Procedure : 2018/0138(COD)
Document stages in plenary
Document selected : A8-0015/2019

Texts tabled :

A8-0015/2019

Debates :

Votes :

PV 13/02/2019 - 16.7

Texts adopted :

P8_TA(2019)0109

REPORT     ***I
PDF 282kWORD 125k
14.1.2019
PE 627.834v02-00 A8-0015/2019

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on streamlining measures for advancing the realisation of the trans-European transport network

(COM (2018) 0277 – C8-0192/2018 – 2018/0138 (COD))

Committee on Transport and Tourism

Rapporteur: Dominique Riquet

AMENDMENTS
DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION
 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
 OPINION of the Committee on Regional Development
 PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE
 FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on streamlining measures for advancing the realisation of the trans-European transport network

(COM(2018)0277 – C8-0192/2018 – 2018/0138(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2018)0277),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 172 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8-0192/2018),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the reasoned opinions submitted, within the framework of Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, by the Czech Senate, the German Bundestag, the Irish Parliament and the Swedish Parliament, asserting that the draft legislative act does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity,

–  having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism and the opinion of the Committee on Regional Development (A8-0015/2019),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Amendment    1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1)  Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council22 sets out a common framework for the creation of state-of-the-art, interoperable networks for the development of the internal market. The trans-European transport networks (TEN-T) have a dual layer structure: the comprehensive network ensures connectivity of all regions of the Union whereas the core network consists of those elements of the network which are of the highest strategic importance for the Union. Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 defines binding completion targets for implementation, with the core network to be completed by 2030 and the comprehensive network by 2050.

(1)  Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council22 sets out a common framework for the creation of interoperable networks comprising a dual-level structure, in the Union, at the service of citizens, for the development of the internal market and for the social, economic and territorial cohesion of the Union. The trans-European transport networks (TEN-T) have a dual layer structure: the core network comprises those parts of the network which have the greatest strategic significance for the Union, and the comprehensive network ensures connectivity between all regions in the Union. The core network should serve as cross-border and multimodal accelerators for a single European transport and mobility area. Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 defines binding completion targets for implementation, with the core network to be completed by 2030 and the comprehensive network by 2050. Furthermore, Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 focuses on cross-border connections that will improve interoperability between the different modes of transport and contribute to the multimodal integration of Union transport, and should also take into account the development dynamics of the transport sector and of new technologies in the future.

__________________

__________________

22 Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on Union guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network and repealing Decision No 661/2010/EU (OJ L 348, 20.12.2013, p. 1).

22 Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on Union guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network and repealing Decision No 661/2010/EU (OJ L 348, 20.12.2013, p. 1).

Amendment    2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2)  Notwithstanding the necessity and binding timelines, experience has shown that many investments aiming to complete the TEN-T are confronted with complex permit granting procedures, cross-border procurement procedures and other procedures. This situation jeopardises the on time implementation of projects and in many cases results in significant delays and increased costs. In order to address these issues and make synchronised TEN-T completion possible,, harmonised action is necessary at Union level.

(2)  Notwithstanding the necessity and binding timelines, experience has shown that many investments aiming to complete the TEN-T are confronted with multiple, slow, unclear and complex permit granting procedures, cross-border procurement procedures and other procedures. This situation jeopardises the on-time implementation of projects, in many cases results in significant delays and increased costs, gives rise to uncertainty for project promoters and potential private investors, and can even lead to projects being abandoned in the middle of the process. Given these conditions, the synchronised completion of the TEN-T by the deadline set out in Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council requires harmonised action at Union level. Moreover, Member States should decide on their national infrastructure plans in accordance with the TEN-T objectives.

Amendment    3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(2a)  This Regulation applies only to Union projects which are recognised as projects of common interest under Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 on the core network of the trans-European transport network. A Member State can also decide to broaden the scope to the comprehensive network.

Amendment    4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3)  In the legal frameworks of many Member States priority treatment is given to certain project categories based on their strategic importance for the economy. Priority treatment is characterised by shorter timelines, simultaneous procedures or limited timeframes for appeals while ensuring that the objectives of other horizontal policies are also reached. When such a framework exists within a national legal framework, it should automatically apply to Union projects recognised as projects of common interest under Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013.

(3)  In the legal systems of many Member States priority treatment is given to certain project categories based on their strategic importance for the Union. Priority treatment is characterised by shorter timelines, simultaneous and/or simplified procedures or limited timeframes for the completion of the permitting procedure or for appeals while ensuring that the objectives of other horizontal policies are also reached. When such rules on priority treatment exist in a national legal framework, they should automatically apply to Union projects recognised as projects of common interest under Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013. Member States that do not have such rules on priority treatment should adopt them.

Amendment    5

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4)  In order to improve the effectiveness of the environmental assessments and streamline the decision-making process , where the obligation to carry out assessments related to environmental issues of core network projects arises simultaneously from Directive 2011/92/EU, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU, and from other Union legislation such as Directive 92/43/EEC, Directive 2009/147/EC, Directive 2000/60/EC, Directive 2008/98/EC, Directive 2010/75/EU, Directive 2012/18/EU and Directive 2011/42/EC, Member States should ensure that a joint procedure fulfilling the requirements of these Directives is provided.

(4)  In order to improve the effectiveness of the environmental assessments and streamline the decision-making process, where the obligation to carry out assessments related to environmental issues of core network projects arises simultaneously from Directive 2011/92/EU, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU, and from other Union legislation such as Directive 92/43/EEC, Directive 2009/147/EC, Directive 2000/60/EC, Directive 2008/98/EC, Directive 2010/75/EU, Directive 2012/18/EU and Directive 2011/42/EC, Member States should ensure that a joint procedure fulfilling the requirements of these Directives is provided. Moreover, early scoping of environmental impacts and early discussion with the competent authority about the content of the environmental assessments may reduce delays during the permitting stage and generally improve the quality of assessments.

Amendment    6

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(4a)  Given the large number of environmental assessments arising from various European Directives and national rules which are necessary for granting permits to projects of common interest in the TEN-T core network, the Union should put in place a common, simplified and centralised procedure which fulfils the requirements of those Directives in order to help achieve the objectives set out in this Regulation aimed at increasing the streamlining of measures.

Amendment    7

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5)  Core network projects should be supported by integrated permit granting procedures to make clear management of the overall procedure possible and to provide a single entry point for investors. Member States should designate a competent authority in accordance with their national legal frameworks and administrative set-ups.

(5)  Member States should designate a single competent authority in accordance with their national legal frameworks and administrative set-ups so that projects concerning the core network will benefit from the integration of permit granting procedures and having a single contact point for investors, thereby enabling clear and effective management of the comprehensive procedure. Where necessary, the single competent authority can delegate its responsibilities, obligations and tasks to another authority at the appropriate regional, local or other administrative level.

Amendment    8

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6)  The establishment of a single competent authority at national level integrating all permit granting procedures (one-stop shop) should reduce the complexity, improve the efficiency and increase the transparency of the procedures. It should also enhance the cooperation between Member States where appropriate. The procedures should promote a real cooperation between investors and the single competent authority and should therefore allow for the scoping in the pre-application phase of the permit granting procedure. Such scoping should be integrated in the detailed application outline and follow the procedure set out in Article 5(2) of 2011/92/EU, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU.

