What changed between the plenary report and the adopted text

Removed:Recital 24: (24) The core network with a deadline of 2030 and the extended core network with a deadline of 2040 should constitute the foundation of the sustainable multimodal transport network, representing the strategically most important nodes and links of the trans-European transport network, according to traffic needs. They should stimulate the development of the entire comprehensive network and enable Union action to concentrate on those components of the trans-European transport network with the highest European added value, in particular cross-border sections, missing links, multimodal connecting points and major bottlenecks. Construction of new railway lines in cross-border regions should in this regard be accelerated both for freight and passengers with a view to exponentially increase rail freight traffic at Union level.

Removed:(Ex AM 18( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 24 a (new): (24 a) Given the current pace of realising the TEN-T network, the 2030 deadline for the completion of the core network seems compromised. Member States should therefore consider the realisation of the core network to be of the highest priority, and should strive to realise it before the completion of the extended and comprehensive networks. This priority should be reflected in the investing tools and funding instruments at Union level, in particular for the CEF, in view of its limited budget relative to the investment needs.

Removed:(Ex AM 19( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 25: (25) Certain existing standards of the core network should be extended to the extended core and comprehensive network in order to reap full network benefits, to increase interoperability between network types and to enable more activity by more sustainable forms of transport, including through higher digitalisation and other technological solutions. The provision of clear and reliable planning for the technical specifications for interoperability (TSI) is of utmost importance for regulatory stability, legal certainty and for unlocking investments in the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS).

Removed:(Ex AM 20( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 26: (26) Exemptions from the infrastructure requirements applicable to the core, extended core and comprehensive network should be possible only in duly justified cases and subject to certain conditions. This should include cases where investment cannot be justified, or where there are specific geographic or significant physical constraints, for example in outermost regions and other remote, insular, peripheral and mountainous regions or in sparsely populated areas, or for isolated or partially isolated networks. When assessing Member States' request for exemption, the Commission shall take into due consideration the functioning and cohesiveness of the whole trans-European transport network, and in particular of connected sections in neighbouring countries and of the functioning of the European Transport Corridors. Exemptions should be granted only exceptionally and, where applicable, should be considered as limited in time.

Removed:(Ex AM 21( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 27: (27) The land-side infrastructure network, established through the core network, extended core network and comprehensive network, should integrate with the maritime dimension of the trans-European transport network. To this end, a truly sustainable, smart, seamless and resilient European Maritime Space should be created. It should encompass all maritime infrastructure components of the trans-European transport network, while paying special attention to islands and outermost regions.

Removed:(Ex AM 22( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 28 a (new): (28 a) Maritime ports play also a key role in transport connectivity, logistics, trade and cohesion, while being important for emergency supply chains, resilience, geopolitical aspects and the Union’s strategic autonomy. For inclusion in the trans-European transport network, ports should therefore also be considered, on a case to case basis, in terms of their high European added value and geostrategic relevance for the European internal market and the Union’s defence.

Removed:(Ex AM 23( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 31: (31) European Transport Corridors should cover the most important long-distance transport flows, with rail as the backbone, and consist of key European transport multimodal axis, based on parts of the trans-European transport network, be multimodal and open to the inclusion of all transport modes covered in this Regulation and cross at least two borders and involve at least three transport modes, and may also include neighbouring countries.

Removed:(Ex AM 24( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 32: (32) In order to establish the trans-European transport network in a coordinated and timely manner, thereby making it possible to maximise network effects, Member States concerned should ensure that appropriate measures are taken to finalise the projects of common interest of the core, the extended core and the comprehensive network by the given deadlines 2030, 2040 and 2050 respectively. To this end, Member States should ensure that there is coherence of the national transport and investment plans with the priorities set out in this Regulation and in the work plans of the European Coordinators. Projects of national plans which are not aligned with the Union transport objectives should not be considered as a priority for receiving Union funds.

