CELEX: 51992PC0231(02)
Language: en
Date: 1992-06-11
Title: Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION on the creation of a Trans- European Road Network

COMMISSION OP THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
                                      COM(92) 231 final
                                      Brussels, 11 June 1992
                   Commission Communication
                  •TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE'
                        Proposal for a
                   COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC)
     amending Regulation (EEC) No 3359/90 for an action
     programme in the field of transport infrastructure
       with a view to the completion of an integrated
                   transport market in 1992
     Implementation Report provided for in Article 11 of
                 Regulation (EEC) No 3359/90
                   Commission Communication
                              and
                        Proposal for a
                       COUNCIL DECISION
      on the creation of a Trans-European Road Network
                   Commission Communication
                              and
                        Proposal for a
                       COUNCIL DECISION
    on the creation of a European inland waterway network
                (presented by the Commission)
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 2 -
                                CONTENTS
I.  Commission Communication
     1.    Purpose of this communication
     2.    The acquis communautaire in transport policy matters
     2.1   Existing rules and regulations
     2.2   Financial support to 1992
     3.    The new approach
     3.1   Trans-European networks in the Treaty on European Union
           (Maastr icht)
     3.2   Future financing
     3.3   Cooperation with non-member countries
     4.    The proposal for a new Regulation
     4.1   Objectives
     4.2   The extension of the programme of financial support
     5.    Conclusions and perspectives
II.  Proposal for a Council Regulation amending              Regulation
     (EEC) No 3359/90                        for an action programme in
     the field of transport       infrastructure with a view to the
     completion of an integrated transport market in 1992
     Financial statement
     SME impact statement
III. Implementation report   provided   for in Article 11 of  Regulation
     (EEC) No 3359/90
IV.  Commission Communication and proposal for a Council Decision on
     the creation of a Trans-European Road Network
V.   Commission Communication and proposal for a Council Decision on
     the creation of a European inland waterway network
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 3 -
                       I. COMMISSION COMMUNICATION
                        "TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE"
1.    PURPOSE OF THIS COMMUNICATION
1.1 This communication deals with transport infrastructure in terms of
Title XII of the Maastricht Treaty on European Union, which concerns
trans-European networks: it lays down the procedures for Community
involvement in the construction and financing of those networks.
Implementation of this Title entails use of the new decision-making
rules by the Council and Parliament and consultation of the Committee
of the Regions.
1.2 While the Commission, in line with Parliament's request to that
effect, is willing to anticipate the application of those provisions of
the Treaty, it cannot overlook a number of problems arising in the
transitional period, particularly      in the transport  infrastructure
field, which requires a certain continuity if measures are to be
effective.
1.3 Last December the Council asked the Commission to present by May a
report on the progress of work conducted at its behest on the
masterplans for combined transport, motorway and inland waterway
networks, taking due account of the decisions of the Maastricht
European Council. The masterplans follow on from the high-speed rail
network masterplan already approved by the Council.
1.4 The Commission's intention to make the Cohesion Fund operational
next year presupposes that masterplans identifying transport projects
eligible for support from that fund will be available at very much the
same time.
1.5 The Commission believes it possible to meet both of the above
requirements. It feels there is nothing to stop presenting at this
time masterplans based on the Treaty currently in force so that the
Council and Parliament might begin work as soon as possible. The entry
 into force of the Maastricht Treaty will alter the legal basis and
decision-making procedures governing the masterplans. It may even be
agreed with the Council and Parliament that the work accomplished prior
to the Treaty's entry into force be viewed as a "first reading" in
respect of the prerogatives of the new - and as yet unestabl ished -
Committee of the Regions, to which the matter will have to be
submi tted.
 1.6 The Community already has a Community transport infrastructure
policy in the shape of a three-year Regulation due to expire on
31 December. A legal vacuum is incompatible with that Community
policy's consistency and could threaten certain major projects now
being financed. The Commission therefore feels it necessary to propose
that Regulation (EEC) No 3359/90 be extended beyond that date, pending
the entry into force of Title XII of the Treaty and any attendant
 implementing procedures.
 ---pagebreak---                                   -  A -
1.7 Apart from these transitional problems, the communication, in line
with the Treaty on European Union's stance on trans-European networks,
gives a broad overview of the approach that the Commission hopes to
develop in the field of transport infrastructure. The aim is to
establish a trans-European network for each mode of            transport,
gradually integrating them in a multimodal approach destined to guide
future Community action, with due regard for the principle of
subsidiarity. The Community will accordingly        restrict   itself to
promoting and encouraging national projects of Community interest.
1.8 It is against this background that the Commission is presenting to
the Council and Parliament:
      a   general  communication    regarding  trans-European    transport
      networks;
      a proposal    for  the  amendment    of Council   Regulation   (EEC)
      No 3359/90;
      the report required by that Regulation on the work so far;
      three proposals for network masterplans       (combined   transport,
      motorways and inland waterways).
Masterplans for the remaining modes (conventional railways, air and
sea) are under preparation and will be proposed next year.
2.    THE ACQUIS COMMUNAUTAIRE IN TRANSPORT POLICY MATTERS
2.1. Existing rules and regulations
The revival of Europe's economy in recent years has been accompanied by
substantial growth in transport. Major economic and social change
coupled with increasing integration have increased the demand for
mobiIity.
Thus, between 1970 and 1988, the volume of traffic in the Community
grew by 3.1% a year for passengers and 2.3% for goods: simple
extrapolation of these figures to 2000 suggests that volume will be 30%
higher than in 1988 or nearly twice that of 1975. The growing
saturation of some Community transport networks highlights an alarming
problem, particularly on the eve of the entry into force of the
 internal market, which is expected to bring a further increase in
 traffic.
The situation has been aggravated by liberalization in Central and
 Eastern Europe, which is likely to lead to the development of new types
of transport (primarily East-West), for which infrastructure has long
 been underdeveloped.
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 5 -
This situation should normally have led to increased investment, but
the figures show that, in real terms, the share of GNP invested in
transport infrastructure declined from 1.5% in 1975 to 1% in 1990.
This accounts for the accentuation of the imbalance between transport
volume and investment. If the trend is not reversed soon, the
objective of "the free movement of persons, goods and services"
throughout the Community, a sine qua non for the completion of the
integrated internal market in 1993, will not be achieved.
This is why transport infrastructure has for some years been a subject
of concern not only to industrialists1 and transport operators, 2 but
to politicians as well. As long ago as December 1988, the Rhodes
European Council was catling on the "Council to consider with the
Commission possibilities in this area".
Long before that European Council meeting, the Community had equipped
itself with an instrument enabling        it to assist the harmonious
development of communications networks of Community interest, namely
the Transport Infrastructure Committee, which was set up In 1978 to
ensure coordination between Member States. 3
With a view to strengthening coordination and promoting the development
of intra-Community networks, the Commission for many years argued for
the right      to encourage Member    States   to carry out    transport
 infrastructure projects of Community interest. it also underlined the
 importance of a multimodal system.
 It was very difficult to obtain acceptance for Community action in this
field. Only in 1982 did the Council accept a one-year Regulation on
the     financing  of   transport    infrastructure  projects,   thereby
acknowledging the need for the coordination of national policies.
However, until 1990 the year-to-year renewal of such a Regulation
blocked medium- and long-term action.
 In 1990 the efforts of the Commission and Parliament4 to obtain       a
multiannual Regulation that would enable financial constraints to     be
counterbalanced by a longer-term commitment bore fruit in the form    of
Council Regulation (EEC) No 3359/90 of 20 November 1990 based         on
Article 75 of the Treaty.
The Transport Infrastructure Committee's role was transformed for the
purposes of implementing that Regulation. It became a regulatory
committee as well as an advisory committee.
1     Industry has long been sounding the alarm: the Round Table of
     European Industrialists has, since its inception in April 1983,
     repeatedly drawn the attention of politicians to the need to do
     something about growing transport demand.
2    CER 1989: proposal for a European high-speed rail network
      IRF 1990: AIMSE - the blueprint for the European motorways of
     tomorrow.
3    Council Decision of 20 February 1978.
4    E.g. Romera report, Doc. PE 148.168 (final).
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 6 -
2.2   Financial support to 1992
In order to encourage Member States to invest in projects of European
interest that would not otherwise be accorded the same degree of
priority, the Commission in 1982 obtained the inclusion in the budget
of resources for that purpose. After a series of annual regulations,
the three-year Regulation (EEC) No 3359/90 was adopted in 1990.
Article 11 of that Regulation provides for the Commission to report to
Parliament    and  the Council   on   the experience   gained   in the
implementation of this financial support operation from 1982 to 1991
inclusive. That document is annexed.
The report shows that Community investment of ECU 702.7 million has led
to the mobilization of ECU 11 167 million, an investment factor of 16.
This Community policy has led to a considerable degree of alignment in
Member States' Investment policy objectives and priorities. The result
has been the establishment of an initial development phase for networks
of Community interest, particularly in the field of inland transport.
 In the regions, the action programme has been complemented by the
regional Funds. Thus in the period 1989-93, the ERDF will have
contributed almost ECU 7 billion for transport       infrastructure in
Objective 1 regions, including at least ECU 3 billion for sections of
major infrastructure of European interest.
The ECSC (in the field of railways) and the EIB have also provided
 loans to finance transport infrastructure projects.
The results and the experience obtained provide a solid foundation for
capitalizing on the new opportunities offered by the Maastricht
agreements. The multiannual programme has proved the most suitable
 instrument, particularly in view of the long periods required for the
preparation and execution of projects. Since national planning and
programming, to which Community measures must be subsidiary, is also
multiannual, effective and consistent Community action requires a
similar temporal approach.
 ---pagebreak---                                    - 7 -
3.    THE NEW APPROACH
3.2   Trans-European   networks   in   the    Treaty    on   European    Union
      (Maastricht)
Groundwork for the single market could not be restricted to transport
alone: it had to include telecommunications and energy too.
Following    discussions   at   ministerial      level,    the   Council    in
December 1989 and June 1990 showed the importance it attached to
networks of European interest and called for "the development and
interconnection of trans-European networks, notably in the area of air
traffic control, the linking of the main Community conurbations by
broad-band telecommunications networks, the most efficient surface
communications links and energy distribution."
The Commission responded with the communication of 10 December 1990
entitled "Towards trans-European networks: for a Community action
programme".1 Parliament backed the Commission's approach               in its
resolution of 7 April this year.2 Because completion of an area
without internal frontiers has brought an urgent need for trans-
European networks in the four sectors of transport, telecommunications,
energy and vocational training, their construction has been stipulated
 in the Treaty on European Union.
 In Articles 129b to I29d, Title XII         provides that trans-European
networks in the areas of transport,         telecommunications and energy
 infrastructure should contribute to the     establishment of the internal
market and the promotion of economic and    social cohesion.
The Treaty further stipulates     that,   in order    to achieve    this dual
objective, "the Community:
      shall establish a series of guidelines covering the objectives,
      priorities and broad lines of measures envisaged in the sphere of
      trans-European networks-, these guidelines shall identify projects
      of common interest;
      shall implement any measures that may prove necessary to ensure
      the interoperability of the networks, in particular in the field
      of technical standards;
      may support the financial efforts made by the Member States..."
 In the transport field, the Commission had already begun the groundwork
for this.
 1   C0M(90) 585 final.
 2   Resolution A3-0125/92
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 8 -
This policy must, however, also be developed      in coherence with  the
principle of subsidiarity.
When applied to the trans-European transport networks, there are a
number of aspects of this principle to be considered in terms of the
extent of Community action.
The principle objectives of the networks are to ensure the efficiency
of the internal market, by improving the mobility of people and goods,
and to reinforce economic and social cohesion.
To achieve these objectives. Community action is needed on:
      the visibility of the overall development needs of the transport
      networks in the Community as a whole and beyond, in a multimodal
      perspective which ensures that the capacities and         inherent
      problems of each mode are taken into account (drawing up master
      plans) ;
      the conditions of interconnection (completing the missing links)
      and interoperability of existing national links (e.g. ensuring
      technical harmonization) in order to ensure their total efficiency
      at Community level;
      the development, consistent with existing networks, of new
      networks where    their  absence causes    isolation  (integrating
      landlocked, island or isolated regions) or hampers the development
      of part of the Community's territory (participation in the
      internal market);
The task of definition should be carried out at Community level but it
 is for the Member States to determine the precise details, the timing
and the pace of completion of the infrastructure required to achieve
the network defined. The indicative nature of the master plans defined
at Community level allows Member States the freedom to act or not to
act, but their actions must follow the guidelines which they have
accepted at Community level.
The incentives at the Community's disposal must allow it to help reduce
certain constraints at national level and convince a Member State, if
necessary, to carry out a project which is within its field of
competence and is in the general interest. It is in this spirit that
Community financing will favour measures on support or incentives.
 ---pagebreak---                                     - 9 -
Council    Decision 78/184/EEC of 20 February 1978 setting up the
Transport     Infrastructure   Committee   was    the  beginning. It   led
eventually    to the Council's request        in December 1989 that    the
Commission set up a high-level working party with a view to drawing up
a high-speed rail masterplan.1 Ten months later the Commission was
asked to set up similar working parties, first for combined transport
and then for roads and inland waterways. The Committee's brief must
now be extended to cover maritime and air transport, since the
multimodal approach has now become a priority.
As a result of cooperation with the Member States and interest groups,
the    Commission,     as    explained    in    the   working   paper   of
29 November 1991, 2 now has draft network masterplans for the four
modes of transport mentioned above, which it is presenting, together
with this communication, for the approval of the other institutions.
Preparations are now also under way for the drafting of network
masterplans for conventional railways, maritime and coastal shipping
and air traffic control.
The establishment of masterplans for all modes of transport heralds a
multimodal transport system, capitalizing on the advantages of the
different modes. Such an approach has become vital, since it paves
the way for more rational use of existing and future infrastructure
and so recognizes the environmental constraints on the expansion of
transport infrastructure. It is one of a series of measures required
to reconcile the transport        infrastructure needed to provide the
mobility generated by the freedom of movement with the need to respect
the environment.
 In the field of maritime transport, ports and sea corridors should be
 integrated into the multimodal system by ensuring their connection
with other      transport   networks. The    different   aspects of   this
 integration are already being studies with interested parties. At the
same time a proposal for a traffic management system is in the
pipeline (the establishment of a vessel traffic system (VTS)). It
should also contribute significantly         to the protection of the
environment by reducing the risk of accidents at sea.
The need to develop a transport network that is more sensitive to the
environment is another major element of the Community's new policy
approach. In its Green Paper on Transport and the Environment, the
Commission identified the areas in which transport has a major impact,
be it in the form of local air and noise pollution at local level or
global    warming - some 25% of         the Community's C 0 2 output    is
generated by transport use. The Green Paper, born both of the
Community's commitment to stabilize CO 2 emissions and the goal of
sustainable development set out in the 5th Environmental Action
Programme, asserts the need for new thinking in transport if mobility
 is to be sustainable.
