Annex 1. Updated Mailing List from Member States

Name Email Name Email

AT Reinhard HALLER Reinhard.Haller@bmvit.gv.at Thomas Spiegel Thomas.SPIEGEL@bmvit.gv.at

BE Laurent DEMILIE laurent.demilie@mobilit.fgov.be

Petar Boyanov Benov pbenov@mtitc.government.bg

Anita Angelova AAngelova@mtitc.government.bg

CY Elpida EPAMINONDA e.epaminonda@gmail.com

CZ Vit SEDMIDUBSKY vit.sedmidubsky@mdcr.cz Anna Batulkova anna.batulkova@mdcr.cz

Reiner Nagelkrämer reiner.nagelkraemer@bmvi.bund.de

Stefanie Reincke stefanie.reincke@bmvi.bund.de

Karen Vargas karen.vargas@bmvi.bund.de

Lina Harms lina.harms@bmvi.bund.de

DK Thomas ROUSING-SCHMIDT tro@TRM.dk

EE Anti MOPPEL anti.moppel@mkm.ee Kristjan Kaunissaare Kristjan.Kaunissaare@mkm.ee

EL Evagelia DIMITRAKOPOULOU e.dimitrakopoulou@yme.gov.gr

ES Maria CORRAL ccorral@fomento.es

Arto Tevajärvi Arto.Tevajarvi@liikennevirasto.fi

Juhani Tervala Juhani.Tervala@liikennevirasto.fi

JL TEN-GROUP JLTENGROUP@liikennevirasto.fi

Malla Paajanen malla@mallapaajanen.com

Guy POIRIER Guy.Poirier@developpement-durable.gouv.fr

Paul JOHO paul.joho@developpement-durable.gouv.fr

Jordan CARTIER jordan.cartier@developpement-durable.gouv.fr

Tomislav Hodak Tomislav.Hodak@mppi.hr

Katja Veneti Katja.Veneti@caacro.hr

Szebeni László szebeni.laszlo@kkk.gov.hu

Erika Saltarelli erika.saltarelli@nfm.gov.hu

IE Michael MORRISSEY MichaelMorrissey@dttas.ie

IT Federica POLCE federica.polce@mit.gov.it Maria Margherita maria.migliaccio@mit.gov.it

DE

lucie.roux@developpement-durable.gouv.fr

ttzenova@mtitc.government.bg

Georg HENKELMANN

MSMSMain contact

FR Lucie ROUX

Kristijan.Lezaic@mppi.hr

Other contacts/CC Mail

Tzvetina TZENOVABG Tzvetina TZENOVA

kromaidou@dmeo.gr; xdritsa@epoalaa.gr; idafa@mou.gr; moikonomou@mou.gr; zpapasiopi@epoalaa.gr; dionelis@ergose.gr>; t.papatriant@yme.gov.gr; m.provatas@yme.gov.gr; r.sfakianaki@yme.gov.gr; bplatias@yen.gr; andreas.mvr@hotmail.com

Lassi.Hilska@mintc.fiLassi HILSKAFI

Ref-G13@bmvi.bund.de

Kristijan LEZAIC HR

beatrix.horvath@nfm.gov.huBeatrix HORVATHHU

Name Email Name Email

LT Ramūnas RIMKUS ramunas.rimkus@sumin.lt

LU André BISSEN andre.bissen@tr.etat.lu

Iveta Rubika Iveta.Rubika@sam.gov.lv

Ilze Aleksandroviča Ilze.Aleksandrovica@sam.gov.lv

Andris Maldups Andris.Maldups@sam.gov.lv

MT Lucienne MEILAK lucienne.meilak@gov.mt

Wim VERGEER wim.vergeer@rvo.nl

Lambert Smeets lambert.smeets@rvo.nl

Adrian Mazur Adrian.Mazur@mib.gov.pl

Michal Strzelichowski Michal.Strzelichowski@mib.gov.pl

Ana Cristina Silva ACSilva@imt-ip.pt

Germano Martins gmartins@imt-ip.pt

Hélder Cristóvão hcristovao@imt-ip.pt

IMT - dseap.secretariado dseap.secretariado@imt-ip.pt

Jose Cruz jose.cruz@amt-autoridade.pt

Margarida Costa MCosta@portodelisboa.pt

Marcosde Jesus marcosteixeira@apram.pt

RO Catalin COSTACHE catalin.costache@mt.ro

SE Emil FASTEN emil.fasten@trafikverket.se Melissa Frodin Melissa.Frodin@regeringskansliet.se