Removed:(Ex AM 25( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 34: (34) Projects of common interest to develop the trans-European transport network in line with the requirements set out in this Regulation have European added value, as they contribute to a high-quality, interoperable, resilient, and multimodal European network, increasing sustainability, cohesion, efficiency or user benefits. In this regard, a multimodal connectivity index should be developed in order to measure the increase in connectivity and multimodality for transport infrastructure projects. The European added value is higher if it leads, in addition to the potential value for the respective Member State alone, to significant improvements of transport connections or transport flows between Member States or between a Member State and a third country. Such cross-border projects should be the subject of priority intervention by the Union in order to ensure that they are implemented.

Removed:(Ex AM 26( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 35: (35) Member States and other project promoters should ensure that assessments of projects of common interest are carried out efficiently, avoiding unnecessary delays and respecting the timeframe laid down in the Smart TEN-T Directive.

Removed:(Ex AM 27( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 35 a (new): (35 a) In the legal frameworks of many Member States, priority treatment is given to certain project categories based on their strategic importance. Priority treatment is characterised by shorter timelines, simultaneous or simplified procedures or limited timeframes for appeals. When such priority treatment is foreseen within a national legal framework, it should automatically apply to projects of common interest under this Regulation. Member States whose national legal frameworks lack such priority treatment should establish one for projects of common interest on the TEN-T.

Removed:(Ex AM 28( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 36: (36) Projects of common interest for which Union funding is sought should be the subject of a socio-economic cost-benefit analysis based on a recognised methodology, taking into account the relevant social, economic, climate-related and environmental benefits, territorial balance and costs as well as the life-cycle approach. The Commission should establish a common methodology for a socio-economic cost-benefit analysis of projects enabling a transparent, comparative appraisal of different project proposals under life cycle assessments and prioritisation of project based on their European added value. The analysis of climate-related and environmental costs and benefits should be based on the environmental impact assessment carried out pursuant to Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council21 and should comply with the timeframe set in the Smart TEN-T Directive .

Removed:(Ex AM 29( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 37: (37) In order to contribute to the climate reduction targets of the European Green Deal of a 90% cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, measures to mitigate the greenhouse gas impacts of projects of common interest in the form of new, extended or upgraded transport infrastructures should be taken into account.

Removed:(Ex AM 30( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 38: (38) Cooperation with third countries, including neighbouring countries, is necessary in order to ensure connection and interoperability between the infrastructure networks of the Union and those countries. In view of this, where appropriate, the Union should promote projects of common interest with those countries, and also assess and ensure that the objectives and requirements of the trans-European transport network are complied with in order to ensure the interoperability, continuity and decarbonisation of the Union network.

Removed:(Ex AM 31( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 38 a (new): (38 a) The resilience of the trans-European transport network has been challenged and put to test by the devastating impact of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine. That aggression has redefined the geopolitical landscape, bringing to the surface the vulnerability of the Union to unforeseen disruptive events beyond the Union’s borders. Its major impacts on global markets, such as global food security, has highlighted the fact that the internal market and Union´s transport network cannot be viewed in isolation when it comes to shaping Union policy. Better connections with the Union neighbouring partner countries are needed more than ever. / (see EC amended proposal - point 1)

Removed:(Ex AM 32( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 38 b (new): (38 b) Given that new geopolitical context, the Commission Communication of 12 May 2022 entitled “An action plan for EU-Ukraine Solidarity Lanes to facilitate Ukraine's agricultural export and bilateral trade with the EU " identifies several major transport infrastructure challenges that the Union and its neighbouring countries need to resolve in order to support Ukraine’s economy and recovery, to enable agricultural and other goods to reach the Union and world markets, and to ensure that connectivity with the Union is greatly enhanced for both exports and imports. To offer increased connectivity with the Union, that Communication proposed to assess the extension of the European Transport Corridors into Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova. / (see EC amended proposal - point 2)