 1   Doc SEC(90) 2402 final
 2   SEC(91) 2274.
 ---pagebreak---                                    - 10 -
At the    fourth informal meeting of the ministers responsible for
regional   policy and land-use planning, held in Lisbon on 15 and 16 May,
it was    agreed that account must be taken of the territorial and
regional   aspects of trans-European networks, namely:
      the links between regional and local infrastructure;
      the concept of "overall viability"      (incorporating   land-use and
      environmental considerations);
      the    need   to  coordinate   the   different   network     financing
      instruments.
The efficiency and interoperability of the various modes of transport
will be further increased by the development of an information,
management and command and control system drawing on state-of-the-art
communications technologies.1 Furthermore, the white paper currently
being prepared by the Commission will show the               importance of
intermodality as a means of achieving greater flexibility in the
management of supply. Intermodality should also help resolve the
transport system's capacity problems by integrating different networks
and connecting them to the urban network.
When priorities are being established, a distinction must be made
between long-term objectives, i.e. those to be attained within 10 to
20 years, and medium-term projects for execution on a time-scale of
5 years, the duration of the financial perspectives.
Thus the masterplans describe the infrastructure of Community interest
needed to meet increased demand for mobility. They also detail the
priority projects to be implemented as and when funds become available.
The limited resources available will be allocated to priority projects
 in accordance with policy objectives: a substantial percentage could,
for example, be earmarked for rail and inland waterways in view of
their comparative advantage in terms of protecting the environment,
while road could be a priority in other regions for reasons of economic
and social cohesion.
Article 129d provides that the series of guidelines shall be adopted by
the Council, acting in accordance with the new Joint decision-making
procedure. Since the new Treaty is not yet in force, the Commission
proposes that the legal instruments be based on Articles 75 and 84(2)
of the Treaty and that they be transitional to permit their amendment
once the Maastricht agreements and their implementing provisions have
entered into force.
     Account should be taken of the experience obtained       from research
     programmes, such as DRIVE, EURET and ATLAS.
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 11 -
The Commission draws to the attention of the Community institutions the
fact that there must be continuity in transport infrastructure measures
if projects, and in particular the high-speed rail network, currently
receiving Community support are to continue according to plan.
3.2  Future financing
In the years ahead transport infrastructure will require considerable
financial   investment. The volume of      investment required     in the
Community's transport infrastructure during the period 1990-2010 has
been estimated at from ECU 1000 billion to ECU 1500 billion, i.e.
between 1 and 1.5% of GDP.
However, there is a danger that Member States' budget resources and
borrowing capacity will become increasingly scarce. The tax burden
appears to have reached the limits of the acceptable, while the scope
for increasing the public debt burden is limited, especially in view of
the 1997-99 deadline agreed for monetary union.
It is clear that any effort to increase the volume of present
investment, for which Member States retain chief responsibility, will
require new solutions to the problems of financing.
The background     to all this may be found         in the Commission's
communication of 10 December 1990 on trans-European networks1 and the
explanatory memorandum of the Commission communication of 24 February
concerning the declaration of European interest of infrastructure
projects.2 As     elsewhere,   private-sector   financing    is   becoming
increasingly important in the transport sector. To that end, the
declaration of European interest will, in the form proposed, encourage
and succour transport infrastructure projects financed wholly or partly
by the private sector.
The use of various Community instruments for the financing of trans-
European networks was broached by "From the Single Act to Maastricht
and beyond: the means to match our ambitions"3 and "The Community's
finances between now and 1997". 4     Coordination between them must be
improved.
The horizontal networks policy will be supported in Spain, Portugal,
Greece and Ireland by the Cohesion Fund or, where appropriate, by the
regional Funds.
A special EIB operation is also planned,         in particular for the
implementation of     the   financial  support   instruments    listed  in
Article 129c of the Maastricht text.
1   C0M(90)  585 final.
2   C0M(92)  15 final.
3   COM(92)  2000.
4   C0M(92)  2001 final
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 12 -
The 1993 budget
The 1993 budget framework for transport infrastructure operations must
be consistent with the overall perspectives proposed by the Commission
in the two documents mentioned above. The guideline given covers the
Community's financial contribution to the development of trans-European
networks under budget heading 4, which concerns horizontal internal
policies.
The transitional nature of the extension of the action programme In the
field of transport infrastructure requires that financing for next year
be established within the perspective for the Delors II package and the
proposals    of   the   1993  preliminary     draft   budget. A     sum   of
ECU 180 million    is requested    for   this    year. As emphasized      in
Commission    communication   C0M(92) 2001,     the   role    of   Community
 intervention after the entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty should
be characterized by three criteria:
      close coordination of national and Community programmes,
      effectiveness, through the identification where necessary of the
      implications of economic and social cohesion,
      an emphasis on promotional measures and      incentives   in line with
      the principle of subsidiarity.
Community financial support in the field of transport infrastructure
has generally taken the form of cofinancing. Financing procedures will
gradually be brought into line with Title XII of the Maastricht Treaty.
During the transitional period the Community will give priority to
feasibility studies and interest rate subsidies, in line with the
Regulation of 20 November 1990, and subsequently (other than the
Cohesion Fund or the ERDF) to the three forms specifically mentioned in
Article 129c, namely feasibility studies, interest rate rebates and
 loan guarantees.
At the same time, and in a similarly transitional vein, thought must be
given to the possibility of using the Cohesion Fund to finance trans-
European transport networks in Spain, Portugal, Greece and Ireland, for
which the Commission has earmarked ECU 1.565 billion. Although that
fund should be set up by the end of next year at the very latest, an
 interface will be necessary between it and the networks proposed in
this communication in accordance with Articles 129c and 129d of the
Treaty on European Union.
The following table illustrates the modal breakdown of the Community
funds available under the networks heading for the period 1993-97.
 ---pagebreak---                                  - 13 -
    Indicative breakdown of aid for transport infrastructure in 1992
           Network                Total        Projects of    Breakdown
                                investment      Commun!ty     of funds
                              (ECU bill ion)     interest     avaiI able
                                              (ECU biI I ion)  1993-97
                                                                 (%)
   High-speed raiI                  150            45               30
   Combined transport and           100            15               20
   conventional railways
   Motorways                        120            12               15
   Inland waterways                 15 to 25       2                 7
   Airports and air traffic           8*             3*             20
   control
   Maritime transport               N.d.             1**             8
                                                  TOTAL            100
*    Air traffic control only
**   Southern European VTS
 ---pagebreak---                                    - 14 -
3.3. Cooperation with non-member countries
The EEA Agreement, the Europe agreements with Poland, Czechoslovakia
and Hungary, and the cooperation agreements with the other countries of
Central and Eastern Europe provide for close cooperation between the
Community    and   its co-signatories      in   the   field   of   transport
infrastructure. The same is true of the Alpine transit agreements
recently initialled with Switzerland and Austria. Last year's transit
agreement with Yugoslavia will have to be renegotiated with the
republics concerned.
Within this framework, the Community will have to promote the
interconnection of its network of major European routes with those of
its neighbours. The AGR, AGTC, TEM and TER agreements concluded at
Geneva within the framework of the ECE for the identification of the
major European routes will also have to be taken into account. The
Commission will continue to work in the ECE for the application and
development of these agreements.
The above is in the spirit of the conclusions of the Prague Conference
on pan-European transport policy.
4.    THE PROPOSAL FOR A NEW REGULATION
 In line with the preceding point, this communication is accompanied by
a Commission      proposal   amending   the   Regulation    to ensure    the
continuation of the Community action programme            in the field of
transport infrastructure in the light of the Maastricht agreements.
The amendments do no more than bridge the gap between the three-year
programme (1990-92) and the new Treaty. The changes include the
filling-out of the objectives to be pursued. The articles laying down
the procedures for Community financial support are unchanged.
The declaration of European utility provided for in Article 2 of the
present Regulation will in due course be replaced by the Declaration of
European    Interest   proposed   by  the Commission      on   24 February,1
depending on the order in which this proposal for extension and that
proposal concerning the declaration are adopted.
     C0M(92) 15 final - Proposal for a           Council Regulation (EEC)
     concerning the declaration of European      interest of infrastructure
     projects.
 ---pagebreak---                                  - 15
4.1. Ob lect ives
Article 1(1) of the proposal includes most of the objectives for the
development of networks of Community        interest that have proved
themselves in previous years. Some new objectives have, however, been
included to underline the need for interconnection and interoperability
not only between national networks but between modes too. Traffic
management, safety and respect for the environment have likewise been
included among the objectives.
Article 1(2) of the proposal extends the powers of the Transport
Infrastructure Committee to the air and maritime sectors in order to
preserve the multimodal approach and take account of their growing
 importance to the transport system.
4.2   The extension of the programme of financial support
The extended action programme follows the broad lines of the previous
Regulation. Article 3 is particularly important in that it specifies
those priority projects of each network masterplan eligible for
Community financial support under Article 4, where such support is
vital to bringing the project under way.
To the list of priority projects in Article 3 of the initial Regulation
have been added the inland waterway, motorway, conventional rail,
maritime transport and air networks. The traffic management system has
also been included.
The amendment made by Article 1(5) provides for an annual report.
A new Article has been added on forecasting at Community level.
As regards the duration of the Regulation, Article 1(7) provides that
 it will be replaced, as and when necessary, upon the entry into force
of the Treaty on European Union and its implementing provisions.
 ---pagebreak---                                    - 16 -
5.    CONCLUSIONS AND PERSPECTIVES
In pursuit of aims connected with the working of the internal market
and economic and social cohesion, the scope of future Community policy
on the European transport infrastructure network must be widened.
The short-term measures planned for this purpose and covered in part by
the proposals accompanying this communication are:
(a)   the establishment by the end of next year of series of guidelines
      for the different modes of transport, such as high-speed rail,
      road, inland waterways, combined transport, transport by air or
      sea, and for a European multimodal           transport   system; the
      development with the Member States of cooperation in the field of
      transport forecasting;
(b)   the continuation and reinforcement of measures taken since 1982
      with regard to transport       infrastructure financing, based in
      particular on the adoption of multiannual programmes and the
      focusing measures on the priorities established when modal
      masterplans are drawn up;
(c)   the implementation     of  measures   relating   to  interoperability
      between networks.
At the same time, further back-up or follow-up measures must be planned
to support the action taken, namely:
(a)   the coordination of Community or other financial instruments with
      a view to developing trans-European transport networks;
(b)   the decisive role that trans-European transport networks must play
       in land-use management and narrowing the gap between regions;1
(c)   the conclusion, within the appropriate forums, of agreements with
      non-member countries regarding the interconnection of different
      networks and measures for the interoperability of those networks;
(d)   the enhanced coordination of measures aimed at ensuring that
      transport infrastructure is developed and used in a context of
      sustainable mobility;
 (e)  the study of methods for the social and economic analysis of
       infrastructure projects to identify clearly criteria of Community
       interest without neglecting externalities, all of which entails a
      suitable information system;
(f)   the in-depth analysis of the interplay of transport infrastructure
      and safety with a view to infrastructure measures aimed at
       increasing safety, especially on the roads;
     Cf 4th informal meeting of the ministers responsible for regional
     policy and land-use planning, held in Lisbon on 15 and 16 May.
 ---pagebreak---                                 - 17 -
(g) the promotion of private-sector investment, and risk capital in
    particular, through the establishment of a framework conducive to
    solving the problems associated with public-sector and private-
    sector partnership and permitting projects to become self-
    financing in the longer term;
(h) the development of a European approach on the application of the
    "user pays" principle with a view to helping rationalize the
    allocation of the capital available for new investment;
(i) the continuation of concertation with the industry and other
    groups interested in transport infrastructure, and in particular
    with   regard  to  logistics, telecommunications and telematic
    systems;
(J) the continuation of research projects, especially in the fields of
    the traffic management and control and the interoperability of
    networks.
(k) the establishment of the schemes needed for the standardization of
    transport infrastructure and its use.
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 18 -
                              Proposal for a
                         COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC)
           amending Regulation (EEC) No 3359/90 for an action
           programme in the field of transport infrastructure
             with a view to the completion of an integrated
                         transport market in 1992
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES:
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European             Economic
Community, and in particular Articles 75 and 84(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament,
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee,
Whereas, since the first multiannual financial support programme for
infrastructure projects is due to expire at the end of 1992 and the
various Community networks remain incomplete, it is vital that the
present programme be extended;
Whereas transport    infrastructure   is crucial   to the working  of  the
internal market;
Whereas   pilot    projects    should    be   planned   to   further   the
interoperability and interconnection of networks;
Whereas the maritime and air sectors are also part of an        integrated
transport market;
Whereas the equilibrium of Europe's territory, and in particular links
with isolated regions, is of constant concern when transport networks
are being planned;
Whereas objectives should take account both of users' interests and
requirements relating to the environment, safety and the rational use
of energy;
Whereas forecasts of future traffic development and land use will be
needed and it is therefore desirable that the national forecasting
organizations and institutions and the Commission should cooperate;
 ---pagebreak---                                     19 -
Whereas, pending more comprehensive measures based on future decisions
relating to trans-European networks, Council Regulation (EEC) No
3359/901should be transitional in nature;
Whereas that Regulation should not lay down an expiry date in order to
prevent any gap in the action programme in the field of transport
infrastructure,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
                                Article 1
Council Regulation (EEC) No 3359/90 of       20 November   1990  is hereby
amended as follows:
1.   Article 1 is replaced by the following:
                                "Article 1
The Community shall identify transport infrastructure projects of
Community interest within the framework of the action programme defined
below and aimed at meeting one of the following objectives:
     eliminating bottlenecks;
-    eliminating missing links;
      integrating areas which, geographically, are either landlocked
      islands, or situated on the periphery of the Community;
     reducing the costs associated with transit traffic and combined
      transport in cooperation with any third countries concerned;
     providing high-quality links between      the  major  urban  centres,
      including high-speed rail links;
     furthering the interconnection and interoperability of different
     transport networks with a view to a Community-wide multimodal
     network;
      improving  compatibility with     European   networks outside    the
     Community in cooperation with the non-member countries concerned,
     particularly in Central and Eastern Europe;
     ensuring optimal traffic management;
     ensuring a high level of safety for all modes of transport;
     protecting the environment and foster the rational use of existing
     and future infrastructures."
     OJ No L 326, 24.11.1990, p. 1
 ---pagebreak---                                       - 20 -
2.   A new Article 1a is added:
                                   "Article 1a
Council     Decision 78/174/EEC(*) shall        apply mutatis  mutandis   to
maritime and air transport infrastructure.
