simple  budgetary  aspects,  it  is  necessary  to  prepare  a  more  ambitious 
revision  of  the  provisions,  the  scope  and  the  instruments  of  implementation  of  the 
TEN  Regulation  in  order  to  take  account  of  the  priorities  in  the  policy  of  trans-

21 Decision No 1229/2003/EC and proposed updates 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
European  network  for  the  period  2007-2013  which  are  reflected  in  the  recent 
decision on the TEN guidelines as well in the position of the Council. 

48. 

In order to meet fully the objectives of the Community as regards development of the 
network, the new regulation establishes the general principles of granting of the aid 
which is based on the major following principles: 

Simplification 

To  simplify,  the  application  of  the  detailed  rules  following  the  Communication  on 
the  financial  perspective,  decisions  will  be  taken  on  the  basis  of  comitology  rather 
than by co-decision procedure.  

The  operational  procedure  of  the  committee  established  by  the  Regulation  is 
modified in order to conform to the Decision of the Council of 1999 on comitology22. 
The  essential  choices  for  the  priority  projects  involved  joint  decision  and  were 
consequently  decided  by  the  EP  and  the  Council.  Given  the  expérience  gained  in 
applying  Regulation  no  2236/95  and  the  nature  of  the  competences  given  to  the 
Commission  by  the  present  Regulation,  it  is  proposed  to  choose  a  consultative 
Committee  more  capable  to  ensure  implementation,  through  the  rapid  treatment  of 
files.  

Conditionality 

An  essential  point  of  the  new  regulation  is  that  any  aid  is  conditional  upon 
compliance  with  principles  of  the  Common  transport  and  energy  Policy.  For 
transport  this  means  more  particular  attention  be  paid  to  the  modes  of  transport 
which are more environmentally friendly such as rail transport in particular freight, 
safety  and  security.  In  the  same  way,  all  requests  for  funding  for  high  speed  rail 
projects  must  be  accompanied  by  a  plan  that  analyses  how  capacity  on  existing 
infrastructure  that  is  made  available  can  be  used  to  develop  long  distance  freight 
services. Financing for transport and energy networks of under the TEN budget will 
also  be  subject  to  the  guarantee  of  continuity  and  of  the  interoperability  of  the 
networks. 

Selection and concentration 

Implementation of conditionality will mean greater selectivity of projects which will 
facilitate the concentration of aid on a reduced number of projects, in particular those 
which demonstrate the strongest added value for the community. This will both allow 
the expectations of the project promoters to be better taken into account and lead to 
more effective management.  

The budget proposed for the TEN-T which amounts to slightly more than 20 billion € 
over  the  period  2007-2013  may  seem  impressive.  The  financial  envelope  (average) 
amounting  to  2.9  billion  €  a  year  against  hardly  more  than  600  million  €  for  the 
current period, will make it possible to ensure a significant share of total investment 
with regard to certain TEN-Transport priority projects 

22 Decision n°CE/1999/468 of 28 June 1999, OJ L 184 of 17 July 1999  

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In  addition,  in  order  to  increase  the  leverage  of  Community  resources,  the  whole 
budget  will  be  concentrated  on  two  groups  of  projects  which  represent  the 
cornerstones of the trans-European transport network: 

- the priority projects and among them special attention will be paid to projects that 
contribute  to  the  integration  of  the  internal  market  in  an  enlarged  Community  and 
which  support  contribute  to  reduce  the  imbalances  between  modes  of  transport  in 
favour  of  those  that  are  environmentally  friendly,  notably  for  long  distance  freight 
transport; 

-  other  projects  of  common  interest  in  particular  the  projects  that  contribute  to  the 
improvement of the quality of service offered on the network and which favour, inter 
alia,  security  and  safety  for  users23,  and  provide  for  interoperability  between  the 
national  networks,  notably  deployment  programmes  for  systems  of 
traffic 
management for rail, air and sea. 

In  the  energy  field,  financing  will  be  concentrated  mainly  on  priority  projects 
identified  in  the  Guidelines  decision  n°1229/2003/EC.  Support,  covering  initially 
feasibility  studies  will  cover  the  development  phase  of  the  projects  (preceding 
construction),  including  technical  and  environmental  studies  and  will  also  include 
geological  investigations  and  trialbores  in  difficult  access  areas  which  can  make 
these  activities  expensive.  Support  for  the  construction  phase  would  be  justified  in 
exceptional  cases  where  the  European  value  added  would  be  very  high  or  where 
natural  obstacles  are  difficult  to  overcome.  This  could  be  the  case  for  cross-border 
projects and projects involving interconnection with bordering countries. 

Proportionality 

For  the  transport  domain,  it  is  envisaged  by  this  regulation,  to  change  the  co-
financing rate to a maximum of 30% for certain sections of the priority projects, and 
that in exceptional cases for cross-border sections, to change the rate to a maximum 
of  50%.  The  rates  of  grant  proposed  offer  a  greater  incentive  being  related  to  the 
value added to the Community, expressed in terms of the benefits that fall to other 
Member States from the construction of a project. Under these conditions, it will be 
easier to ensure on the one hand the respect of timetables fixed by the recent decision 
on the guidelines, and on the other hand to guarantee the continuity of the network 
considering that to date cross-border sections allowing the connections of the various 
national networks were particularly penalised due to insufficient funds.  

In addition, the increased co-financing rate will make it possible, for many projects 
which  have  to  start  between  2007  and  2010,  to  complete  financial  arrangements  – 
which  appear  problematic  today,  thanks  to  the  guarantee  of  Community  financing 
over a 7-year period. It must however be noted that these rates are maximum rates – 
and that accordingly the average intervention rate will be significantly lower as much 
of this appropriation will also be used to support technological and industrial projects 
such  as  the  interoperability,  air  traffic  management  under  the  agreement  on  "single 
sky", safety or safety (which are not directly included in the priority projects). 

23 Directive n° 2004/54 of 29/04/2004 , relating to safety in the tunnels. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In  recognition  of  the  much  higher  rate  of  Community  grant  than  at  present,  the 
Member  States  shall  provide  solid  guarantees  based  on  a  financial  plan  and  firm 
commitments  on  the  date  of  completion  of  the  project.  To  this  end  the  agreements 
between  the  Member  States  concerned  and  the  Commission  should  reinforce  the 
obligations on the States concerned to complete major projects 

The  Commission  will  ensure  that  the  increase  in  the  cofinancing  rate  does  not 
involve  delays  in  implementation  of  on-going  projects,  where  the  financial  plan  is 
still  running.  .  In  addition,  to  facilitate  the  coordinated  implementation  of  some 
projects  included  in  annex  III  of  the  Decision  on  the  TEN  Guidelines  n°  884/2007 
and  as  set  out  in  article  17  a  of  the  decision,  the  Commission  can  call  upon  a 
European coordinator.  

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
The  following  table  describes  the  rates  of  aid  by  category  of  (transport)  project 

Maximum rates 

Etudes 

Construction 

1. Priority Projets 24 

Of which crossborder sections 

2a.  Other 
projects  which 
interopérability – security – safety 

include 

2b. Other projects of common interest 

50% 

50% 

50% 

50% 

up to 30% 

up to 50% 

up to 50% 

up to 15% 

In the Energy sector, support for studies could be up to 50% of eligible costs.TEN-
Energy support for construction is normally be limited to 10% of eligible costs but in 
exceptional  cases,  for  priority  projects  with  particularly  important  financial 
challenges  and  also  particularly  important  identified  European  benefits,  normally 
cross-border projects or interconnections with neighbouring countries, support could 
be up to 20%. Given the competitive character of the energy sector, it is not proposed 
to  increase  the  maximum  support  percentage  above  the  level  already  agreed  under 
the present TEN financial support Regulation. 

TEN-Energy  support  for  construction  should  be  limited  to  the  parts  of  projects 
located inside the Community. Support for studies could be based on the project as a 
whole, including its elements outside the Community. 

For financial support to the construction of projects or sections of projects located in 
partner  countries,  the  coordination  with  other  EU  instruments  (Instruments  devoted 
to the external policies, European Investment Bank etc) is essential, to allow for the 
possibility  of  financial  support  from  these  instruments  for  TEN-Energy  projects  in 
partner  countries.  Financial  instruments  such  as  venture  capital,  interest  rate 
subsidies  for  loans,  loan  guarantees,  coverage  of  non  commercial  risk,  etc,  may  be 
available from these instruments for important infrastructure projects in our partner 
countries  

Types of Aid. 

A range of possibilities are available to promoters to facilitate the implementation of 
projects.  In  addition  to  interest  rate  subsidies  -  aimed  at  lessening  the  impact  of 
interest on loans and seldom used up until now - and risk capital participation which 
are  already  covered  by  the  existing  Regulation,  the  creation  of  a  guarantee  fund, 
covering commercial risks specific to TEN projects in the post construction phase is 
one  of  the  financial  instruments  proposed  by  the  regulation.  The  objective  of  this 
new  instrument  is  to  provide  leverage  for  the  financing  of  TEN  projects  by  the 
private sector. It should contribute to limiting the cost of financing and accelerate the 
conclusion  of  financial  structures  by  the  private  sector,  notably  through  private 

24 According to Annex III of Decision n°884/2004 of 30 April 2004. 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
banks. The guarantee will be limited to the inception phase of a project and, or, to a 
maximum percentage of the private sector loans. A significant contribution from the 
Member States in which the projects are undertaken will be obligatory. The detailed 
proposal as well as the conditions and the methods to apply will be the subject of a 
separate communication. In view of the relative complexity of all these instruments it 
may be necessary to acquire experts to manage them. 

Management  

The  implementation  of  the  projects  is  in  the  first  place  the  responsibility  of  the 
Member States who adopt their own institutional approach. The actions undertaken 
have to be in keeping with the new Regulation which sets down the approach to be 
adopted,  the  respective  responsibilities  of  the  Commission  and  the  Member  States 
with  regard  to  the  selection  and  management  of  projects  plus  the  monitoring  of 
grants. In particular, the new TEN Regulation- although maintaining the key role of 
the Commission in the final selection of projects- proposes to allocate a major role to 
the Member States in relation to technical controls and the certification of costs.  

The  Commission  reserves  the  right  to  delegate  the  management  of  the  present 
programme for the  trans-European  transport network to an executive agency acting 
in  compliance  with  the  Council  regulation  N°  58/2003  of  19  December  2002.  This 
would simply involve the transfer of certain management tasks to the agency and not 
affect the Commission’s responsibilities in the area of planning. 

V. 

COMMENTS ON ARTICLES  

Article  1  defines  the  object  of  the  programme.  This  article  is  almost  identical  to 
article 1 of the current Regulation concerning the granting of financial support in the 
field of trans- European transport and energy networks. 

Article 2 provides the definitions for the terms used in this Regulation. 

Article 3 defines the eligibility criteria for proposals and corresponds to Article 2 of 
the current Regulation. 

Article 4 sets out the rules to present requests for support and repeats a part of article 
8 of the current Regulation. 

Article  5  provides  the  selection  criteria  for  the granting  of  aid  in  the  transport  and 
energy  fields.  The  article  specifies  that  special  attention  will  be  paid  to  priority 
projects which are to receive additional aid. 

Article 6 defines the field of application of the Regulation which is identical to the 
current  Regulation  with  the  exception  of  the  risks  inherent  in  the  post  construction 
phase which are henceforth covered by a guarantee fund instrument. 

Article  7  sets  out  the  types  of  aid  as  well  as  the  maximum  rates  of  Community 
financial support. This article also specifies that the Commission shall set down the 
procedures,  the  timetable  and  the  payments  for  the  financial  instruments  by 
comitology.  

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
 
Article  8  establishes  the  provisions  regarding  the  accumulation  of  Community  aid 
for separate actions concerning the same project 

Article  9  deals  with  the  coordination  and  the  compatibility  with  other  Community 
policies which projects financed under this Regulation have to respect. 

Article 10 establishes the Commission’s responsibility for the implementation of the 
Regulation. 

Article  11  provides  for  the  Commission  to  create  a  multi-annual  programme  for 
priority projects and to define the amounts of financial aid for the period 2007-2013. 
An  annual  programme  will  define  the  criteria  to  grant  aid  to  projects  of  common 
interest not included in the multi-annual programme.. 

Article  12  specifies  the  means  to  grant  Community  financial  support  through  the 
adoption of annual budget decisions subject to the degree of progress of the project 
and  the  available  budget.  The  article  sets  out  the  means  of  notification  of  the 
Commission’s decisions. 

Article 13 takes up the former Article 11 concerning payment provisions. 

Article  14  covers  the  responsibilities  of  the  Member  States.  They  must  ensure  that 
actions which receive Community aid are monitored and verified. 

Article 15 covers the control means to reduce suspend or cancel Community support 
and is almost identical to article 13 of the current Regulation. The Commission may 
require the reimbursement of support taking account of the proportionality principle. 

Article  16provides  financial  protection  measures  aimed  to  verify  that  the  actions 
supported  have  been  undertaken  appropriately  and  to  halt  and  take  action  against 
irregularities 

Article  17  provides  that  the  Commission  will  be  assisted  by  a  management  type 
committee for the implementation of some articles of the Regulation. 

Article  18  provides  an  ex-post  evaluation  of  actions  that  have  received  support, 
either by the Commission or the Member States. 

Article 19 provides for the Commission to report to the other institutions every three 
years on the  activities that have been undertaken.  This  article  also requires that the 
Member States and the beneficiaries shall publicise the Community aid. 

Article 20 provides the budget reference amount for the period 2007-2013. 

