30.11.2023
Kombineeritud transpordi direktiiv
Otsuse ettepanek koordinatsioonikogule
Kujundada seisukoht
Kaasvastutaja sisendi tähtpäev 22.12.2023
KOKi esitamise tähtpäev 10.01.2024
VV esitamise tähtpäev 18.01.2024
Peavastutaja: Kliimaministeerium, kaasvastutaja: RAM, MKM
Seisukoha valitsusse toomise alus ja põhjendus
Algatuse reguleerimisala nõuab vastavalt Eesti Vabariigi põhiseadusele
seaduse või Riigikogu otsuse vastuvõtmist, muutmist või kehtetuks
tunnistamist (RKKTS § 152¹ lg 1 p 1);
Algatuse vastuvõtmisega kaasneks oluline majanduslik või sotsiaalne mõju
(RKKTS § 152¹ lg 1 p 2);
Sisukokkuvõte
Ettepanek on osa rohelise kaubaveo paketist, mille KOM esitas juulis 2023.
Kombineeritud transpordi direktiiv muudab 1992.a vastu võetud direktiivi,
mis on tänaseks aegunud. Varasemalt on KOM esitanud 2 korda direktiivi
muudatusi (1998 ja 2017), kuid mõlemal korral oli KOM sunnitud ettepaneku
tagasi võtma, kuna kokkulepet ei suudetud saavutada.
Direktiivi muudatus hõlmab mh järgmist:
Ajakohastatakse defnitsioone (sh ühendveod, kombineeritud
transport jne)
Täpsustakse kombineeritud transpordile kvaliftseerumise tingimusi
(vedu peab mh vähendama vähemalt 40% väliseid kulusid võrreldes
vaid maanteed või ainult mereteed mööda toimuva transpordi
puhul).
Tuuakse välja, et ühendvedudele ei kehti kvoodi või loasüsteemid
Selleks, et kasu saada toetusmeetmetest peab kombineeritud
transpordi ettevõte oma veoinfo avaldama elektroonilisel platvormil
(eFTI platform)
eFTI platvormi abil kalkuleeritakse välise kulu kokkuhoid, mis
tõendab ettevõtte abikõlblikkuse toetusmeetmetele. Lisaks
genereeritakse platvormil kombineeritud transpordi aastapõhised
agregeeritud andmed, millest peab KOM-ile raporteerima.
Sätestatakse, et iga LR peab (24 kuud peale direktiivi jõustumist)
vastu võtma riikliku poliitikaraamistiku, mis aitab kombineeritud
transpordi vedusid kasutusele võtta. Poliitikaraamistik peab hindama
olemasolevate meetmete mõju ühendvedude arendamisele ning
pakkuma nimekirja meetmetest, mida on vaja rakendada selleks, et
ergutada ühendvedude kasutamist. Meetmed peavad aitama
kombineeritud transpordi rakendamise kulusid ettevõtetele riigis
vähendada vähemalt 10% võrra 7,5 a jooksul peale direktiivi
jõustumist.
LR-id võivad vähendada kombineeritud transpordiga hõlmatud
maanteesõidukite tasusid.
Maanteesõidukitele, mis osalevad kombineeritud transpordis,
antakse erand nädalalõpul, ööl ja pühadel liiklemise keelust.
Ühendvedude ümberlaadimisterminalide operaatorid peavad oma
kodulehel tasuta avaldama terminalis pakutavate teenuste info, mis
aitab tõhustada terminalide kasutamist.
Kas EL algatus reguleerib karistusi või haldustrahve? Ei
Kas nähakse ette uue asutuse loomine (järelevalvelised või muud asutused)?
Ei
Kas lahenduse rakendamine vajab IT-arendusi? Jah
Kombineeritud transpordi ettevõtte veoinfot avaldatakse ja töödeldakse
spetsiaalsel elektroonilisel platvormil (eFTI - Electronic Freight Transport
Information), mis peaks küll juba olemas olema. Platvorm loodi määrusega
(EU) 2020/1056.
Eesmärgid
Eelnõu eesmärgiks on muuta kombineeritud kaubavedu
konkurentsivõimelisemaks ning selle kaudu panustada kaubaveo
rohestamisse.
Mõju ja sihtrühm
Mõju valdkonnad
Sotsiaalala
2
Tervis ja tervishoiukorraldus
Sihtrühm: Kõik inimesed
Mõju sihtrühmale: Maanteedelt liikluse viimine osaliselt mere- või raudteele
panustab turvalisemasse liiklusse, vähendab liiklussurmasid ja -vigastusi
Majandus
Ettevõtlus
Sihtrühm: Transpordi ettevõtted
Mõju sihtrühmale: Riigi toetusmeetmed peavad aitama vähendada ettevõtete
kulusid kombineeritud transpordi rakendamiseks vähemalt 10%
Keskkond
Välisõhk ja kiirgus
Sihtrühm: Kõik inimesed
Mõju sihtrühmale: Kombineeritud transpordi edendamine vähendab
liiklusmüra ja reostust võrreldes vaid maanteed mööda toimuva kaubaveoga
Kliimamuutused
Sihtrühm: Kõik inimesed
Mõju sihtrühmale: Kombineeritud transpordi edendamine aitab kokku hoida
CO2 heidet võrreldes vaid maanteed mööda toimuva kaubaveoga
Riigivalitsemine
Riigieelarve
Kas lahendusega kaasneb mõju riigieelarve kuludele? Jah
Selgitus: Mõju riigieelarve kuludele sõltub meetmete maksumusest, mida riik
peab rakendama selleks, et ergutada kombineeritud transpordi
kasutuselevõttu
Kaasamine
Veoettevõtjad ning kõik asjasse puutuvad huvigrupid ja partnerid
3
Eelnõude infosüsteemis (EIS) on antud täitmiseks ülesanne.
Eelnõu toimik: 15.1/23-0470 - COM(2023) 702 DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Council Directive 92/106/EEC as regards a support framework for intermodal transport of goods and Regulation (EU) 2020/1056 of the European Parliament and the Council as regards calculation of external costs savings and generation of aggregated data
Arvamuse andmine eelnõu kohta Kliimaministeeriumile vastavalt Riigikantselei 05.12.2023 resolutsioonile.
Osapooled: Majandus- ja Kommunikatsiooniministeerium; Rahandusministeerium
Tähtaeg: 22.12.2023 23:59
Link eelnõu toimiku vaatele: https://eelnoud.valitsus.ee/main/mount/docList/3d8ea679-a609-4621-8146-bd12ab0cfe17
Link menetlusetapile: https://eelnoud.valitsus.ee/main/mount/docList/3d8ea679-a609-4621-8146-bd12ab0cfe17?activity=2
Eelnõude infosüsteem (EIS)
https://eelnoud.valitsus.ee/main
EUROPEAN
COMMISSION
Brussels, 7.11.2023
COM(2023) 702 final
2023/0396 (COD)
Proposal for a
DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
amending Council Directive 92/106/EEC as regards a support framework for
intermodal transport of goods and Regulation (EU) 2020/1056 of the European
Parliament and the Council as regards calculation of external costs savings and
generation of aggregated data
(Text with EEA relevance)
{SEC(2023) 373 final} - {SWD(2023) 351 final} - {SWD(2023) 352 final}
EN EN
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
1. CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL
• Reasons for and objectives of the proposal
The European Climate Law stipulates that the European Union needs to reduce its economy-wide
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by at least 55% by 2030 as compared to 1990 levels and to
achieve climate neutrality by 20501. The European Green Deal Communication2 pointed to the need
to reduce transport GHG emissions by 90% by 2050 to achieve climate neutrality. The Zero
Pollution Action Plan3 promotes the switch to cleaner transport to reduce air and noise pollution.
Furthermore, to reduce its dependence of fossil fuels, the EU also needs to improve its energy
efficiency, as highlighted in the REPowerEU package4, which lists the revision of the Combined
Transport Directive (hereinafter ‘CTD’ or ‘the Directive’)5 as an important tool in this regard6.
The transformation towards low-emission and low-energy consumption freight transport requires a
comprehensive approach. The Commission Communication on Sustainable and Smart Mobility
Strategy (SSMS)7 emphasises that all policy levers must be pulled to make all transport modes more
sustainable, to make sustainable alternatives widely available in a multimodal transport system, and
to put in place the right incentives to drive the transition. It calls for decisive actions towards using
sustainable transport modes, notably by moving a substantial amount of freight onto rail, inland
waterways, and short sea shipping. According to the milestones of the SSMS, rail freight traffic
should double, and inland waterways and short sea shipping freight traffic should increase by 50%
by 2050. Similarly, the European Green Deal also called for a substantial part of the 75% of inland
freight carried today by road to be shifted to rail and inland waterways.
Intermodal freight transport including combined transport8 (hereafter both together referred to
as “intermodal transport”) is essential in enabling a higher uptake of rail and waterborne freight
transport, which alone only very rarely provide door-to-door transport solutions. At the same time,
the average external cost for rail and inland waterway transport per tonne-km (tkm) are almost three
times lower, at EUR 0.013 per tkm and EUR 0.019 per tkm, respectively, compared to the average
external cost for Heavy Good Vehicles (HGV) at EUR 0.042 per tkm. Intermodal transport, which
includes feedering road legs at the beginning and/or end of the operation, combines the better
environmental performance and energy efficiency of these non-road modes with the accessibility
and flexibility of road transport. Intermodal transport enables to use transport modes in an
efficient combination, in particular promoting those with comparatively lower environmental
footprints, thereby optimising the use of the existing transport network and resources and
reducing emissions and energy consumption.
Therefore, intermodal transport is instrumental in achieving the ambition of both the SSMS and that
of the European Green Deal. The SSMS accordingly announced that to support the greening of
1
Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 2021 establishing
the framework for achieving climate neutrality and amending Regulations (EC) No 401/2009 and (EU)
2018/1999 (‘European Climate Law’), OJ L 243, 9.7.2021, p. 1-17.
2
COM(2019)640 final.
3
COM(2021) 400 final.
4
REPowerEU:https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-
deal/repowereu-affordable-secure-and-sustainable-energy-europe_en
5
Council Directive 92/106/EEC of 7 December 1992 on the establishment of common rules for certain
types of combined transport of goods between Member States
6
EU 'Save Energy', COM(2022) 240 final.
7
COM(2020) 789 final.
8
Combined transport is a subset of intermodal transport meeting the definition in the CTD.
EN 1 EN
cargo operations in Europe, the existing framework for intermodal transport needs a substantial
revamp and must be turned into an effective tool.
Even if the performance in volumes of intermodal transport has increased substantially over the last
30 years, road still dominates freight transport in the EU, because intermodal transport is often not
competitive with road-only transport due to various factors. First, the success of intermodal transport
depends on the performance (availability, reliability, punctuality, speed) and cost of each part of the
chain, i.e., the services offered by rail and waterborne transport, transhipment terminals as well as
the road transport for the ‘last mile’. There are performance gaps in all those elements that need to
be addressed by respective sectoral legislation and industry efforts. Second, as long as the level of
internalisation of the external costs between the modes differs, non-road and intermodal transport on
medium-long distances is not price-competitive with road-only operations. The SSMS stated that
to deliver fair and efficient pricing across all transport modes, a comprehensive set of
measures is needed. Only then would polluters and users take full responsibility for the costs they
generate, allowing users to make choices aligned with what is best for society. The SSMS also
expects full internalisation of external costs within the EU to be completed by 2050, thus making it
indispensable to take additional action before such time, to fulfil the objectives of the above-
described environmental objectives by 2050.
Since 1975, the EU has had an instrument9 to support eligible intermodal transport operations
(i.e. combined transport) with the objective to increase the competitiveness of combined
transport vis-à-vis road only freight transport and thereby achieve a higher uptake of
combined transport.
In 1992, this instrument was replaced by the Council Directive 92/106/EEC on the establishment of
common rules for certain types of combined transport of goods between Member States (CTD). The
purpose of the CTD is to complement other modal policies to make intermodal transport involving
rail, inland waterway and short sea shipping transport in combination with limited road legs more
competitive. The CTD is the only EU legal instrument that directly supports intermodal transport
and thus incentivises the shift from road freight to lower emission transport modes.
To increase the effectiveness of the CTD, the Commission made a proposal in 1998 to amend it, but
due to no result in negotiations withdrew it in 2001.
In 2016, the Commission conducted a REFIT evaluation10. It concluded that that the CTD
continued to be a relevant instrument for supporting combined transport, but that there is a
significant margin for further improving its effectiveness as some of its provisions are outdated or
unclear. Shortcomings include a narrow eligibility, insufficient economic support and the use of
paper documents. Subsequently, the Commission made a new proposal in 2017. This proposal was
withdrawn in 2020 as negotiations between the co-legislators had resulted in an outcome that would
have reduced the ambition of the CTD at a time when political objectives, as reflected in the
European Green Deal Communication11, required the opposite.
To meet these expectations, the Commission has prepared a new proposal to amend the CTD. The
objective of the initiative is to refocus the support framework that this Directive creates and thereby
increase the competitiveness of intermodal transport compared to long-distance road transport to
stimulate the shift from road freight to other modes of transport, and thereby to reduce external
costs.
9
Council Directive 75/130//EEC of 17 February 1975 on the establishment of common rules for certain
types of combined road/rail carriage of goods between Member States, OJ L 48, 22.2.1975
10
SWD(2016) 140 final.
11
COM(2019) 640 final.