(*) OJ No L 54, 25.2.1978, p. 16."
3.    In Art icle 3. points 4 to 7 are replaced by the following:
      "4.     inland waterway network
              East-West routes
          -   TwentekanaaI-M i t te 11andkanaI Ii nk
              improvement of the MitteI IandkanaI and the links between the
              Elbe and the Oder
              links between   the Elbe/Oder   and the Danube  (non-Community
              project)
              North-South routes
          -   wide link between the Seine and the Scheldt
              River ports
              intermodal development"
     5.       trans-European road network
          -   cross-border links
              links to Scandinavia
          -    links to Central and Eastern European countries
          -    interconnection of the motorway network with other networks
          -   bypassing of major cities
      6.      conventional rail networks
          -   Community internal and external cross-border projects
          -   refurbishment and modernization of networks
      7.      the maritime network
          -   Mediterranean VTS (Vessel Traffic System) installations
          -   port developments for combined transport and short         sea
              shipping
      8.      the air transport network
          -   airport development, including aids to navigation and to
               intermodaIi ty
               integrated air traffic management system in pan-European
              airspace
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 21 -
     9.     traffic management system
           Development, for all modes of transport, of command, control
           and information systems using new communications technology
     10.    links with Greece and Ireland
           Strengthening all types of modal   links within and with both
            these Member States."
4.   The following is added at the end of Article 5(3):
     ", without prejudice to the special           rules   permitting  the
     cumulation of support from the Community budget."
5.   In Art icle 11 "31 December 1991" is replaced by "31 December each
     year".
     A new Article 11a is added:
                               "Article 11a
National and other transport forecasting institutions and organizations
and the Commission shall cooperate in the preparation of Community-wide
forecasts."
7.   The second paragraph of Article 12 is deleted.
                                Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following its
publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
This Regulation shall be binding         in its   entirety   and  directly
applicable in all Member States.
Done at Brussels,                               For the Council
                                                The President
 ---pagebreak---                                  - 22 -
                          FINANCIAL STATEMENT
                   SECTION 1: FINANCIAL  IMPLICATIONS
1.  TITLE OF OPERATION
    Trans-European transport networks
2.  BUDGET HEADING INVOLVED:            B5-70
                                        700 - Transport infrastructure
3.  LEGAL BASIS
    Articles 74 and 84 regarding the common transport policy.
    Extension of Regulation (EEC) No 3359/90. New Title XII of the
    Treaty, concerning trans-European networks, signed at Maastricht
    (Articles 129b, 129c, 129d).
4.  DESCRIPTION OF OPERATION
4.1 Specific objectives of operation
    Once the infrastructure networks to be developed have been clearly
     identified in masterplans, the Community must be able to assist
    network construction by helping to fund projects of common
     interest covered by those masterplans. The aim is to speed up the
    construction of transport infrastructure by the Member States on
    the basis of a given project's importance to the functioning of
    the internal market and to mobility in general.
4.2 Duration
     In principle, this multiannual operation should be permanent.
    Begun in the early eighties, it should be governed by an updated
     legal framework, the duration of which will be established at five
    years, in line with the new financial perspectives.
4.3 Target population
    The Member States primarily, but also any promoter of transport
     infrastructure or anyone else eligible under the above Regulation.
 ---pagebreak---                                   23 -
5.  CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENDITURE:     Differentiated   appropriations/
                                       non-compulsory expenditure
6.  TYPE OF EXPENDITURE
6.1 100% grant: NO
6.2 Subsidy for joint financing     with other  sources  in  the  public
    and/or private sector: YES
6.3 Interest rate subsidy: YES
6.4 Other: Loan guarantees, feasibility studies
6.5 Should the operation prove an economic success, is there provision
    for all or part of the Community contribution to be reimbursed? NO
6.6 Will the proposed operation cause any change in the level of
    revenue? If so, what sort of change and what type of revenue Is
    involved? NO
7.  FINANCIAL IMPACT
7.1 Method of calculating total cost of operation
    The progress of projects of Community interest eligible for
    support is accelerated by the efforts at Community level of all
    concerned by a given transport network, such as high-speed rail,
    waterways, road, combined transport or VTS (Vessel Traffic System)
    and ATC (Air Traffic Control). These efforts have made it
    possible to calculate the sums needed for the construction of a
    network, and in particular for projects of Community interest.
    Many studies will probably be needed next year to determine the
    feasibility of projects and their impact; some projects may
    already begin to be financed or benefit from grants, interest rate
    subsidies or loan guarantees.
    Total annual investment in projects of Community interest is
    estimated at ECU 10 billion (out of a total annual investment of
    ECU 50-60 billion). When the planned aid of ECU 180 mi I I ion is
    being allocated, priority must be given to projects of Community
     interest which would not otherwise be carried out, or at least not
    with the same degree of urgency. The rate of return on the
    projects to be financed will also determine whether or not aid is
    given.
    There will be a particularly heavy involvement in preliminary
    studies, since, while vital for assessing a project's feasibility,
    they are always difficult to finance.
 ---pagebreak---                                          - 24 -
    7.2  Breakdown of operation by component
                                                            (ECU mi I I ion)
    BREAKDOWN                    1992 BUDGET    1993 PDB       % CHANGE
    Grants to projects               81.8          p.m.
    Interest rate subsidies          20            100
    Studies                          38.9           80
    Loan guarantees                   -            p.m.
                                   140.7           180
    7.2   Indicative schedule of commitment appropriations
                                                   PAYMENTS (ECU mi I I ion)
    Commitment       1993   1994   1995    1996  1997    subsequent
    appropriations                                          years
    93      180      70            30            40          40
    94
    95                        p.m. (Package Delors II)
    96
    97
    8.   What anti-fraud measures are planned      in the proposal    for the
         operation?
         Article 10 of the present Regulation contains specific provisions.
         That Article remains unchanged.
(4)
 ---pagebreak---                                      - 25 -
      SECTION 2: ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE (part A of the budget)
1.   Will the proposed operation involve an increase in the number of
     Commission staff? If so, how many? YES, 9 ( 3 x A , 3 x B , 3 x C )
2.   Administrative expenditure involved in the proposed operation
BREAKDOWN                            1992 BUDGET     1993 PDB   % CHANGE
     Expenditure on temporary             -           250 000
     staff and other human
     resources
     Expenditure on office space          N            60 000
     Expenditure on publications           I          100 000
     and information
     Computing                            L            50 000
     Other operating expenses             -            50 000
            TOTAL                        0           510 000
     Man-years                                           4/5
           SECTION 3: ELEMENTS OF COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS
1.   OBJECTIVES AND CONSISTENCY WITH FINANCIAL PROGRAMMING
     This operation directly concerns the construction of the trans-
     European networks, which the Treaty on European Union (Article 3
     of the Treaty; Title XII) regards as a vital Community policy.
      It relates primarily      to transport     infrastructure and   the
     application to that infrastructure of information technology
     designed for traffic management.
     This policy is explicitly included in the Delors II package set
     out in the Commission communication of 12 February 1992 (C0M(92)
     2000).
1.1   Is the operation Incorporated in the financial programming of the
     DG for the years concerned? YES, a five-year action programme.
1.2  To which broader      objective defined     in the DG's    financial
     programming    does  the objective      of  the proposed   operation
     correspond?
     Single market, economic     and social cohesion, construction of
      trans-European transport    networks, mobility, common transport
     poIi cy.
 ---pagebreak---                                   26 -
1.3 Main factors of uncertainty     which  could affect  the  specific
    results of the operation
    The Member States' national budgets; their        priorities  are,
    however, included in Community programming.
2.  GROUNDS FOR THE OPERATION
    A policy to promote Community transport infrastructure networks
    presupposes the availability of budget resources for that purpose.
    While all forecasts suggest a steady growth in transport demand
    (at present 3.5% a year, compared with annual GDP growth of 2.3%),
    the expansion of transport infrastructure is slow and subject to
    delays for both environmental and financial reasons.
    Networks are at present far from homogeneous and affected by
    "missing links", bottlenecks and relative obsolescence: this is
    particularly true near borders, in underdeveloped regions, at
    points where they cross major natural barriers or in non-member
    countries of transit.
    Since 1986 several Commission communications have underlined both
    the need to resolve financing problems and the value of financial
    frameworks, which, supported by the Community budget, would help
    raise capital for investment in the sector. Besides grants, these
    frameworks include interest rate subsidies, budget guarantees, tax
    breaks and measures to enhance a project's ability to finance
    itself.
    To ensure the effectiveness of the Community operation, the
    Commission's most recent communications highlight the value of
    multiannual budgeting and stress the importance of programming and
    focusing aid.
2.1 Cost: Community aid averaging up to 15% of the total investment in
    the projects selected.
2.2 Spin-off effects (impact beyond the specific objective(s)):
    Facilitation of economic activities; integration of isolated
    areas; mobility of goods and persons.
2.3 Multiplier effect (ability to raise capital from other sources):
    Public and private capital in the Member States is unlocked by the
    Community operation; pooling the available resources is made
    easier.
 ---pagebreak---                                 - 27 -
3.  MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF THE OPERATION
    Implementation of the Treaty on European Union entails the ongoing
    monitoring and evaluation of the operation, inasmuch as it is
    governed by a framework previously approved by the Council in the
    form of a series of guidelines (Article 129c of the Treaty).
3.1 Performance   indicators selected: transport costs,     congestion
    costs, economic and social benefit, improved logistics
3.2 Details and frequency of planned evaluation: the Transport
    Infrastructure Committee    is responsible for monitoring. The
    Regulation provides for triennial reports.
 ---pagebreak---                                  - 28 -
             STATEMENT OF THE IMPACT ON SME AND EMPLOYMENT
Subject:   Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EEC)
           No 3359/90 for an action programme          in the field of
           transport infrastructure
1.   Administrative obligations    arising   from   application of  the
     proposed Regulation
     None.
2.   Advantages for small firms
     The amendments to the regulation have no direct impact on SME and
     employment. But     the  execution   of    the   different network
     masterplans and their constituent projects may, however, be
     assumed to be beneficial.
3.   Disadvantages for small firms
     None.
4.   Disadvantages in terms of employment
     None.
5.   Have both sides of industry been consulted beforehand?
     No.
6.   Is there any alternative, less binding approach?
     No.
 ---pagebreak---                                    - 29 -
                                   REPORT
on the experience gained in the implementation of the transport
infrastructure policy provided for in Article 11 of Regulation (EEC)
No 3359/90 for an action programme           in the field of     transport
infrastructure with a view to the completion of an integrated transport
market in 1992
1.   Since 1982 the Community has been conducting a financing policy
     with specific budget resources with a view to:
     -   stimulating    investment   and   channelling   It  towards   the
         modernization of networks of Community interest;
     -   unlocking other sources of financing.
      In the period 1982-92, ECU 702.7 million was earmarked for the
     execution of this policy, contributing to an investment totalling
     ECU 11 billion. With a rate of contribution of 6.5%, this policy
     has proved particularly effective in the mobilization of financing
     (a factor of 16).
     The type of financing breaks down as follows:
TYPE                                       AMOUNT (ECU MILLION)
- Projects
         *  Grants                               555.05
         *   Interest rate rebates                79.65
- Studies                                         68.00
                                          TOTAL  702.70
     The policy has proved no less effective in achieving priorities,
     particularly since the adoption of the action programme permitting
     budget resources to be allocated, programmed and concentrated on a
     multiannual basis.
     As regards the chief priorities (see Table 1 ) , mention should be
     made of the successful involvement in the Channel Tunnel, both in
     terms of the funding of preliminary studies - relating to
     technical and economic feasibility and the financing of the fixed
      link - and the construction of the associated infrastructure, the
     financing of which had previously blocked the entire project.
 ---pagebreak---                                  - 30 -
     PRIORITIES                                  COST   HEADING 700
     Channel Tunnel * (1)                        700       36.7
     TGV Nord * (2)                            3 500      139.7
     TGV Sud *
     Brenner route * (3)                       1 800       50.9
     Pyrenean crossings (4)                      125       29
     Links with Iberian Peninsula (5)          1 460       49.5
     Links with Ireland (6)                      226       25.1
     Scan I ink * (7)                            465       31.8
     Links with Greece * (8)                     521       94.2
     Combined transport * (9)                    950       53.2
     Other:
         Border infrastructure                   500       53.6
         Inland waterways                         82        8.2
         Bypass roads (10)                       528       51.7
         Studies (11)                                      68
         Other (12)                               45        6.7
             TOTAL                            11 167      702.7
*    For planning see footnote (11)
(1)  Additional infrastructure.
(2)  B, NL, D, L.
(3)  Ex 1st ing Iine.
(4)  Somport tunnel.
(5)   Investment in E, F, P.
(6)  Dublin-Belfast (road/rail), A5/A55 North Wales Coast Road.
(7)  Electrification of the railway network.
(8)  Rail/road routes Idomeni/Evzoni-Thessaloniki-Athens-Patras.
(9)  Tunnel widening and intermodal platforms.
(10) London, Dublin, Luxembourg, Madrid, Tordes H las inter alia.
(11) Planning: Channel Tunnel (0.5), TGV Nord (17.5), TGV Sud (14.3),
     Brenner tunnel (5.7), Scanlink (7.2), high-speed rail link with
     Eastern     Germany  (10), combined    transport   network   (0.5),
      integration of Iberian rail networks (high-speed and combined)
      (1.5), links with Greece (2), European command and control system
      (9).
(12) Chavants tunnel, Dordrecht bridge, port of Ostende.
(**) Cost: ECU 265 million. NB the strategic nature of the studies in
      the context of future investment. E.g. the Channel Tunnel Rail
     Link Route Evaluation (cost: ECU 3 849 million), the Hamburg-
     Copenhagen link (Fehmarn) (cost: ECU 4 000 million), the Lyon-
     Turin link (cost: ECU 4 246 million), the Brenner Tunnel (cost:
     ECU 10 000 million) connection to the Portuguese and Spanish high-
     speed rail network (cost: ECU 4 908 million).
 ---pagebreak---                               - 31 -
In this way road projects such as the M 2 0 , A 2 0 , A 2070, E 4 0 ,
A 26 or RN 28 in the United Kingdom, France and Belgium have been
carried out with Community support from budget heading 7 0 0 .
Community     support  amounted   to ECU 26.7 million of        a   total
investment of ECU 400 million.
Heading 700 support for rail infrastructure directly connected
with the Tunnel       has focused on the London-Folkestone           line
(ECU 10 million out of a total of ECU 300 m i l l i o n ) .
Community aid for this operation totalled ECU 36.7 million. With
a total investment of ECU 700 million, this gives an investment
factor of 19.