Article 21 provides a revision clause for the programme after 2013 on the basis of 
the  basis  of  a  report  on  the  results  to  be  submitted  to  Parliament  and  the  Council 
before 2010. 

Article  22  outlines  the  modification  made  by  this  Regulation  to  that  currently  in 
force (2236/95). 

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
 
Article 23 provides for the entry into force of the Regulation and its application from 
1st January 2007. For actions underway at the entry into force, the current Regulation 
n° 2236/95 remains in force. 

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
ANNEX TO THE EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

I. Community added value, subsidiarity and proportionnality. 

•  What are the objectives of the planned measure in relation to the Community's obligations? 

Under  Title  XV  of  the  Treaty,  the  Community  has  an  obligation  to  contribute  to  the 
establishment  and  development  of  trans-European  networks  in  the  area  of  transport 
interconnection  and 
infrastructures.  Community  action  shall  aim  at  promoting 
interoperability of national networks as well as to provide a high degree of safety and security 
for the network users.  

the 

•  Does  the  measure  fall  within  the  Community's  exclusive  competence  or  is  competence 

shared with the Member States? 

The competence is shared with the Member States. 

•  What is the Community dimension of the problem? 

Transport  infrastructure  projects  are  very  dependent  upon  the  finance  supplied  by  national 
budgets.  However,  national  budgets  tend  to  give  greater  priority  to  domestic  projects  than 
cross-frontier  links,  which  can  have  a  lower  immediate  profitability  and  pose  more 
coordination  problems.  If  the  Community  does  not  play  a  role  in  funding  the  majority  of 
cross-frontier links, even although they lie at the heart of the trans-European network policy, 
will be subject to prolonged delays.  

For  energy  networks,  the  Community  dimension  derives  most  strongly  from  the  newly-
established  internal  energy  market.  As  has  been  recognised  by  the  European  Council  on 
several  occasions,  inadequate  infrastructure  could  completely  undermine  progress  made  on 
the  energy  market  and  regulatory  framework.  Over  the  next  years,  energy  infrastructures  in 
Europe  need  to  be  adapted  to  sustain  energy  flows  for  which  they  were  not  originally 
designed.  Consumers 
in 
interconnections  etc  to  make  functioning,  Europe-wide  networks.  Similarly,  they  will  all 
benefit  from  investments  in  new  supply  infrastructure  from  outside  Europe,  needed  to  deal 
with  growing  external  energy  dependence.  Finally,  these  trans-European  networks  will 
encourage efficient use throughout Europe of energy resources, notably renewables.  

the  Community  will  benefit  from 

investments 

throughout 

•  Can the objectives not be adequately achieved by the Member States?  

Major projects to improve traffic flows have consequences that are far wider than the limits of 
national frontiers. It is hardly credible to expect that individual countries alone finance these 
projects where a large part of the benefits falls to other countries. 

For  energy  networks,  incentives  for  investment  have  been  changed  by  energy  market 
liberalisation and integration. Investments which are essentially in the European interest, such 
as  some  interconnectors,  cannot  reasonably  be  paid  for  by  consumers  in  just  one  or  two 
Member States. 

•  What is the most effective solution, that achieved by Community means or that achieved 
by national means? What specific added value is contributed by the planned Community 
measure and what would be the cost of taking no action? 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
Projects of European interest have already been identified in the decision of the Council and 
Parliament on the TEN-Transport guidelines. However, the national interest in investments to 
enable  an  integrated,  competitive  and  safe  transport  infrastructure  network  in  Europe  to 
develop  may  not  be  as  strong  as  the  Community  interest.  Slow  progress  on  cross-border 
investments-in  particular  the  fourteen  priority  projects  endorsed  by  the  Essen  Council  in 
1994-supports  this  conclusion.  In  contributing  to  develop  trade,  notably  trade  between  the 
Member States, and improving accessibility, these projects should stimulate the potential for 
growth  by  0.2  to  0.3%  of  GDP  ,  which  corresponds  to  a  million  permanent  jobs.  They  will 
also reduce CO² emissions by 4% in relation to existing trends. This Community support for 
European  interest  projects  may  be  essential  and  in  any  case,  would  be  justified.  It  is  not  so 
much the case of adding value to Member States actions as a specific focus on investments of 
European  interest.  The  cost  of  not  taking  action  would  be  inadequate  infrastructure, 
undermining the development of the trans-European transport network, with direct effects on 
congestion,  safety  and  accessibility  of  peripheral  regions  and  indirect  effects  on  the  growth 
and competitiveness of the Union as a whole. 

For energy networks, projects of European interest have also been identified, in the decision 
of Council and Parliament on the TEN-Energy Guidelines. However, the national interest in 
investments to enable an integrated, competitive energy market in Europe to develop may not 
be as strong as the Community interest. Slow progress on cross-border investments supports 
this conclusion. Thus, Community support for projects of European interest may be essential 
and in any case, would be justified. It is not so much a case of adding value to Member State 
action as a specific focus on investments of European interest. The cost of taking no action 
would  be  inadequate  infrastructure,  undermining  the  development  of  the  internal  energy 
market.  

•  Are the means of Community action proportionate to the objectives? 

Support  equivalent  to  roughly  15%  of  the  (global)  investment  costs  of  the  identified  in 
transport projects of European interest, essentially cross-border, is proposed. The benefits in 
terms  of  leverage  for  the  development  of  an  interconnected  and  interoperable  transport 
infrastructure network would be very great, as would be the costs of not doing this.  

For  the  energy  networks,  the  financial  means  proposed  correspond  to  1.7  %  of  the  total 
investment costs in Europe of the priority projects identified in the TEN-Energy Guidelines. 
TEN-Energy support will need to be concentrated on particular parts of these priority projects, 
essentially  difficult  cross-border  parts  currently  blocking  progress  towards  Community 
objectives. The benefits in terms of the establishment of a competitive internal energy market, 
encouragement of diversity of external supply etc would be very great, as would be the costs 
in the longer term of not doing this.  

•  What  is  the  most  suitable  act  for  achieving  the  objectives?  (Recommendation,  financial 

support, mutual recognition, legislation, etc.).  

As  a  rule,  Community  financial  support  has  to  be  based  on  Parliament  and  Council 
Regulation. 

•  In the case of legislation, is the scope, duration or intensity greater than what is necessary? 

Due  to  the  limitation  of  public  investment,  the  difficulty  to  attract  private  investors,  the 
Community  support  to  infrastructures,  reflecting  their  European  benefit,  is  justified  and  it 

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
completes  the  existing  policy  framework  as  set  in  the  Commission’s  White  Paper  on 
Transport and TEN-T guidelines.  

For  energy  networks,  financial  support  of  investments,  reflecting  their  European  benefit, 
could  be  justified  in  some  cases,  even  if,  in  liberalised  markets,  investments  in  energy 
transmission infrastructures is now normally made by national transmission system operators, 
with costs taken into account in the regulated tariffs. 

II. Impact assessment 

In  the  framework  of  the  revision  of  the  TEN-Transport  guidelines  (COM  (2003)  564)  the 
Commission  undertook  an  in-depth  impact  analysis  of  the  proposal  modifying  Decision 
1692/96/EC  on  the  development  of  the  trans-European  transport  network.  The  principal 
remarks of the document SEC(2003)1060 are as follows: 

a. The TEN-T investment programme will stimulate Europe’s competitivity and economy. It 
will contribute to the devemopment of international commerce, especially in the new Member 
States. 

b.  In  the  short  term,  the  construction  works  will  stimulate  employment  especially  in  the 
regions concerned. 

c. In the longer term, the improvement in living conditions resulting from the increase in the 
opportunities  for  meetings  and  the  development  of  commercial  perspectives  thanks  to  the 
improvement  in  connections  and  accessibility  are  estimated  at  0.23%  GDP  and  represent 
around a million sustainable jobs. 

The investment needs have been estimated in the framework of the Van Miert report to be 600 
billion euro fort the totality of the projects of common interest, of which 225 billion for the 
priority projects (140 billion for those projects during the period 2007-2013 alone). 

For  the  energy  networks,  the  impact  assessment  for  the  eligible  projects,  that  is  to  say,  the 
projects  of  common  interest  and  especially  the  priority  projects,  was  presented  by  the 
Commission at the same time as the proposal of 10 December 2003 for the new TEN-Energy 
guidelines25. 

In  the  assessment  it  was  concluded  that  the  implementation  of  the  projects  identified  in  the 
current  guidelines  of  June  2003  and  those  proposed  in  the  new  guidelines  would  have  a 
positive impact on the economy as a whole; on cohesion, through the integration of the energy 
networks of the new Member States; on the environment, in facilitating the integration of the 
production  from  the  sources  of  renewable  energies;  on  the  internal  market  in  energy,  in 
increasing  the  capacities  for  commercial  exchanges;  on  the  security  of  energy  supply,  in 
increasing  the  capacity  for  imports  and  in  diversifying  the  sources  and  import  routes;  and 
finally on cooperation with neighbouring states. 

It is clear that the support for the TEN-Energy network does not present the same advantages 
for all the types of energy infrastructure. In particular, the extention of the networks will be of 
benefit for large scale generation of electricity. On the other hand, the direct interconnection 
of  energy  souces  with  the  local  electricty  distribution  sustems  (in  common  with  certain 

25 SEC(2003)1369, of 10 December 2003 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
                                                 
renewable energies and combined heat and power technologies) do not fall within the TEN-
Energy support mandate according to the current guidelines. 

The  proposed  Community  support  will  be  useful  for  encouraging  and  accelerating  the 
implementation of the energy infrastructure projects identified in the TEN-Energy guidelines 
and will therefore make possible the anticipated profits. 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
2004/0154 (COD) 

Proposal of  

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL  

determining the general rules for the granting of Community financial aid in the field of 
the trans-european transport networks and energy and amending Council Regulation 
(EC) n° 2236/95  

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,  

Having regard to the treaty instituting the European Community, and in particular its Article 
156,  
Having regard to the Commission proposal26,  

Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee27,  

Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the regions28,  

Ruling in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 251 of the treaty29,  

whereas:  

(1) 

(2) 

The  Barcelona  Council  of  15  and  16  March  2002  underlined  in  its  conclusions  that 
‘strong and integrated networks in the energy and transport sectors are a keystone in 
the  European  internal  market  and  that  better  use  of  the  existing  networks  and  the 
setting  up  of  missing  links  will  make  it  possible  to  increase  effectiveness  and 
competitiveness and to guarantee an appropriate level of quality, and the reduction of 
saturation  points  and,  therefore,  better  long-term  viability.  These  needs  come  within 
the  framework  of  the  strategy  adopted  by  the  Heads  of  State  and  government  at  the 
Lisbon summit which has since then been regularly referred to.  

The European Council of 12 and 13 December 2003 approved a European Action for 
growth  by  calling  on  the  Commission  to  re-orientate  expenditure,  if  necessary, 
towards investments in physical capital, in particular investments in the infrastructure 
of  the  trans-European  networks,  the  priority  projects  of  which  represent  essential 
elements to strengthen the cohesion of the internal market.  

(3) 

The  delays  recorded  for  the  realisation  of  effective  trans-European  connections,  in 
particular the cross-border sections, are likely to disable seriously the competitiveness 

26 OJ, C…. 
27 OJ, C….  
28 OJ C…. 
29 ….. 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

of the Union, its States and peripheral regions which will not be able, or will no longer 
be able, to profit fully from the beneficial effects of the single market.  

In Council Decision n° 1692/96/EC of the European Parliament and on the guidelines 
on  development  of  the  trans-European  transport  network30,  hereafter  TEN-T,  as 
amended  by  Decision  884/2004/EC,  the  cost  between  now  and  2020,  to  supplement 
the  trans-European  transport  network  was  considered  at  €600  billion.  Investments 
necessary  for  the  only  priority  projects  within  the  meaning  of  Annex  III  of  this 
decision account for almost €140 billion for the period 2007-2013.  

To  achieve  these  goals,  both  the  Council  and  Parliament  put  forward  the  need  to 
strengthen  and  adapt  the  financial  instruments  through  an  increase  in  the  level  of 
Community  co-financing,  by  foreseeing  the  possibility  of  applying  a  higher 
Community  co-financing  rate,  in  particular  for  projects  being  characterised  by  their 
cross-border character, their transit function, or by the crossing of natural barriers.  

Decision 1229/2003/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council at its meeting 
on  26  June  2003  establishing  a  number  of  guidelines  concerning  the  trans-European 
network in the energy sector and repealing 1254/93/EC31, identifies the objectives, the 
priorities  for  action  and  projects  of  common  interest  to  supplement  and  develop  this 
network, including the priority projects. Necessary investments, to make it possible for 
all the Member States to take part fully in the internal market and to supplement the 
interconnections with the neighbouring countries, are about €28 billion between now 
and 2013, for individual priority projects. The latter amount includes approximately €8 
billion of investments to be made in third countries.  

The European Council of 12-13 December 2003 called in addition on the Commission 
to  continue  studying  the  need  to  create  a  specific  Community  guarantee  instrument 
intended to cover certain risks pos-construction under the framework of TEN transport 
projects. With regard to energy, the Council called on the Commission, to re-orientate, 
if  necessary,  expenditure  towards  investments  in  the  physical  capital  in  order  to 
stimulate growth.  