(6)  The establishment of a single competent authority at national level integrating all permit granting procedures (one-stop shop) should reduce the complexity, improve the efficiency and coordination and increase the transparency and the speed of the procedures and of the adoption of the decisions. It should also enhance the cooperation between Member States where appropriate. The procedures should promote a real cooperation between investors and the single competent authority and should therefore allow for the scoping in the pre-application phase of the permit granting procedure. Such scoping should be integrated in the detailed application outline and follow the procedure set out in Article 5(2) of 2011/92/EU, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU.

Amendment    9

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(6a)  Where projects of common interest are considered to be Union priority projects, a joint competent authority agreed between the single competent authorities from two or more Member States or Member States and third countries could be established, in order fulfil the duties arising from this Regulation.

Amendment    10

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8)  Given the urgency to complete the TEN-T core network, the simplification of permit granting procedures should be accompanied by a time limit within which competent authorities responsible should make a comprehensive decision regarding the construction of the project. This time limit should stimulate a more efficient handling of procedures and should, under no circumstances, compromise the Union's high standards for environmental protection and public participation.

(8)  Given the urgency to complete the TEN-T core network by 2030, the simplification of permit granting procedures should be accompanied by a time limit within which competent authorities responsible should make a comprehensive decision regarding the construction of the project. This time limit should ensure a more efficient handling of procedures and should, under no circumstances, compromise the Union's high standards for environmental protection, transparency, and public participation. Projects should be evaluated in terms of the project selection maturity criteria established by the Connecting Europe Facility. Compliance with the deadlines set out in this Regulation should be taken into account when carrying out such evaluations

Amendment    11

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10)  Cross-border TEN-T infrastructure projects face particular challenges as regards the coordination of permit granting procedures. The European Coordinators should be empowered to monitor these procedures and facilitate their synchronisation and completion.

(10)  Cross-border TEN-T infrastructure projects face particular challenges as regards the coordination of permit granting procedures. The European Coordinators referred to in Article 45 of Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 should be empowered to monitor these procedures and facilitate their synchronisation and completion to ensure compliance with the deadlines set by this Regulation.

Amendment    12

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12)  The Commission is not systematically involved in the authorisation of individual projects. However, in some cases, certain aspects of the project preparation are subject to clearance at Union level. Where the Commission is involved in the procedures, it will give priority treatment to the Union projects of common interest and ensure certainty for project promoters. In some cases State aid approval might be required. In line with the Best Practice Code for the conduct of State aid control procedures, Member States may ask the Commission to deal with projects of common interest on the core network of the TEN-T they consider to be of priority with more predictable timelines under the case portfolio approach or the mutually agreed planning.

(12)  The Commission is not systematically involved in the authorisation of individual projects. However, in some cases, certain aspects of the project preparation are subject to clearance at Union level. Where the Commission is involved in the procedures, it will give priority treatment to the Union projects of common interest and ensure certainty for project promoters. In some cases State aid approval might be required. Without prejudice to the deadlines set out in this Regulation and in line with the Best Practice Code for the conduct of State aid control procedures, Member States should be able to ask the Commission to deal with projects of common interest on the core network of the TEN-T they consider to be of priority with more predictable timelines under the case portfolio approach or the mutually agreed planning.

Amendment    13

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13)  The implementation of infrastructure projects on the TEN-T core network should be also supported by Commission guidelines that bring more clarity as regards the implementation of certain types of projects while respecting the Union acquis. For example the Action Plan for nature, people and the economy23 foresees such guidance to bring more clarity in view of respecting the Birds and Habitats Directives. Direct support related to public procurement should be made available for projects of common interests to ensure the best value for public money24 . Additionally, appropriate technical assistance should be made available under the mechanisms developed for the Multi-Annual Financial Framework 2021-2027, with the aim of providing financial support for TEN-T projects of common interest.

(13)  The implementation of infrastructure projects on the TEN-T core network should be also supported by Commission guidelines that bring more clarity as regards the implementation of certain types of projects while respecting the Union acquis. For example the Action Plan for nature, people and the economy23 foresees such guidance to bring more clarity in view of respecting the Birds and Habitats Directives. Direct support related to public procurement should be made available for projects of common interests to ensure the minimising of external costs and the best value for public money24. Additionally, appropriate technical assistance should be made available under the mechanisms developed for the Multi-Annual Financial Framework 2021-2027, with the aim of providing financial support for TEN-T projects of common interest.

__________________

__________________

23 COM(2017) 198 final.

23 COM(2017) 198 final.

24 COM(2017) 573 final

24 COM(2017) 573 final

Amendment    14

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(15)  For reasons of legal certainty, the administrative procedures which started prior to the entry into force of this Regulation should not be subject to the provisions of this Regulation.

(15)  For reasons of legal certainty, the administrative procedures which started prior to the entry into force of this Regulation should not be subject to the provisions of this Regulation, unless otherwise decided with the agreement of those concerned.

Amendment    15

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

This Regulation sets out requirements applicable to the administrative procedures followed by the competent authorities of Member States in relation to the authorisation and implementation of all projects of common interest on the core network of the trans-European transport network..

This Regulation sets out requirements applicable to the administrative procedures followed by the competent authorities of Member States in relation to the authorisation and implementation of all projects of common interest on the core network of the trans-European transport network relating to Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013, including the pre-selected projects listed in Part III of the Annex to the Regulation establishing the ‘Connecting Europe Facility’ 2021-2027.

Amendment    16

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

Member States may decide to extend the application of all provisions of this Regulation, as a block, to projects of common interest on the comprehensive network of the trans-European transport network.

Amendment    17

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a)  "comprehensive decision" means the decision or set of decisions taken by a Member State authority or authorities not including courts or tribunals that determines whether or not a project promoter is to be granted authorisation to build the transport infrastructure needed to complete a project without prejudice to any decision taken in the context of an administrative appeal procedure;

(a)  "comprehensive decision" means the decision or set of decisions taken by the single competent authority of a Member State, and where applicable, the joint competent authority, but not including courts or tribunals, that determines whether or not a project promoter is to be granted authorisation to build the transport infrastructure needed to complete a project without prejudice to any decision taken in the context of an administrative appeal procedure;

Amendment    18

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b)  "permit granting procedures" means every procedure that has to be followed or step that has to be taken before the authorities of a Member State, under Union or national law, before the project promoter can implement the project;

(b)  "permit granting procedures" means every procedure that has to be followed or step that has to be taken before the competent authorities of a Member State, under Union or national law, before the project promoter can implement the project and starting from the date on which the acceptance of the file notification is signed by the single competent authority of the Member State;

Amendment    19

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c)  "Project promoter" means the applicant for authorisation for a private project or the public authority which initiates a project";

(c)  "Project promoter" means any natural person or public or private legal person applying for authorisation to initiate a project";

Amendment    20

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d)  "single competent authority" means the authority which the Member State designates as responsible for performing the duties arising from this Regulation;

(d)  "single competent authority" means the authority which the Member State designates, in accordance with its national law, as responsible for performing the duties arising from this Regulation;

Amendment    21

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(ea)  “Joint competent authority” means an authority established by mutual agreement between the single competent authorities from two or more Member States or from one or more Member States and one or more third countries which is in charge of facilitating the permit-granting procedures related to cross-border projects of common interest.

Amendment    22

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  Each project of common interest on the TEN-T core network shall be subject to an integrated permit granting procedure managed by a single competent authority designated by each Member State in accordance with Articles 5 and 6.

1.  Each project of common interest on the TEN-T core network, including the pre-selected sections in Part III of the Annex to the Regulation establishing the Connecting Europe Facility, shall be subject to an integrated permit granting procedure managed by a single competent authority designated by each Member State in accordance with Articles 5 and 6.