EN 2 EN
The amended Directive applies to all intermodal transport insofar as the national policy
frameworks, reporting and terminal transparency are concerned, and establishes a dedicated
support framework for the subset of intermodal transport that saves a certain level of external
costs. The latter, being a subset of intermodal transport, continues to be called combined
transport.
The lessons learnt from the 1998 and 2017 proposals and negotiations’ outcomes were taken into
consideration when designing this proposal. Specifically, these are:
– The need for a fundamentally different approach to the conditions under which
support could be granted. The conditions in the current CTD are defined in terms of
the length of different road and non-road legs and distances from suitable terminals,
which do not always reflect the actual geographical conditions and lead to difficulties
in implementation. More importantly, these criteria do not reflect the environmental
performance of the actual operation resulting in support not being focused on
operations that ensure external costs savings.
– The provisions regarding investments to achieve sufficient terminal capacity, while
necessary, do not fit well into the scope of the Directive and were opposed by many
Member States. Therefore, these have been now addressed in the Commission
proposal for the revision of the TEN-T Regulation12.
– The use of digital solutions for compliance checks and enforcement, which can also
facilitate access to data on market functioning and on improving the effectiveness of
economic support measures.
– Differentiated situations in Member States that require different approaches to
support measures.
To address its objectives, this initiative has been structured around four areas:
– Conditions for support and proof of compliance
The conditions under which intermodal operations fall within the scope of the
support provided by this Directive are streamlined to cover a larger share of
intermodal transport, to eliminate ambiguities and possibilities for misinterpretations
and unequal treatment and to establish a clear basis for compliance decisions. This
includes conditions on the geographical scope, loading units and their identification
regime, the treatment of empty containers, the minimum of external costs savings to
be achieved, the need for rules on calculating external cost savings, and the contents
and rules for proof of compliance.
– Support frameworks
The rationale of the whole Directive is to provide a support framework for
intermodal transport including appropriate regulatory and/or economic measures.
However, according to the REFIT evaluation, the support framework established by
the Directive to enhance the relative competitiveness of combined transport has had
insufficient impact. Indeed, 70 out of the 100 responses to the open public
consultation confirmed that this is an issue13. The recent European Court of Auditors
special report on intermodal transport also concluded that support on intermodal
transport was not sufficiently effective as there was still no level playing field for
12
COM(2021) 812 final
13
This included 11 public authorities (CZ, two public authorities from BE, AT, three public authorities from
FR, NO, IT, DE, SE), 49 industry stakeholders, four citizens and six responses under the category
‘others’.
EN 3 EN
intermodal freight transport in the EU14. The new rules introduce the following on
top of existing support:
1. a new EU-wide regulatory exemption from national driving bans;
2. obligation on Member States to analyse their existing measures and extend or
establish new national policy frameworks - including appropriate measures of
regulatory and/or economic nature - to support the uptake of intermodal
transport;
3. an objective of an overall 10% reduction in costs for combined transport in each
Member State, to facilitate technological upgrades relevant to intermodal
transport, and to establish new connections between previously unconnected
terminals.
– Transparency of market functioning
As concluded by the REFIT evaluation, there is a lack of transparency as regards the
existing national policy and market situation that would allow to assess whether
support is tailored to the actual situation. 18 out of 49 survey respondents15 agreed or
strongly agreed that an empirical basis for determining the adequate level of support
is missing. Reporting by the Commission stays, but with updated data and reporting
periods, complemented by an obligation on Member States to ensure transparency of
their national intermodal policy frameworks that they are implementing for
supporting combined transport. Links to all national policy frameworks and national
measures will be published in a central gateway managed by the Commission.
Further, a review clause for reassessing this EU support framework is included.
– Terminal transparency requirements
The proposal introduces common transparency requirements for terminals ensuring
that all terminals make data publicly available on terminal facilities and services. In
addition, the proposal provides the possibility to establish a framework of terminal
categories, based on service levels, for available services and facilities. These
measures are complementary to the proposed revision of the TEN-T Regulation,
which addresses terminal capacity and quality on the TEN-T network.
• Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area
The initiative has to be seen in the context of the European Climate Law16 and the European Green
Deal Communication17, both setting GHG emissions reduction targets. Further, in the context of the
REPowerEU package18 aiming at improving the EU’s energy efficiency and identifying the revision
of the CTD as an important tool in this regard19, and the Zero Pollution Action Plan20 which
14
European Court of Auditors (2023), op. cit.
15
14 out of 31 industry respondents and 4/8 authorities.
16
Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 2021 establishing
the framework for achieving climate neutrality and amending Regulations (EC) No 401/2009 and (EU)
2018/1999 (‘European Climate Law’), OJ L 243, 9.7.2021, p. 1-17.
17
COM(2019)640 final.
18
REPowerEU: https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-
deal/repowereu-affordable-secure-and-sustainable-energy-europe_en
19
EU 'Save Energy', COM(2022) 240 final.
20
COM(2021) 400 final.
EN 4 EN
promotes the switch to cleaner transport to reduce air and noise pollution. Also, the SSMS calls for
decisive action to shift freight transport to more sustainable transport modes.
It should be noted that specific policy considerations relevant to combined transport already existed
in the past. In 1992 the Commission published a White Paper on Transport and an accompanying
legislative package, which led to today’s CTD, fully liberalising the combined transport market in
the EU and providing today’s support framework. In 1997, The Commission published a dedicated
strategy on intermodal transport in Europe21. The 2011 Transport White Paper22 set the specific goal
of shifting 30% of long-distance road freight (over 300 km) to rail or waterborne transport by 2030,
and more than 50% by 2050.
• Consistency with other Union policies
The proposal complements other transport policies, which (a) target the environmental performance
of individual modes, (b) internalise external costs by applying the ‘polluter pays’ and ‘user pays’
principles, and (c) provide transparency about the available services and applicable rules for the
sector or parts of it.
Making individual modes more sustainable in terms of their energy efficiency and use of sustainable
fuels, and thus reducing the external costs of transport, has been addressed by a range of policy
tools, such as CO2 performance standards for heavy-duty vehicles23, the revised Renewable Energy
Directive (RED II)24, and the Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation.
Similarly, a range of measures already target the internalisation of external costs, with the aim to
allow the society to make the right choices. These include carbon pricing, infrastructure charges, and
energy and vehicle taxes, which are gradually adjusted and phased in. Eventually they must come
together in a mutually compatible, complementary and coherent policy, however according to the
SSMS this can take until 205025.
While various transparency and reporting obligations exist in mode-specific legislation, cross-
modal reporting or information exchange (relevant for intermodal transport) is to a large
extent not covered. Furthermore, the added value and attractiveness of intermodal transport
depends on the performance of individual modes and available infrastructure capacity. Therefore,
this initiative is developed in close coordination with other transport legislation and legislative
proposals, including those within the Greening Transport Package, which this initiative is part of.
It also has strong connections with other parts of this package, notably the initiative for increasing
the share of rail in international transport26 and the revision of the Weights and Dimensions
Directive27 on road transport, which are both important for removing mode specific barriers to
intermodal transport.
Moreover, the new common EU framework for GHG emissions accounting in transport and
21
COM(97) 243 final.
22
COM(2011) 144 final.
23
Regulation (EU) 2019/1242
24
COM(2021) 557 final
25
The SSMS sets a milestone for all external costs of transport within the EU to be covered by the transport
users at the latest by 2050.
26
https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/13134-International-freight-and-
passenger-transport-increasing-the-share-of-rail-traffic_en
27
Council Directive 96/53/EC of 25 July 1996 laying down for certain road vehicles circulating within the
Community the maximum authorized dimensions in national and international traffic and the maximum
authorized weights in international traffic, OJ L 235, 17.9.1996, p. 59–75. It allows heavier and longer
road vehicles to be used in intermodal transport, including combined transport road legs.
EN 5 EN
logistics (CEEU) and the implementation of the Electronic Freight Transport Information
Regulation (eFTI)28 contribute to the technical framework for the implementation of the revised
CTD.
The revision is also consistent with the recently adopted Naiades Communication29, which calls for
the greater integration of inland waterways into a modern, trans-European intermodal transport
system.
In addition, a precondition for the use of intermodal and multimodal transport is the availability of
appropriate infrastructure at sufficient capacity. The recent study on transhipment technologies30
showed that there are shortcomings on the TEN-T network for intermodal transport, and that the
existing transhipment capacity is insufficient for rail and inland waterway transport. The issue of
terminal capacity was addressed in the Commission proposal for the revision of the TEN-T
Regulation31, which for the first time includes an obligation on Member States to ensure sufficient
multimodal freight terminal capacity based on a dedicated analysis and action plan. These measures
can be expected to deliver better infrastructure capacity for intermodal transport over the next
decade.
The obligations set out in this Directive are without prejudice to the application of the relevant
State aid rules. This Directive will define the criteria for a category of operations with the
highest potential for reducing external costs in transport and establish policy objectives for
promoting this subset of operations. Member States may consider introducing inter alia State
aid measures to achieve the policy objectives in the amended CTD. The mere inclusion of
measures in national policy frameworks that are enacted based on this Directive does not
exempt them from the compatibility assessment, which falls within the exclusive competence
of the Commission.
This proposal is also in line with the final proposals of the Conference on the Future of
Europe, in particular Proposal 3 on climate change, energy and transport, requesting to tackle
climate change and respect the global climate goals.
Finally, it should be noted that a link between CTD and road cabotage is brought up by some
stakeholders. It remains relevant and important to continue to treat international combined transport
and international road transport equally as regards the use of non-resident hauliers as provided for in
Article 4 of the CTD. In the revision of Regulation (EU) 1072/2009 in 202032, the co-legislators
provided a derogation from Article 4 of the CTD (but only in case of it being misused) while
reconfirming that Article 4 has been useful and remains in force33.
28
Regulation (EU) 2020/1056
29
COM(2021) 324 final.
30
Comparative analysis of transhipment technologies for intermodal transport and their costs, PWC,
KombiConsult 2022, https://transport.ec.europa.eu/news/study-analyses-transhipment-options-more-
competitive-intermodal-transport-and-terminal-capacity-ten-2022-05-05_en
31
COM(2021) 812 final.
32
Regulation (EU) 1055/2020 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2020 amending
Regulations (EC) No 1071/2009, (EC) No 1072/2009 and (EU) No 1024/2012 with a view to adapting
them to developments in the road transport sector, OJ L 249, 31.7.2020, p. 17–32.
33
Actions for annulment in respect of this provision have been lodged with the Court of Justice by some
Member States (C-542/20, Lithuania v. Parliament and the Council, C-545/20, Bulgaria v. Parliament and
the Council, C-547/20, Romania v. Parliament and the Council and C-554/20, Poland v. Parliament and
the Council).
EN 6 EN
2. LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY
• Legal basis
Title VI (Articles 90-100) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU) establishes the EU’s
prerogative to make provisions for the common transport policy. Article 91(1), point (c) TFEU
provides that the EU has competence in the field of transport to lay down measures to improve
transport safety, while Article 91(1) point (d) TFEU provides the same competence as regards “any
other appropriate provisions”.
• Subsidiarity (for non-exclusive competence)
EU dimension of the problem
Under the principle of subsidiarity, in areas which do not fall within its exclusive competence, the
EU can act only if, and in so far, as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently
achieved by the Member States. External costs of transport, in particular those relating to climate
change, are trans-boundary problems, which cannot be solved by national or local action alone. The
pressing need to reduce GHG emissions produced by freight transport applies equally to cross-
border and domestic operations. Thus, the problem identified needs to be addressed at EU level
because it has a cross-border dimension.
Added value action at EU level
The aim of the initiative is to promote the uptake of intermodal transport, of which 81% is between
Member States, across the EU through support measures based on common eligibility conditions.
From the policy and the internal market perspective, it is important to ensure that the benefits
provided for are applicable in a comparable way throughout the EU. Given the limited nature of the
current CTD, some Member States designed differentiated support for intermodal transport
operations both in the form of non-harmonised regulatory support as well as under the State aid
rules. In certain cases, information about the availability of those support measures may not have
been equally accessible to all operators, in particular in case of cross-border operations. Some
operators may have gained a competitive advantage with impacts beyond their national border. EU
action has the aim of helping to create comparable treatment for operators across the EU,
simplifying administrative procedures for industry, the Member States and the Commission and
improve the functioning of the internal market. This cannot be achieved by legislating at Member
State level only.
• Proportionality
Choices concerning the relevant policy measures and policy option forming the structure of this
initiative were made in due consideration of the proportionality principle, thus resulting in the most
balanced approach possible. While the proposal puts an obligation on Member States to provide
support to certain types of intermodal transport operations, the impact assessment showed that the
policy option involving only Member States’ voluntary support will not be sufficient to achieve the
objective. The chosen policy option ensures sufficient modal shift at reasonable cost.
• Choice of the instrument
The choice of the instrument, the amendment of the existing Directive allows the satisfactory
achievement of the objective of improving the competitiveness of intermodal transport, while
ensuring adherence to the subsidiarity principles. To ensure the support, Member States will
have freedom to set up their respective policy frameworks with the most relevant support
measures.
EN 7 EN
3. RESULTS OF EX-POST EVALUATIONS, STAKEHOLDER
CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS
• Ex-post evaluations/fitness checks of existing legislation
An evaluation34 of the CTD was carried out in 2014-2016 and concluded that the Directive
continues to be a relevant instrument for supporting freight transport combining different
modes. It was estimated that the shift from road-only to intermodal transport had brought
along an annual saving of up to EUR 2.1 billion in external costs in 2011. While not all of
these savings can be attributed to the CTD, it was established that without EU action, cross-
border combined transport services would likely have been faced with barriers due to different
legal systems, making combined transport services less attractive and possibly unfeasible.