High-speed rail link: Paris - London - Brussels - Amsterdam             -
Cologne, with particular regard to sections in:
Be I g i urn
Community support has enabled this country to surmount the most
severe obstacles      to the execution of      the project, namely
environmental and financing problems. Heading 700 credits covered
half the cost of the Belgian study into the environmental impact
of the construction of this line, while the project's financial
set-up includes a Community contribution of ECU 200 million over
10 years in order to capitalize on its self-financing potential.
Belgium has already received ECU 79.65 million in interest rate
rebates for the execution of this project: when set against the
total cost of the investment, some ECU 1 650 million, this gives
an investment factor of 20.7. In ten years time this factor is
expected to be 8.2.
The Netherlands
ECU 30 mill ion has been granted for projected investment on the
Antwerp-Amsterdam route, including the construction of a new high-
speed railway line, which will branch off from the Schiphol-Leiden
 line towards Rotterdam and from Rotterdam to the Belgian border.
The total cost of the investment is put at ECU 1 450 million.
Over      ten  years  the   Community  is expected          to contribute
ECU 172 million to this project. Today's investment factor of
48.8 is expected to be 8:5 in ten years time.
Germany
ECU 20 million has been granted for investment on the Aachen-
Cologne line. Against a total investment of ECU 250 million, the
 investment factor 12.5.
United Kingdom
Support has been provided         for the technical, economic and
environmental assessment of the different options for the London-
Tunnel line. Environmental problems have prevented the government
 ---pagebreak---                                    - 32 -
    from finalizing the new route or deciding on how to finance it.
    The study is costing ECU 35 million, of which heading 700 is
    covering ECU 17 million. The construction work is costed at ECU
    3 849 mi I I ion.
    Luxembourg
    Support has been provided for            the electrification of the
    Luxembourg-Liège      line. The     total    cost   of    the   work    is
    ECU 178 million: ECU 84 million in Luxembourg and ECU 94 million
    in Belgium. ECU 10 million has been granted for investment in
    Luxembourg, an investment factor of 8.4.
    In this operation, the Community has provided ECU 139.7 million
    (plus ECU 17.5 million for planning in the UK) of a total
    investment    of     ECU 3 500 mi I I ion     (plus    ECU 3 849 mi I I ion).
    representing a current investment factor of 25.
    The               Sev i 11e-Madr i d-Barce Iona-Lyons-Turi n-M iIan-Veni ce-
    Tarvisio/Trieste high-speed rail line
    This involves the execution of preliminary studies for each
    section. A total of ECU 19.1 million has been granted for the
    planning of the TGV Sud:
    -   ECU 5.2 million for the France-Mediterranean-Spain-Portugal
        route (including Madrid's Atocha station),
    -   ECU 13.9 million on the France-Italy route.
    The cost of the studies totals about ECU 95 million.
    The Brenner rail crossing
    The construction of a new base tunnel is being considered as an
    alternative to the expansion of trans-Alpine road traffic. The
    project    is   costed     at   ECU 10 billion. Heading 700       support
    totalling ECU 5.7 million has helped pay for the preliminary
    technical, economic and financial feasibility studies.
    Heading 700 has also been used to increase throughput on the
    existing railway line, for the construction or widening of
    tunnels, for the introduction of two-way running and for track
    straightening. The support provided totals ECU 50.9 million out
    of a total of ECU 1 800 million, yielding an investment factor of
    35.4.
    Pyrenean crossings
    Community support has focused on the Somport route (Bordeaux-Pau-
    Zaragoza-Valencia), and       the construction of        the tunnel     in
    part icular.
    ECU 29 million of a total of ECU 125 million has been committed.
    This represents an investment factor of 4.3.
(5)
 ---pagebreak---                             - 33 -
Links with Ireland
With a view to improving links between Ireland and the rest of the
Community, support from heading 700 has focused on:
-  doubling the width of the A5/A55 North Wales Coast Road, an
   operation costing ECU 189 million (involving the Pen-Y-Clip and
   Rhualit Hill bypass), of which the Community is providing
   ECU 16.1 million, an investment factor of 11.7;
-  modernization of the Dublin-Belfast railway line at a total
   cost of ECU 70 million, of which heading 700 is providing
   ECU 9 million, an investment factor of 7.8.
-   the North-South Dublin-Belfast road, including  several bypasses
   (Dunleer, Wexford, ShankiIl-Bray), among them     the Dublin ring
   road, at a cost of ECU 110 million, of which     ECU 17.4 mi I I ion
   came from heading 700, providing an investment   ratio of 1:6.3.
Support totals ECU 42.4 million out of a total         investment  of
ECU 369 million, an investment factor of 8.7.
Scant ink
Heading 700 support has been focused mainly on:
-   the preliminary studies and work required for the construction
    in Denmark of the Store-Belt, Oresund and Fehman fixed links at
   a total cost of ECU 6 000 million, of which heading 700 is
   providing ECU 7.2 million;
-   the electrification of the railways, and in particular the
   Ringsted-Odense line, at a total cost of ECU 60 million, of
   which heading 700 is furnishing ECU 13.8 million;
-   the Oresdum fixed link (earthworks), costing ECU 400 million,
   ECU 8 million of which comes from heading 700.
The overall volume of these investments is ECU 465 million.
ECU 57.2 million of which is accounted for by heading 700 support,
representing an investment factor of 8.1.
Links with Greece
Heading 700 support for improving access to Greece has focused on
modernizing      the    North-South      Idomeni(raiI)/Evzoni(road)-
Thessaloniki-Athens-Patras routes, in particular:
-   the upgrading of the Idomeni-Thessaloniki-Athen-Patras rail
    line at a total cost of ECU 279.5 million, ECU 37.3 million of
   which was provided under heading 700;
-   doubling the width of the Evzoni-Thessaloniki-Athens-Patras
    road at a total cost of ECU 241.5 million, ECU 56.9 million of
   which came from heading 700;
 ---pagebreak---                                    - 34 -
         feasibility studies concerning the new Igoumenitsa-Volos road
         and two-way running on the Korinthos-Patras railway line.
      The overall volume of these investments is ECU 521 million.
      ECU 94.2 million of which is accounted for by heading 700 support.
      an investment factor of 5.5.
      Links with the Iberian Peninsular
      Heading 700 support for this operation includes:
      -  work on road links in France: the RN 20 (ECU 9 million of a
         total of ECU 54.2 million);
      -  upgrading links In Spain: the N 1 road (ECU 8 million of a
         total of ECU 57.9 mi 11 ion), the Coslada-AIcaI I and Zaragoza-
         Barcelona   railway     lines   and    Madrid's     Atocha    station
         (ECU 20 million towards a total cost of ECU 1 068 million);
      -  upgrading   links    in Portugal:     the    Paredes-Penafiel    road
         (ECU 1.5 million out of ECU 10 million), the Beira-Alta and
         Northern   rail     lines   (ECU 11 million     of    a    total   of
         ECU 205 mill ion).
      (Investment in the Iberian Peninsular has also been financed under
      the headings of "bypass roads", "combined transport", "TGV-Sud",
      "Pyrenees". Such projects       include the M 40, the Valencia-
      Barcelona line, the Lisbon intermodal terminal, the Tordesillas
      ring road and Somport. Of a total cost of ECU 440 million,
      ECU 49.6 has been covered by heading 700.)
      In principle, heading 700 support accounts for ECU 49.5 million of
      a total cost of ECU 1 395 million, representing an investment
      factor of28. (In fact, heading 700 is providing ECU 99.1 million
      of a total of ECU 1 835 million, an investment factor of 18.5.
      Heading 700 support for the studies needed for planning the
      various operations is particularly significant (see Table 2 ) .
      Funding for studies covers ECU 68 million of a total cost of
      ECU 265 million. The total investment required for the execution
      of works amounts to about ECU 40 billion.
                                   TABLE 2
                            STUDIES (ECU mi I I ion)
PROJECT            HEADING 700                     INVESTMENT INVOLVED
TGV Nord              17.5                                   3 500
TGV Sud               14.5                                  15 000
Brenner route          5.7                                  10 000
Scan I ink              7.2                                  6 000
Links with Greece      2.0                                   2 410*
Other                 21.3
            Total    68                         about     40 000
*     Plus Igoumenitsa-Volos road
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 35 -
4.    The breakdown of the sums by country was as follows:
             HEADING 700 - BREAKDOWN BY COUNTRY (ECU MILLION)
Belgium           91.85                                 (13.07%)
Denmark           37.00                                 ( 5.27%)
Germany           47.30                                 ( 6.73%)
Greece            97.00                                 (13.80%)
Spain             58.90                                 ( 8.38%)
France            67.80                                 ( 9.65%)
Ireland           26.60                                 ( 3.79%)
Italy             91.30                                 (12.99%)
Luxembourg        19.00                                 ( 2.70%)
Nether lands                                  48.45       ( 6.90%)
Portugal          22.20                                 ( 3.16%)
United Kingdom     85.50                                (12.17%)
EEC                9.80                                 ( 1.39%)
         TOTAL    702.70                                (100%)
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 36 -
                         COMMISSION COMMUNICATION
             on the creation of a Trans-European Road Network
I.    FRAMEWORK OF WORK TO BE CARRI ED OUT BY THE COMMUN ITY
1.    Following the European Council of Maastricht, the Commission
indicated in its programme for 19921 that it intended to submit
concrete proposals to the Council concerning the trans-European
networks.
The present communication meets this objective as far as the road
network is concerned, this being an exceptionally important network for
enabling the movement of people and goods within the frontier-free area
and the internal market, strengthening the economic and social cohesion
of the Community and creating an environment favourable for European
compet i t ion.
This communication also falls within the framework of the proposal for
a Regulation amending Council Regulation No 3359/90 of 20 November 1990
on the second multiannual action programme 1990-1992 on transport
infrastructure2, presented at the same time by the Commission3.
At the same time the Commission meets the express request of the
Council of Ministers in charge of Transport which in its meeting of
16 and 17 December 1991 had asked it for concrete proposals concerning
the Trans-European Road Network.
2.     In drawing up its proposals, the Commission particularly took
into consideration the recommendations adopted by a group of national
and international experts, the Motorway Working Group 4 , specially set
up for the purpose within the Transport Infrastructure Committee which
met on six occasions between January 1991 and February 1992.
The Commission moreover informed the Council of the initial conclusions
of the Group in November 1991 5 .
1      COM(92) 2000: The Commission's programme for 1992.
2      Regulation (EEC) No 3359/90 for an action programme in the field
      of transport infrastructure with a view to the completion of an
       integrated transport market in 1992.
3      C0M(92) ...: Draft amendment to Regulation (EEC) No 3359/90.
4      Made up of the Commission, the 12 Member States, the ECMT, the
       UN-ECE, the EIB and the following organizations: the IRF, the
       PIARC, the SECAP, the ERT, the ACEA, the IRU and the ITA.
5      SEC(91) 2274 "Transport Infrastructure Networks".
 ---pagebreak---                                    - 37 -
Since then the Working Group has reached a broad consensus on an
approach to the road network as a whole within the European transport
system.
The report drawn up by the Motorway Working Group titled "Trans-
European networks: towards an outline plan for the road network and
road    traffic"1    deserves  special    attention    from   the   Community
institutions. Indeed, a coherent approach with a view to drawing up a
Community policy on roads, while adhering to the principle of
subsidiarity, would seem to be especially necessary and urgent for all
the Member States, as well as for the international organizations, the
operators, industrialists and users represented.
This report is itself being sent at the same time to the Council as a
Commission working document.
3.    On the basis of the work carried out by the Group and taking its
recommendations into account, it is now possible to take a certain
number of important decisions in planning the Trans-European Road
Network and implementing a Community policy on roads, particularly in
terms of
           an outline plan for the trans-European network,
           a road traffic policy,
            internalizing external factors,
           f i nanc i ng.
This is the object of the present communication.
4.    This policy must also        be   developed   in  coherence  with   the
principle of subsidiarity.
When applied to the trans-European transport networks, there are a
number of aspects of this principle to be considered in terms of the
extent of Community action.
The principle objectives of the networks are to ensure the efficiency
of the internal market, by improving the mobility of people and goods,
and to reinforce economic and social cohesion.
To achieve these objectives, Community action is needed on:
       the visibility of the overall development needs of the transport
      networks in the Community as a whole and beyond, in a multimodal
      perspective which ensures that the capacities and inherent
      problems of each mode are taken into account (drawing up master
      plans) ;
       the conditions of interconnection (completing the missing links)
      and interoperability of existing national links (e.g. ensuring
       technical    harmonization)    in order    to ensure     their   total
      efficiency at Community level;
      SEC(92) ... Trans-European Networks: towards an outline plan for
       the road network and road traffic.
 ---pagebreak---                                  - 38 -
      the development, consistent with existing networks, of new
      networks where their absence causes       isolation  (integrating
      landlocked,    island  or   isolated regions) or    hampers   the
      development of part of the Community's territory (participation
       in the internal market);
The task of definition should be carried out at Community level but it
is for the Member States to determine the precise details, the timing
and the pace of completion of the infrastructure required to achieve
the network defined. The indicative nature of the plans defined at
Community level allows Member States the freedom to act or not to act,
but their actions must follow the guidelines which they have accepted
at Community level.
The incentives at the Community's disposal must allow it to help reduce
certain constraints at national level and convince a Member State, if
necessary, to carry out a project which is within its field of
competence and is in the general interest. It is in this spirit that
Community financing will favour measures on support or incentives.
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 39 -
II.    CONCLUSIONS OF THE WORKING GROUP
1.     The status of the road network of interest to Europe in the
       run-up to 1993
1.1    The socio-economic importance of roads for the entire Community
is constantly increasing.
In terms of overland transport, roads carry more than 90% of transport
users (in traveller km) and more than 70% (in tonne km) of goods
transported. As regards international mobility, they carry 70% of
travellers and 60% of goods traffic.
This international traffic is concentrated mainly on:
       the motorway network, which appears essential from an economic
       point of view and is particularly well-suited to a frontier-free
       area
       the centre of the Community, geographically.
1.2     In the run-up to 1993, the European network still appears to be
ill-equipped and its smooth operation to be under threat.
The network is incomplete particularly in those countries on the
periphery of the Community. The motorway or expressway network is still
 in an embryonic state in Ireland, Greece and Portugal and is expanding
significantly in Spain. There are still missing         links in other
Member States, such as the United Kingdom, France or Germany in its new
Lânder.
The interoperability of the network could be improved, particularly
with regard to the standards of the infrastructure and road signs and
signals.
At the same time, the network is threatened by the heavy increase in
traffic, particularly international traffic      which is growing more
rapidly than domestic traffic. Delays are becoming          increasingly
frequent in the Benelux countries, the Ruhr, around London, the Ile de
France, Northern Italy and on the North-South corridors.