Amendment    23

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.  To ensure efficient administrative procedures related to projects of common interest, project promoters and all authorities concerned shall ensure that the most rapid treatment legally possible is given to these projects, including as regards the resources allocated.

3.  To ensure efficient and effective administrative procedures related to projects of common interest, project promoters and all authorities concerned shall ensure that the most rapid treatment legally possible is given to these projects, including as regards the evaluation of the project-selection maturity criteria and the resources allocated.

Amendment    24

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  In order to meet the time limits set out in Article 6 and reduce the administrative burden related to the completion of projects of common interest, all the administrative procedures resulting from the applicable law, both national and of the Union, shall be integrated and result in only one comprehensive decision.

1.  In order to meet the time limits set out in Article 6 and reduce the administrative burden related to the completion of projects of common interest, all the permit granting procedures resulting from the applicable law, including the relevant environmental assessments, both at national and Union level, shall be integrated and result in only one comprehensive decision, without prejudice to transparency, public participation, environmental and safety requirements under Union law.

Amendment    25

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  In the case of projects of common interest for which the obligation to carry out assessments of the effects on the environment arises simultaneously from Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council and other Union law, Member States shall ensure that joint procedures within the meaning of Article 2(3) of Directive 2011/92/EU are provided for.

2.  Without prejudice to the deadlines set out in Article 6 of this Regulation, in the case of projects of common interest for which the obligation to carry out assessments of the effects on the environment arises simultaneously from Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council and other Union law, Member States shall ensure that joint procedures within the meaning of Article 2(3) of Directive 2011/92/EU are provided for.

Amendment    26

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  By … (OP please insert the date one year of the entry into force of this Regulation), each Member State shall designate one single competent authority which shall be responsible for facilitating the permit granting process including for making the comprehensive decision.

1.  By … [one year after the date of entry into force of this Regulation] and in any event no later than 31 December 2020, each Member State shall designate one single competent authority which shall be responsible for facilitating the permit granting procedures necessary for making the comprehensive decision, in accordance with paragraph 3 of this Article.

Amendment    27

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The responsibility of the single competent authority referred to in paragraph 1 and/or the tasks related to it may be delegated to, or carried out by, another authority at the appropriate administrative level, per project of common interest or per particular category of projects of common interest, under the following conditions:

On the initiative of the single competent authority, its responsibilities, obligations and/or the tasks related to it, as referred to in paragraph 1, may, with the agreement of the Member State, be delegated to and carried out by another authority at the appropriate regional, local or other administrative level, per project of common interest or per particular category of projects of common interest, with the exception of the taking of the comprehensive decision referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article, under the following conditions:

Amendment    28

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a)  only one authority is responsible per project of common interest;

(a)  only one competent authority is responsible for each project of common interest;

Amendment    29

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b)  the authority is the sole point of contact for the project promoter in the procedure leading to the comprehensive decision for a given project of common interest, and

(b)  the competent authority is the sole point of contact for the project promoter in the procedure leading to the comprehensive decision for a given project of common interest; and

Amendment    30

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c)  the authority coordinates the submission of all relevant documents and information.

(c)  the competent authority coordinates the submission of all relevant documents and information.

Amendment    31

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The comprehensive decision issued by the single competent authority shall be the sole legally binding decision resulting from the statutory permit granting procedure. Where other authorities are concerned by the project, they may give their opinion as input to the procedure, in accordance with national legislation. This opinion shall be taken into account by the single competent authority.

The comprehensive decision issued by the single competent authority shall be the sole legally binding decision resulting from the permit granting procedure. Without prejudice to the deadlines set out in Article 6 of this Regulation, where other authorities are concerned by the project, they may give their opinion as input to the procedure, in accordance with national legislation. The single competent authority is required to take such opinions into account, particularly if they concern the requirements laid down in Directive 2014/52/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council and in Council Directive 92/43/EEC.

Amendment    32

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4.  When taking the comprehensive decision, the single competent authority shall ensure that the relevant requirements under international and Union law are respected and shall duly justify its decision.

4.  When taking the comprehensive decision, the single competent authority shall ensure that the relevant requirements under international and Union law are respected and shall duly justify its decision on the basis of the applicable legal provisions.

Amendment    33

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5.  If a project of common interest requires decisions to be taken in two or more Member States, the respective competent authorities shall take all the necessary steps for efficient and effective cooperation and coordination among themselves. Without prejudice to obligations arising under applicable Union and international law, Member States shall endeavour to provide for joint procedures, particularly with regard to the assessment of environmental impacts.

5.  Where a project of common interest requires decisions to be taken in two or more Member States, or in one or more Member States and one or more third countries, the respective competent authorities shall take all the necessary steps for efficient and effective cooperation and coordination among themselves, or may establish a joint competent authority, without prejudice to the deadlines set out in Article 6, in charge of facilitating the permit granting procedure. Without prejudice to obligations arising under applicable international and Union law, Member States shall endeavour to provide for joint procedures, particularly with regard to the assessment of environmental impacts.

Amendment    34

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

5a.  To ensure effective implementation of this Regulation and in particular of its Article 6 a, the single competent authority shall inform the Commission of the start date of the permit granting procedure and the comprehensive decision, as set out in Article 6.

Amendment    35

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  The pre-application phase, covering the period from the start of the permit granting procedure to the submission of the complete application file to the single competent authority, shall in principle not exceed two years.

2.  The pre-application phase, covering the period from the start of the permit granting procedure to the submission of the complete application file to the single competent authority, shall in principle not exceed 18 months.

Amendment    36

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.  In order to launch the permit granting procedure, the project promoter shall notify the single competent authority of the Member States concerned about the project in writing, and shall include a detailed description of the project. No later than two months following the receipt of the above notification, the single competent authority shall either acknowledge it or, if it considers that the project is not mature enough to enter the permit granting procedure, reject the notification in writing. If the single competent authority decides to reject the notification, it shall justify its decision. The date of signature of the acknowledgement of the notification by the competent authority shall serve as the start of the permit granting procedure. If two or more Member States are concerned, the date of the acceptance of the last notification by the competent authority concerned shall serve as the date of the start of the permit granting procedure.

3.  In order to launch the permit granting procedure, the project promoter shall notify in writing the single competent authority of the Member States concerned or, where appropriate, the joint competent authority, about the project, and shall include a detailed description of the project. No later than one month following the receipt of the above notification, the single competent authority shall either accept it or, if it considers that the project is not mature enough to enter the permit granting procedure, reject the notification in writing. If the single competent authority decides to reject the notification, it shall justify its decision. The date of signature of the acknowledgement of the notification by the competent authority shall serve as the start of the permit granting procedure. If two or more Member States are concerned, the date of the acceptance of the last notification by the competent authority concerned shall serve as the date of the start of the permit granting procedure.