However, a number of provisions of the CTD, e.g. the requirement to use paper documents,
are outdated as they reflect the market situation in 1992. Other provisions of the Directive
suffer from diverging transposition and implementation at Member State level, which causes
the industry practical problems on a daily basis and hence such provisions are not entirely
effective. Furthermore, the economic support measures are very limited and therefore do not
have a significant impact on the competitiveness of intermodal operations. In the public
consultation, both the industry and public administrations indicated that the policy measures
are proportionate for achieving the policy objectives.
• Stakeholder consultations
The Commission actively engaged with stakeholders and conducted comprehensive consultations
throughout the impact assessment process.
Consultation activities took place in 2021 and 2022, from the publication of the Inception Impact
Assessment (IIA) in August 2021, to the targeted consultation that closed in August 2022.
The objectives of the consultation activities were the following:
• to collect information and opinions of stakeholders on the key problems and
associated drivers, the definition of relevant policy objectives linked to those
problems, and the identification, definition and screening of policy measures that
could be considered in the impact assessment;
• to gather information and opinions on the likely impacts of policy measures and
options.
As part of the initial feedback mechanism, interested parties had the possibility to provide feedback
on the IIA from 19 August to 16 September 2021. A total of 62 individual responses were received.
Subsequently, an open public consultation was accessible on the website “Have your Say” from
7 March to 30 May 2022. In total, 101 responses were received from different stakeholders. Some
stakeholders also provided position papers together with their responses to the consultation.
Finally, the following targeted consultation activities were carried out:
• A targeted online survey aiming to validate the problem definition and the objectives
of the policy options, obtain input to define in more detail the policy
measures/options, and provide data needed to support the assessment of the impact of
the measures and the expected costs. The survey ran from 16 May to 24 June 2022
and received 59 responses.
34
SWD (2016) 140 final
EN 8 EN
• Targeted stakeholder interviews were conducted with 29 stakeholders between May
and August 2022 (including three exploratory interviews conducted in February
2022).
• One stakeholder expert meeting with industry was held on 25 October 2022. There
were 60 participants representing 55 organisations.
The stakeholder consultation activities revealed a large degree of agreement among stakeholders
that the problems and objectives of the initiative are relevant for the development of intermodal
transport.
The IIA consultation and open public consultation focused on the problem at a higher level, after
which the survey and interviews took a more detailed and systematic approach to specifying the
problem and an associated objective for the revision of the CTD. A common theme in the feedback
on the IIA was a lack of clarity surrounding the definition in the current CTD, while others
suggested that the CTD should focus more on inland waterway and short sea shipping transport in
addition to road and rail transport.
As regards the problem definition, the consultation showed that there is a rather broad consensus
among all stakeholders that when no support is provided, intermodal transport was competitive with
road-only transport in the EU only in some situations (63 out of 95, 66%). Terminal operators were
even more pessimistic, with three out of five considering intermodal transport never or almost never
competitive with road-only transport unless supported. The vast majority of industry stakeholder
groups agreed that the lack of price-competitiveness was an obstacle to the development of
intermodal transport, with the exception of freight organisers (e.g. logistics operators, freight
forwarders mostly active in the road transport), who were generally more sceptical in this regard.
Respondents identified six factors as affecting the competitiveness of intermodal transport compared
with road-only transport: transhipment costs (87 out of 94; 93%) and lack of suitable terminals in
the vicinity (85 out of 95; 89%) were the most prominent ones. For both of these factors, at least
75% of respondents from each stakeholder type and industry sub-category agreed that these were
relevant factors. 80% of the respondents considered an additional four factors as being relevant, i.e.:
road transport being cheaper than intermodal transport for door-to-door operations (78 out of 94;
83%); habit of using road-only transport (78 out of 94; 83%); lack of suitable service offer in
terminals in the vicinity (76 out of 95; 80%); and delay/longer transit time compared with road-only
transport (73 out of 92; 79%). For each of these, at least half of the respondents from each
stakeholder type and industry sub-category felt that these factors were relevant, while among
transport organisers only 3 out of 7 felt that road transport being cheaper than
intermodal/multimodal transport for door-to-door operations was a relevant factor.
80 out of 100 respondents (80%) implied that there were differences in the competitiveness of
intermodal transport in different Member States, with common reasons being differences in the
infrastructure and services that were available, as well as differences in the support provided.
As regards the problem drivers, 26 out of 49 respondents to the stakeholders’ survey agreed or
strongly agreed that the current eligibility criteria are too narrow as only operations between
Member States are covered, loading units must be of a minimum size to be eligible, and different
eligibility conditions apply to different modal combinations. Moreover, 24 out of 49 survey
respondents believed that the current eligibility criteria are not entirely relevant to promoting the
uptake of intermodal transport and the reduction of externalities. 25 out of 49 survey respondents
and 15 out of 29 interviewees considered that the current eligibility definition allows different
interpretations.
18 out of 49 survey respondents agreed or strongly agreed that an empirical basis to determine the
adequate level of support is missing, as the REFIT evaluation had already concluded that the CTD
EN 9 EN
lacks an effective market overview framework that would allow to tailor support measures to the
actual situation either at EU or Member State level. 20 out of 49 survey respondents supported the
objective to improve data, analysis and reporting on the status of intermodal transport.
According to the REFIT evaluation, the support measures established by the CTD to increase the
relative competitiveness of combined transport are very limited. 70 out of the 100 responses to the
open public consultation agree that this is an issue, and 19 out of 49 respondents to the stakeholders’
survey agreed or strongly agreed with the low, ineffective and inefficient support measures being an
issue.
The SSMS identifies the need to improve multimodal data interchange and smart traffic
management to simplify the complex regulatory, administrative and business arrangements.
Operators use different systems, with a wide variety of interfaces, dataset requirements and
semantics. 13 out of 49 respondents to the stakeholders’ survey agreed that there is lack of
interoperability, and that the fragmentation of the different data sharing systems is an important
limiting issue. As regards the operational inefficiencies in terminals, 37 of 100 respondents to the
open public consultation considered the poor quality of service in terminals to be a factor that
undermines the competitiveness of intermodal transport.
• Collection and use of expertise
A study was conducted by an external contractor to support the impact assessment
underpinning the proposal (December 2021 - June 2023). It provided valuable insights, in
particular as regards designing the policy options, assessing the expected impacts and to
collecting the views of the directly impacted stakeholders.
• Impact assessment
The policy measures included in this proposal are based on the results of an impact assessment. The
impact assessment report [SWD(2023)351] initially received a negative opinion from the
Commission Regulatory Scrutiny Board [SEC(2023)373]. It was then resubmitted to the Board and
received a positive opinion with reservations. The recommendations received from the Board have
been addressed and Annex 1 to the impact assessment report provides a summary of how this was
done.
Five policy options were considered in the impact assessment for achieving the identified objectives.
These five options all address the following issues:
• covering a wider range of operations under effective compliance conditions
• increasing competitiveness through a support framework
• transparency, cooperation and simplification regarding market entry
• improving reporting and information on market functioning.
Policy option A is the option with the softest intervention at EU level. It applies to all intra-EU
intermodal transport. Eligibility would be based on a wider set of externalities, requiring savings of
at least 40% of external costs, with a methodology established based on the unit values from the
Handbook on the external costs of transport35. The guidance for calculations would be established in
an implementing act36. The data to be provided to prove eligibility would be reviewed and tied to
35
CE Delft (2019).
36
To ensure sufficiently precise comparison of operations, it would be necessary to continue updating the
Handbook on regular basis, taking into account the latest scientific evidence. In addition, consistency and
complementarity with the upcoming CEEU has to be ensured.
EN 10 EN
eFTI platforms37. The current biannual reporting obligation on the Commission would be replaced
by a call to Member States to carry out regular analysis and strategic planning for sustainable modes
of transport to choose appropriate support. While policy option PO-A does not oblige Member
States to provide any support, it does provide a Toolbox with predefined support tools to choose
from. For terminal transparency and cooperation, common transparency rules for terminals would
be introduced with an implementing act.
Policy option B is the option that combines obligations at EU level with flexibility to take into
account specific national situations. It obliges Member States to support intermodal transport but
gives them the freedom to choose among the different support tools listed in the Toolbox, to address
the challenges in national transport systems. This policy option is subdivided into three sub-options
with different scope and eligibility conditions. Policy option B1 and policy option B2a apply to all
intra-EU intermodal operations, while policy option B2b applies only to cross-border intra-EU
operations. In policy option B1, eligibility is based on GHG savings with a threshold of 25%
calculated using the methodology of the Common EU framework for GHG emissions accounting in
transport and logistics (CountEmissions EU proposal). In policy options B2a and B2b, eligibility is
based on a wider set of externalities with a required savings threshold of 40% as in option A. In all
policy option B sub-options, the data to be provided for proof of eligibility would be reviewed and
tied to eFTI platforms. For market analysis and reporting, all policy option B sub-options would rely
on the current obligation on the Commission to prepare reports every 5 years with assistance from
Member States and by using dedicated market analysis studies. In all policy option B sub-options
Member States would be required to achieve an overall costs reduction as well as increase in
technological upgrades, while being allowed to choose from a Toolbox to adapt their support to
national circumstances within the given limits. Furthermore, Member States are called upon to
facilitate start-up of new intermodal routes. All policy option B sub-options would include a
regulatory benefit exempting road-legs of eligible operations from national driving bans. For
terminal transparency and cooperation, the measures are the same as in policy option A.
Policy option C establishes the strongest EU level intervention. It applies to all intra-EU operations.
Eligibility is the same as for policy option A and policy option B2 sub-options, based on a wider set
of externalities with a 40% threshold. Like in other options, the data to be provided to prove
eligibility would be reviewed and tied to eFTI platforms. The Commission’s biannual reporting
obligation would be replaced by an obligation on Member States to carry out regular analysis and
strategic planning, covering the full transport system and including cross-modal analysis. For
support tools, it obliges Member States to provide harmonised support to reduce the cost of (the part
of) eligible operations taking place in their territory at a level that induces uptake of intermodal
transport. This support level is assessed to be 10% of the total door-to-door cost of the operation for
the shipper. Also, this policy option would include a harmonised regulatory benefit exempting road-
legs of eligible operations from national driving bans. Policy option C would further require
establishing a defined data set and obliges the use of common data sets and data exchange protocols.
The measures for terminal transparency are the same as in policy options A and B.
Based on the assessment, policy option B2a is identified as the preferred option. It delivers on the
objective by ensuring the highest modal shift and external cost savings with a good cost-benefit
ratio, while also ensuring coherence and complying with proportionality and subsidiarity principles.
The preferred option is expected to deliver significant recurrent administrative cost savings for
businesses operating in the intermodal sector. The recurrent costs savings for operators engaged in
intermodal transport due to the use of electronic data and eFTI platforms are estimated at EUR 430
million per year. At the same time, terminals would incur administrative costs for updating the
37
Platforms for business-to-authorities (B2A) electronic data exchange established according to
Regulation (EU) 2020/1056.
EN 11 EN
information required to be published on their website. The recurrent annual average cost for all
terminals in 2025-2035 are estimated at around EUR 6100. The administrative cost savings largely
outweigh the negligible costs and the net administrative cost savings for businesses are estimated at
EUR 430 million annually.
To ensure that subsidiarity principle is better served, beyond the outcome of the impact assessment,
total flexibility is left for Member States to choose the type of measures they would implement,
while they still need to meet the 10% cost reduction target. To ensure informed decisions and
achievement of the targets, the preferred option includes an obligation for each Member State to
evaluate their existing and potential measures and to consolidate all measures into a single National
Policy Framework. This is, similar to, but less demanding than the obligation to have cross-modal
strategies analysed under policy option PO-C. It is estimated to have a small impact on costs
(additional one-off costs up to EUR 1.1 million plus recurrent costs of EUR 1.6 million every 5
years). These changes do not alter in a significant way the ranking of options and the choice of the
preferred policy option.
• Fundamental rights
The proposal is in accordance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
4. BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS
The proposal raises net costs for the Union Budget of EUR 2 million over the period 2025-2050.
The budgetary impact of the proposal is described in more detail in the Legislative Financial
Statement annexed to this proposal.
The budgetary impact beyond the current multiannual financial framework (MFF) is described in
the form of an indicative overview, without prejudice to the future MFF Agreement.
5. OTHER ELEMENTS
• Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements
Member States are required to adopt and publish their National Policy Frameworks (NPF)
compiling existing and new measures that impact intermodal transport at the latest two year
after entry into force of this amendment and assess the impact of their NPFs every five years
thereafter. They must notify to the Commission their NPFs as well as the results of their
evaluations.
The Commission will follow the implementation, results and impacts of this proposal through
reporting obligations established under this proposal. 1 year before the application of the Directive,
it will establish the baseline situation on the market and then, 5 years after the application of the
Directive, and every 5 years thereafter, it will draw up a report on the economic development of
intermodal transport in the EU. It will be assisted in collecting the necessary information by the
Member States and by aggregated data from eFTI platforms. The reports will address in particular
the volume of intermodal transport traffic in the EU, the main intermodal transport corridors, the
main barriers to increasing the uptake of intermodal transport, the competitiveness of intermodal
transport compared to road-only transport (including an analysis of the support provided by Member
States in their NPFs) and developments in terminal capacity.
