COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Accompanying the document Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on streamlining measures for advancing the realisation of the trans-European transport network
Date: 2018-05-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, administrative procedure, project of common interest, trans-European network, transport network

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 17.5.2018  SWD(2018) 179 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT  Accompanying the document Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL  on streamlining measures for advancing the realisation of the trans-European transport network {COM(2018) 277 final} - {SEC(2018) 228 final} - {SWD(2018) 178 final}  
 
 
Impact assessment on the initiative on streamlining TEN-T completion 

Executive Summary Sheet 

A. Need for action 

Why? What is the problem being addressed? Maximum 11 lines 
The effective and timely completion of the TEN-T is essential for the efficient functioning of the single market and 
also  supports  the  decarbonisation  and  digitalisation  of  transport  and  the  transition  to  low  carbon  mobility. 
However, currently,  TEN-T  projects  face  delays  due  to  procedures,  and  project  promoters  are  confronted  with 
uncertainty.  In  extreme  cases,  it  takes  up  to  10  years  to  prepare  an  infrastructure  project  before  it  can  go 
forward; on average  it takes around 4-5 years. The problem stems  from the suboptimal organisation of permit 
granting  procedures  (which  involve  multiple  stages  and  lack  time limits) and  difficult  application  of  the  existing 
legal  framework  for  cross-border  procurement.  This  makes  private  investors  reluctant  to  get  involved  in 
infrastructure projects. Most affected stakeholders are TEN-T project promoters, national authorities (notably in 
charge  of  permit  granting),  and  civil  society.  Citizens  often  face  difficulties  with  fully  participating  in  project 
planning  due  to  a  lack  of  transparency  in  how  procedures  are  organised.  If  the  problem  is  not  effectively 
addressed, it is expected that projects will be further delayed and the TEN-T will not be completed by 2030.  

What is this initiative expected to achieve? Maximum 8 lines 
The initiative’s general objective is to address the delays in and high level of uncertainty regarding procedures 
which impact the completion the TEN-T core network projects, which contribute to the general objectives of the 
TEN-T — cohesion, efficiency, sustainability and increasing user benefits. The initiative is expected to accelerate 
TEN-T completion by increasing the proportion of infrastructure that is compliant with standards and to reduce 
the  number  of  TEN-T  core  network  projects  experiencing  delays.  Finally,  the  number  of  projects  that  use 
innovative EU financial instruments or involve private capital is expected to increase. 

What is the value added of action at the EU level? Maximum 7 lines  
The TEN-T network is transnational and EU-wide by definition. Completing it requires significant coordination of 
the various projects in order to fully exploit the overall network benefits at EU level. In this respect, completion of 
the TEN-T network relies on the efficient synchronisation not only of investment but also of the implementation 
pace of individual projects, to avoid time gaps and reap the benefits of having an EU-wide network. The number 
of  authorities  and  levels  of  governance  that  are  involved  in  permit  granting  procedures,  as  well  as  their 
competences and powers, vary significantly across Member States. The delays stemming from these procedural 
differences have significant impact on the completion of the TEN-T network. 

B. Solutions 

What  legislative  and  non-legislative  policy  options  have  been  considered?  Is  there  a  preferred 
choice or not? Why? Maximum 14 lines  
Three options  have been considered, ranging from soft law and non-binding solutions  to legislative measures. 
The  option  that  aims  to  introduce  minimal  changes  to  existing  instruments  (PO1)  consists  in  particular  of 
developing  a  series  of  guidelines  (soft  law)  for  TEN-T  project  promoters  and  better  orientation  of  existing 
instruments mainly in terms of technical assistance. The option that aims to implement limited binding action at 
national level (PO2) includes the legal requirement for Member States to introduce a one-stop-shop for TEN-T 
core  network  projects  and  to  ensure  that  they  get  the  most  rapid  treatment  legally  possible.  Finally,  an  option 
which  would  define  an  EU  framework  for  authorisation  of  TEN-T  core  network  projects  (PO3)  has  been 
considered in two variants — application of EU rules at national level (PO3a) and bringing the granting of permit 
to the EU level (PO3b). 
PO2 is selected as the preferred option due to its positive performance in terms of effectiveness and efficiency in 
comparison with PO1 and its flexibility in comparison with PO3. Moreover, PO2 does not have the drawbacks of 
PO3 in terms of social impacts  and  the impacts  on legal certainty. PO2 is  a  balanced and efficient solution to 
foster  the  implementation  of  TEN-T  projects  and,  at  the  same  time,  to  establish  clearer  and  more  inclusive 
procedures to increase public acceptance of infrastructure projects. 