Amendment    37

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 4 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4.  Within three months of the start of the permit granting procedure, the single competent authority, in close cooperation with the project promoter and other authorities concerned and taking into account the information submitted by the project promoter on the basis of the notification referred to in paragraph 3, shall establish and communicate to the project promoter a detailed application outline, containing:

4.  Within two months of the start of the permit granting procedure, the single competent authority, or where appropriate, the joint competent authority, in close cooperation with the project promoter and other authorities concerned and taking into account the information submitted by the project promoter on the basis of the notification referred to in paragraph 3, shall establish and communicate to the project promoter a detailed application outline, containing:

Amendment    38

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 4 – point -a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(-a)  the competent authority, at the appropriate administrative level, in charge, in case of delegation by the single competent authority in accordance with Article 5(2);

Amendment    39

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 4 – point b – point i

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(i)  the decisions and opinions to be obtained;

(i)  the decisions, permits, opinions and assessments to be obtained;

Amendment    40

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 4 – point b – point ii

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ii)  the authorities, stakeholders, and the public likely to be concerned;

(ii)  the authorities, stakeholders, and the public likely to be concerned and/or consulted;

Amendment    41

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 4 – point b – point iv

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(iv)  major milestones to be accomplished and their deadlines in view of the comprehensive decision to be taken;

(iv)  major milestones to be accomplished and their deadlines in view of the comprehensive decision to be taken, and the overall scheduled timeframe;

Amendment    42

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

6.  The project promoter shall submit the application file based on the detailed application outline within the period of 21 months from the receipt of that detailed application outline. After the expiry of that period, the detailed application outline is no longer considered applicable, unless the single competent authority decides to prolong that period, on the basis of a justified request from the project promoter.

6.  The project promoter shall submit the application file based on the detailed application outline within the period of 15 months from the receipt of that detailed application outline. After the expiry of that period, the detailed application outline is no longer considered applicable, unless the single competent authority decides, on its own initiative, to prolong that period by a maximum of 6 months, on the basis of a justified request from the project promoter.

Amendment    43

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8.  The single competent authority shall assess the application and adopt a comprehensive decision within the period of one year from the date of submission of the complete application file in accordance with paragraph 7. Member States may set an earlier time-limit, where appropriate.

8.  The single competent authority shall assess the application and adopt a comprehensive binding decision within the period of 6 months from the date of submission of the complete application file in accordance with paragraph 7, unless the single competent authority decides, on its own initiative, to extend this period, by a maximum of 3 months, substantiating its decision. Member States may set an earlier time-limit, where appropriate.

Amendment    44

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

Article 6 a

 

Permit granting procedure and final assistance from the Union

 

1.  In accordance with the procedure set out in Article 6 of this Regulation, the state of progress of the project shall be taken into account when evaluating projects according to the selection maturity criteria of projects set out in Article 13 of Regulation (EU) .../... [establishing the Connecting Europe Facility].

 

2.  Delays occurring with regard to the stages and deadlines set out in Article 6 will justify an investigation of the state of progress of the project and a revision of the financial assistance received by the Union under the Connecting Europe Facility, as provided for in Article 17(1) of Regulation (EU) .../... [CEF] and might result in a reduction or the withdrawal of the financial assistance.

Amendment    45

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  For projects that involve two or more Member States, the competent authorities of the Member States concerned shall align their timetables and agree on a joint schedule.

1.  For projects that involve two or more Member States or one or more Member States and one or more third countries, the competent authorities of the Member States concerned shall align their timetables and agree on a joint schedule.

Amendment    46

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

1a.  In such cases, in order to facilitate the permit granting procedure, single competent authorities from two or more Member States or one or more Member States and one or more third countries may, by mutual agreement, establish a joint competent authority, as provided for under article 5 (5).

Amendment    47

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  The European Coordinator referred to in Article 45 of Regulation (EU)² No 1315/2013 shall be empowered to closely follow the permit granting procedure for cross-border projects of common interest and to facilitate contacts between the involved competent authorities.

2.  The European Coordinator referred to in Article 45 of Regulation (EU)² No 1315/2013 shall be empowered to follow the permit granting procedure for cross-border projects of common interest and to facilitate contacts and cooperation between the involved competent authorities or where appropriate, with the joint competent authority.

Amendment    48

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.  Without prejudice to the obligation to comply with the time limits under this Regulation, if the time-limit for the comprehensive decision is not observed, the competent authority shall immediately inform the European Coordinator concerned about the measures taken or to be taken to conclude the permit granting procedure with the least possible delay. The European Coordinator may request the competent authority to regularly report on progress achieved.

3.  Without prejudice to the obligation to comply with the time limits under this Regulation, if the time-limit for the comprehensive decision is not observed, the single competent authority shall immediately inform the Commission, and where appropriate, the European Coordinator concerned about the measures taken or to be taken to conclude the permit granting procedure with the least possible delay. The Commission, and where appropriate, the European Coordinator may request the single competent authority to regularly report on progress achieved.

Amendment    49

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  In case the procurement procedures are conducted by a joint entity set up by the participating Member States, that entity shall apply the national provisions of one of those Member States and, by way of derogation from these Directives, those provisions shall be the provisions determined in accordance with point (a) of Article 57(5) of Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council or point (a) of Article 39(5) of Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, as applicable, unless an agreement between the participating Member States provides otherwise. Such an agreement shall in any case provide for the application of a single national legislation in case of the procurement procedures conducted by a joint entity.

2.  In case the procurement procedures are conducted by a joint entity set up by the participating Member States, that entity, together with its subsidiaries, where appropriate, shall apply the national provisions of one of those Member States and, by way of derogation from these Directives, those provisions shall be the provisions determined in accordance with point (a) of Article 57(5) of Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council or point (a) of Article 39(5) of Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, as applicable, unless an agreement between the participating Member States provides otherwise. Such an agreement shall in any case provide for the application of a single national legislation for the procurement procedures conducted by a joint entity and, where appropriate, its subsidiaries, across the whole of the project.

Amendment    50

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

On the request of a project promoter or Member State, in accordance with the relevant Union funding programmes and without prejudice to the Multi-Annual Financial Framework, the Union shall make available technical assistance for the implementation of this Regulation and the facilitation of the implementation of projects of common interest.

At the request of a project promoter or Member State, in accordance with the relevant Union funding programmes and without prejudice to the Multi-Annual Financial Framework, the Union shall make available technical, advisory and financial assistance for the implementation of this Regulation and the facilitation of the implementation of projects of common interest at each stage of the process.

Amendment    51

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

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

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

 

However, Articles 4, 5, 6 and 7 shall apply in a given Member State from the date when the single competent authority has been designated by that Member State in accordance with Article 5(1).

 

The Commission will publish in the Official Journal a notice when those provisions become applicable in a Member State.


EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

The Union needs a network of modern, effective infrastructure at EU level which will connect its citizens and businesses and support the single market. In order to achieve this, the European institutions have designated trans-European transport networks (TEN-Ts) comprising a comprehensive network but above all a core network: a real backbone for the Union. Projects of common interest form part of this network and are the subject of this regulation, and they provide considerable European added value.

The completion of TEN-T networks is vital to achieving lasting, sustainable economic growth in the Union while ensuring its competitiveness in the face of increasing global competition. The Union and its Member States have set themselves a deadline of 2030 to complete the core network. This is expected to generate an additional EUR 4 500 billion or 1.8% of Union GDP and account for 13 million job-years until 2030.

BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION FOR THE REGULATION

If nothing is done to speed things up, the 2030 target will not be met. Installation of the TEN-T core network infrastructure is beset by major problems. These are of two kinds,

–  the first of which is financial. Given the budgetary restraints in the Member States and the very limited European budget, there is a need to attract huge levels of investment. An estimated EUR 500 billion in investment is required for the 2021-2030 period if the TEN-T core network is to be completed, with a further EUR 1 500 billion needed to complete the comprehensive TEN-T network by 2050.