SI Matjaz VRCKO Matjaz.Vrcko@gov.si

Stanislav Trčík Stanislav.Trcik@mindop.sk

Ludmila Vodzinská Ludmila.Vodzinska@mindop.sk

UK Andrew PRICE AndrewD.Price@dft.gsi.gov.uk Andrew Ashbourne Andrew.Ashbourne@dft.gsi.gov.uk

NL

MSMain contact Other contacts/CC Mail

ICSeabra@imt-ip.ptIsabel Carvalho SEABRA PT

gerko.slotman@rvo.nlGerko SLOTMAN

Michal.Kwiatkowski@mib.gov.pl

SK Rastislav FARKAS Rastislav.Farkas@mindop.sk

LV Sergejs.Lukins@sam.gov.lv

Michal KWIATKOWSKI PL

Sergejs LUKINS

Annex 2. List of the National Programmes per Member State

Transport National programmes

Bulgaria

o Operational programme “Innovations and Competitiveness” [BG]

o Operational programme “Regions in Growth” [BG]

o Operational programme “Transport and transport infrastructure” [BG]

Czech Republic

o Enterprise and Innovation for Competitiveness [CS]

o Integrated Regional Operational Programme [CS]

o Transport [CS]

Cyprus

o Competitiveness and sustainable development [EL]

Estonia

o Operational Programme for Cohesion Policy Funding 2014-2020 [ET]

France

o Operational Programme ERDF-ESF Guadeloupe et St Martin Etat 2014-

2020 [FR]

o Interregional programme Rhône 2014-2020 [FR]

o Interregional programme Réunion Conseil Régional 2014-2020 [FR]

o Regional programme Guadeloupe Conseil Régional 2014-2020 [FR]

o Regional programme Languedoc-Roussillon 2014-2020 [FR]

o Regional programme Martinique Conseil Régional 2014-2020 [FR]

o Regional programme Mayotte 2014-2020 [FR]

Greece

o ATTICA OP [EL]

o CONTINENTAL GREECE OP [EL]

o CRETE OP [EL]

o EASTERN MACEDONIA-THRACE OP [EL]

o IONIAN ISLANDS OP [EL]

o NORTH AEGEAN OP [EL]

o PELOPONNESUS OP [EL]

o SOUTH AEGEAN OP [EL]

o THESSALY OP [EL]

o TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE, ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABLE

DEVELOPMENT OP [EL]

o WESTERN GREECE OP [EL]

o WESTERN MACEDONIA OP [EL]

o CENTRAL MACEDONIA OP [EL]

o COMPETITIVENESS, ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND INNOVATION OP [EL]

o EPIRUS OP [EL]

Italy

o National Operational Programme on Infrastructures and Networks [IT]

o ROP Basilicata ERDF [IT]

o ROP Calabria ERDF ESF [IT]

o ROP Campania ERDF [IT]

o ROP Puglia ERDF ESF [IT]

o ROP Sicilia ERDF [IT]

Latvia

o Growth and Employment [LV]

Lithuania

o Operational Programme for EU Structural Funds Investments for 2014-

2020 [LT]

Hungary

o Integrated Transport OP [HU]

Malta

o Fostering a competitive and sustainable economy to meet our

challenges [MT]