1.3    Forecasts of growth in mobility suggest that the Community is in
danger of being faced in the medium term with even more serious traffic
problems if no large-scale action is taken to combat the congestion.
2. Modernization of the network
 In order to create a truly trans-European Road Network, the Working
Group is well aware of the need to construct the missing links and even
missing networks in the countries on the periphery of the Community. In
most cases these infrastructures have already been planned by the
Member States. It is because of this national planning that it has been
possible to put forward an outline plan for the network up to 2002.
Nonetheless, in certain countries (Germany, Greece, Spain, France and
 Ireland) with longer-term plans, some 5 000 km of links for the trans-
European network will not be completed until after 2002.
 ---pagebreak---                                        - 40 -
    The plan for the network consists of approximately 37 000 km     of links
    of motorway or near-motorway standard, of which approximately   12 000 km
    are motorways or high quality roads to be constructed in         the next
    10 years, with approximately 40% being sited in the outlying    countries
    of the Community.
    Stress is laid on the development of motorways in the four peripheral
    countries (E, P, GR, IRL) currently with a low density of motorways.
    The increase will be of the order of 70% and the length of roads will
     increase from about 7 000 km to 12 000 km in total.
    Execution of the outline plan will enable the Community area to be
    structured, particularly in the outlying regions of the Community, and
    will facilitate international trade, personal mobility and regional
    access to the major international routes.
    Particular attention should be paid to by-passing large European
    conurbations, to improving       inter-connections with other forms of
    transport, particularly with multimodal terminals, as well as to the
    development of the network across the continent in order to guarantee
    transit of Community goods, and links to Scandinavia and the countries
    of Central and Eastern Europe.
    Standardization of the technical characteristics of the major road
     infrastructures would appear to be worthwhile. A special study will be
    set up to encourage the development of a typology of Inter-urban
    routes.
    Finally, the compatibility of road equipment, particularly that
     incorporating the new technologies, must be increased in order to be
    able to provide a uniform standard of comfort             throughout  the
    trans-European network, and work on standardization should be actively
    cont inued.
    3.   The need for a road traffic policy
    3.1     In view of increasing congestion, the Community   has to adopt a
    proper strategy in order to optimize road mobility.
    To this end, action must in particular be taken to
           rationalize existing traffic,
           encourage the use of other complementary forms of transport
           (particularly for the movement of goods)
           pass on the actual direct and indirect costs of using the network
           directly to the users 1 .
     It would appear that a structural measure on the costs of using the
     road infrastructure is appropriate to regulate traffic effectively and
    maximize initiatives for combating congestion. Whatever the possible
    solutions (raising taxes, collecting tolls), concerted consideration
    will actively be given to this subject.
            In accordance with the Commisison proposal: COM(90) 540, Proposal
           for a Council Directive on the charging of infrastructure costs
           to heavy goods vehicles,
(6)
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 41 -
Given the interfaces between the urban and trans-European networks, the
Working Group is of the opinion that the Community could play a
significant role in defining a frame of reference for regulating
traffic (for example with regard to the development of systems using
the new technologies) in and around towns, where traffic problems are
even more serious than on the European network.
3.2    Furthermore, in the trans-European network it will be necessary
to develop the quality of the services offered to the user who, within
a -frontier-free area, is becoming more and more European. This means
that particular attention will have to be paid to the requirements of
road safety, to the development of road information and to traffic
management as well as to optimizing travel time.
As for road safety, the choice of standards has a powerful influence
and those applying to motorways would bring considerable advantages in
this area. Tightening international regulations relating to road signs,
signals and markings must be looked into. The Working Group underlined
the importance of the proposals drawn up within the framework of the
High-Level Group on Road Safety1.
Road information and traffic management are currently undergoing a
technological revolution which should permit a considerable increase in
traffic fluidity. The "intelligent" road and "intelligent" vehicles,
which have emerged from European research programmes such as Drive and
Prometheus, should actively aid the development of a truly innovative
traffic concept. However, a certain number of clarifications of a
political nature will have to be made rapidly in order not to delay the
 introduction of equipment for integrated traffic management. It seems
that a concerted          European plan for the introduction of this
equipment and its standardization would be particularly useful.
The Community will have a major role          in introducing effective
management of international traffic on the trans-European corridors.
Finally, optimizing travel time will in turn help to optimize the
network: rest areas, service areas for professional travellers as well
as intermodal transfer complexes will enable the use of the road
network within the transport system to be rationalized.
4.     Taking external factors into account
The creation of the Trans-European Road Network will require a better
understanding of the effects which it will produce, whether they are
negative (for the environment, for example), or positive (for spatial
development).
       Report of the High-Level Group on Road Safety
 ---pagebreak---                                    - 42 -
4.1    The effects of the Trans-European Road Network on the environment
will have to be analyzed specifically. In this respect, it does,
however, appear that:
       it will be necessary to limit the physical impact of the new road
       links which are to be constructed and to reduce the impact of the
       ex ist ing I inks.
       roads must play an important role in the Community strategy on
       controlling     C02  emissions  and   the   implications     for   the
       greenhouse     effect.   This   consideration     demonstrates     the
       advisability of optimizing mobility on the roads.
The Green Paper1 on the impact of transport on the environment: A
Community strategy for sustainable mobility further emphasizes these
two points.
4.2    The effets of the Trans-European        Road   Network    on   spatial
development should be felt:
       both at local level, where many regions        should   benefit   from
       better access to the international network;
       and globally, where the balance and the cohesion of the Community
       will be strengthened by the creation of a network serving the
       whole of the Community and non-member countries, providing the
       entire population and economic agents with a high an comparable
        level of service wherever they may be.
5.     Financing
The cost of turning the master plan for the network into reality is
estimated at around ECU 120 billion, based on available information.
 In view of the restrictions which have affected              investment in
 infrastructures and of the need to look for greater        mobilization of
financing capacities, particularly from the financial       markets, and of
the trend towards internalizing the external costs and       regulating road
traffic mobility, it is probable that there will            be a concerted
overhaul of the financing of road infrastructure.
Toll-levying motorways are an excellent example of successful financing
of transport infrastructure without recourse to budget capacities.
6.     Final recommendations of the Working Group
At its meeting of 27 February 1992, the Working Group            adopted  the
following recommendations addressed to the Commission:
"To enable the Community to contribute to the establishment and
development of a trans-European road network, the group recommends that
the Commission present appropriate proposals to the Council in order
to:
       Green Paper on the impact of transport on        the environment: A
       Community strategy for sustainable mobility.
 ---pagebreak---                                 - 43 -
1. reach the objective of providing the territory of the Community
   with a high quality road network, i.e. a network of motorways and
   expressways, which will:
        provide for the interconnection of national networks, by
        means of the construction of missing stretches of road and
        the improvement of existing ones if necessary, so that they
        are fully accessible and coherent across the Community;
        bring the interoperability of the network up to standard, In
        particular by means of the standardization of road design and
        the adoption of a policy of traffic management.
2. declare the projects listed below to be of common interest on the
   grounds of their socio-economic impact, and establish a list of
   priorities of Community intervention in accordance with the
   fol lowing cr iter ia:
        contribution to the creation of trans-European axes;
        elimination of bottlenecks;
        integration of landlocked or peripheral regions;
        facilitation     and safeguarding   of   international    trade,
        including transit, in cooperation with any third country
        concerned;
        improvement of links on land/sea routes;
        provision of high quality links between major conurbations.
   These projects are the following:
   (a) The completion of links as depicted on the annexed map and
        upgrading of links on the existing network.
   (b) The introduction of advanced telematics systems in road
        transport and the application of road management measures in
        the trans-European network.
3. promote, where appropriate and within the framework set out
   above, the following lines of action in order to ensure the
   homogeneous,     balanced  and   sustainable  development    of   the
   trans-European road network:
        definition of a European standard of service;
         implementation of measures needed to improve road safety;
        establishment of a European strategy for road traffic
        management      and  for   optimizing   mobility     on    major
        trans-European routes, taking regional and multimodal aspects
         into account ;
        adoption of a concerted plan for road telematics;
         implementation of measures needed to reduce the impact of the
        road schemes on the environment;
   -    drafting of proposals for financing infrastructure needed for
        road transport."
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 44 -
III.  COMMISSION PROPOSALS
1.    The Commission takes due note of the progress of the work and of
      the recommendations made by the Working Group
These recommendations are in line particularly with the guidelines
defined within the framework of the policy on transport infrastructure
networks drawn up by the Commission in the document C0M(92)....
Transport infrastructure.
These recommendations are in accordance with the proposals already sent
to the Council on trans-European networks1 and introduced in the
Treaty on political union.
Execution of the plan of the Trans-European Road Network as it will
look in 2002 and the various types of action proposed to ensure its
interoperability     will    contribute   towards    guaranteeing     the
competitiveness of the European economy.
The construction of the missing links, or even of the missing networks,
will significantly strengthen the economic and social cohesion of the
Community, at the same time as the action taken directly within the
framework of the Community's regional policy. Ultimately, according to
the needs in the area of spatial development evaluated by the
Commission2,   the territorial balance of      the Community    will be
strengthened by it.
The network plan is also an important step forward in stressing the
need to develop a traffic policy at Community level. Such a policy is a
priority in view of the congestion on the roads, mobility trends and
environmental prerogatives. It should, in particular, address the
challenge of the estimated 35% increase in the number of vehicles
within the Community by 2010.
The setting up of urban and interurban systems using new technologies
for managing traffic, drawing on the results of the Drive and Eureka
research programmes (Prometheus in particular), will be significant in
this   respect.   It should, moreover, be      pointed   out   that   the
standardization of this new equipment for traffic management will have
a considerable industrial impact, since European industry will meet
with serious competition in this market from American and Japanese
industr ies.
Similarly, the     introduction of a multimodal     transport    network,
particularly for the transportation of goods, should be made easier by
the development of interconnections between the Trans-European Road
Network and the large multimodal centres. The reallocation of long-
distance traffic to the combined transport network and to the inland
waterway network would be increased by developing systems for charging
for the use of infrastructures, further integrating the external costs
of transportation in terms of time lost, congestion and pollution.
1     C0M(90) 585 "Towards trans-European networks - For a Community
      action programme".
2     C0M(91) 452 "Europe 2000 - Outlook for the development of the
      Community's territory".
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 45 -
In accordance with the Green Paper on the impact of transport on the
environment which it has recently adopted1, the Commission stresses
that it is particularly necessary that road traffic contributes towards
limiting air pollution, particularly in a multimodal framework, while
not putting at risk the economic efficiency of the transport system and
the freedom of choice of the users.
The part played by the Trans-European Road Network should be evaluated
with this in mind.
2.    The Commission proposes that the Council adopt the proposal for a
      Decision annexed hereto.
3.    Continuing the work
In order to promote the development and smooth running of the Trans-
European Road Network, it is necessary to continue the work started in
the following way 2 :
      Monitor    the   development   of  traffic   flows,  particularly
       international flows, on the major European corridors. Evaluate
      any action taken, in terms of the creation of new road
       infrastructures, traffic management and transfers to other forms
      of transport.
      Define a Community strategy for developing standards for the user
      services in terms of information, safety and optimization of
      travel time.
      Examine the consequences of cost internalization policies for
      road users and for the transport system.
      Continue work on a European plan for developing equipment for
      traffic management, drawing on the European research programmes
      on telematics, particularly Drive.
      Evaluate the impact of the trans-European network on the
      environment, so that it does not adversely affect the economic
      efficiency of the transport system and the freedom of choice of
      the users.
      Evaluate the impact of the trans-European network on the spatial
      development and economic and social cohesion of the Community.
      study initiatives to encourage the private financing of the road
       infrastructures.
      Green Paper on the impact of transport on the environment: A
      Community strategy for sustainable mobility.
      These points largely emerged from the report of the Motorway
      Working Group: SEC(92) ... Trans-European networks: Towards a
      master plan for the road network and road traffic.
 ---pagebreak---                            - 46 -
evaluate the implications for the multimodal urban transport
system of policies to combat road congestion in and around towns.
examine the    interrelations between the Trans-European Road
Network and logistics systems for the transportation of goods.
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 47 -
                              Proposal for a
                             COUNCIL DECISION
             on the creation of a Trans-European Road Network
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES.
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the            European   Economic
Community, and in particular Article 75 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission^ 1 ),
Having regard to the opinion of the European Par Iiament^2),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee^ 3 ),
Whereas it is essential for the proper functioning of the internal
market to improve the efficiency of the transport            infrastructure
networks between the regions of the Community,
Whereas road infrastructure plays a fundamental economic and social
role in the transport of goods and persons throughout the Community as
well as to and from third countries.
Whereas the interconnection of national road networks needs to be
completed by constructing the links that are missing and making the
necessary improvements to existing links in order to improve regional
accessibility and to reinforce economic and social cohesion throughout
the whole Community area,
Whereas    road   infrastructure   are  needed    to  provide    intermodal
connect ions,
Whereas environmental    impact  assessments  for  road  projects  must  be
taken into account,
Whereas there is a need to guarantee the inter-operabi I ity of the
network to a satisfactory level, in particular through road standards
and equipment and through traffic management policies,
Whereas the development of a Trans-European Road Network requires the
formulation of a plan delimiting the priority operations to be
undertaken,
Whereas the outline plans of transport infrastructure networks are of
an indicative and evolutionary nature and tend progressively towards a
multi-modal transport system.
(1)
(2)
(3)
 ---pagebreak---                                    - 48 -
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
                                 Article 1
The plan for a Trans-European Road Network by the year 2002, as shown
on the attached maps in the Annex, shall be composed of motorways and
high-quality roads.
The completion and functioning of the network shall be ensured by:
       construction of the missing      links   and upgrading   of  existing
       links, where necessary, and
       implementation of advanced road computerized information systems
       and development of traffic management measures.
                                 Art icie 2
Priority measures shall be taken within the appropriate framework for
the following projects:
(a)    Missing links, in particular those situated on cross-border
       intra-Community axes and those of interest to peripherical and
       isolated regions;
(b)    Third country-Community links
       * Scandinavian I ink
       * Links with Central and Eastern European countries;
(c)    Intermodal connections,    in particular   with  a view   to combined
       transport axes;
(d)    Bypasses  around  the main   urban   centres  on  the  trans-European
       network;
 (e)   Traffic management projects, including demonstration projects.
                                 Art icle 3
The completion and functioning of the Trans-European Road Network shall
 involve:
       a common methodology   for assessing the environmental      impact of
       road projects;
       a unified European system for road classification and signs;
       a harmonized set of standards to ensure full compatibility with a
       view to traffic management systems and computerized information
       systems;
       a traffic policy for the trans-European axes.