–  The second is regulatory and operational in nature. This regulation aims to reduce the regulatory barriers which pose considerable problems to project promoters and the completion of the TEN-Ts. In particular, the rapporteur notes that, over time, the increasing complexity and large number of studies, evaluations and consultations needed for projects to go ahead has made their implementation more difficult. For major infrastructure projects, for example, there is an average of eight years between the generation phase and the closure of the dossier for implementation. The lengthened deadlines give rise to considerable uncertainty for operators, a sharp rise in the cost of studies and the final cost of work, and a large number of appeals. These factors are demotivating not only for project promoters but also their partners – particularly their financial partners – because of the long, uncertain nature of the procedures and their outcomes. The situation is now so critical that it threatens to become prohibitive for promoters, with some projects never getting off the ground as they are regarded as too uncertain in view of the procedural complexity.

PROPOSALS MADE BY THE REPORT

It is against this background that the rapporteur welcomes this proposal for a regulation by the Commission, which aims to better organise and to shorten the administrative procedures for the authorisation and implementation of projects of common interest concerning the core network of the trans-European transport network (TEN-T). This streamlining will not affect the nature or the content of administrative and regulatory formalities, which remain the responsibility of the Member States, in accordance with the subsidiarity principle. However, the regulation introduces provisions concerning organisation, deadlines, simplification and the introduction of a single point of contact, with the aim of tangibly reducing the uncertainty and costs.

  Deadlines

The rapporteur therefore welcomes and supports the introduction of clear, specific deadlines at each stage of the permit granting procedure. A maximum period for the whole of this procedure has also been introduced – and reduced to less than three years by the rapporteur – which is a significant improvement over the current situation.

  Single competent authority

The streamlining covers the establishment of a single point of contact for project promoters in each Member State with the designation of a single competent authority, which will undertake all permit granting procedures and will be the only authority able to make the single comprehensive decision. The rapporteur does, however, take into account the opportunity for the Member States to delegate this competence to another authority if this would be at a more appropriate level, as long as the principle of having a single competent authority and a single point of contact for promoters is adhered to.

  Cross-border projects

With regard to public procurement procedures for cross-border projects carried out by a joint entity between Member States, the rapporteur has reinforced the Commission proposal by providing for a single applicable law covering the whole of the project for the joint entity, including its subsidiaries.

  Priority treatment

The rapporteur also stresses the crucial importance of projects of common interest (the only projects which this regulation addresses) and their considerable European added value for achieving the Union’s objectives, and therefore the priority treatment they should be accorded by the Member States in their legal frameworks.

  Consistency with the CEF

In addition, the rapporteur has introduced a new provision in the regulation which takes account of compliance with the deadlines set out in this regulation as one of the criteria for selecting projects submitted to the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF).

The rapporteur is convinced that a regulation such as this one can make a great contribution to the effective completion of TEN-T networks in the Union by reducing the risk of delays, increasing the level of certainty for project promoters and investors throughout the necessary procedures, and reinforcing in fine the participation of private investors. Swift adoption of the regulation would enable, among other things, projects of common interest under the new CEF II programme, starting in 2020, to benefit.


OPINION of the Committee on Regional Development (19.11.2018)

for the Committee on Transport and Tourism

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on streamlining measures for advancing the realisation of the trans-European transport network

(COM(2018)0277 – C8‑0192/2018 – 2018/0138(COD))

Rapporteur for opinion: Demetris Papadakis

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

As the EU strives to become a world leader in innovation, digitisation and decarbonisation, the European Commission, has adopted three legislative ‘mobility packages’ with main aim to make transport safer, more accessible and cleaner, while ensuring the competitiveness of the European industry and securing jobs. The proposed regulation on streamlining measures for advancing the realisation of the trans-European Network (TEN-T) comes within the third ‘Europe on the Move’ mobility package.

Efficient, smart and sustainable transport is crucial for the effective functioning of the EU’s internal market and important for ensuring competitiveness, creating new business and employment opportunities, protecting the environment and mitigating climate change by promoting low-emission mobility. Therefore, it is important to boost transport infrastructure investments with significant EU added value, in particular through the development of the TEN-T.

The TEN-T consists of two planning layers, the comprehensive network (covers all European regions, should be implemented by 2050) and the core network (most important connections, should be implemented by 2030).

The implementation of the TEN-T network, with particular emphasis on cross-border connections and within the time-frames laid down, will reduce bottlenecks, bridge missing links-especially at cross-border sections-and improve interoperability between the various modes of transport.

However, there are concerns that due to identified problems concerning delays and legal uncertainties, the set deadline of 2030 for the completion of the TEN-T core network will not be met.

The overall objective of the Commission’s proposal is to address the delays and the high level of uncertainty affecting the effective delivery of the TEN-T projects. The identified problem drivers are:

i)  Multiple stages and authorities involved in permit granting procedures;

ii)  Absent or unenforced time limits;

iii)  Differing public procurement procedures for cross-border TEN-T projects;

iv)  Coordination challenges for the delivery of cross-border projects;

iv)  Perceived uncertainties related to State aid procedures.

Therefore, the Commission’s proposal focuses on:

-  Increased coordination of public procurement procedures for cross-border projects,

-  Simplification and setting of time limits for permit granting rules,

-  Simplification of documents and administrative procedures across all transport modes,

-  Reduction of delays encountered in infrastructure projects,

-  Facilitation of the involvement of private investors,

-  Clarification of rules for public consultations.

TEN-T network is crucial for the sustainable development of Europe's regions. The rapporteur stresses the need to ensure that the TEN-T will take into account peripheral and island regions, outermost regions and neighbouring cross-border regions. Therefore, Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) is an important tool towards this direction.

The rapporteur acknowledges the added value of CEF in relation to the TEN-T as there is a leverage effect on sustainable growth and jobs as well as social, economic and territorial cohesion. In order to maximize the effect of EU funding, the rapporteur supports the optimal use of the private and public funding schemes, also in the light of blending the CEF and Horizon 2020 with the European Fund for Strategic Investments and other financial instruments.

The rapporteur stresses the need that the Commission, the European Coordinators and the other stakeholders involved pay equal importance to large-scale and smaller TEN-T projects and to short-,medium-and long-term benefits that may be generated through such projects.

The European Commission has estimated that the investments needed to deliver the core TEN-T network will amount to around €500 billion between 2021 and 2030, contributing to the creation of 13 million jobs a year until 2030 and generation of additional revenue of 1.8% of EU GDP.

Moreover, the rapporteur recognizes the importance of safeguarding the environmental aspects linked to the TEN-T planning and implementation through the promotion of low-emission transport and meeting of objectives of low greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, all aspects regarding health and social well-being in relation to transport should be equally protected.

The effective implementation of TEN-T projects also relies on the involvement of stakeholders from the very early planning stage of transport infrastructure and organisation of consultations with the public, civil society organisations and relevant local authorities in an efficient and timely manner. Social and civic dialogue at national, regional and local level can make key contributions to boosting public acceptance of transport infrastructure projects, gaining credibility and reducing conflicts in the later stages of the project.

The rapporteur states that by ensuring that the project effectively contributes to regional and local development, the perception of the project will automatically improve and increase the feeling of common good and ownership at local level.

The rapporteur stresses the overall benefits to the daily lives of EU citizens deriving from the completion TEN-T. In this regard, it is important Member States to decide on their national infrastructure plans in accordance with the TEN-T objectives with a view to providing an integrated perspective that will allow greater and increased mobility for all EU citizens - a critical factor in social inclusion and environmental protection.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Regional Development calls on the Committee on Transport and Tourism, as the committee responsible, to take into account the following amendments:

Amendment    1

Proposal for a regulation

Citation 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 172 thereof,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 171(2), Article 172 thereof,

Amendment    2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1)  Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council22 sets out a common framework for the creation of state-of-the-art, interoperable networks for the development of the internal market. The trans-European transport networks (TEN-T) have a dual layer structure: the comprehensive network ensures connectivity of all regions of the Union whereas the core network consists of those elements of the network which are of the highest strategic importance for the Union. Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 defines binding completion targets for implementation, with the core network to be completed by 2030 and the comprehensive network by 2050.