EN 12 EN
At latest, after 10 years the Commission will evaluate whether it is appropriate to continue the
support regime under this Directive.
• Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal
The title of the Directive is adjusted to reflect the extended scope by removing the wording
‘between Member States’ and replacing “combined transport” with “intermodal transport”.
Article 1 of the amending Directive provides the following amendments to Directive
92/106/EEC:
• Article 1 of the current Directive provided the scope of the CTD by setting conditions
to be met to qualify for the support framework for ‘combined transport’. In the
revised Directive, to ensure clarity, two Articles are inserted describing the scope
(Article 1a) and providing definitions (Article 1b), followed by a new Article 1c
providing the new conditions for operations to qualify as “combined transport”.
• Article 2 is replaced by updated language to remove the redundant target date in
1993.
• Article 3 is replaced by updated conditions for the proof of compliance.
• Article 3a is inserted establishing an obligation on Member States to adopt, publish,
implement and evaluate National Policy Frameworks for supporting intermodal
transport.
• Article 5 is replaced by updated language on reporting by the Commission.
• Article 6.1 is replaced by updated language to ensure compliance with State aid
rules.
• Article 7 is deleted.
• Article 9 is replaced by new language to update obsolete references and simplify the
language.
• Article 9a is inserted establishing an obligation to exempt the road legs of combined
transport from national weekend and holiday driving bans.
• Article 9b is inserted, to establish transparency requirements for intermodal freight
terminals.
• Article 9c is inserted, to establish the conditions conferring delegated powers to the
Commission under this Directive.
• Article 9d is inserted, to establish the committee procedure for the exercise by the
Commission of the power to adopt implementing acts.
• Article 10 is deleted.
• An annex is inserted, providing an indicative list of support measures referred to in
Article 3a.
Article 2 of the amending Directive amends Regulation (EU) 2020/1056 to introduce an
obligation on eFTI platforms to provide a functionality for calculating the external costs
savings and generation of aggregated data on annual volumes of combined transport.
Article 3 of the amending Directive establishes the obligation of transposition and deferred
implementation.
EN 13 EN
Article 4 of the amending Directive establishes the date of entry into force and application of this
Directive.
Article 5 of amending Directive establishes the addressees.
EN 14 EN
2023/0396 (COD)
Proposal for a
DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
amending Council Directive 92/106/EEC as regards a support framework for
intermodal transport of goods and Regulation (EU) 2020/1056 of the European
Parliament and the Council as regards calculation of external costs savings and
generation of aggregated data
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular
Article 91(1) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee1,
Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions2,
Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure,
Whereas:
(1) Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of the European Parliament and of the Council 3 aims at
reducing the Union’s economy-wide greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by
2030 when compared to 1990 levels and achieving climate neutrality by 2050. For
transport that goal means reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 90% by 2050.
Furthermore, to reduce its dependence of fossil fuels, the Union also needs to
improve its energy efficiency, as highlighted in the REPowerEU package4 and switch
to cleaner transport to reduce air and noise pollution as provided for in the Zero
Pollution Action Plan5.
(2) Intermodal transport combines better environmental performance and energy
efficiency of rail and waterborne transport with the accessibility and flexibility of
1
OJ C , , p. .
2
OJ C , , p. .
3
Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 2021 establishing
the framework for achieving climate neutrality and amending Regulations (EC) No 401/2009 and (EU)
2018/1999 (‘European Climate Law’) (OJ L 243, 9.7.2021, p. 1, ELI:
http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/1119/oj).
4
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council,
the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, REPowerEU Plan
(COM(2022) 230 final).
5
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council,
the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Pathway to a
Healthy Planet for All EU Action Plan: 'Towards Zero Pollution for Air, Water and Soil' (COM(2021)
400 final).
EN 15 EN
road transport and is thus key in enabling the higher uptake of rail and waterborne
freight transport. It also enables a more efficient allocation of volumes among
transport modes and tackles effectively those road transport external costs which are
hard to fully internalise, in particular congestion and accidents. However, the
transport prices today do not yet reflect to the full extent the negative impacts caused
by different modes and that hampers the effective reduction of the impacts of the
externalities through the uptake of more sustainable freight transport options.
(3) Council Directive 92/106/EEC6, established a framework to encourage the
development of intermodal transport, and in particular combined transport
operations. It supports intermodal transport operations which compete with a
unimodal road transport, and it is the main legislative act of the Union to incentivise
the shift from road freight to lower emission transport modes such as inland
waterways, short sea shipping and rail. While Directive 92/106/EEC contributed to
the development of the Union's policy on modal shift, its limited scope, insufficient
support and shortcomings in the implementation reduced its effectiveness. It is
therefore necessary to ensure that intermodal transport operations in the Union which
reduce the external costs by being environmentally friendlier, safer, more energy
efficient and causing less congestion than road transport, would become attractive for
shippers.
(4) Only intermodal transport operations that have a commercially viable unimodal road
transport alternative lead to saving of external costs. Intermodal operations
connecting islands and mainland have no road-alternative but external cost savings
can be achieved by different routing using longer short sea shipping legs or different
short sea shipping legs that allow a combination with rail and inland waterways
transport.
(5) About one fifth of intermodal transport operations take place exclusively within a
single Member State. However, the negative effect of national road transport
operations, and notably greenhouse gas emissions and congestion, have an impact
beyond the national borders of Member States. Therefore, to ensure that all
operations contributing to the reduction of external costs are treated in the same way,
it is necessary to incentivise at the Union level both international and national
intermodal transport operations, including different modal combinations.
(6) For developing intermodal transport, the availability of transhipment terminals is
essential. However, support measures for increasing terminal capacity should not be
covered by this Directive, as they are included in [add a reference to the revised
TEN-T Regulation, currently being negotiated by the co-legislators].
(7) Eligibility for the benefits from Directive 92/106/EEC is based on distance limits of
different parts of operation. That approach of defining “combined transport
operations” does not sufficiently support the objective of reducing external costs as it
is not targeted enough. Furthermore, it does not reflect objectively the conditions and
circumstances in different regions and disregards the characteristics of the
environmental performance of the actual operation, including for instance the type of
vehicle and fuel used. Therefore, the support provided should apply only to
intermodal transport operations that ensure a sufficient level of external costs savings
and allow an optimised use of the transport network. To capture such operations, a
6
Council Directive 92/106/EEC of 7 December 1992 on the establishment of common rules for certain
types of combined transport of goods between Member States (OJ L 368, 17.12.1992, p.38, ELI:
http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/1992/106/oj).
EN 16 EN
threshold of savings from external costs, including greenhouse gas (‘GHG’)
emissions, air pollution, injuries and fatalities, noise and congestion, of an intermodal
transport operation compared to the commercially viable alternative unimodal road
operation should be set. The threshold should allow all modal combinations to
benefit, while ensuring that rail, inland waterways and short sea shipping legs would
constitute a major part of an intermodal operation. Moreover, external costs of all
integral parts of the intermodal transport operation need to be taken into account
when calculating the external costs savings to allow for fair comparison with other
transport options.
(8) In the case of operations starting or ending outside the Union, or both, or starting and
ending in the Union, but passing through a third country, the part of that intermodal
transport operation that takes place in the Union should fall within the scope of this
Directive, if that part of the operation fulfils the conditions set out in this Directive,
given that it brings along modal shift within the Union.
(9) The intermodal transport operations can differ widely from each other as regards
combinations of modes and number of different operational parts, including different
number of transport legs. Combined transport operations supported under this
Directive could involve either one or two road legs and one or several non-road legs.
Given that none of the different transport legs of a combined transport operation
would take place without the other legs, and in line with the Court case law, an
operation from shipper to final receiver constitutes one single inseparable transport
operation7. Therefore, barriers to any part of the intermodal operation would
undermine the viability of the total intermodal operation and thus result in an
increased use of unimodal road transport.
(10) To be able to follow intermodal loading units through the intermodal chain with the
objective to establish the intermodal transport operations that can benefit from the
support framework under this Directive, it is essential that intermodal loading units
used in all those operations use existing and widely used means of identification and
marking. Standardised identification should also speed up the handling of intermodal
loading units in terminals and facilitate the flow of the intermodal transport
operations.
(11) In container transport, there may be a need to pick up or bring back an empty
container in a container depot before or after it is used for an intermodal transport
operation. Where such depot runs are made with dedicated empty containers and are
covered by the transport contract of the intermodal transport operation or by part
thereof, they should also be considered an integral part of an intermodal transport
operation.
(12) In order to ensure that only eligible intermodal transport operations benefit from the
support framework established by this Directive, it is important to be able to verify
the compliance of any operation with the conditions set out by the support
framework. Modern digital tools can perform the calculation of the external costs
savings and assist in verifying compliance. The platforms for digital transport data
established pursuant to Regulation (EU) 1056/2020 of the European Parliament and
of the Council8 (“eFTI platforms”) provide a suitable tool as they are built to include
7
Judgment of 7 May 1991, Commission / Italy (C-45/89, ECR 1991 p. I-2053) ECLI:EU:C:1991:185.
8
Regulation (EU) 1056/2020 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2020 on electronic
freight transport information (OJ L 249, 31.7.2020, p. 33, ELI:
http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/1056/oj).
EN 17 EN
the regulatory information needed, including calculation of external costs savings.
Therefore, the use of an eFTI platform should be mandatory for all operations that
wish to benefit from the support framework.
(13) A common harmonised calculation methodology with reference values of external
costs or sources of such reference values needs to be established and updated
regularly, keeping the pace with developing knowledge and evidence base.
Therefore, the exact methodology should be established by means of an
implementing act, calculated in accordance with to the unit values established in the
Handbook on the external costs of transport9, in its up-to-date version.
(14) The transport information required should be recorded in eFTI platforms before the
start of an operation and be strictly limited to the data and calculations necessary for
proof of compliance. To avoid administrative burdens, no additional information
should be requested by national competent authorities for the purpose of compliance
checks.
(15) In order to allow the Commission to comply with its reporting obligations set out by
this Directive, certain data on combined transport operations recorded on eFTI
platforms should be made available to the Commission annually, in aggregated form.
(16) The use of intermodal transport can be cost-competitive with unimodal road transport
at longer distances as transport costs of non-road transport modes are usually lower
per unit. However, at medium and shorter distances unimodal road transport is often
chosen by shippers and transport organisers due to competitive pressures, because on
such shorter distances the lower transport costs per unit are not sufficient to
compensate for the additional organisational and transhipment costs deriving from
the fact that intermodal transport involves several modes of transport. For medium
distances, that difference in cost-competitiveness is on average 10%. Therefore, to
stimulate a rapid increase in the uptake of intermodal transport on medium distances,
Member States should adjust national policies and take the necessary regulatory and
non-regulatory measures that improve the competitiveness of intermodal transport.
(17) Some Member States have national policies to promote intermodal rail, inland
waterway or short sea shipping transport, aiming to reduce the cost difference
between road transport and alternative transport options. However, those modal
policies are not always aligned between the modes or between the neighbouring
Member States. Furthermore, some Member States have no support measures in
place. The fragmentation caused by uncoordinated approach reduces effectiveness of
the existing support and results in an uneven playing field between the modes and
Member States. Therefore, all Member States should establish and implement
national policy frameworks to support the uptake of intermodal transport,
considering the potential of each modal combination as well as the interactions of all
modes comprehensively; Member States should regularly reassess the effectiveness
and relevance of the national measures.
(18) The national policy frameworks should include both existing and planned national
regulatory and non-regulatory measures impacting the competitiveness of
intermodal transport used by a Member State, such as regulatory exemptions or
preferential treatments; charges, taxes, fees and levies, including infrastructure,
9
Handbook on the external costs of transport. European Commission. Version 2019 – 1.1, Publications
Office of the European Union, ISBN 978-92-76-18184-2
EN 18 EN
external-cost and congestion charges as well as those applying to unimodal road
freight transport; and freight transport support schemes applying to individual modes
or to intermodal transport, including those applying to unimodal road freight
transport or specific parts of it. Support measures should apply equally to all
operations meeting the conditions for being considered combined transport
operations. Where necessary, Member States should cooperate with other
neighbouring Member States, by means of consultation or joint policy frameworks.
The coordination of those national policy frameworks and their coherence at the
Union level should be supported by market analysis and reporting by the
Commission.
(19) In order for medium-distance intermodal operations to become cost-competitive with
unimodal road operations, and to motivate shippers to shift their operations to
intermodal transport, the national policy frameworks should contribute to achieving a
general cumulative reduction of at least 10% of total door-to-door costs of
intermodal transport operations on the medium term. Measures to achieve such
reduction can include legal, economic, fiscal, or administrative adjustments and
arrangements. Member States may use the revenues generated according to Directive
1999/62/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council10 to benefit the
intermodal transport operations covered by this Directive. Subject to the rules
applicable to specific programmes, the support can be also funded from existing
Union financial instruments.
(20) Furthermore, to enable the use of intermodal transport, it is important to have
dedicated support for investments allowing a necessary upgrade of intermodal
technologies. That support can address technological needs in terminals or in any of
the modes involved in intermodal transport.
(21) Where there are no connections other than road between certain terminals or in their
vicinity, “start-up” support to open new intermodal connections could be necessary
as demand for services at start-up phase may not be sufficient to ensure profitability
of such services.
(22) Member States can introduce State aid measures to achieve the goals of the European
Green Deal and the Climate Law, provided those measures are compatible with the
internal market.