 ---pagebreak---                                  - 49 -
                               Art icle 4
The plan for a Trans-European Road Network by the year 2002 shall be
indicative in nature, being intended to promote action by the Member
States and, where approriate, by the Community with a view to carrying
out projects relating to the networks. This Decision shall not entail
any financial commitment on the part of the Member States or the
Community.
                               Article 5
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels,                                For the Council
                                                The President
 ---pagebreak--- j SCHEMA DIRECTEUR DU RESEAU ROUTIER
  TRANSEUROPEEN IHORIZON 2002)
  TRANSEUROPEAM ROAD NETWORK
  OUTUNE R O N (2002 HORIZON)
I LEITSCHEMA DES TRANSEUROPAISCHEN
  STRASSENNETZES IHORIZONT 20021
      •           UlTTAAT/UISTWlC^MTtMlKO
  " — — ** *• ~ • ruurmt/n>MNto/af FIANT
                  COMMUIONS AVIC U t HkYt TICK!
                  TMWO cootrrmr coMMtcnoxt
                                             (CALL 1 I I 100 MO
                                                                o
 ---pagebreak--- - 51 - ---pagebreak--- - 52 - ---pagebreak--- - 53 - ---pagebreak---  ---pagebreak---  ---pagebreak--- - 56 - ---pagebreak---  ---pagebreak---                                                                             - 58
                                                                                                 m9»
                                        VA
                                               MILANO
                                                                              VENEZIA
                                                                     BOLOtiNA
                                                            J
                                'G EN O V A
                                                                                       ANCONA
                                                         iFIRENZI
                                                                         ROM>                        BARI
                                                                                          o'
                                                                                             NAPOLI
                                               CAGLIARI
                                                                                     PALERMO
S C H E M A DIRECTEUR D U RESEAU ROUTIER
TRANSEUROPEEN ( H O R I Z O N 2 0 0 2 )                                      » ...
TRANSEUROPEAN ROAO N E T W O R K
O U T L I N E PLAN ( 2 0 0 2 H O R I Z O N )
L E I T S C H E M A DES      TRANSEUROPÂISCHEN
STRASSENNETZES               (HORIZONT 2 0 0 2 )
                   lXISTA»n/tXIST«NC/»CSTtM£NO
                  ri** intypt> N N c o /G t r LAN T                          O
                   CONNEXIONS AVEC L£S PAYS TIERS
                   THIRD COUNTRY CONNECTIONS
                   VCRîmOUNGEN MfT ORITTLANDERN
ITALIA                                                  SCALf 1 » * 0 0 OOO
 ---pagebreak--- - 59 - ---pagebreak---                                                    - 60 -
    S C H E M A OIRECTEUR O U RESEAU R O U T I E R
    TRANSEUROPEEN ( H O R I Z O N 2 0 0 2 )
    TRANSEUROPEAN R O A D N E T W O R K
    OUTLINE PLAN ( 2 0 0 2 H O R I Z O N )
    LEITSCHEMA DES        TRANSEUROPAISCHEN
    STRASSENNETZES        (HORIZONT 20021
! i
                  EXIST AMT/CXtSTTNC/ICSTEHENO
    — — — —       PlANtFICrrLAMNED/CCPtAHT
                  CONNEXIONS AVEC LES PAYS TIERS
                  THIRO COUNTRY CONNECTIONS
                  VCRBINDUNCFN MIT DRITTLAMOERN
    PORTUGAL
                           LISBOA
 ---pagebreak---                                     - 61 -
  SCHEMA DIRECTEUR OU RESEAU ROUTKR
  TRAMSEUROPEEN IHORIZON 20021
  TRANSCUROrCAN ROAO NETWORK
l OUTLINE PLAN {2002 HORUONI
' IEITSCHEMA OIS TRANSEUROPAISCHEN
• STRASSENNETZES (HORIZONT 20021
 ---pagebreak---                                  - 62 -
              STATEMENT OF THE IMPACT ON SME AND EMPLOYMENT
Subject :  Proposal for a Council Decision on the creation of a Trans-
           European Road Network
1.    Administrative obligations    arising   from  application of  the
      proposed Regulation
      None.
2.    Advantages for small firms
      The main advantages for small firms are:
           the development of a speed network for the whole Community
           terr itory,
           the implementation of a policy for combating congestion and
           economic wastes which it involves.
3.    Disadvantages for small firms
      None.
4.    Disadvantages in terms of employment
      None.
5.    Have both sides of industry been consulted beforehand?
      No.
6.     Is there any alternative, less binding approach?
       No.
 ---pagebreak---                                 - 63 -
                               CONTENTS
1.  Introduct ion
1.1 The importance of inland waterways
1.2 Work already undertaken
1.3 Main conclusions
1.4 The Commission's proposals
2.  Inland waterways in Europe
2.1 Classification of inland waterways
2.2 Inland waterway links
2.3 Traffic flows
2.4 Conclusions
3.  Towards a European inland waterway network
3.1 Criteria used to draw up the master plan
3.2 Short and medium-term priorities for the
    Community
3.3 Other projects in the Community
3.4 Waterways of regional  importance
3.5 Short and medium-term priorities in
    Eastern Europe
3.6 Long-term projects in Eastern Europe
4.  Other possibilities for improvements
4.1 Combined transport
4.2  Information systems
5.  FoI Iow-up
 ---pagebreak---                                     - 64 -
                           COMMISSION COMMUNICATION
            on the creation of a European inland waterway network
1.      INTRODUCTJON
1.1    The importance of Inland waterway
A sound infrastructure is one of the factors on which the development of a
single internal market and economic growth throughout Europe depend.
Together with road and rail inland waterways form one of the three so-
called modes of surface transport.
As such it forms part within Europe of a very diversified network of
differing capacity. Its role is, however, not simply confined to that of
transport, it has other contributions to make to the economy.
As the 2000 Pius Report and predictions by          various economic study
institutes have underlined, road and even rail      infrastructure have now
reached saturation in many places.
It is unlikely that the problem can be solved by simply developing or
improving road transport or building new rail links. Clearly there will
have to be an attempt to develop inland waterway transport which is cheap,
non-polluting, consumes little energy and has spare infrastructure and
vessel capacity. Inland waterways have a very special role to play in
Community transport infrastructure policy as they can link up national
networks and operate in conjunction with other modes of transport.
1.2    Work already undertaken
At its informal meeting in Rotterdam on 5 and 6 July last year at which it
discussed transport policy, the Council underlined the importance of a well
developed infrastructure for an effective transport and traffic policy in
Europe.
The Commission was asked to collaborate with national experts in drawing up
a project to define inland waterway networks. This was seen as a
continuation of the work already undertaken on the high-speed train,
combined transport and road infrastructure networks.
 In the course of these discussions attention was drawn to the need to
eliminate bottlenecks and weaknesses in the links to and from Central and
Eastern Europe.
 ---pagebreak---                                       - 65 -
The Commission accordingly convened for 30 September last year a meeting of
a Group composed of government representatives from Member States and
organizations     representing    inland   waterway    operators    and    users.
Representatives of the UN Economic Commission for Europe, the European
Conference of Ministers of Transport and the Central Commission for
Navigation of the Rhine were also invited to attend as observers.
The Group    has  been  asked  by  the Commission   to consider   the   following
aspects:
(a)     a plan of waterway infrastructure in the Member States;
(b)     identification of priority projects;
(c)     establishment of a master plan for      inland waterways of     Community
        interest.
At its meeting on 3 February this year the Group adopted a report after the
 inclusion of a number of amendments; this was forwarded to the Transport
 Infrastructure Committee1 for discussion on 11 and 12 March. This report,
which forms the basis for future action, contains a number of conclusions
based on available information and a proposed master plan for inland
waterways of Community interest.
1.3     Main conclusions
1.3.1   Inland waterways offer a real alternative to road and rail transport
        which, on some major routes in Europe, are becoming congested and
        whose growing use can only have a deleterious impact both on the
        environment and transport costs.
1.3.2   If inland waterway transport is to be made more attractive and more
        economic, a more integrated European network must be created. This
        can be done by completing the links which are missing and
        eliminating the main bottlenecks which exist at present.
1.3.3    In order to promote its integration with other modes of transport,
        the opportunities offered by combined transport2, especially for
        the initial and final stages of freight operations, need to be taken
         into account and certain inland ports need to be carefully developed
        as intermodal logistics centres for this type of transport.
1.3.4   These objectives need to be given practical expression in a master
        plan of inland waterways of Community interest. Such a plan should
        be based on the present and anticipated pattern of interregional
        traffic flows and take account of opportunities for transfer from
        other modes of transport. The technical specifications of the
        projects    to be undertaken under       the plan     are   sufficiently
        broad-based.
1       Council Decision 78/174/EEC of 20 February 1978.
2       See the Commission Communication concerning the creation            of  a
        European combined transport network (C0M(92) 230/4).
 ---pagebreak---                                     - 66 -
1.3.5 This policy must also be developed      in coherence with the principle
      of subsidiarity.
      When applied to the trans-European transport networks, there are a
      number of aspects of this principle to be considered in terms of the
      extent of Community action.
      The principle objectives of the networks are to ensure the
      efficiency of the internal market, by Improving the mobility of
      people and goods, and to reinforce economic and social cohesion.
      To achieve these objectives, Community action is needed on:
                 the visibility of the overall development needs of the
                 transport networks in the Community as a whole and beyond,
                 in a multimodal     perspective which ensures that       the
                 capacities and inherent problems of each mode are taken
                 into account (drawing up master plans);
                 the conditions of interconnection (completing the missing
                 links) and interoperability of existing national links
                 (e.g. ensuring technical harmonization) in order to ensure
                 their total efficiency at Community level;
                 the development, consistent with existing networks, of new
                 networks where their absence causes isolation (integrating
                 landlocked, island or isolated regions) or hampers the
                 development   of   part   of    the   Community's  territory
                 (participation in the internal market);
      The task of definition should be carried out at Community level but
       it is for the Member States to determine the precise details, the
      timing and the pace of completion of the infrastructure required to
      achieve the network defined. The indicative nature of the plans
      defined at Community level allows Member States the freedom to act
      or not to act, but their actions must follow the guidelines which
      they have accepted at Community level.
      The incentives at the Community's disposal must allow it to help
      reduce certain constraints at national level and convince a Member
      State, if necessary, to carry out a project which is within Its
      field of competence and is in the general interest. It is in this
      spirit that Community financing will favour measures on support or
       incent ives.
 ---pagebreak---                                    - 67 -
1.4     The Commission's proposals
The Commission suggests     that   the   Council,   in accordance  with  the
appended proposal:
(a)     approve the master pian drawn up on the basis of available data;
(b)     approve the following list of missing links and bottlenecks to
        be given priority within an appropriate framework:
           (i)     upgrading of the Mittellandkanal and construction of
                   the aqueduct over the Elbe at Magdeburg;
          (ii)     upgrading of the links between the Elbe and the Oder;
         (iii)     linking the Twentekanaal and the MitteIlandkanal;
          (iv)     linking the Seine and Scheldt in France and Belgium;
           (v)     upgrading the Scheldt-Rhine link in Belgium (southern
                   section and Charleroi-Brussels Canal);
          (vi)     upgrading the eastern section of the north-south link
                   via the Meuse and the Lanaye and Juliana Canals to
                   the Rhine;
         (vii)      linking the Rhine and Rhône;
        (viii)     upgrading    the    Elbe   between   Magdeburg  and   the
                   CzechosIovak border ;
          (ix)      linking the Main and Danube and upgrading       the Main
                   and Danube between Straubing and Vilshofen;
           (x)     upgrading the Danube between        Vienna  and  Budapest
                   (non-Community project);
(c)     take note of its intention to examine further appropriate
        measures with the Member States to build the links which are
        missing and eliminate the bottlenecks identified in the master
        plan.
 It should be pointed out that the Commission has included the first
four projects listed above in its proposal for a Council Regulation on
the implementation of a second transport infrastructure programme.
 ---pagebreak---                                     - 68 -
2.      INLAND WATERWAYS   IN EUROPE
2.1    Classification of inland waterways
The European inland waterway network       is very diverse  in terms of its
technical characteristics.
In 1961 the European Conference of Ministers of Transport adopted
Resolution No 8 on the classification of inland waterways and standard
vessel and infrastructure dimensions. This is illustrated in the
following table which also includes the ECE's classification which is
based on vessels' deadweight capacity.
                                     TABLE
Class               Length     Beam          Draught   Headroom   Deadweight
                                                                   capacity
                       (m)          (m)        (m)       (m)       (tonnes)
0                                                                    <250
I                  38.50         5.00         2.20       3.55       250-400
I I                50.00         6.60         2.50       3.95       400-650
111                67.50         8.20         2.50       4.20       650-1000
IV                 80.00         9.50         2.50       4.40      1000-1500
V                  95.00        11 .50        2.70       6.70      1500-3000
VI                                                                  < 3000
With the development of pusher craft and, to a lesser degree, container
transport the 1961 classification no longer fully corresponds to
reality, especially on certain international routes where these two
techniques have taken off.
For all these reasons the ECMT and ECE embarked      last year upon a study
of a new single classification.
This will probably be adopted by the ECMT at the meeting of Ministers
of Transport in June and by the ECE at the annual meeting of its main
Working Party on Inland Waterway Transport in October.
 ---pagebreak---                                  - 69 -
2.2    Inland waterway links
There are four major I inks - in the broadest sense of the term:
2.2.1  The Rhine link connecting the main Dutch and Belgian seaports
       (Rotterdam, Antwerp, Amsterdam, Ghent) with Germany (the Ruhr,
       industrial zones of Frankfurt, Mannheim and Stuttgart) with
       Strasbourg and the Metz-Nancy industrial region in France and
       with the north of Switzerland (Basle). The main waterways are
       the Rhine and its tributaries (Moselle, Main and Neckar), to
       which should be added the Weser-Dattelnkanal and the Rhein-
       Hernekanal which connect the Rhine and the waterways of northern
       Germany.
2.2.2  The east-west link connecting certain northern and eastern areas
       of Germany, in particular the new Lander of the former GDR, with
       the western part of Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium. The
       most important waterways are the Elbe (Hamburg), the Weser
       (Bremen) and the Ems, plus the Dortmund-Ems Canal, the
       Elbe-Seitenkanal and the Elbe-LUbeck Canal. The MitteIlandkanal
       and, to a lesser extent, the KUstenkanal provide the structure
       of the east-west route on to which are grafted the waterways
       ment ioned above.
2.2.3  The north-south link connecting the Netherlands, Belgium and
       France via waterways other than the Rhine. Two rivers, the
       Meuse and the Scheldt, link the Dutch and Belgian seaports, as
       well as Dunkirk, with the interior of the Benelux countries and
       the industrial regions around Lille in the north of France. The
       main waterways are the Scheldt, the Meuse, the Lys, the Sambre,
       the Albert Canal, the Char Ieroi-Brussels Canal, the canal
       linking Brussels with the Scheldt, the Ghent-Terneuzen Canal and
       the series of canals linking Dunkirk with Lille.