Council  Regulation  (EC)  n°2236/95  of  18  September  1995  determining  the  rules  for 
the granting of Community financial aid in the field of the trans-European networks32, 
as  amended  by  Regulation  n°1655/99/EC  and  Regulation  n°  807/2004/EC  already 
represents  a  real  progress,  since  it  permits  the  projects  declared  as  having  priority  a 
higher  financing  rate,  changed  to  20%33.  There  remains  nevertheless  a  tributary  of 
implementation  rules  which  deserve  simplification  and  an  overall  budget  of  limited 
resources.  It  appears  therefore  necessary,  in  addition  to  public  national  and  private 
financing,  to  increase  the  Community  aid  in  terms  of  both  amount  and  rates  of 
intervention with a view to strengthening the leverage action of the Community funds 
thus making it possible to carry out the stopped priority projects.  

30 O.J L 228 of 9/9/96 latest modified by Decision n° 884/2004/ EC , J.O L 167 of 30/04/2004 p.1 
31 O.J L 176 of 12/07/2003, p.11 
32 O.J L 228 of 23/9/95 p.1, latest modified by European Parliament and Council Regulation n°807/2004/EC O.J 

L143 of 30/04/2004 p. 46   

33  All  priority  projects  in  the  energy  sector  benefit  from  such  rate  whereas  it  only  applies  to  crossborder  or 

crossnatural sections in the transport sector. 

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(9) 

In  light  of  the  developments  of  each  component  of  the  trans-European  networks  - 
transport,  energy  and  telecommunications  -  and  of  their  intrinsic  characteristics,  and 
with  a  view  to  more  effective  management  of  each  programme,  it  is  advisable  to 
stipulate a separate regulation for the fields of transport and energy covered until now 
by Council Regulation (EC) n° 2236/95 of 18 September 1995.  

(10)  By this Regulation, it is appropriate to establish a programme determining the general 
rules  for  the  granting  of  Community  financial  aid  in  the  field  of  the  trans-European 
transport  and  energy  networks.  This  programme  –  in  the  respect  of  the  'acquis 
communautaire',  in  particular  as  regards  environment  -  has  to  contribute  to  the 
reinforcement  of  the  internal  market  and  have  a  stimulating  effect  on  the 
competitiveness and growth of the Community.  

(11)  Given  that  the  aims  of  implementation  of  the  trans-European  transport  and  energy 
networks cannot be achieved adequately by the Member States, taking into account, in 
particular, the need for coordination of the national operations, and consequently can 
be  managed  more  effectively  at  the  Community  level,  the  Community  can  take 
measures in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity in Article 5 of the Treaty. In 
accordance with the principle of proportionality as described in the aforesaid Article, 
this regulation does not exceed what is necessary to achieve these goals.  

(12)  This  programme  has  to  be  characterised  by  Community  financial  aid  focused  on  the 
projects  or  parts  of  projects  presenting  the  highest  European  value  added  and  has  to 
tend to encourage the actors to accelerate the implementation of the priority projects in 
the decisions concerning the guidelines as regards transport and energy, mentioned in 
recitals  4  and  6.  This  programme  has  to  make  it  possible  also  to  finance  the  other 
European infrastructure projects identified as being of common interest defined in the 
decisions.  

(13)  The  Community  financial  aid  is  granted  with  the  aim  of  developing  investment 
projects in the trans-European transport and energy networks to provide firm financial 
commitments,  to  mobilise  the  institutional  investors  and  to  prompt  the  formation  of 
financing  partnerships  between  the  public  and  private  sectors.  In  the  energy  sector, 
financial assistance has mainly to help to surmount the financial obstacles which can 
arise  at  the  time  of  the  preparation  of  projects  and  at  the  time  of  their  preliminary 
development prior to setting under construction, and will have to be concentrated on 
the cross-border sections of the priority projects and on the interconnections with the 
neighbouring countries.  

(14)  The  Community  financial  aid  should  be  able  to  take  several  forms,  namely  direct 
subsidy,  interest  rebate,  loan  guarantee  instruments,  participation  in  the  funds  of 
venture  capital  and  should  also  be  able  to  cover  specific  risks  following  the 
construction phase.  

(15)  For  the  implementation  of  Community  financial  support  for  large-scale  projects 
spreading  across  several  years,  it  is  advisable  to  allow  an  agreement  from  the 
Community  on  a  multi-annual  basis.  Indeed,  only  definite,  attractive  financial 
agreements,  binding  the  Community  in  the  long  term,  will  allow  the  reduction  of 
uncertainties connected with the carrying out of these projects and to mobilise the both 
public and private investors.  

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
(16)  Close attention has to be given to effective coordination of all the Community projects 
affecting  the  trans-European  networks,  in  particular  the  financing  resulting  from  the 
Structural  Funds  and  from  the  cohesion  Fund  and  the  interventions  of  the  European 
Investment Bank.  

(17) 

(18) 

This regulation establishes, for all the duration of the programme, a total appropriation 
which  constitutes  for  the  budgetary  authority  the  privileged  reference  within  the 
meaning  of  item  33  of  the  inter-institutional  agreement  of  6  May  1999  between  the 
European  Parliament,  the  Council  and  the  Commission,  on  budgetary  discipline  and 
the improvement of the procedure34. 

Given the expérience gained in applying Regulation no 2236/95 and the nature of the 
competences  given  to  the  Commission  it  is  appropriate  to  adopt  the  measures 
necessary  for  the  implementation  of  this  regulation  in  accordance  with  Decision 
nº1999/468/EC  of  the  Council  at  its  meeting  on  28  June  1999  laying  down  the 
methods of the exercise of the executive powers conferred on the Commission35.  

(19) 

In  view  of  the  adoption,  by  this  regulation,  of  specific  provisions  in  the  field  of 
transport  and  energy,  by  Council  Regulation  (EC)  n°…  of  the  European  Parliament 
and  the  Council,  it  is  appropriate  to  amend  Regulation  (EC)  n°  2236/95  in  order  to 
limit its scope to the field of telecommunications alone36. 

34 OJ..L… 
35 OJ, L 184 of 17/7/99 p.23 
36 See p….of O.J ….relating to the Regulation on Satellite Navigation and Positioning (GALILEO) 

EN 

25 

   EN 

 
                                                 
HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Chapter 1: General Provisions. 

Article 1: Objective 

This  Regulation  defines  the  conditions,  means  and  the  procedures  for  the  granting  of 
Community  aid  to  projects  of  common  interest  in  the  field  of  trans-European  transport  and 
energy networks on the basis of article 155 paragraph 1 of the Treaty. 

For the purposes of this Regulation it is understood that: 

Article 2: Definitions 

(1)  project  of  Common  Interest:  a  project  or  part  of  a  project  identified  to  be  of  common 
interest for the Community in the transport domain in the framework of the Decision 1692/96, 
and in the energy domain in the framework of Decision 1229/2003/CCE  

(2)priority project: in the domain of transport a project of common interest considered to be a 
priority  for  the  Community  as  defined  by  annex  III  of  the  Decision  N°  1692/96/CE  in  the 
domain of energy in the framework of Decision Nº 1229-2003-CE; 

(3)Part  of  a  Project:  all  independent  activity,  financially,  technically  or  over  time  and 
supporting the undertaking of the project.  

(4)Beneficiary: a public or private body having the overall responsibility for the project and 
proposing to invest its own resources or other funds in its construction. 

(5)Studies: studies needed for the definition of a project, including the preparatory studies, the 
feasibility and evaluation and any other technical support activities including activities prior 
to infrastructure works needed to complete the definition of a project and to make decisions 
about its financing, including exploratory work on the sites concerned and the preparation of 
the financial structure. 

(6)Works: purchase and supply of components systems and services, undertaking construction 
and  installation  works  related  to  the  project,  including  the  reception  of  installations  and  the 
entry into service of the project. 

(7)  Post  construction  phase  risks:  Risks  occurring  in  the  first  years  following  the  end  of 
construction due to specific factors and involving reduced receipts in use of income relative to 
forecasts. 

(8)  Project  Cost:  the  sum  of  the  total  cost  of  studies  and  works  directly  related  to  and 
necessary for the undertaking of the project and actually supported by the beneficiary. 

(9) Eligible Costs: the part of a projects’ costs taken into consideration by the Commission for 
the calculation of Community financial aid.  

EN 

26 

   EN 

 
Chapter: 2 Requests, Eligible Actions and Types of Aid 

Article 3: Eligibility of Projects 

Only  projects  of  common  interest,  identified  in  the  framework  of  Decisions  Nº 
1. 
1692/96/CE and nº 1229/2003/CE can benefit from Community financial support under this 
Regulation.  

Eligibility is subject to respect for Community policies and laws, notably in relation to 
the  effective 

2 
competition,  environmental  protection,  public  procurement  and 
implementation of Community provisions of interoperability of networks, in particular rail. 

to 

3 
In  the  domain  of  transport  only,  eligibility  is  also  subject  to  engagement  by  each 
member state concerned to the financial contribution to the projects submitted for Community 
financial aid while mobilising, if necessary, private funds. 

Article 4: Presentation of Requests for aid. 

Requests  for  financial  aid  are  presented  to  the  Commission  by  the  Member  State  or  States 
concerned or in the case of energy, also with the agreement of the latter by the public bodies 
or enterprises directly concerned. 

Article 5: Selection of Projects 

Projects  of  common  interest  shall  be  awarded  Community  aid  in  relation  to  their 
1. 
contribution  to  the  objectives  and  the  priorities  defined  in  the  framework  of  Decisions  nº 
1692/96/CE and nº 1229/2003. 

In the domain of transport special attention will be paid to the following projects and 

2. 
programmes. 

Projects  presented  jointly  by  at  least  two  Member  States  notably  in  cross-frontier 

a) 
cases. 

b) 

The projects contribution to network continuity and the optimisation of capacity. 

Priority  projects  which  contribute  to  the  integration  of  the  single  market  in  the 
c) 
enlarged  Union  and  to  the  re-balancing  of  transport  modes  in  favour  of  the  most 
environmentally friendly, notably for long distance freight transport. To this end, all requests 
to finance high speed rail lines must be accompanied by a plan showing how the infrastructure 
capacity  released  on  existing  lines  due  to  the  transfer  of  passenger  traffic  to  the  high  speed 
line, will be used for the development of freight traffic. 

Projects  contributing  to  the  improvement  of  quality  of  service  offered  on  the  trans-
d) 
European network and which favour, among other objectives, the safety and security of users 
and provide for interoperability between national networks. 

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
e) 
To  programmes  for  the  deployment  of  traffic  management  systems  for  rail  and  its 
components  as  well  as  traffic  management  systems  in  the  domain  of  air  and  maritime  that 
provide for interoperability. 

3. 

In the field of energy particular attention will be paid to projects that contribute to: 

a) the continuity of the network and the optimisation of its capacity 

b) the integration of the energy internal market and in particular the cross-border sections 

c) the security of energy supply and in particular the interconnections with the third countries 

d) the connection of the renewable energy resources and/or 

e) the safety, reliability and interoperability of the inter-connected networks 

Article 6: Types of Aid 

Community  financial  aid  covers  the  studies,  works  and  risks  which  occur  after  the 
construction phase. 

Article 7: Forms of Support. 

Community  financial  aid  to  studies,  development  actions  works  related  to  projects 

1. 
referred to in article 3 paragraph 1, can take one or more of the following forms: 

a) 

Direct grants. 

Interest rate rebates on loans given by the European Investment Bank (EIB) or other 

b) 
public or private financial institutions; 

c) 

d) 

Loan guarantees to cover risks after the construction phase. 

Participation in risk capital funds  

If necessary, a combination of Community aid referred to in point a) to d) with the aim 

e) 
of obtaining the maximum stimulating effect from mobilised budgetary resources. 

2. 

Community financial aid does not exceed the following rates: 

For Studies: 50% of the total eligible cost of studies whatever the project of common 

a) 
interest concerned. 

b) 

For Works  

For Priority projects in the transport domain, a maximum of 30% of the total eligible 
i) 
costs  of  the  works;  exceptionally,  trans-frontier  sections  of  projects  included  in  the  TEN-T 
programme  can  benefit  from  a  maximum  grant  rate  of  50%  of  total  eligible  costs,  provided 
that they are started before 2010 and that the Member States concerned have presented a plan 
to  the  Commission  giving  all  the  guarantees  necessary  regarding  the  financial  support  from 

EN 

28 

   EN 

 
the Member State and the timetable for the implementation of the project. This rate shall be 
adapted in relation to the benefits received by the other Member States; 

For  Priority  projects  in  the  energy  domain,  a  maximum  of  20%  of  the  total  eligible 

ii) 
costs of the works; 

iii) 
For other projects in the domain of transport: a maximum of 15% of the total eligible 
costs  of  the  works;  exceptionally,  for  projects  linked  to  the  deployment  of  interoperable 
systems, of safety and security, the rate may reach a maximum of 50%, adjusted to relation to 
the benefits to other Member States, of the total eligible costs of the works. 

iv) 

For other projects in the energy domain, a maximum of 10% of the total eligible costs. 

3. 
The Commission, in conformity with the procedures set out in article 17 paragraph 2, 
adopts  the  procedures,  the  timetable  and  the  amounts  for  the  payments  for  the  instruments 
referred to in paragraph 1 points b), c),d) of this article. 

Article 8: Accumulation of Community Support. 

1. 

2. 

The financial aid related to studies and to infrastructure works is cumulative. 

EIB operations are compatible with the granting of aid under the present Regulation. 

Community financial aid is excluded for sections of projects which receive other 

3. 
Community financing. 

Article 9: Compatibility and Coordination with other Community Policies. 

1. 
The projects of common interest financed under this Regulation must be in conformity 
with  the  provisions  of  the  Treaty,  to  legal  acts  adopted  on  the  basis  of  the  Treaty  and  to 
Community  policies,  including  those  concerning  the  protection  of  the  environment, 
interoperability, competition and public procurement. 