(23) Support measures introduced in national policy frameworks could constitute State
aid. When a Member State establishes measures in its national policy framework, it
should assess if any of those measures constitutes State aid, it is without prejudice to
the application of Articles 107 and 108 TFEU. Where a measure constitutes State
aid, the procedural and substantive State aid rules will apply. It is understood that the
compatibility assessment of State aid measures falls within the exclusive competence
of the Commission pursuant to Article 108 TFEU.
(24) To ensure that practical information about available support measures implemented
by Member States is easily accessible publicly and free of charge to all operators in
the Union, it should be made accessible on a dedicated webpage in a central location
allowing the undertakings organising international operations to find it easily.
10
Directive 1999/62/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 1999 on the charging of
vehicles for the use of road infrastructures (OJ L 187, 20.7.1999, p. 42, ELI:
http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/1999/62/oj).
EN 19 EN
(25) It is important to have an overview of market developments and the impact of the
support measures on the uptake of intermodal transport. Such market overview
should ensure comparability across the Union. The Commission should therefore
continue reporting the market developments with assistance from the Member States.
Such a report should establish first the baseline for cost-competitiveness of
intermodal transport with road transport, and then be conducted every 5 years to
allow sufficient time for any support measures to produce effects.
(26) Dedicated regulatory provisions at Union level that address specific situations in
intermodal transport can support the uptake and efficiency of intermodal transport.
To ensure efficient terminal and non-road capacity use, it is important that the
operation of terminals and non-road transport is not hindered by temporal driving
limitations on road legs.
(27) To ensure that information about services and facilities available in any intermodal
transhipment terminal is easily accessible to all operators and transport organisers in
the Union, that information should be published free of charge by terminal operators
on their webpage. To provide a framework for identifying a service level of intermodal
transhipment terminals in the Union, a detailed list of such information should be
established in an implementing act.
(28) Comparability of service levels in different terminals in the Union should be ensured
by establishing a categorisation for intermodal transhipment terminals. Such
categorisation should avoid excessive complexity and burdens and should therefore
be based on already published information.
(29) A dedicated support for intermodal transport is only necessary until the market price
adequately represents the total cost of various transport operations to society.
Therefore, a review should be carried out after 10 years to assess whether such
support is still relevant and if so, how it may need to be adjusted.
(30) In order to allow implementation this Directive, eFTI platforms should provide
functionalities to calculate external costs savings and generate aggregated data.
(31) In order to take into account the technical nature of certain requirements, the power
to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of supplementing
this Directive with the list of further data needed for calculating the external costs
saving of an intermodal transport operation, necessary for demonstrating the
compliance with this Directive and rules for making the annual aggregated data on
combined transport operations available for market analysis. It is of particular
importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its
preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted
in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13
April 2016 on Better Law-Making11. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the
preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all
documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts
systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with
the preparation of delegated acts.
(32) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Directive and in
particular of the detailed rules for the calculation of external costs, the list of
predefined alternative intermodal operation routes for island and mainland
11
OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.
EN 20 EN
connections and the information to be provided for the services available in terminals
and on terminal categorisation, implementing powers should be conferred on the
Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation
(EU) No 182 /2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council12.
(33) The objective of this Directive is to further promote the shift of freight transport from
road to more environmentally friendly modes of transport, with a view to reduce the
external costs of the Union transport system. Given that intermodal transport is
primarily international in nature and infrastructure is interlinked, that objective
cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather be better
achieved at Union level. Therefore, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance
with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European
Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality as set out in that Article,
this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve those objectives.
(34) In order to allow for the continuation of seamless cross-border transport operations in
the Union, the application of national laws, regulations and administrative provisions
necessary to transpose this Directive should be deferred until eFTI platforms are
available. That deferred application should be without prejudice to the obligations of
the Member States relating to the time limit for the transposition into national law.
(35) In accordance with the Joint Political Declaration of 28 September 2011 of Member
States and the Commission on explanatory documents13, Member States have
undertaken to accompany, in justified cases, the notification of their transposition
measures with one or more documents explaining the relationship between the
components of a directive and the corresponding parts of national transposition
instruments. With regard to this Directive, the legislator considers the transmission of
such documents to be justified.
(36) Directive 92/106/EC and Regulation (EU) 2020/1056 should therefore be amended
accordingly,
HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
Amendments to Directive 92/106/EEC
Directive 92/106/EEC is amended as follows:
(1) the title is replaced by the following:
“Council Directive 92/106/EEC of 7 December 1992 on the establishment of a
support framework for intermodal transport of goods”;
(2) Article 1 is deleted;
(3) the following Articles 1a, 1b and 1c are inserted:
12
Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011
laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of
the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 1313, ELI:
http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2011/182/oj).
13
OJ C 369, 17.12.2011, p. 14.
EN 21 EN
‘Article 1a
This Directive establishes a support framework for intermodal transport operations
carried out fully or in part in the territory of the Union. It also lays down rules on
transparency requirements for intermodal transhipment terminals.
Article 1b
For the purposes of this Directive, the following definitions apply:
(1) “intermodal transport operation” means the carriage of a single intermodal
loading unit between its loading point and unloading point over two or more
transport legs, where at least one leg takes place by rail, inland waterways or
short sea shipping and the initial or final leg, or both, take place by road,
without handling of the goods during transhipment between the different
transport legs, whether or not covered by a single multimodal transport contract
or consecutive mode specific transport contracts;
(2) “combined transport operation” means an intermodal transport operation that
complies with the conditions set out in Article 1c(2) within the territory of the
Union;
(3) “intermodal loading unit” means a container, swap body or semi-trailer or road
vehicle or vehicle combination used in intermodal transport;
(4) “loading point” means the location at which the goods are loaded into an
intermodal loading unit;
(5) “unloading point” means the location at which the goods are offloaded from an
intermodal loading unit;
(6) “external costs” means costs generated by transport users and not borne by
them but by the society as a whole, notably related to greenhouse gas
emissions, air pollution, injuries and fatalities, noise and congestion;
(7) “alternative unimodal road transport operation” means a virtually planned
commercially viable unimodal transport operation of the intermodal loading
unit where all transport takes place on the road between the same starting point
and end point as those of the actual combined transport operation;
(8) “alternative maritime intermodal operation” means a virtually planned
commercially viable intermodal transport operation that uses one of the
maritime legs in the list established in accordance with Article 1.c(7) for
carrying the intermodal loading unit between the same starting point and end
point as those of the combined transport operation concerned;
(9) “intermodal transhipment terminal” means an intermodal freight terminal
having a structure equipped for the transhipment of intermodal loading units
between at least two transport modes or between two different vehicles or
vessels, such as terminals in inland or maritime ports, along inland waterways,
in airports as well as rail-road terminals;
(10) “starting point of the transport leg” means the location where the intermodal
loading unit starts the combined transport operation on the given mode of
transport;
EN 22 EN
(11) “end point of the transport leg” means the location where the intermodal
loading unit ends the combined transport operation on the given mode of
transport;
(12) “starting point of the combined transport operation” means the location where
the intermodal loading unit is loaded onto the vehicle or vessel carrying out the
first transport leg of the combined transport operation in the Union and where
the intermodal transport operation starts outside the territory of the Union, the
entry point of the intermodal loading unit into the territory of the Union;
(13) “end point of the combined transport operation” means the location where the
intermodal loading unit is unloaded from the vehicle or vessel carrying out the
last transport leg of the combined transport operation in the Union and where
the intermodal operation ends outside the territory of the Union, the exit point
of the intermodal loading unit from the territory of the Union.
(14) “Support measures” means measures and actions of economic, regulatory, administrative or any
other nature aiming at promoting the uptake of intermodal transport.
Article 1c
1. All combined transport operations shall benefit from the support measures referred to
in Articles 2, 3a, 4, 6, 8, 9 and 9a, as applicable.
2. A combined transport operation shall meet the following conditions:
(a) except for operations referred to in point (b), the operation produces at
least 40% less external costs than the alternative unimodal road transport
operation;
(b) in the case of connections between an island and the mainland without a
road alternative, the operation produces at least 40% less external costs
than the alternative maritime intermodal operation;
(c) the intermodal loading unit in unaccompanied transport has a unique
reference in accordance with the identification and marking regime
established pursuant to the up-to-date versions of international standards
ISO6346 or EN13044.
3. The road transport of an empty container used for a given operation from or to a
container depot before or after the loading or unloading point, where such transport
is subject to the same transport contract, shall be considered an integral part of the
combined transport operation. Any other movement of road vehicles before or after
loading or unloading point shall not be considered part of the combined transport
operation.
4. The calculation of external costs referred to in paragraph 2 shall take into account all
parts of the operation, including terminal operations, which take place in the Union,
including the transport of the empty container referred to in paragraph 3.
5. Support measures referred to in Articles 2, 3a, 4, 6, 8, 9 and 9a shall be applied in a
non-discriminatory manner to all combined transport operations that are fully or in
part carried out in the territory of the Union irrespective of the origin of the
undertaking organising the operation or carrying out all or part of the operation.
6. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts establishing detailed rules for the
calculation of external costs referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article. Those
EN 23 EN
implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure
referred to in Article 9d(2).
7. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts establishing the list of the predefined
maritime leg of the alternative maritime intermodal operations referred to in
paragraph 2, point (b), of this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in
accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 9d(2).’;
(4) Articles 2 and 3 are replaced by the following:
‘Article 2
No quota systems and systems of authorisations shall apply to the intermodal
transport operations.
Article 3
1. In order to benefit from the support framework established by this Directive, the
undertaking which organises the combined transport operation, shall record and
make available the transport information in accordance with Regulation
(EU) 2020/1056 of the European Parliament and of the Council* on an electronic
freight transport information platform (‘eFTI platform’).
2. The transport information referred to in paragraph 1 shall be recorded before the start
of the combined transport operation concerned and shall cover all parts of such an
operation. Such transport information shall include the following information:
(a) the name, address, and contact details of the undertaking which organises
the combined transport operation;
(b) the name, address and contact details of the undertaking that receives the
intermodal loading unit at end point of the combined transport operation;
(c) the name, address and contact details of the intermodal transhipment
terminal or terminals for that combined transport operation;
(d) the type of the intermodal loading unit transported and its reference in
accordance with Article 1c(2), point (c);
(e) the location of the pickup or delivery of the empty container as indicated
in the transport contract referred to in Article 1c(3), where relevant;
(f) for each transport leg, the locations of the starting and end points of each
transport leg of the combined transport operation in the Union, the
respective expected start date and end date, and the mode of transport
used for each leg;
(g) additional transport information required for calculating the external
costs of a combined transport operation as specified in the implementing
act referred to in Article 1c(6).
3. Transport information recorded pursuant to paragraph 2 shall be used, through
dedicated functionalities of the eFTI platforms, to:
(a) calculate the external cost savings referred to in Article 1c(2), point
(a);
(b) generate annual aggregated data on combined transport operations referred to
in Article 5(4) points (a), b and (c).
EN 24 EN
The calculation referred to in the first subparagraph, point (a), of this
paragraph, shall be carried out in accordance with the rules established in the
implementing act referred to in Article 1c(6).
The aggregation referred to in the first subparagraph, point (b), of this
paragraph, shall be carried out in accordance with the rules established in the
delegated act referred to in paragraph 7.
4. Proof of compliance with the conditions set out in Article 1c(2) shall consist of the
transport information referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and the results of the
calculation of the external costs savings. Such proof of compliance shall be
accessible to competent authorities as well as to the parties involved in that combined
transport operation on the same eFTI platform where the transport information and
calculation results were recorded. For the purpose of compliance checks with this
Directive, no additional information shall be requested.
5. By 28 February of each year, the eFTI service providers or the undertakings that own
or manage eFTI platforms for their own activities shall make available to the
Commission the aggregated data referred to in paragraph 3, first subparagraph, point
(b), of this Article, for the purposes of meeting the Commission’s reporting
obligations pursuant to Article 5(4) points (a), (b) and (c).
6. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 9c
to supplement this Directive by establishing further details for transport information
referred to in paragraph 2, points (a) to (f), of this Article, and the list of additional
transport information required referred to in paragraph 2, point (g) of this Article.
7. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 9c
to supplement this Directive by establishing a list of the annual aggregated data
referred to in paragraph 3, first subparagraph, point (b), of this Article, detailed rules
for generating that aggregated data and conditions for making that data available to
the Commission.
8. In the case of roadside checks, a discrepancy between the combined transport
operation and the provided information, in particular as regards the information
referred to in paragraph 2, points (c) and (f), shall be permitted where it is duly
justified and caused by exceptional and unforeseen circumstances outside the control
of the carrier. To provide the required proof, the driver shall be allowed to contact
the head office, the transport manager, the consignor or another undertaking who
organises the combined transport operation concerned, or any other person or entity
capable of providing additional justification regarding this discrepancy.
_________
* Regulation (EU) 1056/2020 of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 15 July 2020 on electronic freight transport information (OJ L 249,
31.7.2020, p. 33, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/1056/oj).’;
(5) the following Article 3a is inserted:
‘Article 3a
1. By [PO, please insert the date: 24 months after entry into force of this
Directive], each Member State shall adopt a national policy framework for
facilitating the uptake of intermodal transport and, in particular, combined
transport operations. Such framework shall contain at least the following
elements:
EN 25 EN
(a) an overview of existing relevant regulatory and non-regulatory measures
impacting the competitiveness of transport operations of different modes,
including those falling within the scope of Articles 4, 6 and 9a, as well as
an assessment of their impact on intermodal transport operations;
(b) a list of measures necessary to reduce the competitiveness gap of
intermodal transport operations compared to unimodal road transport
operations, which is established on the basis of the overview and the
assessment referred to in point (a); an indicative list of suitable measures
is set out in the Annex.