       The Seine basin and the Dunkirk-Lille link are sometimes
       considered as forming part of this link. It must be pointed
       out, however, that the Canal du Nord, the main waterway linking
       the Seine and the Scheldt, can only take vessels with a maximum
       capacity of 700 to 800 tonnes provided their beam is less than 6
       m. Consequently there is a lack of continuity in this link
       between the northern France, the Seine which connects the
       seaport of Le Havre with Paris and the Oise, an important
       tributary flowing from the north.
2.2.4  The south-east link, including navigation in the countries
       through    which  the  Danube    flows. As   a  result   of  the
        liberalization policies embarked upon by the countries of
       central and eastern Europe this river has taken on a new
        importance for the Community. The Danube flows from southern
       Germany to the Black Sea, through Austria, Czechoslovakia,
       Hungary, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Romania and the former USSR.
 ---pagebreak---                                  - 70 -
In addition to these four main links there is the Rhône-Saône link
which connects the seaport of Marseille with the Lyons and Dijon
regions. There are also a number of small waterways which connect
various points along several of these links. In France, for example,
the Canal de l'Est connects the Moselle with the Belgian network and
the Rhine-Rhone Canal links the Saône near Dijon with the Rhine near
Basle; both waterways are restricted to vessels of 350 dwt. Finally,
between the waterways of northern Germany and those of Poland a whole
network of canals links the MitteIlandkanal and the Elbe with the Oder
and Vistula in Poland, thus extending the east-west link.
2.3    Traffic flows
According to forecasts by various institutes for economic studies, the
anticipated changes in transport demand and logistics needs will lead
to an    increase  in the volume of      traffic on the Rhine from
297.5 million tonnes in 1989 to 309.9 million tonnes in the year 2000.
On the east-west link around six million tonnes were carried in 1988
between the FRG and the former GDR, to and from Berlin or to and from
other regions of the GDR. Inland waterway transport demand between the
Federal Republic and the countries of eastern Europe (including the new
German Lander) is expected to rise to around 19.4 million tonnes.
Although traffic on the north-south link as a whole increased by some
8% between 1982 and 1987, it is important to note that all the flows to
and from France and Belgium and the Netherlands registered a decline
during this period. According to estimates, traffic could be expected
to grow by 1.78 million tonnes in the year 2000, providing freight
regulations on the north-south market are liberalized.
 In 1988 only 2.5 million tonnes of south-east traffic were recorded
between the FRG and the countries through which the Danube flows.
Experts predict the volume of traffic will rise in the future to
between 5 and 7 million tonnes. If trade between Germany and other
Danube states is taken into account, total transport demand on the
south-east link could reach between 8 and 10 million tonnes.
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 71 -
Table  Traff ic flows  on  the  main   European   waterway   links  (million
       tonnes)
                   Rhine I ink     East-west       North-south    South-east
                                     I Ink           I ink          I ink
1989 traffic         297.5            8.31            47.3 2        2-7
Forecast 2000        309.9           19.4             49.1          8-10
Variation (%)       + 4.2          +133.8             +3.8        +200-300
                                                   Source : NEA/PLANC0
1
  1988 figure
2
  1987 figure
2.4.   Conclusions
A certain amount of   information can be gleaned from the present state
of the network.
2.4.1. The situation on the waterway links between western Germany (the
       Ruhr, Hamburg, Bremen, Frankfurt, Stuttgart, Mannheim), eastern
       France (Strasbourg) the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg and
       northern   Switzerland   (Basle)    is   in general     satisfactory.
       Nonetheless, there are certain weak points in the network.
2.4.2. In due course an increase in the flow of goods between western
       and eastern Europe can be expected, beginning with those regions
       whose economies are more developed, that is to say: the five
       new German Lender, Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Poland. Existing
       waterway links are not capable of coping with this increase.
2.4.3. Inland waterways play an insignificant role in transport between
        the countries of north-western Europe and those to the south.
       This is in part due to the state of the French waterway network
       but also to the fact that neither Italy, Spain nor Portugal can
        be linked into this form of transport. Nevertheless, as an
       element of combined transport inland waterways could be used for
        the initial and final road sections of combined              freight
       operations to those countries, for example via the Rhône.
       Combined sea/inland waterway transport is another possibility in
        this respect.
2.4.4. The above comments apply also to transport between north-western
        Europe and Scandinavia and the British Isles.
2.4.5. With the opening of the Main-Danube Canal this year there will
        be a new direct 3 000 km link via the Rhine basin from the North
        Sea to the Black Sea through          southern Germany, Austria,
        Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Romania and the
        former USSR.
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 72 -
3.      TOWARDS A EUROPEAN INLAND WATERWAY NETWORK
3.1     Criteria used to draw up the master plan
3.1.1   The present and future importance of the waterway in question
        for international intra-Community transport, transit traffic and
        trade with non-Community countries: in most cases the waterway
        will be situated on one of the main traffic arteries connecting
        seaports with major industrial centres or conurbations;
3.1.2   opportunities for transferring traffic from other modes of
        surface transport to the waterways to relieve road and rail
        congestion; intermodal     logistics    centres   using    combined
        transport techniques would have to be available alongside the
        waterway or neighbouring waterways;
3.1.3   the project's contribution to the integration of the overall
        network: newly constructed or upgraded waterways must be able
        to carry container traffic on sections where            it can be
        developed;
3.1.4   although there is no time to discuss this aspect in any detail
        here, emphasis should be put on the economic benefit of any
        construction or upgrading project for a particular waterway:
        the benefits deriving from its use must be greater than the sum
        of   the costs of     its upkeep, maintenance       and operation
        (cost/benefit ratio greater than 1 ) .
3.2     Short-and medium-term priorities for the Community
On this basis the following links of Community interest have           been
 identified on which the following projects can be undertaken:
(a)     east-west    link: improvement   of    the  connections   via   the
        Mi tteIlandkanal with extensions to the east towards the Polish
        frontier and the west towards the Twentekanaal; improvements to
        the Elbe between Lauenburg/Elbe-Seitenkanal and the Czechoslovak
        border ;
(b)     north-south link: improvement of the links between the Benelux
        seaports and Dunkirk and central and eastern Belgium, the Paris
        basin, the Moselle and, eventually, the Rhône;
(c)     south-east link: completion of the Rhine-Main-Danube link and
        elimination of the bottlenecks created by insufficient depth of
        water at certain points, by certain bridges on the Main and
        Main-Danube Canal and by certain sections of the Danube
        (Regensburg to Passau).
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 73 -
3.2.1   East-west I ink
The north German and east European waterway networks are I inked by the
Elbe and the MitteIlandkanal. Navigability on the latter is hampered
by the water levels of the Elbe, which is not canalized in the area of
Magdeburg. For a large part of the year the Elbe is not accessible to
large vessels. The water levels fluctuate but the average annual
draught, especially up river from Magdeburg, (11) is below the 2.5 m
required for classes II and III. At low water the east German inland
ports (Berlin and Magdeburg) are accessible only to shallow-draught
vessels and the industrial regions of Halle and Dresden, Czechoslovakia
and Poland cannot be reached. Nor does the Elbe downstream of
Magdeburg in the direction of Hamburg (10) 1 offer a suitable link at
low water, but the Mi tteIlandkanal and the EIbe-Seitenkanal serve as a
reasonable alternative.
In view of the expected increase in traffic in these regions, the
shallow depth of the Elbe (1.3 m at low water) is a major obstacle.
The section of the Elbe in Czechoslovakia has already been canalized.
 In Germany some upgrading is being considered.
 If further regulation work is undertaken, it would be economically
feasible to increase the draught from 0.2 to 0.3 m on most sections of
the Elbe. This would enable some rail traffic to be transferred to the
waterways.
However, no solution has yet been found to the problem of how to
 improve the poor navigability on certain sections of the Elbe caused by
to the hard bedrock and steep gradients, particularly in the Magdeburg
region. Similarly, it is not economically feasible to canalize the
Elbe to raise the draught to 2.5 m or more all the year round because
of the very high cost of the considerable infrastructure work this
would involve and consequently, there is little prospect of this being
undertaken. This also applies to any idea of building lateral canals
with fewer locks with lifts.
The construction of an aqueduct has also been considered where the
Mi tte I landkanal crosses the Elbe (7). The building of a dam on the
Elbe to enable vessels to use the river throughout the year is
technically feasible and      is being considered as an alternative
so lut ion.
The MitteIlandkanal is at present accessible only to class III vessels
with a draught of 2 m. The German Government has drawn up a plan for
two-barge pushed trains and large self-propelled craft (11.4 beam and
2.8 m draught) to operate on the MitteIlandkanal, the Elbe-Havel Canal,
the Havel as far as Berlin and the link to the Magdeburg ports.
Upgrading of the western section of the MitteIlandkanal has been under
way since 1965 and has been completed on most sections of the canal
(8). Since it has been possible to raise headroom under bridges to
only 5.25 m, containers can be carried in two stacks only.
         The figures in brackets correspond with those on the map
         attached to the master plan of inland waterways of Community
         interest.
 ---pagebreak---                                  - 74 -
Economie ways must be found of extending the east-west link towards the
Polish border to establish "attractive" waterway links with the port of
Stettin, Warsaw (Oder-Havel Canal) and the industrial region of Silesia
(Oder-Spree-Canal) (9). At present the maximum draught is only 1.85 m
on the two canals which link up with the Oder. The southern route is
the Oder-Spree Canal which can be used only by vessels with a maximum
capacity of 600 tonnes.
In the Netherlands it is planned, In the west, to connect the
Mi tte I landkanal and the Twentekanaal by building a new 50 km long
canal (6) linking the Rhine estuary ports and the MitteIlandkanal.
This will provide a much shorter route than the present one between the
Dutch and Belgian seaports, via the Wesel-Dattel/Rhein-Hernekanal, and
eastern Europe. A pre-feasibiIIty study carried out by the Dutch does
not consider that the feasibility of such a project has yet been
demonstrated. The Germans will also be carrying out an economic
feasibiIity study.
3.2.2    North-south link
A north-south artery could be established by improving links between
the coastal ports from Amsterdam to Dunkirk and the Meuse and Scheldt
 industrial hinterland and with the Paris and Lyons regions. At present
only small vessels can reach these regions via this route.
 In France the Scheldt-Seine, Seine-Moselle       and,  eventually,   the
Moselle-Saône links would have to be upgraded.
The Scheldt-Seine link (14) will have to be improved if inland waterway
transport is to be developed. The Canal du Nord, which Is at present
the main link between the Belgian network and the Seine and Oise, is
navigable only by self-propelled craft or 700 to 800 tonne barge
trains. The proposed upgrading of this north-south link to 4 500
tonnes would involve re-routing via the Saint Ouentin Canal. This
project is being studied by the relevant French authorities.
 In a second phase, a new link between the Seine and Moselle (15), which
would be extended in the longer term to link the Moselle and Saône
(16), will provide a waterway link to France's major           industrial
centres. Given the considerable volume of traffic between the Benelux
and Paris and Lyons, such a waterway would be of direct benefit to a
number of European countries including southern Europe (via the
Moselle-Seine link connecting with the Rhône).
 In addition to the construction of these missing links, creation of a
north-south waterway route of Community importance involves eliminating
a certain number of bottlenecks. Modernization of the links between
France and Belgium has already led to the upgrading of the Scheldt.
From now on work must be concentrated on improving the links with
Dunkirk by upgrading to class IV the Lys, by increasing headroom at the
Courtrai bridge (19), completing the work of upgrading to class IV the
Canal du Centre between Mons and La Louvière (20) (constructing a lift
at Strépy-Thieu, a canal bridge at Houdeng and completion of the
Strépy-Thieu section), upgrading the Nimy-Blaton section of the Nimy-
Blaton-Péromes Canal to class IV and widening the lock at Evergem sur
 le Ringwaart near Ghent (21).
 ---pagebreak---                                  - 75 -
Several other improvements could usefully contribute over time to the
development of navigation on the north-south route, in the Netherlands
the widening of the Zuid Bevel and Canal to take four-barge trains,
doing away with the locks at Wemeldinge in 1993 and renovating those at
Hansweert, would allow the Rotterdam-VIissingen-Ghent/Antwerp link to
be upgraded.
In Belgium most of the network's main waterways have been upgraded to
take 1 350 tonne vessels. Once the lock at Wijnegem is completed by
the end of this year/beginning of next year, the Albert Canal between
Antwerp and Liege will be navigable for 9 000 tonne barge trains
between Wijnegem and Liege (although navigation will continue to be
limited on the Antwerp-WiJnegem section to 4 500 tonne vessels).
Further south, completion of a fourth lock at Lanaye on the Lanaye
Canal which connects the Albert Canal to the stretch of the Meuse in
the Netherlands would reduce waiting time and improve navigational
safety in the event of a breakdown of the present lock system.
Upgrading of the Meuse in southern Belgium and replacement of old
barrages by modern infrastructure to improve water control will help
develop navigation on the eastern section of the north-south link (23).
Finally, mention should also be made of the lock at Hingene which is
virtually completed. This will link the Scheldt to the Brussels
Maritime Canal. A major drainage and dredging project is under way to
enable the Char Ieroi-Brussels Canal to again carry 2.5 m draught
vessels.
3.2.3   South-east I ink
The main gap in the inland waterway network between north-west and
central Europe should be plugged this year when the Main-Danube Canal
 is completed (24). This will be navigable for two-barge pushed trains.
The Main itself is navigable for articulated trains only on special
authorization. It will not be accessible to two-barge pushed trains
until the mid 1990s. There are, however, a number of other projects
planned for this waterway: the deepening of the river downstream from
Aschaf fenburg   to bring  the draught    up to 3.1 m and       between
Aschaffenburg and Bamberg upstream from Freudenberg to provide a
draught of 2.9 m.
Work is being carried out on the German section of the Danube
downstream from Regensburg and in Austria to bring it up to the same
gauge as the Main-Danube Canal. In the long term it is hoped to make
the Danube downstream from Regensburg navigable by four-barge pushed
trains. Finally, the problem of headroom under the bridges over the
Main and the Main-Danube Canal must be taken into consideration; this
constitutes a major impediment to the expansion of container traffic on
this route (25).
 ---pagebreak---                                  - 76 -
2.4     Rhine-Rhône link
The proposed Rhine-Rhône link will provide access from northern and
eastern Europe to the Mediterranean and vice versa through a wide-gauge
inland waterway network incorporating the Rhine, the Rhine-Main-Danube
I ink and the Rhône.
The Rhine-Main-Danube link, which will come into service this year,
will link up the inland waterways of north-west Europe, the major
Benelux ports and eastern Europe.