(1)  Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council22 sets out a common framework for the creation of state-of-the-art, interoperable networks for the development of the internal market which should also take into account the development dynamics of the transport sector and of new technologies in the future. The planning, development and operation of trans-European transport networks (ΤΕΝ-Τ) aim at the development of smart, safe and sustainable mobility of persons and goods, ensuring accessibility and connectivity for all regions of the Union, including the remote, insular and outermost regions and contributing to further economic growth and competitiveness while pursuing environmental, social and sustainable development goals. The TEN-T have a dual layer structure: the comprehensive network ensures connectivity of all regions of the Union whereas the core network consists of those elements of the network which are of the highest strategic importance for the Union. Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 defines binding completion targets for implementation, with the core network to be completed by 2030 and the comprehensive network by 2050, with the aim of achieving smart, secure and sustainable mobility that will support development and connectivity between urban, peri-urban and rural areas, favouring economic development and cohesion.

__________________

__________________

22 Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on Union guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network and repealing Decision No 661/2010/EU (OJ L 348, 20.12.2013, p. 1).

22 Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on Union guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network and repealing Decision No 661/2010/EU (OJ L 348, 20.12.2013, p. 1).

Amendment    3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2)  Notwithstanding the necessity and binding timelines, experience has shown that many investments aiming to complete the TEN-T are confronted with complex permit granting procedures, cross-border procurement procedures and other procedures. This situation jeopardises the on time implementation of projects and in many cases results in significant delays and increased costs. In order to address these issues and make synchronised TEN-T completion possible, harmonised action is necessary at Union level.

(2)  Notwithstanding the necessity and binding timelines, experience has shown that many investments aiming to complete the TEN-T are confronted with slow and cumbersome permit granting procedures, cross-border procurement procedures and other complex procedures. This situation jeopardises the on time implementation of projects and in many cases results in significant delays and increased costs as well as uncertainty for project promoters and potential private investors. In order to address these issues and make synchronised TEN-T completion possible, harmonised action is necessary at Union level. In this regard, Member States should decide on their national infrastructure plans in accordance with the TEN-T objectives.

Amendment    4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3)  In the legal frameworks of many Member States priority treatment is given to certain project categories based on their strategic importance for the economy. Priority treatment is characterised by shorter timelines, simultaneous procedures or limited timeframes for appeals while ensuring that the objectives of other horizontal policies are also reached. When such a framework exists within a national legal framework, it should automatically apply to Union projects recognised as projects of common interest under Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013.

(3)  In the legal frameworks of many Member States priority treatment is given to certain project categories that benefit from fast-track procedures based on their greater European added value and strategic importance for the economy. Priority treatment is characterised by reduction in the number of permits to be obtained, shorter timelines, simultaneous, simplified procedures or limited timeframes for the completion of the permitting procedure or for appeals while ensuring that the objectives of other horizontal policies are also reached. When such a framework exists within a national legal framework, it should automatically apply to Union projects recognised as projects of common interest under Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013, so as to enable the key objectives of such projects to be met at a pan-European level.

Amendment    5

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4)  In order to improve the effectiveness of the environmental assessments and streamline the decision-making process , where the obligation to carry out assessments related to environmental issues of core network projects arises simultaneously from Directive 2011/92/EU, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU, and from other Union legislation such as Directive 92/43/EEC, Directive 2009/147/EC, Directive 2000/60/EC, Directive 2008/98/EC, Directive 2010/75/EU, Directive 2012/18/EU and Directive 2011/42/EC, Member States should ensure that a joint procedure fulfilling the requirements of these Directives is provided.

(4)  In order to improve the effectiveness of the environmental assessments and streamline the decision-making process , where the obligation to carry out assessments, bringing them into line with the 2030 clean air objectives, related to environmental issues of core network projects arises simultaneously from Directive 2011/92/EU, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU, and from other Union legislation such as Directive 92/43/EEC, Directive 2009/147/EC, Directive 2000/60/EC, Directive 2008/98/EC, Directive 2010/75/EU, Directive 2012/18/EU and Directive 2011/42/EC, Member States should ensure that a joint procedure fulfilling the requirements of these Directives is provided. Moreover, early scoping of environmental impacts and early discussion with the competent authority about the content of the environmental assessments may reduce delays during the permitting stage and generally improve the quality of assessments. In addition to environmental assessments, thorough assessment of social impacts is also required in terms of employment, EU cohesion, health (reduction of accidents), life quality, local benefits and social inclusion.

Amendment    6

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5)  Core network projects should be supported by integrated permit granting procedures to make clear management of the overall procedure possible and to provide a single entry point for investors. Member States should designate a competent authority in accordance with their national legal frameworks and administrative set-ups.

(5)  Core network projects - both large-scale and smaller TEN-T projects - have to be supported by integrated permit granting procedures to make clear, transparent and cohesive management of the overall procedure possible and to provide a single entry point for investors. Member States should designate a competent authority in accordance with their national legal frameworks and administrative set-ups.

Amendment    7

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6)  The establishment of a single competent authority at national level integrating all permit granting procedures (one-stop shop) should reduce the complexity, improve the efficiency and increase the transparency of the procedures. It should also enhance the cooperation between Member States where appropriate. The procedures should promote a real cooperation between investors and the single competent authority and should therefore allow for the scoping in the pre-application phase of the permit granting procedure. Such scoping should be integrated in the detailed application outline and follow the procedure set out in Article 5(2) of 2011/92/EU, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU.

(6)  The establishment of a single competent authority at national level integrating all permit granting procedures (one-stop shop) should reduce the complexity, lower the cost, improve the efficiency and coordination and increase the transparency and the speed of adoption of the procedures so as to enable the projects to be efficiently implemented and the set objectives to be attained. It should also enhance the cooperation between Member States and promote synergy between the various instruments for this objective, given that the stimulation of TEN-T will contribute to the improvement of business competitiveness in the European single market, favouring intra-Community trade. The procedures should promote a real cooperation between investors and the single competent authority and should therefore allow for the scoping in the pre-application phase of the permit granting procedure. Such scoping should be integrated in the detailed application outline and follow the procedure set out in Article 5(2) of 2011/92/EU, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU.

Amendment    8

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7)  The procedure set out by this Regulation should be without prejudice to the fulfilment of the requirements defined in the international and Union law, including provisions to protect the environment and human health.

(7)  The procedure set out by this Regulation should be without prejudice to the fulfilment of the requirements defined in the international and Union law, including provisions to protect the environment and human health through the promotion of sustainable, low-emission transport and through meeting the objective of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to low levels.

Amendment    9

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8)  Given the urgency to complete the TEN-T core network, the simplification of permit granting procedures should be accompanied by a time limit within which competent authorities responsible should make a comprehensive decision regarding the construction of the project. This time limit should stimulate a more efficient handling of procedures and should, under no circumstances, compromise the Union's high standards for environmental protection and public participation.

(8)  Given the urgency of completing the TEN-T core network, the simplification of permit granting procedures should be accompanied by a time limit within which competent authorities responsible should make a comprehensive decision regarding the construction of the project. This time limit should ensure more efficient handling of procedures and should, under no circumstances, compromise the Union's high standards for environmental protection and public participation.