2. The measures referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall aim to achieve the
following objectives when compared to the baseline assessment included in the
report referred to in Article 5(1):
(a) an overall reduction of at least 10% of the total costs of combined
transport operations in their territory borne by the undertakings
organising combined transport operations by [PO, please insert the date:
90 months, i.e. 7 years and 6 months after entry into force of this
Directive];
(b) an increased upgrade or uptake of technologies improving the efficiency
of intermodal transport operations; and
(c) where relevant, the establishment of new rail, inland waterway or short
sea shipping connections between previously not connected intermodal
transhipment terminals.
3. The introduction of the measures referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article in a
national policy framework shall not be an indication of their compatibility with
Union law or otherwise. Where the measures referred to in paragraph 1 of this
Article constitute State aid, they shall comply with the applicable procedural
and substantive State aid rules, including those on notification, publication and
transmission of information to the Commission.
4. Member States shall publish their national policy frameworks on the internet
and notify them to the Commission without delay and no later than 1 month
after their adoption together with a link to such publication and any underlying
assessments or studies carried out, including on the contribution of those
measures for reaching the objectives set out in paragraph 2 of this Article. as
regards measures that constitute State aid which are not covered by a block
exemption regulation, the publication and notification obligation provided for
the national policy frameworks shall be in addition to the prior notification
obligation and standstill obligation under State aid rules set out in Article
108(3) TFEU.
5. Member States shall implement the measures referred to in paragraph 1. They
shall publish the practical information such as conditions, application
procedure and any other information relevant for the potential beneficiaries of
those measures after the adoption, but prior to application of such measures in
an easily accessible way and free of charge on the internet. They shall, at the
same time, provide the Commission with a link to that information.
6. Where necessary, Member States shall cooperate to maximise the effect of the
measures referred to paragraph 1 on cross-border intermodal transport
operations.
EN 26 EN
7. Member States shall assess the uptake and impact of the measures in their
national policy frameworks referred to in paragraph 1, including their
effectiveness and relevance in terms of reducing external costs and in terms of
achieving the objectives set out in paragraph 2, at least every 5 years. On the
basis on that assessment, they shall adapt their national policy frameworks as
necessary to achieve those objectives. Member States shall communicate the
results of their assessments and updated policy frameworks to the Commission
without delay, to assist it in preparing the reports referred to in Article 5(2),
and shall publish those updated national policy frameworks on the internet.
8. The Commission shall, without delay, publish the links to the national
information provided by the Member States referred to in paragraphs 4, 5 and 7
on its webpage dedicated to support measures under this Directive.
(6) Article 5 is replaced by the following:
‘Article 5
1. By [PO, please insert the date: 18 months after entry into force of this Directive], the
Commission shall prepare a report to the European Parliament and the Council,
assessing the competitiveness of intermodal transport in comparison to unimodal
road transport in Member States, including the analysis of the total door-to-door
costs of the main categories of intermodal transport operations, including combined
transport operations.
2. By [PO, please insert the date: 90 months, i.e. 7 years and 6 months, after adoption
of this Directive] and every 5 years thereafter, the Commission shall draw up a report
to the European Parliament and the Council on the economic development of
intermodal transport, including combined transport operations, in the Union.
3. When drawing up the reports referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the Commission shall
be assisted by the Member States to collect the information necessary for that
purpose.
4. The reports referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall present and analyse the
developments related to intermodal transport operations, including combined
transport operations. In particular, they shall cover:
(a) the volume of intermodal operations in the Union per modal
combination, per market segment, per transhipment technology and
per type of intermodal loading units used and per geographical
coverage (national and intra-Union);
(b) the main transport corridors where intermodal transport is used and
the main areas in the Union where it is not used, and the reasons for
both;
(c) number, location density and type of transhipment terminals
providing services for combined transport operations
(d) the main barriers identified by users for increasing the uptake of
intermodal transport operations;
(e) developments in available capacity of intermodal transhipment
terminals and areas where additional developments are needed;
EN 27 EN
(f) availability, ease of access and completeness of information on
intermodal transhipment terminals;
(g) an analysis of the effectiveness and efficiency of support provided
by Member States in the context of their national policy
frameworks as provided for in Article 3a(1) and (2);
(h) the competitiveness of intermodal transport compared to unimodal
road transport;
(i) the environmental benefits of intermodal transport, notably in the
light of the evolution of the environmental, energy efficiency and
greenhouse gas emissions performance of different modes of
transport.
5. The reports referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall, where appropriate, propose
solutions for the subsequent improvement of information availability and the
measures to improve the situation in the intermodal transport sector.
6. On the basis on the reports paragraphs 1 and 2, the Commission shall evaluate, at
least every 10 years, the effectiveness and relevance of the provisions of this
Directive in facilitating combined transport operations.’;
(7) In Article 6, paragraphs 1 and 2 are replaced by the following:
‘1. Member States may take the necessary measures, in accordance with Union
law, to ensure that the taxes listed in paragraph 3 which are applicable to road
vehicles (lorries, tractors, trailers or semi-trailers) when routed in combined transport
are reduced or reimbursed either by a standard amount, or in proportion to the
journeys that such vehicles undertake by rail in the Member State concerned. Such
reductions or reimbursements shall be granted by the Member State in which the
vehicles are registered. Where such measures constitute State aid, they shall comply
with the relevant procedural and substantive State aid rules.
2. Vehicles used exclusively for initial or final road legs of combined transport,
or both, may be exempted, where they are taxed separately, from the taxes listed in
paragraph 3, in accordance with Union law. In particular, where such measures
constitute State aid, they shall comply with the relevant procedural and substantive
State aid rules. ’
(8) Article 7 is deleted;
(9) Article 9 is replaced by the following:
‘Article 9
Where a semi-trailer or a trailer used in a combined transport operation is owned by
the dispatching or the receiving undertaking and is transported on a road leg using a
tractor owned, bought on deferred terms or hired pursuant to Directive 2006/1/EC of
the European Parliament and of the Council* by the other undertaking concerned, that
road leg shall be considered to fulfil the conditions of Article 1(5), point (d) of
Regulation (EU) 1072/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council**.
* Directive 2006/1/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of
18 January 2006 on the use of vehicles hired without drivers for the carriage of
goods by road (OJ L 33, 4.2.2006, p. 82, ELI:
http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2006/1/oj).
EN 28 EN
** Regulation (EC) No 1072/2009 of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 21 October 2009 on common rules for access to the international
road haulage market (OJ L 300, 14.11.2009, p. 72, ELI:
http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2009/1072/oj).’;
(10) the following Articles 9a, 9b, 9c and 9d are inserted:
‘Article 9a
Vehicles carrying out road legs of combined transport operations shall be exempted
from weekend, night and holiday driving bans applying to heavy goods vehicles
only. That exemption shall not apply in the event of general driving bans applicable
to all vehicles used for private purposes.
Article 9b
1. All operators of intermodal transhipment terminals shall make available on their
webpage, publicly and free of charge, information about available services and
facilities in a terminal.
2. The Commission shall lay down, by means of implementing acts, a detailed list of
the information referred to in paragraph 1. Those implementing acts shall be adopted
in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 9d(2).
3. To provide a framework for identifying a service level of intermodal transhipment
terminals in the Union, the Commission may adopt implementing acts laying down
criteria for intermodal transhipment terminal categories. Such criteria shall be
established by defining service levels for available services and facilities from the list
established in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article. Those implementing acts
shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in
Article 9d(2).
4. Where a framework for service level of intermodal transhipment terminals in the
Union is established, intermodal transhipment terminal operators shall publish the
applicable service levels pursuant to paragraph 1.
Article 9c
1. The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the
conditions laid down in this Article.
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 3(6) and 3(7) shall be
conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [PO, please
insert the date of entry into force of this Directive].
3. The delegation of powers referred to in Article 3(6) and 3(7) may be revoked at any
time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an
end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the
day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European
Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any
delegated acts already in force.
4. Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by
each Member State in line with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional
Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making.
EN 29 EN
5. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to
the European Parliament and to the Council.
6. Delegated acts adopted pursuant to Article 3(6) and 3(7) shall enter into force only if
no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or by the Council
within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament
and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and
the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That
period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament
or of the Council.
Article 9d
1. The Commission shall be assisted by a committee. That committee shall be a
committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011*.
2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5 of Regulation
(EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.
_________
* Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles
concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s
exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13, ELI:
http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2011/182/oj).
(11) the text set out in the Annex to this Directive is added as the Annex.
Article 2
Amendments to Regulation (EU) 2020/1056
Regulation (EU) 2020/1056 is amended as follows:
In Article 9(1), the following point (l) is inserted:
’(l) the calculation of external costs savings, referred to in Article 3(3), first subparagraph,
point (a) of Directive 92/106/EEC, is made in accordance with the methodology established in
the implementing act referred to in Article 1c(6) of that Directive.
(m) the generation of aggregated data, referred to in Article 3(3) ), first subparagraph, point
(b) of Directive 92/106/EEC, is made in accordance with the rules established in the delegated
act referred to in Article 3(7) of that Directive.’.
Article 3
Transposition
1. Member States shall adopt and publish, by [PO, please insert the date: 24 months
after entry into force of this Directive] at the latest, the laws, regulations and
EN 30 EN
administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall
forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.
They shall apply those provisions from [PO, please insert the date: 30 months after
entry into force of this Directive].
When Member States adopt those provisions, they shall contain a reference to this
Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official
publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made.
2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main provisions
of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive.
Article 4
Entry into force
This Directive shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in
the Official Journal of the European Union.
Article 5
Addressees
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels,
For the European Parliament For the Council
The President The President
EN 31 EN
LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT
Contents
1. FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE ................................................. 3
1.1. Title of the proposal/initiative ...................................................................................... 3
1.2. Policy area(s) concerned .............................................................................................. 3
1.3. The proposal/initiative relates to: ................................................................................. 3
1.4. Objective(s) .................................................................................................................. 3
1.4.1. General objective(s) ..................................................................................................... 3
1.4.2. Specific objective(s) ..................................................................................................... 3
1.4.3. Expected result(s) and impact ...................................................................................... 3
1.4.4. Indicators of performance ............................................................................................ 3
1.5. Grounds for the proposal/initiative .............................................................................. 4
1.5.1. Requirement(s) to be met in the short or long term including a detailed timeline for
roll-out of the implementation of the initiative ............................................................ 4
1.5.2. Added value of Union involvement (it may result from different factors, e.g.
coordination gains, legal certainty, greater effectiveness or complementarities). For
the purposes of this point 'added value of Union involvement' is the value resulting
from Union intervention which is additional to the value that would have been
otherwise created by Member States alone. ................................................................. 4
1.5.3. Lessons learned from similar experiences in the past .................................................. 5
1.5.4. Compatibility with the Multiannual Financial Framework and possible synergies
with other appropriate instruments............................................................................... 6
1.5.5. Assessment of the different available financing options, including scope for
redeployment ................................................................................................................ 6
1.6. Duration and financial impact of the proposal/initiative ............................................. 7
1.7. Management mode(s) planned ..................................................................................... 7
2. MANAGEMENT MEASURES................................................................................... 8
2.1. Monitoring and reporting rules .................................................................................... 8
2.2. Management and control system(s) ............................................................................. 8
2.2.1. Justification of the management mode(s), the funding implementation mechanism(s),
the payment modalities and the control strategy proposed .......................................... 8
2.2.2. Information concerning the risks identified and the internal control system(s) set up
to mitigate them............................................................................................................ 8
2.2.3. Estimation and justification of the cost-effectiveness of the controls (ratio of "control
costs ÷ value of the related funds managed"), and assessment of the expected levels
of risk of error (at payment & at closure) .................................................................... 8
2.3. Measures to prevent fraud and irregularities ................................................................ 9
EN 1 EN
3. ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE ............ 10
3.1. Heading(s) of the multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget line(s)
affected ....................................................................................................................... 10
3.2. Estimated financial impact of the proposal on appropriations ................................... 11
3.2.1. Summary of estimated impact on operational appropriations.................................... 11
3.2.2. Estimated output funded with operational appropriations ......................................... 14
3.2.3. Summary of estimated impact on administrative appropriations ............................... 15
3.2.4. Compatibility with the current multiannual financial framework.............................. 17
3.2.5. Third-party contributions ........................................................................................... 17
3.3. Estimated impact on revenue ..................................................................................... 18
EN 2 EN
1. FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
1.1. Title of the proposal/initiative
Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive
92/106/EEC of 7 December 1992 on the establishment of common rules for certain
types of combined transport of goods between Member States.
1.2. Policy area(s) concerned
Mobility and Transport
1.3. The proposal/initiative relates to:
a new action
a new action following a pilot project/preparatory action51
the extension of an existing action
a merger or redirection of one or more actions towards another/a new action
1.4. Objective(s)
1.4.1. General objective(s)
The generable objective of the Directive is to facilitate an increase of intermodal
transport in total intra-EU freight transport, to reduce external costs and energy
consumption of freight transport. The Directive will contribute to SDG 13 (Take
urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts), SDG 9 (Build resilient
infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialisation and foster innovation)
and SDG 11 (Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable).
