L 200/186
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
29.7.2022
residents and commuters (e.g. a one-way ticket costs only EUR 7).
As a result, without the service of Laziomar on that particular route, the public service need for regular connectivity of that island with the mainland at affordable prices would not be satisfied, as Vetor could not have provided the same services and under the same conditions as Laziomar over the whole contract period.
(195) In light of the above, the Commission concludes that, at the moment of the entrustment of Laziomar, market forces alone were insufficient to meet the public service needs.
Indeed, on a number of routes Laziomar was the only operator while on the other routes the services provided by the competitors in the Pontino archipelago were not equivalent in terms of continuity, regularity, capacity and price and therefore did not satisfy in full the public service obligations laid down in the new service contract with Laziomar.
(3) Least harmful approach (196) The Commission notes that Italy has chosen to conclude a public service contract with one operator (Laziomar) rather than to impose public service obligations on all operators interested in serving the routes at stake.
Based on the information provided by Italy, the Commission accepts that the user demand could not have been met by imposing public service obligations (see recital 180).
In particular, on several routes Laziomar is the only operator and where this is not the case, the offer provided by the other operators does not meet (all) the requirements of regularity, continuity, capacity and price.
Further, the operation of most routes, especially in the low season, is lossmaking, so that without public service compensation they would not be operated at all.
In addition, the Commission takes note of Italy’s argument that the choice for a public service contract was also necessary in view of the privatisation of Laziomar.
More specifically, Italy argues that tendering out Laziomar together with a new public service contract allowed to (i) ensure continuity of the maritime public service; and (ii) maximise value for the State.
It is for these reasons that the Commission agreed (see recital 89) that Italy would tender out Laziomar business together with a new public service contract.
In doing so, the Commission also accepted, and reiterates in this Decision, that Italy could not rely on public service obligations that apply to all operators but that it would rather conclude a public service contract with Laziomar only.
Conclusion (197) On the basis of the above assessment, the Commission concludes that Italy has not made a manifest error when defining the services entrusted to Laziomar as SGEI.
The doubts expressed by the Commission in the 2012 Decision are hence dispelled.
(198) In order to conclude that Altmark 1 is complied with, the Commission must still check whether Laziomar was entrusted with public service obligations, which were clearly defined.
In this regard, the Commission notes that the public service obligations are clearly described in the new public service contract and its annexes (which include for instance ship specifications for each route).
Likewise, the rules regulating the compensation are detailed in the new public service contract, the 2009 Law and the CIPE Directive.
The new public service contract also has a clear duration (10 years), identifies Laziomar as the public service operator and contains the arrangements for avoiding and recovering any overcompensation (see also recital 215).
Therefore, the Commission concludes that the first Altmark criterion is observed.
Berthing priority (199) Article 19-ter, paragraph 21 of the 2009 Law clearly specifies that the berthing priority is necessary to guarantee the territorial continuity with the islands and in light of the public service obligations of the companies of the former Tirrenia Group, including Laziomar.
Indeed, if there were no priority berthing for companies entrusted with public service obligations, these may (sometimes) have to wait their turn before docking and thereby incur delays, which would defeat the purpose of ensuring reliable and convenient connectivity to the citizens.
A regular timetable is indeed necessary to satisfy mobility needs of the islands’ population and to contribute to the economic development of the islands concerned.
Furthermore, since there are specific time scheduling obligations in the new public service contract for the departure of public service routes, the berthing priority helps to ensure that ports allocate the berths and berthing times in such a way to enable the public service operator to respect its public service obligations.
Against this background, the Commission considers that this measure is awarded to enable Laziomar to perform its public service obligations, which constitute genuine SGEI (see recital 197).
Furthermore, Italy has confirmed that the berthing priority is only applicable to services provided under the public service regime.
Therefore, the berthing priority also complies with the first condition of the Altmark judgment.