Amendment    10

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(8 a)  The establishment of effective and broad consultation procedures with the public, civil society organisations and relevant regional and local authorities from the earliest phases of preliminary planning will address the delays in project permitting and implementation processes and guarantee local benefit of the projects.

Amendment    11

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10)  Cross-border TEN-T infrastructure projects face particular challenges as regards the coordination of permit granting procedures. The European Coordinators should be empowered to monitor these procedures and facilitate their synchronisation and completion.

(10)  Cross-border TEN-T infrastructure projects face particular challenges as regards the coordination of permit granting procedures. In order to avoid delays in the cross-border implementation of these projects, the European Coordinators, assisted by local and regional authorities, are empowered to monitor these procedures and to facilitate their synchronisation and completion, strengthening executive cooperation and building on INTERREG projects on sustainable mobility in cross-border areas.

Amendment    12

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11)  Public procurement in cross-border projects of common interest should be conducted in accordance with the Treaty and Directives 2014/25/EU and/or 2014/24/EU. In order to ensure the efficient completion of the cross-border core network projects of common interest, public procurement carried out by a joint entity should be subject to a single national legislation. By way of derogation from the Union public procurement legislation, the applicable national rules should in principle be those of the Member State where the joint entity has its registered office. It should remain possible to define the applicable legislation in an intergovernmental agreement.

(11)  Public procurement in cross-border projects of common interest should be conducted in accordance with the Treaty and Directives 2014/25/EU and/or 2014/24/EU. In order to ensure the efficient completion of the cross-border core network projects of common interest, public procurement carried out by a joint entity should be subject to a single national legislation. By way of derogation from the Union public procurement legislation, the applicable national rules should in principle be those of the Member State where the joint entity has its registered office, or the applicable legislation should be defined in an intergovernmental agreement.

Amendment    13

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12)  The Commission is not systematically involved in the authorisation of individual projects. However, in some cases, certain aspects of the project preparation are subject to clearance at Union level. Where the Commission is involved in the procedures, it will give priority treatment to the Union projects of common interest and ensure certainty for project promoters. In some cases State aid approval might be required. In line with the Best Practice Code for the conduct of State aid control procedures, Member States may ask the Commission to deal with projects of common interest on the core network of the TEN-T they consider to be of priority with more predictable timelines under the case portfolio approach or the mutually agreed planning.

(12)  The Commission is not systematically involved in the authorisation of individual projects. However, in some cases, certain aspects of the project preparation are subject to clearance at Union level. Where the Commission is involved in the procedures, it will give priority treatment to the Union projects of common interest and ensure certainty for project promoters. In some cases State aid approval might be required whereas a rapid appraisal procedure will be adopted in cases where a project is in conformity with State aid rules, which would enhance legal certainty and predictability of the investment. In line with the Best Practice Code for the conduct of State aid control procedures, Member States may ask the Commission to deal with projects of common interest on the core network of the TEN-T they consider to be of priority with more predictable timelines under the case portfolio approach or the mutually agreed planning. The Commission will also need to make certain to promote the exchange of best practices in order to ensure a successful trans-European transport network.

Amendment    14

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13)  The implementation of infrastructure projects on the TEN-T core network should be also supported by Commission guidelines that bring more clarity as regards the implementation of certain types of projects while respecting the Union acquis. For example the Action Plan for nature, people and the economy23 foresees such guidance to bring more clarity in view of respecting the Birds and Habitats Directives. Direct support related to public procurement should be made available for projects of common interests to ensure the best value for public money24. Additionally, appropriate technical assistance should be made available under the mechanisms developed for the Multi-Annual Financial Framework 2021-2027, with the aim of providing financial support for TEN-T projects of common interest.

(13)  The implementation of infrastructure projects on the TEN-T core network should be also supported by Commission guidelines that bring more clarity as regards the implementation of certain types of projects while respecting the Union acquis, development needs and the EU’s climate change goals. For example the Action Plan for nature, people and the economy23 foresees such guidance to bring more clarity in view of respecting the Birds and Habitats Directives. The established voluntary ex-ante assessment mechanism of the procurement aspects for large infrastructure projects should be made available for all TEN-T projects. Through a combination of tools (helpdesk, notification mechanism and information exchange) national, regional and local authorities and project promoters will benefit considerably from existing expertise and get the best value for public money24. Additionally, appropriate technical assistance should be made available under the mechanisms developed for the Multi-Annual Financial Framework 2021-2027, with the aim of providing financial support for TEN-T projects of common interest, contributing thus to the Commission's multi-modal objectives.

__________________

__________________

23 COM(2017) 198 final.

23 COM(2017) 198 final.

24 COM(2017) 573 final

24 COM(2017) 573 final

Amendment    15

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 13 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(13 a)  The Commission should propose a framework for finding additional resources for projects with Union added value without reducing the budgetary appropriation for Cohesion Policy instruments.

Amendment    16

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d)  "single competent authority" means the authority which the Member State designates as responsible for performing the duties arising from this Regulation;

(d)  "single competent authority" means an existing or newly established authority, identified by a Member State at the appropriate administrative level, which acts as a contact point for project promotors, works closely with the respective European Coordinators and facilitates the implementation of this Regulation;

Amendment    17

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.  To ensure efficient administrative procedures related to projects of common interest, project promoters and all authorities concerned shall ensure that the most rapid treatment legally possible is given to these projects, including as regards the resources allocated.

3.  To ensure fast and efficient administrative procedures related to projects of common interest, project promoters and all authorities concerned shall ensure that the most rapid, effective and efficient treatment legally possible is given to these projects, including as regards the resources allocated.

Amendment    18

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  In order to meet the time limits set out in Article 6 and reduce the administrative burden related to the completion of projects of common interest, all the administrative procedures resulting from the applicable law, both national and of the Union, shall be integrated and result in only one comprehensive decision.

1.  In order to meet the time limits set out in Article 6, promote synergy between the instruments available and reduce the administrative burden related to the completion of projects of common interest, all the administrative procedures resulting from the applicable law, both national and of the Union, shall be integrated and result in only one comprehensive decision.

Amendment    19

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  In the case of projects of common interest for which the obligation to carry out assessments of the effects on the environment arises simultaneously from Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council and other Union law, Member States shall ensure that joint procedures within the meaning of Article 2(3) of Directive 2011/92/EU are provided for.

2.  In the case of projects of common interest for which the obligation to carry out assessments of the effects on the environment arises simultaneously from Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council and other Union law, Member States shall ensure that joint procedures within the meaning of Article2(3) of Directive 2011/92/EU are provided for. Member States shall also address complexities regarding potential environmental impacts in cross-border projects including where appropriate impacts on water resources or NATURA 2000 protected areas. Specialised support is required for projects in the waterborne transport sector – which includes maritime ports, inland ports and inland waterways – due to the dependence of that sector on water resources. Such projects need to be assessed within the context of the requirements of the Water Framework Directive.

Amendment    20

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(ca)  the responsible authority shall coordinate with the Member States on cross-border projects

Amendment    21

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 4 – point b – point i v

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(iv)  major milestones to be accomplished and their deadlines in view of the comprehensive decision to be taken;

(iv)  major milestones to be accomplished and their deadlines in view of the comprehensive decision to be taken, and the overall scheduled time-frame;

Amendment    22

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8.  The single competent authority shall assess the application and adopt a comprehensive decision within the period of one year from the date of submission of the complete application file in accordance with paragraph 7. Member States may set an earlier time-limit, where appropriate.