Removed:(Ex AM 33( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 38 c (new): (38 c) Because of Russia’s war of agression against Ukraine, and the position adopted by Belarus in that conflict, cooperation between the Union and Russia and Belarus in the field of the TEN-T policy is neither appropriate nor in the interest of the Union. Hence the TEN-T network in those two third countries should be discontinued. As a consequence, improved cross-border connections to Russia and Belarus are no longer of high priority on the territory of the Member States. Connections currently exist between Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland with those two third countries. To reflect the lesser priority in building and upgrading those connections, the last-miles of all cross-border connections with Russia and Belarus currently included in the core network should be downgraded from the core to the comprehensive network for which only a later deadline of implementation of 2050 is provided for. However, in case of a democratic transition in Belarus building and upgrading the country’s cross border connections with the EU in line with the comprehensive economic plan for a democratic Belarus would be a high priority, including through re-inclusion of the country back in the Regulation. / (see EC amended proposal - point 3)

Removed:(Ex AM 34( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 38 d (new): (38 d) The new geopolitical context also showed how important seamless transport connections are within the Union’s territory and with neighbouring third countries. A different railway track gauge from the European nominal standard nominal track gauge of 1 435 mm severely hampers the interoperability of the railway networks across the Union and even impacts the competitiveness of those isolated railway networks. New railway lines should therefore be only built in European standard nominal track gauge of 1 435 mm. In addition, Member States with a different track gauge network should assess the migration of existing lines of the European Transport Corridors. This obligation should not apply to Ireland as its transport network, due to its insular situation, is fully detached from any land-side connection on the Union territory. / (see EC amended proposal - point 4)

Removed:(Ex AM 35( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 39: (39) To achieve transformation of the transport sector into a truly multimodal system of sustainable and smart mobility services, the Union should build a high quality transport network with rail services meeting minimum line speed. Competitive passenger rail has one of the highest potentials for the decarbonisation of transport. There is the need to develop a coherent and interoperable European high speed rail network linking its capitals and major cities, for which sufficient funding is needed. Complementing existing high speed lines with passenger lines at a minimum line speed of 160 km/h should in return lead to network effects, a more coherent network and an increased number of passengers travelling by rail. Double-track infrastructure should be encouraged for railway infrastructure suffering from bottlenecks. The completion of a high-performance network will also facilitate the development and introduction of new or different models of capacity allocation, for example interval-service timetables enabled by the Timetable Redesign (TTR) initiative.

Removed:(Ex AM 36( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 40: (40) A more sustainable, resilient and reliable rail freight network across Europe should be established to contribute to the competitiveness of multimodal and of combined transport. The infrastructure for combined railway transport and of terminals should be upgraded to ensure that intermodal transport is primarily done by rail, inland waterways or short-sea shipping and that any initial and/or final legs carried out by road are as short as possible.

Removed:(Ex AM 37( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 41: (41) Given the fact that the deployment of the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS), both onboard and trackside equipment, in Europe is in need of acceleration, whilst recognising that several Member States have already adopted plans to deploy ERTMS on their entire national rail networks by 2040, there is a need to take account of slow progress to date and set a more ambitious ERTMS deployment deadline for the comprehensive network.

Removed:(Ex AM 38( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 42: (42) ERTMS should be deployed in a continuous manner, and should be synchronised between onboard and trackside equipment, not only on the core network, extended core network and comprehensive network, including in the urban nodes, but also on access routes to multimodal terminals. Synchronised means a coordinated approach in time and place between infrastructure rollout and the rollout of onboard units of trains. This will enable operations with ERTMS only and boost the business case of railway undertakings. Under no circumstance should it be possible for a new railway project that is not planning ERTMS deployment to be financed by Union funds.

Removed:(Ex AM 39( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 43: (43) As deployment of ERTMS further contributes to the elimination of national rules affecting operation, Member States should ensure that ERTMS will be fully deployed from 2025 and the entire trans-European transport network equipped with ERTMS by 2050. Since Future Railway Mobile Communication System (FRMCS) technology is promising in terms of quality of service and cost of deployment, development initiatives should be carried out to enable its use in the future. Space technologies could also be used for a faster and less costly deployment.