Who supports which option? Maximum 7 lines  
PO1  is  supported  by  national  authorities  as  the  burden  of  applying  the  other  options  would  most  likely  fall  on 
national  administrations.  PO3  is  mainly  supported  by  project  promoters,  who  expect  that  this  option  has  the 
biggest potential in terms of simplifying procedures and clarity. PO2 is supported by most stakeholders, because 
national administrations, project promoters and individuals who participated in the open public consultation see 

1 

 
 
the opportunity to improve the current system by better synchronising processes while respecting the subsidiarity 
principle and avoiding legal uncertainty.  

C. Impacts of the preferred option 

What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? Maximum 12 lines                                       
PO2 would result in a € 5.1 billion reduction in user costs (0.2 % decrease relative to the baseline) and external 
cost savings of around € 724 million over 2018-2030. All policy options are expected to have a positive impact in 
terms of economic growth; the EU-level economic benefits of PO2 would be between €0.9 billion and € 1.6 billion 
per year (0.9-1.6 % increase relative to the baseline). 
In PO2, the establishment of a one-stop-shop at national level is expected to lead to a significant reduction of 
costs for project promoters (€ 166 million) over the 2018-2030 period, relative to the baseline. PO2 is in fact the 
option which would reduce the total administrative burden by the highest amount (€ 153 million). 
PO2 would also have significant impact in terms of additional job creation by 2030, relative to the baseline (5 600 
additional jobs per year or 1.6 % increase relative to the baseline). 
Finally,  in  terms  of  social  impacts,  the  integration  and  coordination  of  overall  authorisation  procedures  under 
PO2  would  have  a  positive  impact  on  public  consultations  at  project  level,  due  to  better  synchronisation  of 
procedures and set time limits. 

What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? Maximum 12 lines                                       
In  PO2,  the establishment  of  a  one-stop-shop  at national  level  is  expected  to  generate  administrative costs of 
€ 13 million for permitting authorities over 2018-2030. No other costs are envisaged.  

How will businesses, SMEs and micro-enterprises be affected? Maximum 8 lines 
SMEs  and  micro-enterprises  are  not  expected  to  be  directly  affected  by  this  initiative.  Greater  clarity  and 
simplification of the existing processes may benefit SMEs which do not always have the capacity to take part in 
complex and lengthy procedures. In addition, the overall impact on the civil engineering market is expected to 
have positive spill-over effects on SMEs in the construction market. 

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations? Maximum 4 lines 
The  only  impact  on  national  budgets  and  administrations  will  result  from  the  additional  costs  for  permitting 
authorities  (€ 13  million  over  2018-2030).  However,  it  can  be  assumed  that  these  costs  will  mainly  relate  to 
compliance with the new framework and will decrease over time.   

Will there be other significant impacts? Max 6 lines  
All three policy options are expected to have legal implications. However, the preferred option (PO2) provides for 
the necessary legal guarantees that the single authorising authority established at national level will follow the 
existing national rules in terms of administrative law. Also, it is modelled on the existing framework for granting 
permits for infrastructure projects in the field of energy. 
The three policy options also all have an impact on civil society, but the preferred option is the one that can best 
reinforce clarity and transparency to encourage more effective participation of local communities in consultations 
and ultimately greater public acceptance.   

When will the policy be reviewed? Maximum 4 lines  
The legislative instrument will be regularly monitored and evaluated using the existing tools and mechanisms for 
reporting on the advancement of completing the TEN-T network.  

D. Follow up 

2