The  Commission  shall  ensure  the  coordination  and  the  coherence  of  projects 
2. 
undertaken in the framework of this Regulation with actions that have received Community 
budget support, actions of the EIB and other Community financial instruments. 

EN 

29 

   EN 

 
Chapter III Implementation, Programming, Control  

Article 10: Implementation. 

The  Commission  is  responsible  for  the  implementation  of  this  Regulation.  It  shall 
establish  the  means  and  the  conditions  to  undertake  projects  of  common  interest  in  the 
decisions  regarding  the  granting  of  aid  which  will  be  notified  to  the  Member  States 
concerned.  

Article 11: Multi-annual programming and Annual Programming. 

The  Commission  shall  establish,  in  conformity  with  the  procedure  established  in 

1. 
article 17§2, a multi-annual programme and an annual programme.  

2. 
The multi-annual programming shall apply to priority projects and shall establish the 
criteria  for  granting  support  together  with  the  budget  available  for  the  period  2007-2013, 
which must lie within the range of 65-85% of the budgetary resources laid down in article 19. 
paragraph1. 

3. 
The annual programme defines the criteria which shall apply to the grant of financial 
aid to other projects of common interest not included in the TEN-T multi-annual programme. 
Each year, the resources not used in the TEN-T multi-annual programme shall be allocated to 
the financing of other projects of common interest which form part of the annual programme.  

Article 12: Granting of aid 

1. 
Each project of common interest selected under the multi-annual programme, will be 
the subject of single Commission grant decision within the meaning of Article 17 paragraph 2. 
The budgetary commitment for each annual allocation is made by the Commission through a 
grant decision based on the evaluation of the state of progress of the projects of the estimated 
needs and of the available budget. 

Projects of common interest other than those covered under point 1 above shall be the 

2. 
subject of an annual Commission financial decision to grant support  

The  Commission  shall  notify  the  decision  as  well  as  the  conditions  attached  to  the 

3. 
grant to the beneficiary Member States and shall inform the beneficiaries.  

Article 13: Financial provisions  

The Community aid can cover only the expenditure related to the project and borne by 

1. 
the recipients or by third parties of the implementation of it.  

Expenditure  incurred  before  the  date  on  which  the  request  for  aid  is  received  by  the 

2. 
Commission is not eligible. 

EN 

30 

   EN 

 
 
 
The decisions taken by the Commission to grant financial assistance under the terms 

3. 
of Article 12 signify engagement of the expenditure authorised by the budget. 

4. 
As  a  general  rule,  payments  are  carried  out  in  the  form  of  an  advance,  intermediate 
and a final payment. The advance, which does not normally exceed 50% of the first annual 
block,  is  paid  when  the  request  for  aid  has  been  approved.  The  intermediate  payments  are 
carried out on the basis of the payment requests and in consideration of the state of progress 
of the project or of the study and, if necessary, taking account, in a rigorous and transparent 
way, of the revised financial schemes.  

5. 
The payment methods have to take account of the fact that the implementation of the 
infrastructure  projects spread out over several years and that it is important consequently to 
envisage similar distribution of financing. 

6. 
The Commission shall carry out the final payment after acceptance of the final report 
concerning a project or study, submitted by the recipient and certified by the Member State, 
detailing all expenditure actually incurred.  

Article 14: Member States’ responsibilities 

1. 
The  Member  States  shall  make  every  effort  to  implement,  in  the  field  of  their 
responsibility,  the  projects  of  common  interest  which  benefit  from  Community  aid  granted 
under this Regulation.  

2. 
The  Member  States  shall  undertake  the  monitoring  and  control  of  projects  in  close 
cooperation with the Commission and certify the reality and the conformity of the expenditure 
incurred  under  the  project  or  the  part  o  the  project.  The  Member  State  may  request  the 
participation of the Commission for ‘on site’ visits. 

3. 
The  Member  States  shall  inform  the  Commission  of  the  measures  taken  under 
paragraphs 2 and 3 and supply, notably, a description of the control systems, the management, 
and the monitoring established to ensure that the projects are undertaken correctly. 

Article 15: Cancellation, reduction, suspension and discontinuance of assistance 

1 
Except  for  those  cases  where  a  full  justification  is  made  to  the  Commission, 
Community finance aid granted to projects of common interest which have not commenced in 
the  two  years  following  the  date  set  down  in  the  grant  decision  shall  be  cancelled  by  the 
Commission.  

If a part or all the aid provided to undertake a project .is deemed not to be justifiable 
2 
the  Commission  shall  undertake  an  appropriate  examination  of  the  case  and,  in  particular, 
request the Member State or beneficiary, to present their observations within a specified time.  

Following the examination provided for by paragraph 2, the Commission can reduce, 
3 
suspend or cancel the aid for the project in question if any irregularities have been revealed or 
any of the conditions attached to the grant of aid have not been respected, notably when any 
important  modifications  have  been  introduced  concerning  the  nature,  or  the  means  of 
undertaking the project. 

EN 

31 

   EN 

 
Any unauthorised accumulation shall lead to the recovery of the amounts paid without 

4. 
due entitlement.  

5. 
If, ten years after the award of Community financial aid to a project, it has not been 
completed, the Commission can, in accordance with the principle of proportionality, request 
reimbursement of the aid paid, taking account all relevant facts.  

6. 

All aid paid without due entitlement shall be returned to the Commission. 

Article 16: Financial Control 

The  Commission’s  Anti-Fraud  Office  (OLAF)  can  undertake  on  site  controls  and 

1. 
checks in accordance with Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) n° 2185/96   

2 
For  Community  actions  financed  under  this  Regulation,  the  term  ‘irregularity’  in 
article 1 paragraph 2 of the Regulation (Euratom, EC) n° 2988/95 of the Council shall cover 
all  breaches  of  the  provisions  of  Community  law  or  any  failure  to  follow  a  contractual 
obligation  due  to  any  act  or  omission  by  a  legal  body  which  has  a  negative  impact  on  the 
general budget of the EU or the other budgets concerned by undue payments. 

3. 
Decisions stemming from the present Regulation can, notably, provide for monitoring 
and financial controls to be undertaken by the Commission (or any authorised representative) 
and audits by the Court of Auditors, if appropriate, on site. 

The  Member  State  concerned  and  the  Commission  shall  immediately  exchange  all 

4 
relevant information concerning the results of the controls undertaken. 

Chapter 4: Final Provisions 

17: Committee 

1. 

The Commission shall be assisted by a committee. 

2. 
If  reference  is  made  to  this  paragraph,  the  consultation  procedure  provided  for  by 
article 3 of the Council decision (EC) 1999/468 shall apply, in conformity with the provisions 
of articles 8 of the decision.  

3. 

4. 

The Committee shall adopt its internal rules.  

The EIB is represented in the committee and does not take part in the voting. 

Article 18: Evaluation. 

The  Commission  and  the  Member  States,  supported  by  the  beneficiaries  of  support,  can 
undertake an evaluation of the means adopted to undertake projects of common interest and 
programmes  as  well  as  the  impact  of  their  operation,  in  order  to  assess  if  the  objectives 
including  issues  concerning  environmental  protection-  have  been  attained.  The  Commission 
can  request  the  beneficiary  Member  States  to  provide  a  specific  evaluation  of  projects  of 

EN 

32 

   EN 

 
common  interest  financed  under  this  Regulation  or,  where  appropriate,  to  supply  the 
information and assistance required to undertake an evaluation of the projects. 

Article 19: Information and Publicity  

1. 
The Commission shall submit a report every three years to the European Parliament, 
the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the 
activities  undertaken  under  this  Regulation.  The  report  shall  contain  an  evaluation  of  the 
results achieved with Community aid in the various different fields of application, in terms of 
the  original  objectives,  as  well  as  a  chapter  on  the  content  and  the  implementation  of  the 
current multi-annual programme. 

2. 
The beneficiary Member States and where appropriate, beneficiaries shall ensure that 
suitable publicity is given to assistance granted under this Regulation in order to inform the 
public of the role of the Community in the implementation of the projects of common interest. 

Article 20  
Budgetary resources  

1.  The  amount  of  the  financial  reference  for  the  implementation  of  this  regulation  for  the 
period 2007-2013 is €20,690 million of which €20.350 million are allocated to transport and 
€340 million to energy.  
2. The annual appropriations are authorised by the budgetary authority within the limits of the 
financial perspective.  

Article 2 1  
Revision clause  

Before the end of 2010, the Commission will submit to the European Parliament and to the 
Council a general report on the experience gained with the mechanisms provided for by this 
regulation for the granting of Community financial aid.  

The European Parliament and the Council, ruling according to the procedure provided for in 
Article 156, first subparagraph, of the treaty, decide if and under which conditions, the actions 
provided for by this regulation will be maintained or modified beyond the period referred to in 
Article 20 paragrpah 1.1. 

Article 22: Amendment of Regulation (EC) n° 2236/95  

Regulation (EC) n° 2236/95, is amended as follows:  

1) 

The title is replaced by the following title:  

"Council regulation (EEC) n° 2236/95, decided 18 September 1995, determining the general 
rules  for  the  granting  of  Community  financial  aid  in  the  field  of  the  trans-European 
telecommunications networks”  

2) 

The 1st article is replaced by the following text:  

"Article 1: Definition and scope  

EN 

33 

   EN 

 
This  regulation  defines  the  conditions,  methods  and  procedures  of  implementation  of  the 
Community  aid  for  projects  of  common  interest  in  the  field  of  the  trans-European 
telecommunications networks, under Article 155 paragraph 1, of the treaty" 

3) 

4) 

Article 4, Paragraph 3 is withdrawn;  

Article 5 (3), is replaced by the following text:  

"3. Irrespective of the form of selected assistance, the total amount of Community aid granted 
to the title of this regulation cannot exceed X% of the total cost of investments." 

5) 

6) 

7) 

Article 5 a) is deleted  

Article 9 (1) (a), the fourth indent is deleted.  

Article 10 is replaced by the following text:  

“Article 10 

Granting financial support 

In compliance with article 274 of the Treaty, the Commission shall decide to grant financial 
support under this Regulation through an assessment of the applications based on the selection 
criteria “. 

Article 11paragraph.7 is replaced by the following text: 

8. 
“7; The Commission shall adopt in accordance with the procedures referred to in Article 17 
paragraph  3,  a  framework  for  the  procedures,  the  timetable  and  the  amounts  of  interest-rate 
subsidies, grants, guarantee premiums and support in the form of risk capital participation, for 
investment funds or comparable financial undertakings with a priority focus on providing risk 
capital for trans-European network projects.” 

9. 

Article 14 shall be deleted.  

Article 15, paragraph 3, first phrase, the reference to articles 5 and 6 is replaced by a 

10. 
reference to article 5, paragraphs 1 and 2 and to Article 6.  

Article 16 paragraph 1 is replaced by the following text : 

11. 
“1.  Each  year  the  Commission  shall  present  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council,  the 
Economic  and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  report  on  the  activities 
undertaken in the framework of this Regulation. This report will include an evaluation of the 
results  achieved  by  Community  support  in  the  various  sectors  having  regard  to  the  initial 
objectives “. 

12. 

Annex 1 shall be deleted.  

Article 23: Entry into Force 

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

It applies as from 1 January 2007. 

EN 

34 

   EN 

 
The actions underway in the transport and energy fields on the date of entry into force of this 
Regulation  shall  continue  to  be  subject  to  Regulation  2236/95  until  their  completion,  in  its 
version into force until 31st december 2006.  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. 

Done at Brussels, […] 

For the European Parliament 
The President 
[…] 

For the Council 
The President 

EN 

35 

   EN 

 
FICHE FINANCIÈRE LÉGISLATIVE 

Domaine(s) politique(s): Promotion de la compétitivité, de la sécurité et de la soutenabilité 
en matière environnementale des réseaux transeuropéens. 

Activité(s): Réseau Transeuropéen de Transport et d’Energie 

DÉNOMINATION  DE  L’ACTION:  SOUTIEN  FINANCIER  POUR  DES  PROJETS  D’INTERET  COMMUN 

DANS LE RESEAU TRANSEUROPEEN DE TRANSPORT ET D’ENERGIE 

1. 

LIGNE(S) BUDGÉTAIRE(S) + INTITULÉ(S) 

06.0301 : Soutien financier aux projets d’intérêt commun du réseau transeuropéen de 
transport 

06.01.04.04 : Soutien financier aux projets d'intérêt commun du réseau transeuropéen 
de transport — Dépenses pour la gestion administrative 

06.03.02: Soutien financier  aux projets d’intérêt commun  du réseaux transeuropéen 
de l’énergie. 

06.01.04.05 : Soutien financier aux projets d'intérêt commun du réseau transeuropéen 
de l'énergie — Dépenses pour la gestion administrative 

2. 

2.1 

DONNÉES CHIFFRÉES GLOBALES  

Enveloppe totale de l’action (partie B): millions d'euros en CE 

20.690 millions d’€ en crédits d’engagement. 