1.4.2. Specific objective(s)
The specific objectives of the Directive are to:
- Provide support to a wider range of intermodal operations under effective
compliance conditions
- Ensure better support by improving reporting on intermodal transport
- Increase the competitiveness of intermodal transport to reduce external costs
- Improve transparency and simplify market entry
1.4.3. Expected result(s) and impact
Specify the effects which the proposal/initiative should have on the beneficiaries/groups targeted.
The proposal is expected to increase the competitiveness of intermodal transport vis-
à-vis unimodal road transport and thereby to promote its use, resulting in a reduction
of external costs.
1.4.4. Indicators of performance
The effectiveness of the proposed Directive with respect to the Specific Objective 1
will be determined based on the following indicator:
51
As referred to in Article 58(2)(a) or (b) of the Financial Regulation.
EN 3 EN
- the volume of intermodal transport operations in the EU, per modal combination,
per market segment, per transhipment technology and per type of loading units;
- the main corridors where intermodal transport is used and those where not and
reasons for that.
The effectiveness of the proposed Directive with respect to the Specific Objective 2
will be determined based on the following indicators:
- provision of a report in the intervals stipulated by the Directive on the economic
development of intermodal transport in the Union.
The effectiveness of the proposed Directive with respect to the Specific Objective 3
will be determined based on the following indicators:
- the competitiveness of intermodal transport compared to unimodal road transport
and the evolution of the support provided by Member States.
- changes to modal split and share of intermodal transport.
The effectiveness of the proposed Directive with respect to the Specific Objective 4
will be determined based on the following indicators:
- developments in transhipment terminal capacity;
- availability, ease of access and completeness of information on intermodal
terminals.
1.5. Grounds for the proposal/initiative
1.5.1. Requirement(s) to be met in the short or long term including a detailed timeline for
roll-out of the implementation of the initiative
The proposal will provide a support framework to increase the competitiveness of
intermodal transport vis-à-vis unimodal road transport in order to stimulate its uptake
and thereby reduce the external costs of freight transport. It includes:
- common and effective conditions for compliance and rules for the proof of
compliance;
- economic and regulatory measures to help increasing the competitiveness of
intermodal transport;
- requirements to ensure terminal transparency as regards facilities and services;
- rules for and contents of market reports and a review clause to reassess the
usefulness of the support framework after a given time.
All these provisions should be fully applicable 30 months after the entry into force of
this Directive.
This legislative financial statement specifically relates to a study to be conducted to
assess whether there is a need for developing a terminal categorisation/labelling
framework, subject to the outcome of the study on the need for the development of
such a framework, and to market studies as input for the reports to be established.
1.5.2. Added value of Union involvement (it may result from different factors, e.g.
coordination gains, legal certainty, greater effectiveness or complementarities). For
the purposes of this point 'added value of Union involvement' is the value resulting
EN 4 EN
from Union intervention, which is additional to the value that would have been
otherwise created by Member States alone.
Reasons for action at European level (ex-ante)
Providing harmonised rules for (a) effective compliance conditions and their proof
and (b) for types of support will help to create comparable treatment of operators
across the EU, simplify administrative procedures for the industry, Member States
and the Commission and improve the functioning of the internal market. Currently,
due to the shortcomings of the CTD, this level of harmonisation could not be
achieved.
Expected generated Union added value (ex-post)
The EU transport sector has a strong cross-border dimension and plays an important
role for the free flow of people and goods on the EU internal market. Efficient
transport services are key for the functioning of supply chains and the growth of the
EU economy. But transport, expected to further increase, still constitutes one of the
largest emitters of GHG emissions and creates considerable other external costs
related to congestion, accidents and noise.
This Directive is clearly conceived as an instrument to reduce the external costs of
transport through increasing the competitiveness of intermodal transport vis-à-vis
unimodal road transport and thereby promoting its uptake.
1.5.3. Lessons learned from similar experiences in the past
The EU has a long-standing history of supporting modal shift towards more
environmentally friendly transport modes and preferably using the different transport
modes in their best combination possible, in order to optimise the transport system
and network and to reduce external costs.
Since 1975, the EU has had an instrument in place to support eligible combined
transport operations as a sub-form of intermodal transport. In 1992, this instrument
was replaced by the current Combined Transport Directive (CTD).
To increase the effectiveness of the CTD, the Commission made a proposal in 1998
to amend the CTD, proposing an extension of eligibility to domestic road operations,
a road leg limit based on a 20% share in total operation, the exclusion of island
transport, and combined transport exemption from weekend driving bans. Due to the
fact that no agreement could be reached during the interinstitutional negotiations, the
Commission withdrew the proposal in 2001.
In 2016, the Commission conducted a REFIT evaluation, which concluded that the
CTD continued to be a relevant instrument for supporting combined transport, but
that there was a significant potential for further improving the effectiveness of the
CTD as some of the provisions of the CTD were outdated or unclear, providing
significant room for ambiguous interpretation of the Directive and therefore a non-
harmonised implementation.
Subsequently the Commission made a new proposal in 2017 to amend the CTD with
a focus on clarifying the definition in light of existing case law and complaints
without changing the approach based on fixed distances for different parts of the
operation. It also proposed to promote investments into terminal infrastructure and
considerably improve the fiscal and economic support tools.
EN 5 EN
While all Member States welcomed the amendment and supported the objective to
improve the competitiveness of combined transport, any proposals to extend the
eligibility, and in particular to extend the scope to operations in Member States, were
met rather with resistance. Similarly, many Member States were against an
obligation to facilitate the increase of terminal capacity, while they could agree on an
obligation to promote terminal investments. As regards an increased support to
combined transport operations Member States views diverged, meaning Member
States did not support a harmonised mandatory support, but an obligation to provide
support when the choice of support tool was left to the Member States. The current
proposal has been prepared keeping those Member States’ concerns in mind.
The European Parliament broadly supported the proposal, proposed further ambition
as regards the economic support, but also requested some exemptions. Several
amendments introduced by the co-legislators modified the proposal in a manner
which, if adopted, would have significantly reduced the ambition and effectiveness
of the Commission proposal. Therefore, the Commission withdrew its proposal.
1.5.4. Compatibility with the Multiannual Financial Framework and possible synergies
with other appropriate instruments
The proposed Directive is a key deliverable of the Communication from the
Commission on a Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy (SSMS), which sets out
the EU vision for the transport system of the future. The strategy announced that the
Commission is planning to conduct a review of the regulatory framework for
intermodal transport, including the Combined Transport Directive (under Flagship 4
– Greening Freight Transport).
The Directive will create synergies with other transport policies and pieces of the EU
regulatory framework which either target the environmental performance of
individual modes and the transport system or the internalisation of external costs. As
regards the environmental performance, those pieces include notably Regulation
(EU) 2019/1242, COM(2021) 557 and COM(2021) 559. Measures targeting the
internalisation of external costs include carbon pricing, infrastructure charges, energy
and vehicle taxes.
The proposal is compatible with the Multiannual Financial Framework. The initiative
requires funding to finance at least three market studies necessary to comply with the
reporting obligations established under the Directive and a study to assess whether
there is a need to develop a terminal categorisation/labelling framework as stipulated
by the Directive.
1.5.5. Assessment of the different available financing options, including scope for
redeployment
The budgetary implications of this proposal are dealt with under this legislative
financial statement. In terms of expenditures, the specific budgetary impact of this
initiative is limited to appropriations for studies as mentioned under 1.5.4. The
execution of these activities does not require an increase of human resources of the
European Commission. Within the current MFF, the needs can be met by
redeployment within the transport prerogative budget line for EUR 0.4 million. No
additional cost is foreseen within the current MFF. In the post-2027 MFF, the cost
for the studies is proposed to be financed through the subsequent MFF, without pre-
empting the agreement on the MFF and programmes.
EN 6 EN
1.6. Duration and financial impact of the proposal/initiative
limited duration
in effect from [DD/MM]YYYY to [DD/MM]YYYY
Financial impact from YYYY to YYYY for commitment appropriations and from
YYYY to YYYY for payment appropriations.
unlimited duration
Implementation with a start-up period from 2027-2037
followed by full-scale operation.
1.7. Method(s) of budget implementation planned
Direct management by the Commission
by its departments, including by its staff in the Union delegations;
by the executive agencies
Shared management with the Member States
Indirect management by entrusting budget implementation tasks to:
third countries or the bodies they have designated;
international organisations and their agencies (to be specified);
the EIB and the European Investment Fund;
bodies referred to in Articles 70 and 71 of the Financial Regulation;
public law bodies;
bodies governed by private law with a public service mission to the extent that
they are provided with adequate financial guarantees;
bodies governed by the private law of a Member State that are entrusted with the
implementation of a public-private partnership and that are provided with
adequate financial guarantees;
bodies or persons entrusted with the implementation of specific actions in the
CFSP pursuant to Title V of the TEU, and identified in the relevant basic act.
If more than one management mode is indicated, please provide details in the ‘Comments’ section.
Comments
N/A
EN 7 EN
2. MANAGEMENT MEASURES
2.1. Monitoring and reporting rules
Specify frequency and conditions.
The Commission will be overall accountable for implementing the proposed
Directive as well as for reporting to the European Parliament and the Council (a) on
the competitiveness of intermodal transport compared to unimodal road transport
prior to the application of the Directive and afterwards (b) every five years on the
economic development of intermodal transport in the Union. After ten years the
Commission will assess whether the support scheme is still needed.
The tasks directly implemented by DG MOVE will follow the annual cycle of
planning and monitoring, as implemented in the Commission and the executive
agencies, including reporting the results through the Annual Activity Report of DG
MOVE.
2.2. Management and control system(s)
2.2.1. Justification of the management mode(s), the funding implementation mechanism(s),
the payment modalities and the control strategy proposed
The Commission and more specifically, DG MOVE, will manage the
implementation of the proposed Directive. Funding will be provided through
procurement agreements. The expenditure will be implemented through directly
managed procurements, in full application of the provisions of the Financial
Regulation. The control strategy for procurements and grants in DG MOVE includes
specific ex-ante legal, operational and financial controls on the procedures as well as
on the signature of contracts and agreements. In addition, expenditure made to
procure goods and services is subject to ex-ante and, when necessary, ex-post
financial controls.
2.2.2. Information concerning the risks identified and the internal control system(s) set up
to mitigate them
The risk of error at payment and at closure is expected to remain under 2%.
The potential risks related to the procurement of services of this value are considered
low.
These risks are linked to use of procurement procedures: delays, availability of data,
timely information to the market, etc. These risks would be covered by the existing
mechanisms of the Financial Regulation and mitigated by the set of internal controls
deployed by DG MOVE (systematic ex-ante legal and financial controls before
publication of calls for proposals and before the award of the contract, monitoring
and assessment of deliverables, ex-post audits of expenditure as defined in the yearly
Audit work plans).
2.2.3. Estimation and justification of the cost-effectiveness of the controls (ratio of "control
costs ÷ value of the related funds managed"), and assessment of the expected levels
of risk of error (at payment & at closure)
Considering the limited scope and amount of EU funding to be granted, and since
beneficiaries of EU funds are regarded as low-risk, the tasks resulting from the
EN 8 EN
proposed Directive are not expected to generate additional control costs beyond the
existing cost of controls of DG MOVE.
2.3. Measures to prevent fraud and irregularities
Specify existing or envisaged prevention and protection measures, e.g. from the Anti-Fraud Strategy.
The regular Commission prevention and protection measures would apply,
specifically:
- Payments for any services are checked by the Commission staff prior to payment,
taking into account any contractual obligations, economic principles and good
financial or management practice. Anti-fraud provisions (supervision, reporting
requirements, etc.) will be included in all contracts concluded between the
Commission and recipients of any payments.
- To combat fraud, corruption and other unlawful activities, the provisions of
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 concerning investigations conducted by the
European Anti-fraud Office (OLAF) and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office
(EPPO) established by Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 shall apply without
restriction.
The Commission further maintains a robust antifraud strategy, CAFS, currently
under revision.
In addition, DG MOVE adopted a revised Anti-fraud Strategy (AFS) in 2020. The
MOVE AFS is based on the Commission Anti-fraud Strategy and anticipates a
specific risk assessment carried out internally to identify the areas most vulnerable to
fraud, on the controls already in place, and the actions necessary to improve DG
MOVE’s capacity to prevent, detect and correct fraud.
The contractual provisions applicable to public procurement ensure that audits and
on-the-spot checks can be carried out by the Commission services, including OLAF,
using the standard provisions recommended by OLAF.
EN 9 EN
3. ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
3.1. Heading(s) of the multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget
line(s) affected
Existing budget lines
In order of multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines.
Type of
Budget line expenditur Contribution
e
Heading of from
multiannua candidate
l financial from from
countries
framework Number Diff./Non- EFTA
and other other assigned
52 countries third revenue
diff. potential
53 countries
candidates
54
02.20.04.01
1 Diff. NO NO NO NO
52
Diff. = Differentiated appropriations / Non-diff. = Non-differentiated appropriations.
53
EFTA: European Free Trade Association.
54
Candidate countries and, where applicable, potential candidates from the Western Balkans.