Removed:(Ex AM 40( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 44: (44) ERTMS deployment should be coupled with a regulatory deadline for decommissioning of class B systems trackside, thus making ERTMS the only signalling system used in Member States. Decommissioning of class B systems trackside will bring about significant maintenance savings for infrastructure managers, as deploying ERTMS and keeping additional trackside systems for a prolonged period is very costly and complicated. Class B systems should be removed in a coordinated way with a sufficient transitional period, by 2040, allowing the railway undertakings to anticipate the change and adopt the most suitable migration strategy. ERTMS, being a system, requires a synchronised deployment both trackside and on-board and full system benefits including safety benefits, only occur when both trains and trackside are equipped. The European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA), in close cooperation with the horizontal priority coordinator and taking into account the advice of European Union Agency for Railways (ERA), is well placed to contribute to a consistent, synchronised and widespread implementation of ERTMS.

Removed:(Ex AM 41( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 44 a (new): (44 a) The useful life of rail equipment, including ERTMS, is around thirty years on average, which entails a long amortisation period for investments that, although constituting a brake on the renewal of equipment, is a major economic criterion for the balance of transactions carried out. The frequent evolution of the technical specifications of interoperability limits the lifespan of the equipment in an unpredictable way for the actors of the rail and can consequently constitute a deterrent to investment. It is therefore necessary to tend towards a situation of normative stability and allow, when possible, retrocompatibility of the different system versions.

Removed:(Ex AM 42( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 44 b (new): (44 b) While the Smart and Sustainable Mobility Strategy sets ambitious targets in terms of high speed network, doubling high-speed rail traffic volume by 2030 and tripling it by 2050, this Regulation should also aim to improve rail high-speed connectivity between capitals and major cities of Europe, in particular by completing missing high-speed rail links in the core and extended core networks.

Removed:(Ex AM 43( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 44 c (new): (44 c) Complementary to high speed trains, night trains represent a sustainable way of cross-border travelling between European cities, making use of existing rail infrastructure. For its full potential to be fulfilled across the Union, it is necessary that capacity management duly incorporates the specific need for international travel slots and ensures an optimised coexistence between cargo trains and night trains.

Removed:(Ex AM 44( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 44 d (new): (44 d) The Union set itself several targets for shifting goods from road to rail. With the finalisation of the TEN-T core network in 2030, the Union is expected to finally have a high capacity infrastructure at its disposal, which would enable it to achieve the target as set out in the Smart and Sustainable Mobility Strategy. However, managing this high-capacity European infrastructure in the current system of 25 national infrastructure managers is challenging when it comes to cross-border operations. Since already now more than 50% of rail-freight operations are crossing at least one national border, the legacy system of managing the infrastructure became a considerable capacity bottleneck on its own. Solving this problem requires a European approach and therefore, the Commission should consider submitting a a proposal for a European system of rail traffic management which should be responsible for cross border train operations and which should have the authority to guarantee seamless cross-border operations on the trans-European transport network.

Removed:(Ex AM 45( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 45: (45) Inland waterways in Europe are characterised by a heterogeneous hydro-morphology which hampers a coherent performance for all waterway stretches. Inland waterways, especially free flowing stretches, may be heavily impacted by climate and weather conditions. In order to ensure reliable international traffic, while respecting the hydro-morphology and applicable environmental legislation, TEN-T requirements should take into account the specific hydro-morphology of each waterway (for example free-flowing or regulated rivers) as well as the objectives of environmental and biodiversity policies. Such an approach should be considered at corridor or river basin level and, where needed, be tailored to a more granular level, in particular at waterway section level.

Removed:(Ex AM 391( Or. en) of FdR \\epadesres\commis\IPOL\TRAN\AM\1266\1266991EN.docx)

Removed:Recital 45 a (new): (45a) Good navigation status should be defined by the natural characteristics of free flowing river basins and no major new interventions nor dredging works, which could have a negative impact on biodiversity, should be encouraged in order to enable navigability.

Removed:(Ex AM 46( Or. en) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\TRAN\docep\AM\1274380EN.docx)