The decision by the legislative authority is taken without prejudice of the budgetary 
decisions taken in the context of the annual procedure 

2.2 

Période d’application: 

2007-2013 

2.3 

Estimation globale pluriannuelle des dépenses: 

a) 

Échéancier  crédits  d'engagement/crédits  de  paiement  (intervention  financière) 
(cf. point 6.1.1) 

Millions d'euros (à la 3e décimale) 

Crédits 
d'engagement 

Crédits de 
paiement 

2007 

2008 

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013 

2014 

2015

Total 

908,8  1781,2 

2344

2874,5

3544,5

4240,5

4931,5 

0 

0

20625

359,9 

982,3  1741,2

2385,6

2982,5

3621,2

4304,8 

2764  1483,6

20625

EN 

36 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
b) 

Assistance 
(cf. point 6.1.2) 

technique  et  administrative  (ATA)  et  dépenses  d’appui  (DDA) 

2007 

2008 

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013 

2014 

2015 Total 

CE 

CP 

6,2 

6,8 

6,2 

6,8 

8

8

10,5

10,5

11,5

11,5 

10,5

10,5

11,5

11,5 

0 

0 

0

0

65

65

Sous-total 
a+b 

CE 

CP 

2007 

2008 

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013 

2014 

2015

Total 

915 

1788 

2352

2885

3555

4252

4943 

0 

0

20690

366,1 

989,1  1749,2

2396,1

2993

3632,7

4316,3 

2764  1483,6

20690

c) 

Incidence  financière  globale  des  ressources  humaines  et  autres  dépenses  de 
fonctionnement 
(cf. points 7.2 et 7.3) 

2007 

2008 

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013 

2014 

2015 Total 

CE/CP 

10,973  10,973  10,973

10,973

10,973

10,973

10,973 

0 

0

76,811

TOTAL 
a+b+c 

CE 

CP 

2007 

2008 

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013 

2014 

2015

Total 

926,0  1799,0  2363,0

2896,0

3566,0

4263,0

4954,0 

0,0 

0,0

20766,8

377,1  1000,1  1760,2

2407,1

3004,0

3643,7

4327,3  2764,0  1483,6

20766,8

2.4 

Compatibilité avec la programmation financière et les perspectives financières 

[X]  Proposition compatible avec la Communication de la Commission concernant 

2007-2013 du 10 février 2004 (COM (2004) 101). 

2.5 

Incidence financière sur les recettes 

[X]  Aucune  implication  financière  (concerne  des  aspects  techniques  relatifs  à  la 

mise en œuvre d'une mesure). 

3. 

CARACTÉRISTIQUES BUDGÉTAIRES 

Nature de la dépense 

Nouvelle 

Participation 
AELE 

Participation 
pays 
candidats 

Rubrique PF

EN 

37 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
DNO 

CD 

NON 

NON 

NON 

N° 1A 

4. 

BASE JURIDIQUE  

L’article 156 du traité. 

Le  Règlement  (CE)  n°  2236/95  du  Conseil  du  18  septembre  1995  déterminant  les  règles 
générales  pour  l'octroi  d'un  concours  financier  communautaire  dans  le  domaine  des  réseaux 
transeuropéens,  amendé  par  le  Règlement  (CE)  nº  1655/1999  du  Parlement  européen  et  du 
Conseil, du 19 juillet 1999 et modifié par le Règlement (CE) n° 807/2004 du 21 avril 2004. 

La Décision n° 1692/96/CE du Parlement européen et du Conseil, du 23 juillet 1996, sur les 
orientations  communautaires  pour  le  développement  du  réseau  transeuropéen  de  transport 
amendée  par  la  Décision  n° 1346/2001/CE  du  Parlement  européen  et  du  Conseil  du  22  mai 
2001 modifiant la décision n° 1692/96/CE en ce qui concerne les ports maritimes, les ports de 
navigation intérieure et les terminaux intermodaux ainsi que le projet n° 8 de l’annexe III et 
amendée par la Décision n°884/2004/CE du 29 avril 2004. 

DÉCISION No 1229/2003/CE DU PARLEMENT EUROPÉEN ET DU CONSEIL du 26 juin 
2003 établissant un ensemble d'orientations relatif aux réseaux transeuropéens dans le secteur 
de l'énergie, et abrogeant la décision no 1254/96/CE 

RÈGLEMENT (CE)……….. DU PARLAMENT EUROPEEN ET DU CONSEIL 

du …….. déterminant les règles générales pour l’octroi d’un soutien financier communautaire 
dans le domaine des réseaux transeuropéens de transport et d’énergie 

L'enveloppe  financière  du  programme  peut  également  couvrir  les  dépenses  afférentes  aux 
actions de préparation, de suivi, de contrôle, d'audit et d'évaluation, directement nécessaires à 
la  gestion  du  programme  et  à  la  réalisation  de  ses  objectifs,  notamment,  des  études,  des 
réunions,  des  actions  d'information  et  de  publication,  (des  dépenses  liées  aux  réseaux 
informatiques  visant  l'échange  d'informations),  ainsi  que  toute  autre  dépense  d'assistance 
administrative  et  technique  à  laquelle  peut  recourir  la  Commission  pour  la  gestion  du 
programme. 

EN 

38 

   EN 

 
FICHE FINANCIÈRE LÉGISLATIVE : POINTS SPECIFIQUES POUR LE RESEAU 
TRANSEUROPEENS DE TRANSPORT 

DÉNOMINATION  DE  L’ACTION:  SOUTIEN  FINANCIER  POUR  DES  PROJETS  D’INTERET  COMMUN 

DANS LE RESEAU TRANSEUROPEEN DE TRANSPORT 

1. 

LIGNE(S) BUDGÉTAIRE(S) + INTITULÉ(S) 

voir ci-dessus 

2. 

2.1 

DONNÉES CHIFFRÉES GLOBALES  

Enveloppe totale de l’action (partie B): millions d'euros en CE 

20.350 millions d’€ en crédits d’engagement. 

2.2 

Période d’application: 

2007-2013 

2.3 

Estimation globale pluriannuelle des dépenses: 

a) 

Échéancier  crédits  d'engagement/crédits  de  paiement  (intervention  financière) 
(cf. point 6.1.1) 

Millions d'euros (à la 3e décimale) 

2007 

2008 

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013 

2014 

2015

Total 

Crédits 
d'engagement 

Crédits de 
paiement 

889,0  1.761,5  2.294,5  2.825,0  3.485,0  4.182,0  4.853,0 

0,00 

0,00 

20.290,0 

354,0 

968,5  1.712,5  2.345,0  2.930,0  3.565,0  4.240,0  2.715,0  1.460,0 

20.290,0 

b) 

Assistance 
(cf. point 6.1.2) 

technique  et  administrative  (ATA)  et  dépenses  d’appui  (DDA) 

2007 

2008 

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013 

2014 

2015 Total 

CE 

CP 

6,0 

6,0 

6,5 

6,5 

7,5 

7,5 

10,0 

10,0 

10,0 

10,0 

10,0 

10,0 

10,0 

10,0 

Sous-total 
a+b 

CE 

CP 

2007 

2008 

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013 

2014 

2015

895 

1.768 

2.302 

2.835 

3.495 

4.192 

4.863 

- 

- 

20.350 

360 

975 

1.720 

2.355 

2.940 

3.575 

4.250 

2.715 

1.460 

60,0 

60,0 

Total 

20.350 

   EN 

EN 

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
c) 

Incidence  financière  globale  des  ressources  humaines  et  autres  dépenses  de 
fonctionnement 
(cf. points 7.2 et 7.3) 

2007 

2008 

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013 

2014 

2015 Total 

CE/CP 

10,4 

10,4 

10,4 

10,4 

10,4 

10,4 

10,4 

TOTAL 
a+b+c 

CE 

CP 

2007 

2008 

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013 

2014 

2015

905,4  1.778,4  2.312,4  2.845,4  3.505,4  4.202,4  4.873,4 

0,0 

0,0 

20.422,8 

370,4 

985,4  1.730,4  2.365,4  2.950,4  3.585,4  4.260,4  2.715,0  1.460,0 

20.422,8 

72,8

Total 

3. 

CARACTÉRISTIQUES BUDGÉTAIRES 

voir ci-dessus 

4. 

BASE JURIDIQUE  

voir ci-dessus 

5. 

5.1 

DESCRIPTION ET JUSTIFICATION 

Nécessité d'une intervention communautaire37 

La  nécessité  de  l'intervention  communautaire  se  justifie  par  l'obligation  de  contribuer  à 
l'établissement et au développement du réseau transeuropéen de transport, considéré comme 
une politique essentielle pour le bon fonctionnement du Marché Intérieur et pour la cohésion 
économique  et  sociale  (articles  154  à  156).  Cette  contribution  prend  la  forme  du 
cofinancement des projets d'intérêt commun identifiés dans les orientations communautaires 
pour le développement du réseau transeuropéen de transport (Décision n° n°884/2004/CE du 
29 avril 2004). 

5.1.1 Objectifs poursuivis 

La  Commission  dans  son  Livre  Blanc  sur  la  politique  commune  des  transports38,  avait 
cependant  tiré  la  sonnette  d’alarme  sur  les  retards  dans  la  réalisation  de  ce  réseau. 
Notamment,  malgré  les  engagements  pris  par  les  Etats  au  Conseil  européen  d’Essen  en 
décembre 1994 de réaliser d’ici 2010 quatorze grands projets d’infrastructure, à la fin 2003, 
seulement  trois  de  ces  projets  avaient  été  terminés :  en  particulier,  moins  du  quart  des 
investissements nécessaires pour les liaisons transnationales de ces projets ont été trouvés. Si 
cette  situation  ne  devait  pas  évoluer,  pour  achever  l’ensemble  du  réseau  transeuropéen  de 

37 Pour plus d'informations, voir le document d'orientation séparé. 
38 COM (2001) 370 : « La politique européenne des transports à l’horizon 2010 : l’heure des choix » 

EN 

40 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
  
 
                                                 
transport tel que révisé en 2004, il faudrait encore plus de 20 ans, compte tenu du fait que les 
ressources  publiques,  des  Etats,  de  la  Communauté  ou  des  régions,  allouées  à  ces  projets 
restent très en deça des besoins. 

Avec  l’arrivée  des  dix  nouveaux  Etats  membres  au  sein  de  l’Union,  le  trafic  entre  Etats 
membres va quasiment doubler d’ici 202039 sur des infrastructures parfois obsolètes ou dont 
la  capacité  est  déjà  aujourd’hui  très  en  deçà  des  besoins.  Le  manque  de  connexions 
transeuropéennes  performantes  pour  faire  face  à  cette  demande  risque  ainsi  d’handicaper 
sérieusement  la  compétitivité  de  l’Union  et  des  Etats  et  les  régions  périphériques  qui  ne 
pourront  pas  –  ou  ne  pourront  plus  -  profiter  pleinement  des  effets  bénéfiques  du  grand 
marché unique. Pour faire face à ces défis, la Commission a présenté – en octobre 2003 – une 
proposition de révision des orientations relatives au réseau transeuropéen de transport, et en 
particulier une mise à jour de la liste des projets prioritaires – désormais au nombre de 30 - 
couvrant  l’Union  élargie.  Celle-ci  a  été  adoptée  par  le  Parlement  et  le  Conseil  le  21  avril 
dernier. 

Si  la  Communauté  est  dotée  des  compétences  en  matière  de  planification  des  réseaux 
transeuropéens, celles-ci ne sont cependant pas accompagnées du volet financier adéquat pour 
soutenir la réalisation ces réseaux. Les financements communautaires présentent pourtant des 
avantages significatifs par rapport aux financements nationaux. Il offriront une stabilité dans 
le financement que beaucoup des budgets nationaux, soumis aux aléas de la conjoncture et des 
changements  d’arbitrages,  n’offrent  pas;  ils  jouent  un  effet  de  levier  incitant  les  Etats 
membres à investir dans des projets à forte valeur ajoutée européenne mais également pour les 
inciter  à  se  coordonner  entre  eux.  Ils  contribuent  à  la  mise  en  œuvre  de  la  politique  des 
transports,  en  particulier  en  privilégiant  les  modes  plus  « soutenables »,  notamment  les 
connexions  ferroviaires  transfrontalières40  et  ils  pourraient  également  servir  de  catalyseur 
pour  le  montage  de  partenariats  public-privé.  Malgré  tous  ces  avantages,  les  ressources 
allouées  aux  réseaux  transeuropéens  sur  la  période  2000-2006,  soit  4.170  M€  destinés  au 
transport - ont été largement insuffisantes par rapport aux coûts de réalisation du réseau. Ceci 
représente à peine 600 M€ par an sur la période, ce qui reste très insuffisant par rapport aux 
besoins  financiers  identifiés  pour  le  réseau  transeuropéen  de  transport  et  par  rapport  aux 
demandes  de  soutien  formulées  par  les  Etats  membres  qui  représentent  plusieurs  fois  cette 
enveloppe.  

Les besoins financiers des 30 projets prioritaires au sens de l’annexe III de la décision sur les 
orientations  relatives  aux  réseaux  transeuropéens  de  transport  identifiés  par  le  Conseil  et  le 
Parlement représentent à eux seuls 225 milliards d’€ dont la plus grande partie des coûts sera 
supportée entre 2007 et 2013, ce qui représente environ 140 milliards d’€.  

D’une façon générale, les objectifs poursuivis ont pour but : 

- d’améliorer l’écoulement du trafic au bénéfice des usagers et des entreprises ; 

-  d'accélérer  la  réalisation  par  les  Etats  Membres  des  projets  d’intérêt  commun  et  en 
particulier des projets transfrontaliers du réseau transeuropéen de transport, afin qu’au moins 

39 Trafic total : +70% du trafic fret pour EU 15 et +100% pour EUR10. 
40 Plus de 65% du budget RTE est alloué aux projets ferroviaires, 20% aux systèmes de transport intelligents 
(ITS)  et  innovants,  tels  que  les  systèmes  d’interopérabilité  dans  le  domaine  ferroviaire  ou  de  la 
navigation  aérienne.  Un  accent  particulier  est  également  mis  sur  le  développement  de  grands  projets 
transfrontaliers à vocation fret qui bénéficient d’une assurance des financements.  