EN 10 EN
3.2. Estimated financial impact of the proposal on appropriations
3.2.1. Summary of estimated impact on operational appropriations
The proposal/initiative does not require the use of operational appropriations
The proposal/initiative requires the use of operational appropriations, as explained below:
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Heading of multiannual financial
1 Single Market, Innovation and Digital
framework
Year
DG: MOVE TOTAL55
2027
Operational appropriations
Commitments (1a) 0,4 0,4
Budget line 02.20.04.01
Payments (2a) 0,4 0,4
Commitments 0,4 0,4
TOTAL appropriations
for DG MOVE Payments 0,4 0,4
Commitments (4) 0,4 0,4
TOTAL operational appropriations
Payments (5) 0,4 0,4
TOTAL appropriations Commitments 0,4 0,4
under HEADING 1
of the multiannual financial framework Payments 0,4 0,4
55
Beyond 2027, the cost of the proposal is estimated at EUR 0.6 million in 2032, EUR 0.7 million in 2037 and a final additional EUR 0.3 million later bringing the total
costs for the EU budget to EUR 2 million, which is proposed to be financed through the subsequent MFFs, without pre-empting the agreement on the MFFs and
programmes.
EN 11 EN
TOTAL operational appropriations (all Commitments (4) 0,4 0,4
operational headings) Payments (5) 0,4 0,4
TOTAL appropriations of an administrative nature financed
from the envelope for specific programmes (all operational
headings) (6)
TOTAL appropriations Commitments =4+ 6 0,4 0,4
under HEADINGS 1 to 6
of the multiannual financial framework Payments =5+ 6 0,4 0,4
(Reference amount)
EN 12 EN
Heading of multiannual financial
7 ‘Administrative expenditure’
framework
This section should be filled in using the 'budget data of an administrative nature' to be firstly introduced in the Annex to the Legislative
Financial Statement (Annex 5 to the Commission decision on the internal rules for the implementation of the Commission section of the general
budget of the European Union), which is uploaded to DECIDE for interservice consultation purposes.
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Enter as many years as
Year Year Year Year
necessary to show the duration TOTAL
N N+1 N+2 N+3 of the impact (see point 1.6)
DG: <…….>
Human resources
Other administrative expenditure
TOTAL DG <…….> Appropriations
TOTAL appropriations
(Total commitments =
under HEADING 7 Total payments)
of the multiannual financial framework
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Year Year Year Year
TOTAL
2027 2032 2037 tbc
TOTAL appropriations Commitments 0,4 0,6 0,7 0,3 2,0
under HEADINGS 1 to 7
of the multiannual financial framework Payments 0,4 0,6 0,7 0,3 2,0
EN 13 EN
3.2.2. Estimated output funded with operational appropriations
Commitment appropriations in EUR million (to three decimal places)
Year Year Year Year Enter as many years as necessary to show the
TOTAL
N N+1 N+2 N+3 duration of the impact (see point 1.6)
Indicate
objectives and OUTPUTS
outputs
Type Avera
56 Total Total
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
ge Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost
No cost
cost
57
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 1 …
- Output
- Output
- Output
Subtotal for specific objective No 1
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 2 ...
- Output
Subtotal for specific objective No 2
TOTALS
56
Outputs are products and services to be supplied (e.g.: number of student exchanges financed, number of km of roads built, etc.).
57
As described in point 1.4.2. ‘Specific objective(s)…’
EN 14 EN
3.2.3. Summary of estimated impact on administrative appropriations
The proposal/initiative does not require the use of appropriations of an
administrative nature
The proposal/initiative requires the use of appropriations of an administrative
nature, as explained below:
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Year Year Year Year Enter as many years as necessary to show the
58 TOTAL
N N+1 N+2 N+3 duration of the impact (see point 1.6)
HEADING 7
of the multiannual
financial framework
Human resources
Other administrative
expenditure
Subtotal HEADING 7
of the multiannual
financial framework
59
Outside HEADING 7
of the multiannual
financial framework
Human resources
Other expenditure
of an administrative
nature
Subtotal
outside HEADING 7
of the multiannual
financial framework
TOTAL
The appropriations required for human resources and other expenditure of an administrative nature will be met by
appropriations from the DG that are already assigned to management of the action and/or have been redeployed within the
DG, together if necessary with any additional allocation which may be granted to the managing DG under the annual
allocation procedure and in the light of budgetary constraints.
58
Year N is the year in which implementation of the proposal/initiative starts. Please replace "N" by the
expected first year of implementation (for instance: 2021). The same for the following years.
59
Technical and/or administrative assistance and expenditure in support of the implementation of
EU programmes and/or actions (former ‘BA’ lines), indirect research, direct research.
EN 15 EN
3.2.3.1. Estimated requirements of human resources
The proposal/initiative does not require the use of human resources.
The proposal/initiative requires the use of human resources, as explained below:
Estimate to be expressed in full time equivalent units
Enter as many years as
Year Year Year Year
necessary to show the duration
2025 2026 2027 N+3
of the impact (see point 1.6)
Establishment plan posts (officials and temporary staff)
20 01 02 01 (Headquarters and Commission’s Representation
Offices)
20 01 02 03 (Delegations)
01 01 01 01 (Indirect research)
01 01 01 11 (Direct research)
Other budget lines (specify)
60
External staff (in Full Time Equivalent unit: FTE)
20 02 01 (AC, END, INT from the ‘global envelope’) 0 0 0 0
20 02 03 (AC, AL, END, INT and JPD in the delegations)
- at Headquarters
61
XX 01 xx yy zz
- in Delegations
01 01 01 02 (AC, END, INT - Indirect research)
01 01 01 12 (AC, END, INT - Direct research)
Other budget lines (specify)
TOTAL 0
XX is the policy area or budget title concerned.
The human resources required will be met by staff from the DG who are already assigned to management of the
action and/or have been redeployed within the DG, together if necessary with any additional allocation which
may be granted to the managing DG under the annual allocation procedure and in the light of budgetary
constraints.
Description of tasks to be carried out:
Officials and temporary staff
External staff
60
AC= Contract Staff; AL = Local Staff; END= Seconded National Expert; INT = agency staff;
JPD= Junior Professionals in Delegations.
61
Sub-ceiling for external staff covered by operational appropriations (former ‘BA’ lines).
EN 16 EN
3.2.4. Compatibility with the current multiannual financial framework
The proposal/initiative:
can be fully financed through redeployment within the relevant heading of the
Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF).
The initiative is financed by the transport policy support budget line (02.20.04.01), no reprogramming
is required.
requires use of the unallocated margin under the relevant heading of the MFF
and/or use of the special instruments as defined in the MFF Regulation.
Explain what is required, specifying the headings and budget lines concerned, the corresponding
amounts, and the instruments proposed to be used.
requires a revision of the MFF.
Explain what is required, specifying the headings and budget lines concerned and the corresponding
amounts.
3.2.5. Third-party contributions
The proposal/initiative:
does not provide for co-financing by third parties
provides for the co-financing by third parties estimated below:
Appropriations in EUR million (to three decimal places)
Year Enter as many years as necessary
Year Year Year
to show the duration of the Total
N62 N+1 N+2 N+3
impact (see point 1.6)
Specify the co-financing
body
TOTAL appropriations
co-financed
62
Year N is the year in which implementation of the proposal/initiative starts. Please replace "N" by the
expected first year of implementation (for instance: 2021). The same for the following years.
EN 17 EN
3.3. Estimated impact on revenue
The proposal/initiative has no financial impact on revenue.
The proposal/initiative has the following financial impact:
on own resources
on other revenue
please indicate, if the revenue is assigned to expenditure lines
EUR million (to three decimal places)
63
Impact of the proposal/initiative
Appropriation
s available for
Budget revenue line: Enter as many years as necessary to
the current Year Year Year Year
financial year show the duration of the impact (see
N N+1 N+2 N+3
point 1.6)
Article ………….
For assigned revenue, specify the budget expenditure line(s) affected.
Other remarks (e.g. method/formula used for calculating the impact on revenue or any other
information).
63
As regards traditional own resources (customs duties, sugar levies), the amounts indicated must be net
amounts, i.e. gross amounts after deduction of 20 % for collection costs.
EN 18 EN
EUROPEAN
COMMISSION
Brussels, 7.11.2023
COM(2023) 702 final
ANNEX
ANNEX
to the Proposal for a
DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
amending Council Directive 92/106/EEC as regards a support framework for intermodal
transport of goods and Regulation (EU) 2020/1056 of the European Parliament and the
Council as regards calculation of external costs savings and generation of aggregated data
{SEC(2023) 373 final} - {SWD(2023) 351 final} - {SWD(2023) 352 final}
EN EN
ANNEX
Indicative list of support measures referred to in Article 3a
Part I: Support measures to reduce the competitiveness gap of combined transport
operations compared to unimodal road transport operations
Measures to improve the competitiveness of combined transport operations contributing to the
objectives set out in Article 3a(2), point (a), can be implemented through regulatory and non-
regulatory adjustments and incentives in national administrative and economic instruments
impacting the competitiveness of combined transport operations. Such adjustments and
incentives must aim to make combined transport more attractive to the undertakings that
decide on the chosen modes, that is to say shippers or undertakings who organise the
combined transport operations.
Adjustments and incentives can include measures impacting:
(a) organisation of combined transport operations and parts thereof, including
attribution of infrastructure and terminal capacity and priority to intermodal
transport; improved management of disruptions during infrastructure
construction works, including cooperation between Member States on those
matters; simplification of national and local administrative procedures,
including those applicable in preparation phase of an operation as well as
during the operation;
(b) intermodal operation cost-competitiveness, including road charges and other
charges, levies, taxes or fees in relation to the use of transport and intermodal
infrastructure, and congestion charges;
(c) external-cost charges, defined in Article 2 of Directive 1999/62/EC of the
European Parliament and of the Council1 for zero- and low-emission heavy-
duty vehicles, defined in Article 3(11) and (12) of Regulation 2019/1242 of the
European Parliament and of the Council2 in intermodal transport,
(d) measures to facilitate the entry into intermodal market for small and medium-
sized enterprises, such as facilitation of rent or lease of intermodal loading
units, including through guarantees; facilitation of use of intermodal planning
platforms or freight consolidation platforms, including through training and
awareness campaigns;
(e) planning and lease conditions for the land suitable for intermodal transhipment
terminal development.
Part II: Support measures to increase the upgrade or uptake of technologies improving
the efficiency of intermodal transport operations
1
Directive 1999/62/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 1999 on the charging
of vehicles for the use of road infrastructures (OJ L 187, 20.7.1999, p. 42, ELI:
http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/1999/62/oj).
2
Regulation (EU) 2019/1242 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 setting
CO2 emission performance standards for new heavy-duty vehicles and amending Regulations (EC) No
595/2009 and (EU) 2018/956 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Directive
96/53/EC (OJ L 198, 25.7.2019, p. 202, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2019/1242/oj).
EN 1 EN
Measures to support the upgrade or uptake of technologies improving the efficiency of
intermodal transport operations set out in Article 3a(2), point (b), can be implemented for
example through facilitation or support to the following:
(a) identifying the semi-trailers used in combined transport in accordance with the
identification regime established pursuant to international standards ISO6346 or
EN13044;
(b) reinforcing the non-craneable semi-trailers to become craneable or an aid for
acquiring craneable semi-trailers;
(c) waving the vehicle registration fees and vehicle taxes of craneable standard-size
semitrailers;
(d) the integration of connected systems and the automation of operations in
combined transport, digital logistics, related information and communication
technologies and intelligent transport systems that are necessary for the smooth
functioning of intermodal transport operations such as support for investments
into intermodal transhipment terminal photogates and automatic check-in/check-
out booth;
(e) measures to facilitate the introduction of an intermodal waybill on their territory;
(f) the low-and zero emission vehicles or vessels or transhipment equipment in
combined transport;
(g) accessories for existing technology for transhipment of containers to allow
transhipment of semi-trailers such as gantry crane grapple arms for vertical
transhipment of semi-trailers.’
EN 2 EN
Resolutsiooni liik: Riigikantselei resolutsioon
Viide: Kliimaministeerium / / ; Riigikantselei / / 2-5/23-02333
Resolutsiooni teema: Kombineeritud transpordi direktiiv
Adressaat: Kliimaministeerium
Ülesanne: Tulenevalt Riigikogu kodu- ja töökorra seaduse § 152` lg 1 p 2 ning Vabariigi Valitsuse
reglemendi § 3 lg 4 palun valmistada ette Vabariigi Valitsuse seisukoha ja otsuse eelnõu järgneva
algatuse kohta, kaasates seejuures olulisi huvigruppe ja osapooli:
- Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
amending Council Directive 92/106/EEC as regards a support framework for intermodal transport of
goods and Regulation (EU) 2020/1056 of the European Parliament and the Council as regards
calculation of external costs savings and generation of aggregated data, COM(2023) 702.
EISi toimiku nr: 23-0470
Tähtaeg: 08.01.2024
Adressaat: Majandus- ja Kommunikatsiooniministeerium, Rahandusministeerium
Ülesanne: Palun esitada oma sisend Kliimaministeeriumile seisukohtade kujundamiseks antud
eelnõu kohta (eelnõude infosüsteemi (EIS) kaudu).
Tähtaeg: 22.12.2023
Lisainfo: Eelnõu on kavas arutada valitsuse 18.01.2024 istungil ja Vabariigi Valitsuse reglemendi §
6 lg 6 kohaselt sellele eelneval nädalal (10.01.2024) EL koordinatsioonikogus. Esialgsed materjalid
EL koordinatsioonikoguks palume esitada hiljemalt 08.01.2024.
Kinnitaja: Merli Vahar, Euroopa Liidu asjade direktori asetäitja
Kinnitamise kuupäev: 05.12.2023
Resolutsiooni koostaja: Elen Nurme
[email protected], 693 5201