The    Rhine-Rhône   link  will  improve   communications  between   the
Mediterranean countries and eastern and northern Europe and provide a
link between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean.
Problems will be encountered on the north-south link in the years
ahead. At present the only route is through the Alps or the Rhoden
Corridor. However, with the introduction of restrictions on road
traffic in Austria, where there is a night-time ban on heavy goods
vehicle between 2200 and 0600 hours, and in Switzerland, which Is
considering tax measures, traffic will switch to the Rhône valley.
Consequently    rational  use will    have   to be made    of   existing
infrastructure and national networks will have to be linked up in order
to develop complementary means of transport. The completion of the
Rhine-Rhône link creating a wide-gauge inland waterway network will
provide increased freight capacity by: inland waterway and sea,
combined transport, container transport and maritime cabotage services
from Spain to Séte or Marseille from where goods can be shipped by
 inland waterway to northern Europe.
3.      Other projects in the Community
3.1     The Rhine I ink
The Rhine basin and Scheldt-Meuse network of waterways are connected to
the Netherlands downstream only by the Waal-Meuse Canal. A navigable
 link from the Rhine near Neuss, Germany, via Aachen to the Meuse in
Belgium, in the area of Liege, was designed but never got off the
drawing-board. Such a new canal would offer an additional route
through a heavily industrialized region (1). Germany does, however,
not consider such a project to be economically feasible.
As far as the elimination of the existing bottlenecks on the Rhine and
 its tributaries is concerned, mention should be made of the project to
upgrade the locks near Kembs on the Rhine lateral canal (2) and the
deepening of the Rhine in its central course upstream from Koblenz (3).
On the Waal, deepening of the channel and improvements on the bends at
Erlecom, Hulhuizen and Haalderen above Nijmegen are proposed to allow
the passage of six-barge trains (4). On the Amsterdam-Rhine Canal it
 is proposed to eliminate certain difficult points, especially near
Zeeburg; at present four-barge pushed trains cannot be loaded to their
max imum draught.
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 77 -
The aim of ensuring a draught at low water of 2.1 m, equivalent to a
draught of 3 m at mean water, on the Rhine has virtually been achieved.
Control operations to improve navigation on the Rhine should also
enable erosion of the river bed to be measured and appropriate action
to be taken to reduce it. Flood water control and management of water
resources is also proposed for the upper reaches of the Rhine.
On the Moselle (5) the rapid growth in the volume of traffic
necessitates modernization work to increase the draught from 2.7 m to
3 m ; this will make waterway transport more cost-effective. Initially
the capacity of a number of overloaded locks, beginning with Fankel and
Zeltingen, which are the busiest, needs to be increased. Upstream from
Thionville work will be undertaken to canalize, upgrade and deepen the
Moselie.
3.3.2   East-west I ink
A certain amount of work, especially deepening of the Dortmund-Emskanal
between Datteln and Bergeshovede (12), will have to be undertaken to
improve the waterway network linking the North Sea with the Rhine in
western Germany.
3.3.3   North-south link
The absence of an adequate link between Zeebrugge and the Scheldt-Meuse
basin (17) excludes the possibility of transporting containers and bulk
cargoes by water to the Belgian interior and the industrialized regions
of north-west Europe. Although the port of Zeebrugge is witnessing
rapid growth and extension of its installations, there are no real
plans for a waterway link with its hinterland. The canal linking the
two important seaports of Ghent and Zeebrugge needs upgrading to at
 least class VI.
Construction of the Caberg Canal would create a direct link between the
Juliana and Albert Canals by eliminating the need for vessels to make
the present detour via Maastricht and Lanaye (18). In the Netherlands
 improvements on the Meuse, the Lisse-Buggenum lateral canal and the
Juliana Canal (22) are proposed to permit the passage of two-barge
pushed trains. On the Meuse it is proposed to build an additional lock
at Lith.
3.4.    Waterways of regional  importance
There are certain areas in the Community where inland waterways are of
greater regional importance and are often not linked up to the main
European network. This chiefly concerns the Po (Italy), the Douro
(Portugal) and Tagus (Spain and Portugal) basins. Some of these
regions are already      industrialized and suffer from road traffic
congestion. Others will be able to develop their industrial fabric.
Consequently, the development of inland waterways will provide enormous
opportunities for them all. The Po network, in particular, is of
 interest to transit traffic passing through Austria and Switzerland,
which give it a certain Community interest.
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 78 -
Under Italy's general transport plan construction work Is to be carried
out on the Po and Venice waterway network (28), where the volume of
traffic is considerable (67% of freight in Italy is concentrated in the
four regions of Piedmont, Lombardy, Emi11a-Romana and Venice). It is
hoped that some of this traffic, which at present operates solely by
road, will be transferred to the inland waterways.
The study carried out on the proposed waterway linking the Adriatic and
the Danube (29), forms part of a project which involves six countries
("iniziative esagonale").
An application has been made (to the G24) on the Community's side for
funding for a feasibility study.
3.5.    Short and medium-term priorities in Eastern Europe
Once the Main-Danube       link  is open and on completion of some
improvements on the south-east route, around 1995, there will be a
direct link from Rotterdam to the Black Sea for two-barge pushed
trains. The canal itself may be open this year, permitting the
carriage of goods by water to and from Austria, Hungary, southern
Czechoslovakia and the other eastern European countries through which
the Danube flows.
The main difficulty encountered on this route is the draught on the
Danube between Bratislava and Budapest (1.6 m ) , which makes navigation
risky ( 2 6 ) .
Three dams had been planned for the Vienna-Budapest section of the
Danube where it was uneconomic to maintain the draught of 2.5 m on
navigable sections recommended by the Danube Commission along the whole
section. The Hainburg and Nagynaros barrages have not been built for
environmental reasons but the Gabcikovo barrage is going ahead.
 In the medium and long term the upper section of the Danube will
continue to be a bottleneck as the main traffic flows culminate here
(10 days' voyage from the point of loading). High construction
standards have to be used because of the draught of vessels and the
problems connected with low water. More modest projects than those
originally planned are now being considered. It should, however, prove
possible to eliminate the bottleneck downstream from Passau by means of
appropriate measures owing to good hydraulicity.
3.6.     Long-term projects in Eastern Europe
 In the coming years the need to expand the inland waterway network and
 in particular the usefulness of a link between the waterways of the
east-west route and the Danube basin (13) may well show itself in
central Europe. Construction of canals between the Elbe, Oder and
Danube is a project on an even greater scale than the Rhine-Main-Danube
 link. It would link up east European, German and Polish waterways with
 the Danube countries.
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 79 -
In 1959 the UN Economic Commission for Europe set up a group of experts
to study the feasibility of the project. In 1982 their study was
published and at the present time efforts are being made to encourage
the countries concerned to plan, design and finance the project.
4.     Other possibilities for improvement
4.1.   Combined transport
While road and rail transport are approaching the limits of their
capacity on the principal routes, the spare capacity of the inland
waterway fleet could advantageously be utilized, especially in the form
of combined transport. Container transport and, to a lesser extent,
roll-on roll-off (Ro/Ro) transport on the Rhine and Danube is growing
apace; container transport on the Rhine rose from 40 000 TEU in 1977
to 450 000 TEU in 1990.
In order to build on the assets of combined transport using inland
waterways it is essential to target minimum technical demands for
vessels, waterways and trans-shippment points (ports/terminals). To
provide cost-effective combined transport services vessels must be able
to carry containers in stacks of at least 4 wide and 3 high; this
necessitates a minimum height under bridges of 7 m (including a safety
margin). Ro/Ro services are operated mainly by vessels in class V or
above.
 If the minimum infrastructure requirements (draught, headroom) are
taken into account, the following waterways are well suited to
container transport:
(a)     the Rhine: from Basle to the North Sea;
(b)    north-south route: linking canals between Amsterdam, Antwerp,
       Ghent and between Brussels and the Rhine; the Meuse up to
       Namur, and the Juliana and Albert Canals;
(c)     south-east route: the entire section of the Danube downstream
        from Deggendorf would be suitable for 4 wide x 3 high stacked
        container transport provided navigability upstream from Budapest
        is guaranteed.
The following waterways are suitable        to  some  extent   (i.e. for
3 wide x 2 high stacked containers):
 (a)    Rhine basin: Moselle up to Nancy, the canalized Sarre,       the
        Neckar;
 (b)    east-west   route: the EIbe-Seitenkanal,     (upgrading   of the
        Mi tteIlandkanal is proposed);
 (c)    north-south route: Scheldt, Seine as far as Paris;
 (d)    south-east route: Main-Danube;
 (e)    the Rhône and Saône up to Chalon.
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 80 -
This network has been defined1 by a high-level Working Party set up
under the Council Resolution of 30 December 1990. It is based on an
economic and technical analysis of inland waterways' ability to provide
an efficient service for container and swap body transport. The
present network is not very large but requires investment if it is to
be extended. This could be provided through the projects forming part
of the inland waterway master plan.
4.2     Information systems
Rapidly evolving information technology provides an opportunity to
improve traffic guidance and control. Communication between the
operator of a vessel and an on-shore control centre can lead to greater
efficiency in the use of the waterway and greater transport speed and
safety.
The Commission is considering a proposal concerning potential IT
applications for inland waterway transport under the R&D programme
European Nervous System (ENS). This will require a massive research
programme into the definition and use of standard European messages for
the operation of locks and traffic control centres along waterways.
One of the main objectives of such research is the creation of a
harmonized information technology network between the relevant national
authorities; this will make inland waterways an important component of
the logistics chain with greater use of inland waterway vessels in an
 integrated multimodal transport system.
5.      Fo11ow-up
Although some significant conclusions have already been drawn, it is
 impossible   at   this  stage   to   formulate  an  overall   strategy.
Consequently, the work embarked upon by the Group needs to be
cont inued.
Future work should concentrate on:
5.1     forward studies into traffic flows and cost/benefit analyses
        which are essential to an economic assessment of the master
        plan's projects;
5.2     the (primarily environmental) potential of the new links given
        the pollution which a growth in traffic in other inland modes
        might cause without an inland waterway infrastructure;
5.3     an analysis of techniques enabling inland waterways to be used
        for the initial and final stages of freight operations involving
        coastal or short-sea transport;
        See the Commission Communication concerning the creation of a
        European combined transport network (COM (92) 230/4)
 ---pagebreak---                                 - 81 -
5.4    the use of harmonized information systems for inland waterways
       and   information technology which will make a significant
       contribution to traffic safety and rationalization and will,
       thereby, increase infrastructure capacity through more efficient
       operation of the existing network;
5.5    a study of (public or private) financing techniques for inland
       waterway infrastructure;
5.6    a more sustained policy to promote the use of inland waterways
       in tandem with infrastructure measures to ensure more effective
       investment in network upgrading.
On this basis an overall strategy can be mapped out in the light of
scientific   and   policy  data  and   the  relevant   conclusions  and
recommendations can be put before the Council. The Commission will
undertake the requisite work.
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 82 -
                              Proposa I for a
                            COUNCIL DECISION
         on the creation of a European inland waterway network
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the          European   Economic
Community, and in particular Article 75 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission1,
Having regard to the Opinion of the European Parliament2,
Having regard to the Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee3,
Whereas it is essential for the proper functioning of the internal
market that the Community's transport infrastructure between major
seaports and the industrialized regions of the European hinterland be
improved and made more efficient through the development of an inland
waterway freight transport network;
Whereas inland waterways can play a greater role in trade, since they
offer a less expensive, less-polluting and low energy-consuming mode of
transport ;
Whereas there is considerable spare vessel and infrastructure capacity
in this sector and it is a mode which lends itself to use with other
modes of transport;
Whereas a master plan must be drawn up to ensure technical consistency
between waterways and to define the priority measures to be taken in
order to develop a European inland waterway network;
Whereas action should focus on      the  links which carry  most  freight
traffic in the Community;
Whereas the outline plans of transport infrastructure networks are of
an indicative and evolutionary nature and tend progressively towards a
multi-modal transport system,
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 83 -
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
                                 Article 1
The European inland waterway network shall incorporate existing river
basins and a number of major traffic arteries using rivers and canals
and the branches and links which connect them. It shall serve
industrial regions and major conurbations and link up the major
seaports. The minimum      technical   specifications adopted      for  the
network's waterways shall correspond to class IV and permit in a
satisfactory way the passage of vessels used for combined transport.
The network shall be developed over a period of at least ten years as
specified in the master plan in the Annex.
                                 Article 2
Priority measures shall be taken within the appropriate framework to
create the links which are missing and eliminate the following
bottlenecks:
       upgrading of the MitteIlandkanal and          construction   of  the
       aqueduct over the Elbe at Magdeburg;
       upgrading of the links between the Elbe and Oder;
        linking the Twentekanaal and the Mittellandkanal;
        linking the Seine and Scheldt in France and Belgium;
       upgrading the Scheldt-Rhine link      in Belgium  (southern section
       and Char Ieroi-Brussels Canal);
       upgrading the eastern section of the north-south link via the
       Meuse and the Lanaye and Juliana Canals to the Rhine;
        I inking the Rhine and Rhône;
       upgrading   the  Elbe   between  Magdeburg   and  the   Czechoslovak
       front ier;
        linking the Main and the Danube and upgrading         the Main  and
       Danube between Straubing and Vilshofen-,
       upgrading    the Danube between      Vienna   and   the   Black  Sea
        (non-Community project).
 ---pagebreak---                                  - 84 -
                               Article 3
This plan shall be indicative in nature, being intended to promote
action by the Member States and, where appropriate, by the Community
with a view to carrying out projects relating to the networks. This
Decision shall not entail any financial commitment on the part of the
Member States or the Community .
                               Article 4
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels,                              For the Council
                                               The President
 ---pagebreak---  ---pagebreak---                                   - 86 -
              STATEMENT OF THE IMPACT ON SME AND EMPLOYMENT
Subject:     Proposal for a Council Decision     on  the creation   of  a
             European inland waterway network
1.     Administrative obligations    arising  from  application  of   the
       proposed ReouI at i on
       None.
2.     Advantages for small firms
       The development of a European inland waterway network will
       benefit small businesses in general by improving transport
       conditions, and especially small businesses which use semi-
       finished products in particular.
3.     Disadvantages for small firms
       None.
4.     Disadvantages in terms of employment
       None.
5.     Have both sides of industry been consulted beforehand?
       No.
6.      Is there any alternative, less binding approach?
       No.
 ---pagebreak---                                  #1 -
                                                                     ISSN 0254-1475
                                                              COM (92) 231 final
                                                      DOCUMENTS
EN                                                                              07
                                Catalogue number : CB-CO-92-363-EN-C
                                                             ISBN 92-77-46980-3
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities
L-2985 Luxembourg