EN 

41 

   EN 

 
                                                 
75%  des  projets  prioritaires  aient  été  complétés  en  2013,  y  compris  pour  ce  qui  est  des 
sections internationales ; 

- de surmonter les obstacles financiers pouvant se poser dans la phase de mise en œuvre de 
ces projets et d'assurer de meilleurs montages financiers des projets, en minimisant le recours 
aux fonds publics, grâce à la souplesse des modalités d'intervention ; 

-  de  stimuler  la  participation  de  capitaux  privés  au  financement  des  projets  ainsi  que  le 
partenariat entre secteurs public et privé; 

Pour  l’Union  dans  son  ensemble  l’achèvement  de  ces  projets  permettra  de  réduire  les 
émissions de CO2 de 4%, ainsi que la pollution atmosphérique en particulier dans les zones 
sensibles de montagne. La congestion routière devrait être réduite, quant à elle de 14% et ils 
feront gagner des gains de temps dans les transports entre régions valant 8 milliards € par an. 
Ils contribueront à stabiliser la répartition modale et pourront même l’inverser en faveur des 
modes de transports les plus respectueux de l’environnement sur certains axes internationaux. 
Par ailleurs, en contribuant à développer les échanges entre Etats membres, et en améliorant 
l’accessibilité, ces projets devraient accroître le potentiel de croissance de 0,2 à 0,3% du PIB, 
ce qui correspondrait à la création ou au maintien d’un million d’emplois permanents 

5.1.2 Dispositions prises relevant de l’évaluation ex ante  

Dans le cadre de la révision des orientations RTE-T (COM (2003) 564) la Commission a fait 
réaliser  une  analyse  d'impact  approfondie  de  la  proposition  modifiant  la  décision 
n° 1692/96/CE  sur  le  développement  du  réseau  transeuropéen  de  transport.  Les  principales 
remarques du document SEC (2003) 1060 sont les suivantes : 

a. Le programme d'investissement RTE-T stimulera la compétitivité et l'économie en Europe. 
Il  contribuera  au  développement  du  commerce  international,  notamment  dans  les  nouveaux 
pays membres.  

b.  A  court  terme,  les  travaux  de  construction  stimuleront  l'emploi,  en  particulier  dans  les 
régions concernées. 

c.  A  plus  long  terme,  l'amélioration  des  conditions  de  vie  résultant  de  la  multiplication  des 
occasions  de  rencontres  et  le  développement  des  perspectives  commerciales  grâce  à 
l'amélioration  des  connexions  et  de  l'accessibilité  sont  estimées  à  0,23 %  du  PIB  et 
représentent environ un million d'emplois durables. 

Les besoins en investissement ont été estimés dans le cadre du rapport Van Miert s’élèvent à 
600 milliards d’€ pour l’ensemble des projets d’intérêt commun, dont 225 milliards pour les 
projets prioritaires (140 milliards pour ces projets pour la seule période 2007-2013). 

5.2 

Actions envisagées et modalités de l'intervention budgétaire 

Population visée  

Administrations  nationales  et  régionales  de  transport,  sociétés  et  consortia  réalisateurs  des 
projets,  instituts  et  fondations  techniques,  groupes  économiques  d’intérêt  européen,  usagers 
des infrastructures de transport. Selon le nouveau Règlement, les demandes de concours sont 
présentées à la Commission par le ou les Etats membres directement concernés. 

EN 

42 

   EN 

 
Choix des modalités d’intervention 

Comme déjà indiqué, la Commission considère que le soutien maximal aux projets du réseau 
transeuropéen  appartenant  à  la  catégorie  des  projets  ferroviaires  transfrontaliers  devant 
franchir  des  barrières  naturelles  ou  bien  les  projets  visant  à  l’élimination  de  goulets 
d’étranglement  devrait  être  augmenté  dans  une  fourchette  allant  jusqu’à  50  %  du  coût  total 
afin de déclencher un effet multiplicateur et notamment d’attirer des investisseurs privés 

La modalité d’intervention pour les projets spécifiques dépend en premier lieu de la situation 
et du degré de maturité de chaque projet. 

Les  études  de  faisabilité  sont  appropriées  pour  garantir  que  les  projets  sont  bien  définis 
depuis leur conception jusqu’à leur lancement.  

Les  autres  types  d’intervention,  c’est-à-dire  bonifications  d’intérêt,  contributions  aux 
primes de garantie d’emprunt, sont retenus de façon à s’assurer que le type de financement 
retenu  est  le  plus  approprié  pour  le  développement  du  projet  considéré.  Ceci  est  valable 
également  pour  les  subventions  dans  les  cas  où  elles  permettent  par  le  biais  de 
l’additionnalité, l’accélération des projets, rendue impossible jusqu’alors par manque de fonds 
et  par  l’insuffisance  de  rentabilité  financière  pour  des  projets  économiquement  viables.  La 
mise en œuvre d’un fonds de garantie permettra également de couvrir des risques postérieurs 
à la construction dans le cas de montages de type PPP. 

Des  informations  précises  sont  fournies  par  les  Etats  Membres  ou  promoteurs  selon  les 
indications citées dans les formulaires de demande de soutien financier pour des études et pour 
des  projets  éligibles,  c'est-à-dire  les  coûts  éligibles  estimés.  Le  plan  de  financement  est  aussi 
élaboré  par  les  Etats  Membres  ou  promoteurs  en  utilisant  le  tableau  "Ventilation  des  coûts  et 
plan  de  financement"  qui  se  trouve  dans  le  formulaire  de  demande  de  soutien  financier.  Ils 
doivent  aussi  déclarer  avoir  vérifié  la  possibilité  d'utilisation  d'autres  sources  de  financement, 
notamment privées. 

Les orientations RTE (n°884/2004) comprennent une série de projets d’intérêt commun et parmi 
ces  projets  on  dénombre  30  projets  prioritaires qui  bénéficieront  en  priorité  du  financement  à 
travers le budget RTE-T (entre 65 et 85% du total). 

La  sélection  des  projets  bénéficiant  d’un  cofinancement  RTE-T  se  fera  sur  la  base  des 
informations  envoyées  par  les  Etats  membres,  une  première  appréciation  de  ces  informations 
permet d’estimer qu’un certain nombre de ces projets répondent aux objectifs liés aux réseaux 
transeuropéens Transport. 

Selon  le  règlement  RTE  actuel,  les  demandes  de  concours  financier  sont  présentées  à  la 
Commission par les Etats membres ou les promoteurs. Celles-ci font alors l’objet d’un examen 
approfondi afin de vérifier la conformité de la dotation de chaque projet, y compris les projets 
transfrontaliers.  A  cet  égard,  il  est  tenu  compte,  en  accord  avec  le  règlement,  des  points 
suivants : 

a) Degré de contribution du projet spécifique aux objectifs énoncés dans le traité, ainsi qu’aux 
objectifs et priorités couvertes par les orientations communautaires pour le développement du 
RTE ; 

b) Viabilité économique/financière potentielle ; 

EN 

43 

   EN 

 
c) Maturité du projet (y compris exécution budgétaire antérieure) ; 

d)  Effet  de 
“publics/privés”; 

stimulation  de 

l’intervention  communautaire 

sur 

les 

financements 

e) Effets socio-économiques directs et indirects, notamment sur l’emploi ; 

f) Impact sur l’environnement ; 

g) garantie du respect du droit communautaire ; 

h) calendrier d’exécution et information sur l’enveloppe financière et la participation prévue 
d’entités publiques ou autres ; 

i) bénéfices retirés par les autres Etats membres. 

5.3 

Modalités de mise en œuvre 

Gestion  directe  par  la  Commission  uniquement  avec  du  personnel  statutaire  ou  externe  –  la 
possibilté  d’avoir  recours  à  une  agence  exécutive  est  cependant  prise  en  compte  dans  la 
proposition de Règlement. 

6. 

6.1 

INCIDENCE FINANCIÈRE  

Incidence  financière  totale  sur  la  partie  B  (pour  toute  la  période  de 
programmation) 

6.1.1 

Intervention financière 

Crédits d'engagement en millions d'euros (à la 3e décimale) 

2007 

2008 

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013 

2014 

2015 Total 

760,75 

1502,8 

1956,7 

2409,75 

2970,75 

3563,2 

4133,55 

0 

134,25 

265,2 

345,3 

425,25 

524,25 

628,8 

729,45 

0 

0 

0 

895 

1768 

2302 

2835 

3495 

4192 

4863 

0 

0 

17297,5 

3052,5 

20350 

Ventilation 

Programme 
RTE 
pluriannuel 

Autres 
projets 
d’intérêt 
commun 

Total  

6.1.2 

Assistance  technique  et  administrative  (ATA),  dépenses  d'appui  (DDA)  et  dépenses 
TI (crédits d’engagement)en M€ 

2007 

2008 

2009 

2010 

2011 

2012-2013 

Total 

1)  Assistance  technique  et 
administrative (ATA): 
a) Bureaux d’assistance 
technique (BAT) 

EN 

44 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
b) Autre assistance 
technique et administrative: 
- intra-muros: 
- extra-muros: 
dont  pour  la  construction  et 
la  maintenance  de  systèmes 
de gestion informatisés: 

1,0 

Sous-total 1  1,0 

2) Dépenses d’appui (DDA): 

1,0 

1,0 

1,0 

1,0 

1,0 

1,0 

1,0 

1,0 

2,0 

2,0 

a) Études 

4,5 

5,0 

6,0 

8,5 

8,5 

17 

b) Réunion d’experts 

c) Information et  
publications 

0,5 

Sous-total 2  5,0 

0,5 

5,5 

0,5 

6,5 

0,5 

9,0 

0,5 

9,0 

1 

18,0 

TOTAL  6,0 

6,5 

7,5 

10,0 

10,0 

20,0 

6.2. 

Calcul  des  coûts  par  mesure  envisagée  en  partie  B  (pour  toute  la  période  de 
programmation)41 

Crédits d'engagement en millions d'euros (à la 3e décimale) 

Ventilation 

Etudes 
pour 
réalisation des projets RTE-T 

travaux 

et 

Nombre de 
réalisations/ 
outputs 
(total pour 
années 1…n)  
2 

40 

Coût unitaire 
moyen 

Coût total 
(total pour années 
1…n)  

3 

4=(2X3) 

Type  
de réalisations 
/outputs 
(projets, 
dossiers …) 
1 

Etudes 
techniques, 
environnementa
les, 
économiques, 
financières  

la 

Travaux 

160 

COÛT TOTAL 

200 

(Si nécessaire, expliquer le mode de calcul.) 

41 

Pour plus d'informations, voir le document d'orientation séparé. 

EN 

45 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
7. 

INCIDENCE 
SUR 
ADMINISTRATIVES  

LES 

EFFECTIFS 

ET 

LES 

DÉPENSES 

7.1. 

Incidence sur les ressources humaines 

Les  besoins  en  ressources  humaines  et  administratives  seront  couverts  à  l’intérieure  de  la 
dotation allouée à la DG gestionnaire dans le cadre de la procédure d’allocation annuelle 

L'allocation  de  postes  dépendra  d'une  part  de  l'organisation  interne  de  la  prochaine 
Commission  et  d'autre  part  d'une  éventuelle  réallocation  de  postes  entre  services  suite  aux 
nouvelles perspectives financières. 

Situation actuelle 
Types d’emplois 

Effectifs à affecter à la gestion de l’action 
par utilisation des ressources existantes 
et/ou supplémentaires 

Nombre d’emplois 
permanents 

Nombre d’emplois 
temporaires 

A 
B 
C 
ressources 

Fonctionnaires ou 
agents 
temporaires 
Autres 
humaines 
Total 

27 
11 
20 

58 

Situation future 
Types d’emplois 
Variation par 
rapport à la situation 
actuelle 

Effectifs à affecter à la gestion de l’action 
par utilisation des ressources existantes 
et/ou supplémentaires 

Nombre d’emplois 
permanents 

Nombre d’emplois 
temporaires 

Total 

27 
11 
20 

58 

Total 

Description des tâches découlant de 
l’action 

(Si nécessaire, une description plus 
complète des tâches peut être annexée.) 

Description des tâches découlant de 
l’action 

A 
B 
C 
ressources 

Fonctionnaires ou 
agents 
temporaires 
Autres 
humaines 
Total 

37 (+10) 
29 (+18) 
27 (+7) 

93 (+35) 

37 (+10) 
29 (+18) 
27 (+7) 

(Si nécessaire, une description plus 
complète des tâches peut être 
annexée.) 

93 (+35) 

7.2 

Incidence financière globale des ressources humaines 

Type de ressources humaines 

Montants en euros 

Mode de calcul *  

Fonctionnaires 
Agents temporaires 

Autres ressources humaines 

10.044.000 

(indiquer la ligne budgétaire) 

Total  10.044.000 

Les montants correspondent aux dépenses totales pour 12 mois. 