8.  The single competent authority shall assess the application and adopt a comprehensive decision within the period of one year from the date of submission of the complete application file in accordance with paragraph 7. Member States may set an earlier time-limit, where appropriate, as well as apply sanctions in case of missed deadlines.

Amendment    23

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  The European Coordinator referred to in Article 45 of Regulation (EU)² No 1315/2013 shall be empowered to closely follow the permit granting procedure for cross-border projects of common interest and to facilitate contacts between the involved competent authorities.

2.  The European Coordinator referred to in Article 45 of Regulation (EU)² No 1315/2013 and representatives of the local and regional authorities shall be empowered to closely follow the permit granting procedure for cross-border projects of common interest and to facilitate contacts between the competent authorities involved.

Amendment    24

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

On the request of a project promoter or Member State, in accordance with the relevant Union funding programmes and without prejudice to the Multi-Annual Financial Framework, the Union shall make available technical assistance for the implementation of this Regulation and the facilitation of the implementation of projects of common interest.

On the request of a project promoter or Member State, in accordance with the relevant Union funding programmes and without prejudice to the Multi-Annual Financial Framework, the Union shall make available targeted technical assistance for the implementation of this Regulation and the facilitation of the implementation of projects of common interest.

Amendment    25

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

Special assistance is also necessary for ensuring the maintenance of the network in order to ensure the sustainability and performance of TEN-T infrastructure. In this respect, the Commission and the Member states, together with the EIB, should study new funding schemes to facilitate investments in the maintenance of the network.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title

Streamlining measures for advancing the realisation of the trans-European transport network

References

COM(2018)0277 – C8-0192/2018 – 2018/0138(COD)

Committee responsible

       Date announced in plenary

TRAN

11.6.2018

 

 

 

Opinion by

       Date announced in plenary

REGI

11.6.2018

Rapporteur

       Date appointed

Demetris Papadakis

20.6.2018

Discussed in committee

9.10.2018

 

 

 

Date adopted

15.11.2018

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

30

5

1

Members present for the final vote

Pascal Arimont, Victor Boştinaru, Mercedes Bresso, Steeve Briois, Andrea Cozzolino, Rosa D’Amato, Raymond Finch, Iratxe García Pérez, Krzysztof Hetman, Ivan Jakovčić, Sławomir Kłosowski, Constanze Krehl, Martina Michels, Iskra Mihaylova, Andrey Novakov, Younous Omarjee, Konstantinos Papadakis, Mirosław Piotrowski, Stanislav Polčák, Liliana Rodrigues, Fernando Ruas, Monika Smolková, Ruža Tomašić, Ramón Luis Valcárcel Siso, Monika Vana, Matthijs van Miltenburg, Lambert van Nistelrooij, Kerstin Westphal

Substitutes present for the final vote

Martina Anderson, Daniel Buda, Ivana Maletić, Tonino Picula, Bronis Ropė, Milan Zver

Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote

Mircea Diaconu, David Martin

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

30

+

ALDE

Mircea Diaconu, Ivan Jakovčić, Iskra Mihaylova, Matthijs van Miltenburg

ECR

Ruža Tomašić

EFDD

Rosa D'Amato

GUE/NGL

Martina Michels, Younous Omarjee

PPE

Pascal Arimont, Daniel Buda, Krzysztof Hetman, Ivana Maletić, Lambert van Nistelrooij, Andrey Novakov, Stanislav Polčák, Fernando Ruas, Ramón Luis Valcárcel Siso, Milan Zver

S&D

Victor Boştinaru, Mercedes Bresso, Andrea Cozzolino, Iratxe García Pérez, Constanze Krehl, David Martin, Tonino Picula, Liliana Rodrigues, Monika Smolková, Kerstin Westphal

VERTS/ALE

Bronis Ropė, Monika Vana

5

-

ECR

Sławomir Kłosowski, Mirosław Piotrowski

EFDD

Raymond Finch

ENF

Steeve Briois

NI

Konstantinos Papadakis

1

0

GUE/NGL

Martina Anderson

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention


PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Title

Streamlining measures for advancing the realisation of the trans-European transport network

References

COM(2018)0277 – C8-0192/2018 – 2018/0138(COD)

Date submitted to Parliament

17.5.2018

 

 

 

Committee responsible

       Date announced in plenary

TRAN

11.6.2018

 

 

 

Committees asked for opinions

       Date announced in plenary

ENVI

11.6.2018

IMCO

11.6.2018

REGI

11.6.2018

 

Not delivering opinions

       Date of decision

ENVI

21.6.2018

IMCO

19.6.2018

 

 

Rapporteurs

       Date appointed

Dominique Riquet

6.7.2018

 

 

 

Discussed in committee

9.10.2018

 

 

 

Date adopted

10.1.2019

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

37

6

4

Members present for the final vote

Daniela Aiuto, Lucy Anderson, Inés Ayala Sender, Georges Bach, Izaskun Bilbao Barandica, Deirdre Clune, Michael Cramer, Luis de Grandes Pascual, Andor Deli, Isabella De Monte, Ismail Ertug, Jacqueline Foster, Tania González Peñas, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch, Merja Kyllönen, Innocenzo Leontini, Peter Lundgren, Marian-Jean Marinescu, Georg Mayer, Gesine Meissner, Cláudia Monteiro de Aguiar, Renaud Muselier, Markus Pieper, Tomasz Piotr Poręba, Gabriele Preuß, Christine Revault d’Allonnes Bonnefoy, Dominique Riquet, Massimiliano Salini, David-Maria Sassoli, Claudia Țapardel, Keith Taylor, Pavel Telička, Marita Ulvskog, Wim van de Camp, Marie-Pierre Vieu, Roberts Zīle

Substitutes present for the final vote

Rosa D’Amato, Michael Gahler, Maria Grapini, Karoline Graswander-Hainz, Peter Kouroumbashev, Evžen Tošenovský

Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote

Pascal Durand, Andrey Novakov, Csaba Sógor, Sergei Stanishev, Mylène Troszczynski

Date tabled

15.1.2019


FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

37

+

ALDE

Izaskun Bilbao Barandica, Gesine Meissner, Dominique Riquet, Pavel Telička

ECR

Roberts Zīle

ENF

Georg Mayer

PPE

Georges Bach, Wim van de Camp, Deirdre Clune, Andor Deli, Michael Gahler, Luis de Grandes Pascual, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch, Innocenzo Leontini, Marian-Jean Marinescu, Cláudia Monteiro de Aguiar, Renaud Muselier, Andrey Novakov, Markus Pieper, Massimiliano Salini, Csaba Sógor

S&D

Lucy Anderson, Inés Ayala Sender, Isabella De Monte, Ismail Ertug, Maria Grapini, Karoline Graswander-Hainz, Peter Kouroumbashev, Gabriele Preuß, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, David-Maria Sassoli, Sergei Stanishev, Claudia Țapardel, Marita Ulvskog

VERTS/ALE

Michael Cramer, Pascal Durand, Keith Taylor

6

-

ECR

Jacqueline Foster, Peter Lundgren, Tomasz Piotr Poręba

EFDD

Daniela Aiuto, Rosa D'Amato

ENF

Mylène Troszczynski

4

0

ECR

Evžen Tošenovský

GUE/NGL

Tania González Peñas, Merja Kyllönen, Marie-Pierre Vieu

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

Last updated: 29 January 2019Legal notice