108.000 
fonctionnaire et par an 

€ 

en  moyenne 

par 

EN 

46 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
7.3 

Autres dépenses de fonctionnement découlant de l’action 

Ligne budgétaire   
(n° et intitulé) 

Enveloppe globale (Titre A7) 
A0701 – Missions 
A07030 – Réunions 
A07031 – Comités obligatoires (1) 
A07032 – Comités non obligatoires (1) 
A07040 – Conférences 
A0705 – Études et consultations 
  Autres dépenses (indiquer lesquelles) 

Systèmes d’information (A-5001/A-4300) 

Montants en euros 

Mode de calcul 

200.000  

162.000 

200  missions  par  an  et  1.000  €  par 
mission 
4  réunions  du  comité réglementaire 
obligatoire RTE-T par an à 27 et 1.500 
€ par personne  

Autres dépenses - partie A (indiquer lesquelles) 

Total  362.000 

Les montants correspondent aux dépenses totales de l’action pour 12 mois. 

(1) Préciser le type de comité ainsi que le groupe auquel il appartient. 

I. 
II. 
III. 

Total annuel (7.2 + 7.3) 
Durée de l’action 
Coût total de l’action (I x II) 

8. 

SUIVI ET ÉVALUATION 

8.1 

Système de suivi 

10.406.000 euros 
7 années 

72.842.000 euros 

Le Règlement prévoit la nécessité d'un suivi et l'évaluation de chaque action. Il est ainsi prévu 
que les décisions de la Commission incluent, le cas échéant, des indicateurs physiques établis 
en accord avec les Etats membres. 

D'autre  part,  selon  les  termes  des  Décisions  standard  de  la  Commission,  les  bénéficiaires 
doivent fournir annuellement des informations sur le déroulement des actions (Project Status 
Report) qui alimentent les analyses permettant l'évaluation conjointe avec les Etats Membres 
sur les modalités de réalisation des projets.  

Les  études,  pour  lesquelles  des  indicateurs  ne  peuvent  pas  être  élaborés,  seront  évaluées 
conjointement avec les Etats membres, en fonction des objectifs poursuivis. 

8.2 

Modalités et périodicité de l’évaluation prévue 

Indicateurs d’impact selon les objectifs poursuivis 

L’impact et les résultats vis-à-vis les objectifs spécifiques seront évalués autant que possible 
selon les effets dérivés : 

- augmentation des capacités et de l’efficacité des infrastructures RTE-T; 

-  sécurité  des  transports  (passagers,  cargos  dangereux  etc.)  et  réduction  du  nombre 
d’accidents; 

EN 

47 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
- évolution d’indicateurs socio-économiques par rapport aux prévisions ex-ante; 

- réduction de la congestion ; 

- réduction de pollution ; 

- évaluation qualitative chez les utilisateurs des réseaux ; 

- bénéfices retirés par d’autres Etats membres ; 

- avantages économiques engendrés par l’intervention communautaire (y compris justification 
des  choix  d’instruments  financiers,  en  l’occurrence  bonifications  d’intérêt,  subventions 
directes, primes de garantie etc.). 

Ces  indicateurs  seront  chiffrés  selon  les  types  d’action  évalués  et  après  discussion  avec  les 
Etats membres. 

Evaluation  ponctuelle:  pour  un  nombre  limité  d’actions,  il  est  possible  de  lancer  des 
évaluations de projets ou d’un ensemble de projets. 

Par  ailleurs,  une  évaluation  à  mi-parcours  sera  réalisée  avant  fin  2010  pour  adapter  le 
programme si nécessaire. Une évaluation générale des résultats de l'activité RTE-Énergie sera 
réalisée à la fin du programme. 

Cette évaluation visera à mesurer les résultats des actions financées dans le cadre des RTE-
transport et à voir dans quelle mesure ces actions ont contribué par leur impact à atteindre ou 
à s’approcher des objectifs politiques de l’Union. Elle permettra également l’adaptation future 
des orientations RTE-transport. 

9. 

MESURES ANTI-FRAUDE 

Les dispositions anti-fraude sont établies par le règlement modifié qui prévoit des dispositions 
renforcées  par  rapport  au  règlement  en  vigueur et  définit  que  les  Etats  Membres  et  la 
Commission, chacun dans son domaine de compétence, prennent les mesures nécessaires pour 
vérifier l’exécution des projets, prévenir et sanctionner les irrégularités et récupérer les fonds 
perdus suite à une irrégularité. 

1. 

– 

– 

2. 

Afin de garantir l’opportunité, la légalité et la régularité des dépenses couvertes dans 
le  cadre  des  projets  financés  au  titre  du  présent  règlement,  les  Etats  membres  et  la 
Commission,  chacun  dans  son  domaine  de  compétence,  prennent  les  mesures 
nécessaires pour : 

vérifier régulièrement que les projets et les études bénéficiant d’un soutien financier 
communautaire ont été exécutés correctement ; 

prévenir  et  sanctionner  les  irrégularités,  récupérer  les  fonds  perdus  à  la  suite  d’une 
irrégularité, y compris les intérêts y afférents. 

L’Etat membre effectue les contrôles nécessaires y inclus les contrôles sur place afin 
de  vérifier  et  certifier  la  régularité  et  l’exactitude  des  demandes  de  paiements 

EN 

48 

   EN 

 
 
 
établies.  L’Etat  membre  peut  demander  la  participation  de  la  Commission  lors  des 
contrôles sur place.  

L’Office  de  Lutte  Anti-Fraude  de  la  Commission  (OLAF)  peut  également  procéder  à  des 
contrôles et vérifications sur place en application du règlement (Euratom, CE) n° 2185/96 du 
Conseil. 

Pour  les  actions  communautaires  financées  par  le  présent  règlement,  la  notion  d’irrégularité 
visée à l’article 1 paragraphe 2 du règlement (CE, Euratom) n° 2988/95 s’entend comme toute 
violation d'une disposition du droit communautaire ou toute méconnaissance d'une obligation 
contractuelle résultant d'un acte ou d'une omission par une entité juridique qui a ou aurait pour 
effet de porter préjudice au budget général de l'Union européenne ou à des budgets gérés par 
celles-ci par une dépense indue. 

Les décisions prises au titre du présent règlement prévoient notamment un suivi et un contrôle 
financier de la Commission (ou tout représentant autorisé par elle) et des audits de la Cour des 
Comptes, le cas échéant sur place. 

L’Etat  membre  concerné  et  la  Commission  se  transmettent  immédiatement  toutes  les 
informations appropriées concernant les résultats des contrôles effectués.  

3. 

L’Etat membre est responsable du remboursement des sommes indûment payées. 

Plus spécifiquement, la Commission a mis en place une série de mesures, destinées à réduire 
le risque de fraude, parmi lesquelles on peut citer : 

– 

– 

– 

– 

la mise en place de procédures financières et contractuelles dérivées des dispositions 
du règlement financier et de ses modalités d’application ; ces procédures permettent 
d’assurer une application homogène des règles ; 

la  vérification  de  la  réalité  de  la  prestation  sur  la  base  de  rapports  techniques 
détaillés ainsi  que  la  vérification  systématique  des  décomptes  financiers  avant 
paiement  en  tenant  compte  des  obligations  contractuelles  ainsi  que  des  principes 
d’économie et de bonne gestion financière ; 

la  réalisation  d’audits  financiers  sur  place,  soit  selon  un  programme  basé  sur 
l’analyse de risques, soit en cas de doute sur un contractant ; 

la  revue  de  l’adéquation  du  système  de  contrôle  interne  par  la  capacité  d’audit 
interne, sur base d’une analyse des risques.  

EN 

49 

   EN 

 
FICHE FINANCIÈRE LÉGISLATIVE : POINTS SPECIFIQUES POUR LE RESEAU 
TRANSEUROPEENS D’ENERGIE 

DÉNOMINATION DE L’ACTION: PROGRAMME RTE - ENERGIE 

1. 

LIGNE(S) BUDGÉTAIRE(S) + INTITULÉ(S) 

2. 

2.1 

2.2 

2.3 

DONNÉES CHIFFRÉES GLOBALES  

Enveloppe totale de l’action (partie B): 340 Mio€ en CE 

Période d’application: 2007 - 2013 

Estimation globale pluriannuelle des dépenses: 

a)  Echéancier  crédits  d'engagement/crédits  de  paiement  (intervention  financière)  (cf.  point 
6.1.1) 

Année 
2007 

2008 

2009 

2010 

2011 

2012 

2013 

2014 

2015 

Total 

Crédits d'engagement 

19,8 

19,7 

49,5 

49,5 

59,5 

58,5 

78,5 

Crédits de paiement 

5,9 

13,8 

28,7 

40,6 

52,5 

64,8 

56,2 
Mio€ (à la 3ème décimale) 

49,0 

23,6 

b) Assistance technique et administrative (ATA) et dépenses d’appui (DDA) (cf. point 6.1.2) 

CE 

CP 

0,2 

0,2 

0,3 

0,3 

0,5 

0,5 

0,5 

0,5 

0,5 

0,5 

1,5 

1,5 

1,5 

1,5 

335,0 

335,0 

5 

5 

Sous-total a+b 

CE 

CP 

20,0 

20,0 

50,0 

50,0 

60,0 

60,0 

80,0 

- 

- 

340,0 

6,1 

14,1 

29,2 

41,1 

53,0 

57,7 

66,3 

49,0 

23,6 

340,0 

c) Incidence financière globale des ressources humaines et autres dépenses de fonctionnement  
(cf. points 7.2 et 7.3) 

CE/CP 

0,573 

0,573 

0,573 

0,573 

0,573 

0,573 

0,573 

4,011 

TOTAL a+b+c 

CE 

CP 

EN 

20,6 

20,6 

50,6 

50,6 

60,6 

60,6 

80,6 

- 

- 

6,7 

14,7 

29,7 

41,6 

53,6 

58,3 

66,9 

49,0 

23,6 

50 

344,0 

344,0 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3. 

CARACTÉRISTIQUES BUDGÉTAIRES 

voir ci-dessus 

4. 

BASE JURIDIQUE  

voir ci-dessus 

5. 

DESCRIPTION ET JUSTIFICATION 

5.1 

Nécessité d'une intervention communautaire 

5.1.1 Objectifs poursuivis 

La Communauté favorise l'interconnexion, l'interopérabilité et le développement des réseaux 
transeuropéens  d'énergie,  ainsi  que  l'accès  à  ces  réseaux,  en  conformité  avec  le  droit 
communautaire en vigueur, dans le but de: 

a) favoriser la réalisation effective du marché intérieur en général et du marché intérieur de 
l'énergie  en  particulier,  tout  en  encourageant  la  production,  la  distribution  et  l'utilisation 
rationnelles de ressources énergétiques ainsi que la valorisation et la connexion des ressources 
renouvelables, en vue de réduire le coût de l'énergie pour les consommateurs et de contribuer 
à la diversification des sources d'énergie; 

b) faciliter le développement et le désenclavement des régions moins favorisées et insulaires 
de la Communauté et contribuer ainsi au renforcement de la cohésion économique et sociale; 

c)  renforcer  la  sécurité  d'approvisionnement  énergétique,  y  compris  par  le  renforcement  des 
relations, dans le secteur de l'énergie, avec les pays tiers dans leur intérêt mutuel, notamment 
dans le cadre du traité sur la Charte de l'énergie ainsi que des accords de coopération conclus 
par la Communauté. 

Une attention particulière sera portée aux projets qui contribuent à: 

l’intégration  du  marché 

- 
transfrontalières, 

intérieur  de 

l’énergie,  et  notamment 

les  sections 

la  sécurité  d’approvisionnement  énergétique,  et  notamment  les  interconnexions  avec 

- 
les pays tiers, 

- 

- 

la connexion des sources d’énergie renouvelables et/ou  

la sûreté, la fiabilité et l’interopérabilité des réseaux interconnectés. 

5.1.2 Dispositions prises relevant de l’évaluation ex ante  

See the conclusions of the Extended Impact Assessment : SEC(2003) 1369 

This assessment comes to the conclusion that the need for action in conjunction with matched 
support  for  authorisation  procedures  and  accelerating  investments  call  for  increased  co-
ordination from side of the Commission, as well as action on the demand side. 

EN 

51 

   EN 

 
technical  cooperation  projects  between 

The creation of a more favourable context for investment in energy networks is an essential 
cornerstone as the construction of new transmission projects requires attention of not only all 
energy markets participants but also of governmental and local authorities. In this context, the 
European  Commission  will  promote  cooperation  between  Member  States  with  a  view  to 
enhancing authorisation procedures for projects on Trans-European energy networks and will 
promote 
the 
management,  monitoring  and  control  of  the  Trans-European  energy  networks.  As  a  first 
priority the selection of truly important projects from a large list of eligible projects needs to 
be addressed. These projects have to satisfy the following two criteria: they are cross-border 
interconnections  or  they  have  significant  impact  on  cross-border  transmission  capacity.  For 
this objective there is a need to set up an appropriate instrument, e.g. a forum, for the decision 
to attribute to individual priority projects the highest level of priority, through a Declaration 
of  European  Interest.  It  is  emphasised  that  this  declaration  is  the  consequence  of  defining 
priority axes on the highest level (Annex 1 of decision) in the recently adopted guidelines and 
the extensive list of projects on a lower level (Annex 3 of decision). 

the  operators  responsible  for 

For  establishing  a  more  favourable  context  it  is  also  essential  to  ensure  that  regulation  will 
develop in a harmonised and consistent way so that it will not introduce market distortions at 
national  level.  These  risks  can  be  avoided  if  high-level  dialogue  and  co-operation  between 
regulators are established. Co-ordination between regulators and TSOs are crucial to enhance 
the  coherence  of  the  market.  The  appropriate  co-ordination  employed  by  the  Commission 
need to be dynamic and problem oriented and not static and formal. Expertise from all sectors 
involved  needs  to  get  heard  and  the  corresponding  experts  invited.  Involvement  of  both  the 
Member States concerned and the Commission, each within its own range of competence, is 
indispensable  for  carrying  out  the  priority  projects  especially  cross-border  projects.  In 
particular, the Commission may designate a Coordinator for a given priority axis or for an 
individual priority project.  

The  third  component  in  the  endeavour  for  progressing  in  the  completion  of  needed 
infrastructure  is  given  by  the  co-ordinated  European-wide  planning  which  will  establish  the 
tools for developing studies and simulations covering the entire European network. The action 
has  two  phases,  consultation  and  execution.  The  exchange  of  findings  and  expertise  in  the 
process  of  consultation  with  Member  States,  including  key  stakeholders,  constitutes  an 
important  aspect  in  the  first  phase.  The  objective  is  to  agree  on  a  detailed  plan  for  network 
construction together with the corresponding investment. The second, i.e. execution phase can 
be  described  by  a  predictor-corrector  scheme,  where  the  TSO’s  report  annually  on  their 
investment  strategy  and  the  regulatory  authorities  give  feedback  concerning  existing  and 
planned generation, transmission and distribution. This feedback can incorporate measures for 
correcting the course of action when obstacles or delays occur. 

In  this  fashion  the  positive  features  building  on  the  economic  viability  of  the  energy  sector 
and the strength of the liberalised markets are integrated. The minimum co-ordination option 
was otherwise not found appropriate for mastering the challenges. 

At  several  occasions  the  possible  insufficiencies  of  simply  continuing  the  current  TEN-E 
policy, i.e. the balanced co-ordination option, have been elucidated. One might argue that the 
proposed option of increased co-ordination is basically the relevant adaptation of the current 
TEN-E policy. We can agree to this view as a possibly natural evolution. 

Concerning the European Regulatory Approach option, one can summarise the arguments by 
saying  that  the  time  is  not  yet  ripe  for  really  drastic  regulatory  measures.  There  are  many 

EN 

52 

   EN 

 
concerns expressed with regard to the consequences for industry, employment and society in 
general.  Again  it  is  argued  that  certain  appropriate  measures  are  incorporated  in  the  future 
TEN-E policy actions.  

Put briefly, the option called ‘increased co-ordination’ aims at incorporating strong elements 
of both the market strength and the regulatory supervision in the future TEN-E policy. This 
‘increased  co-ordination’  entails  two  new  instruments,  namely  the  Declaration  of 
European Interest for the selection of important projects and the Commission-designated co-
ordinator for a given axis or project for finalising new infrastructure. This new policy should 
be put into effect by developing dynamic actions in conjunction with variable arrangements 
for guidance and co-ordination, tailored to specific and quite different challenges and needs. 

The third component in the strategy aiming at the completion of needed infrastructure is given 
by the European consolidated planning with consultation and execution phases respectively. 

5.1.3 Dispositions prises à la suite de l’évaluation ex post 

L’évaluation  intérimaire  du  programme  en  cours  a  confirmé  l’utilité  du  programme 
RTE  Energie  en  concluant  que  la  Communauté  doit  financer  les  actions  préparatoires 
ainsi que les investissements des travaux pour les projets prioritaires. 

5.2 

Actions envisagées et modalités de l'intervention budgétaire 

- la/les population(s) visée(s) (spécifier les bénéficiaires en termes quantitatifs si possible);  

Toute l’Union Européenne 

- les objectifs spécifiques fixés pour la période de programmation (en termes mesurables) 

Mobiliser  20  milliards  d’investissements  privés  dans  l’union  européenne  pour  la 
réalisation des projets prioritaires dans les réseaux transeuropéens de l’énergie. 

- les mesures concrètes à prendre pour la mise en œuvre de l'action;  

Programme pluriannuel et annuel 

- les réalisations immédiates ; 

Cofinancement des actions préparatoires et des travaux 

- les effetss/l'impact attendu(s) sur la réalisation de l'objectif général. 

Cofinancement  des  études  et  autres  actions  préparatoires  des  projets  jusqu’à  50%  du  coût 
éligible 

Cofinancement des travaux pour la réalisation des projets : 

Jusqu’à 20% du coût éligible pour les projets prioritaire 
Jusqu’à 10% du coût éligible pour les autres projets d’intérêt commun 

Participation à des instruments financiers 

EN 

53 

   EN 

 
 
 
des  bonifications  d’intérêt  sur  les  prêts  accordés  par  la  Banque  européenne 

- 
d’investissement ou d’autres organismes financiers publics ou privés ; 

- 

des subventions aux primes de garanties et  

d’une aide sous forme de participation aux fonds de garantie d’investissement ou des 

- 
dispositifs financiers comparables. 

5.3 

Modalités de mise en œuvre 

Gestion directe par les services de la Commission avec du personnel statutaire ou externe 

6. 

6.1 

INCIDENCE FINANCIÈRE  

Incidence  financière  totale  sur  la  partie  B  (pour  toute  la  période  de 
programmation) 

6.1.1 Intervention financière 335 CE en Mio€ (à la 3ème décimale) 

2007 

2008 

2009 

2010 

2011 

2012 

2013 

Tota

Ventilation 

Action 1 

Action 2 

Etc. 

TOTAL 

19,8 

19,7 

49,5 

49,5 

59,5 

58,5 

78,5 

335 

19,8 

19,7 

49,5 

49,5 

59,5 

58,5 

78,5 

335 

6.1.2  Assistance  technique  et  administrative  (ATA),  dépenses  d'appui  (DDA)  et  dépenses  TI 

(crédits d’engagement) 

2007 

2008 

2009 

2010 

2011 

2012 

2013 

Total

0.2 

0.3 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

1.5 

1.5 

5 

1)  Assistance 
technique 
et 
administrative 
(ATA): 
a) Bureaux 
d’assistance 
technique 
(BAT) 
b) Autre 
assistance 
technique et 
administrative: 
- intra-muros: 
- extra-muros: 

dont pour la 
construction et 
la maintenance 
de systèmes de 
gestion 
informatisés: 

Sous-total 1  0.2 

0.3 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

1.5 

1.5 

5 

EN 

54 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2)  Dépenses 
d’appui 
(DDA): 
a) Études 

Réunion 

b) 
d’experts 
c)  Information 
et  
publications 

Sous-total 2 

TOTAL  0.2 

0.3 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

1.5 

1.5 

5 

6.2. 

Calcul  des  coûts  par  mesure  envisagée  en  partie  B  (pour  toute  la  période  de 
programmation)42 

Ventilation 

Type  
de réalisations 
/outputs 
(projets, 
dossiers …) 
1 

Nombre de 
réalisations/ 
outputs 
(total pour 
années 1…n)  
2 

CE en Mio€ (à la 3ème décimale) 

Coût unitaire 
moyen 

Coût total 
(total pour années 
1…n)  

3 

4=(2X3) 

Action 1 
Action 2 

Etudes 
Projets 

60 
60 

0.6 
5 

36 
300 

COÛT TOTAL 

335 

7. 

SUR 
INCIDENCE 
ADMINISTRATIVES  

LES 

EFFECTIFS 

ET 

LES 

DEPENSES 

7.1. 

Incidence sur les ressources humaines 

Les  effectifs  actuels  pour  la  gestion  des  réseaux  transeuropéens  d’Energie  sont  de  2,5 
personnes. 

Types d’emplois 

Effectifs à affecter à la gestion de l’action 
par utilisation des ressources existantes 
et/ou supplémentaires 

Total 

Description des tâches découlant de 
l’action 

42 Pour plus d'informations, voir le document d'orientation séparé. 

EN 

55 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Nombre d’emplois 
permanents 

Nombre d’emplois 
temporaires 

A 
B 
C 

Fonctionnaires ou 
agents 
temporaires 
Autres ressources 
humaines 
Total 

3 

1 

4 

Si nécessaire, une description plus 
complète des tâches peut être annexée. 

3 

1 

4 

Les  besoins  en  ressources  humaines  et  administratives  seront  couverts  à  l’intérieure  de  la 
dotation allouée à la DG gestionnaire dans le cadre de la procédure d’allocation annuelle 

L'allocation  de  postes  dépendra  d'une  part  de  l'organisation  interne  de  la  prochaine 
Commission  et  d'autre  part  d'une  éventuelle  réallocation  de  postes  entre  services  suite  aux 
nouvelles perspectives financières. 

7.2 

Incidence financière globale des ressources humaines 

Type de ressources humaines 

Montants € 

Mode de calcul *  

Fonctionnaires 
Agents temporaires 

Autres ressources humaines 

432.000 

4*108.000 € 

(indiquer la ligne budgétaire) 

Total  432.000 € 

Les montants correspondent aux dépenses totales pour 12 mois. 

7.3 

Autres dépenses de fonctionnement découlant de l’action 

Ligne budgétaire 
(n° et intitulé) 

Enveloppe globale (Titre A7) 
A0701 – Missions 
A07030 – Réunions 
A07031 – Comités obligatoires (1) 
A07032 – Comités non obligatoires (1) 
A07040 – Conférences 
A0705 – Etudes et consultations 
… Autres dépenses (indiquer lesquelles) 

Systèmes d’information (A-5001/A-4300) 

Montants € 

Mode de calcul 

10.285 

81.000 

10 missions / an 

2 réunions/an x 27 experts x 1500 € 

50.000 

PMS : système de gestion de projets 

Autres dépenses - partie A (indiquer lesquelles) 

Total  141.285 

Les montants correspondent aux dépenses totales de l’action pour 12 mois. 

(1) Préciser le type de comité ainsi que le groupe auquel il appartient. 

I. 
II. 
III. 

Total annuel (7.2 + 7.3) 
Durée de l’action 
Coût total de l’action (I x II) 

573.285 € 
7Années 
4.012.996 € 

EN 

56 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(Dans l’estimation des ressources humaines et administratives nécessaires pour l’action, les 
DG/services  devront  tenir  compte  des  décisions  arrêtées  par  la  Commission  lors  du  débat 
d’orientation et de l’approbation de l’avant-projet de budget (APB). Ceci signifie que les DG 
devront indiquer que les ressources humaines peuvent être couvertes à l’intérieur de la pré-
allocation indicative prévue lors de l’adoption de l’APB.  

Dans  des  cas  exceptionnels  où  les  actions  visées  n’étaient  pas  prévisibles  lors  de  la 
préparation  de  l’APB,  la  Commission  devra  être  saisie  afin  de  décider  si  et  comment  (à 
travers  une  modification  de  la  pré-allocation  indicative,  une  opération  ad  hoc  de 
redéploiement, un budget rectificatif et supplémentaire ou une lettre rectificative au projet de 
budget) la mise en œuvre de l’action proposée peut être acceptée) 

8. 

SUIVI ET ÉVALUATION 

8.1 

Système de suivi 

Au  cours  de  la  période  2007-2013,  l’activité  “RTE-énergie”  fera  l’objet  d’un  monitorage 
annuel qui n’est ni une évaluation ni un audit mais vise essentiellement à donner une analyse 
indépendante  et  rapide  de  la  mise  en  place  du  programme  afin  de  pouvoir  en  corriger  les 
éventuelles dérives ou faiblesses 

Il s’agira d’une analyse factuelle qui, en début de période 2007-2013, se concentrera sur les 
actions  lancées  et  qui,  au  fur  et  à  mesure  de  l’avancement  des  années,  portera  aussi  sur  les 
résultats et les impacts. Une partie de l’analyse sera consacrée à la valeur ajoutée européenne. 

Les experts en charge du monitorage étudieront les volets suivants : 

efficacité  et  transparence  de  la  conduite  du  programme  (notamment  appels  à 
- 
proposition,  information  des  soumissionnaires,  procédure  d’évaluation  et  de  sélection  des 
offres, aspects contractuels) et de la coordination interne à la Commission ; 

cohérence des projets sélectionnés avec les objectifs du programme et avec les autres 

- 
objectifs politiques de l’Union européenne; 

répartition géographique équilibrée des organisations et des entreprises retenues dans 

- 
les appels d’offres, compte tenu des besoins identifiés par les orientations RTE-énergie ; 

Les rapports de monitorage seront adressés au Secrétariat général, à la DG BUDG, à la DG 
AUDIT et, le cas échéant, aux autres services intéressés de la Commission. 

8.2 

Modalités et périodicité de l’évaluation prévue 

Une  évaluation  à  mi-parcours  sera  réalisée  avant  fin  2010  pour  adapter  le  programme  si 
nécessaire. 

Une  évaluation  générale  des  résultats  de  l'activité  RTE-Énergie  sera  réalisée  à  la  fin  du 
programme, ainsi que le prévoit le Règlement. 

Cette évaluation visera à mesurer les résultats des actions financées dans le cadre des RTE-
énergie et à voir dans quelle mesure ces actions ont contribué par leur impact à atteindre ou à 
s’approcher  des  objectifs  politiques  des  RTE-énergie.  Elle  permettra  également  l’adaptation 
future  des  orientations  en  fonction  de  l’évolution  technologique  et  des  changements  de  la 
structure de production et de consommation d’énergie en Europe et chez ses voisins concernés 
par les RTE-énergie. 

EN 

57 

   EN 

 
Les  rapports  d’évaluation  seront  adressés  au  Secrétariat  général,  à  la  DG  BUDG  et  le  cas 
échéant,  aux  autres  services  intéressés  de  la  Commission.  Ils  seront  également  soumis  aux 
autres Institutions communautaires. 

9. 

MESURES ANTI-FRAUDE 

voir point 9 des dispositifs pour les Réseaux transeuropéens de transport 

[…] 

EN 

58 

   EN