Poland

o OP Development of Eastern Poland [PL]

o OP Infrastructure and Environment [PL]

o ROP 1 Regional Operational Programme for Dolnośląskie Voivodeship

2014-2020 [PL]

o ROP 10 Regional Operational Programme for Podlaskie Voivodeship [PL]

o ROP 11 Regional Operational Programme for Pomorskie

Voivodeship [PL]

o ROP 12 Regional Operational Programme for Śląskie Voivodeship [PL]

o ROP 13 Regional Operational Programme for Świętokrzyskie

Voivodeship [PL]

o ROP 14 Regional Operational Programme for Warmińsko-Mazurskie

Voivodeship [PL]

o ROP 15 Regional Operational Programme for Wielkopolskie

Voivodeship [PL]

o ROP 16 Regional Operational Programme for Zachodniopomorskie

Voivodeship [PL]

o ROP 2 Regional Operational Programme for Kujawsko-Pomorskie

Voivodeship 2014-2020 [PL]

o ROP 3 Regional Operational Programme for Lubelskie Voivodeship 2014-

2020 [PL]

o ROP 4 Regional Operational Programme for Lubuskie Voivodeship 2014-

2020 [PL]

o ROP 5 Regional Operational Programme for Łódzkie Voivodeship 2014-

2020 [PL]

o ROP 6 Regional Operational Programme for Małopolskie Voivodeship

2014-2020 [PL]

o ROP 7 Regional Operational Programme for Mazowieckie Voivodeship

2014-2020 [PL]

o ROP 8 Regional Operational Programme for Opolskie Voivodeship [PL]

o ROP 9 Regional Operational Programme for Podkarpackie

Voivodeship [PL]

Portugal

o Competitiveness and Internationalisation OP [PT]

o Regional OP Azores (Autonomous Region) [PT]

o Regional OP Madeira (Autonomous Region) [PT]

Croatia

o Competitiveness and Cohesion OP [HR]

Romania

o Large Infrastructure Operational Programme [RO]

o Regional Operational Programme [RO]

Slovenia

o Operational Programme for the Implementation of the EU Cohesion

Policy in the period 2014 – 2020[SL]

Slovakia

o Integrated Infrastructure [SK]

o Integrated Regional Operational Programme [SK]

Spain

o Andalucía ERDF 2014-20 OP [ES]

o Canary Islands ERDF 2014-20 OP [ES]

o Ceuta ERDF 2014-20 OP [ES]

o Extremadura ERDF 2014-20 OP [ES]

o Melilla ERDF 2014-20 OP [ES]

o Sustainable growth ERDF 2014-20 OP [ES]

Sweden

o Central Norrland [SV]

o Upper Norrland [SV]

United Kingdom

o United Kingdom - ERDF England

o United Kingdom - ERDF West Wales and The Valleys

Annex 3: Data collection template for the financial funding sources Proje

ct code

Location

country code

Section

name

GIS ID of

TEN-T Sectio

n

Project

title

Project short

description

Type of

project I

Type of

project II

Project

Start Date (year)

Project

End Date (year)

Beneficiary

country code

Type of

network

Mode of

transport

Contribution to the indicator

Total expenditure for the

project (€)

Total expenditur

e "Financial source" (€)

(source reporting

the expenditur

es)

Expenditure

"Financial source" 2014 (€) (source

reporting the

expenditures)

Expenditure

"Financial source" 2015 (€) (source

reporting the

expenditures)

Total co-

financing

from other

sources (€)

CEF

Total co-

financing

from other

sources (€)

EIB

Total co-

financing

from other

sources (€)

ERDF

Total co-

financing

from other

sources (€) CF

Total co-financing

from other

sources (€)

National

funding

Total co-

financing from other

sources (€)

Other (specif

y amount and source

)

The guidelines for filling in the table are presented below:

• Project code: code used by the reporting source

• Location country code: code of the country where the project was running

• Section name: section where the project was located

• GIS ID of the TENtec section: GIS ID of the section, available in TENtec

• Project title: indicate the project title

• Project short description: short description of the project

• Type of project I – drop-down list:

o Studies

o Mixed (studies and works)

o Works

• Type of project II – drop-down list:

o New construction

o Rehabilitation/ Upgrade

o New implementation e.g ERTMS implementation

• Project Start Date and Project End Date: years when the project was started and finished.

• Beneficiary country code: code of the country(ies) benefited from the project

• Type of network - drop-down list:

o Core

o Comprehensive

o Core and Comprehensive

• Mode of transport - drop-down list:

o Road

o Rail: ERTMS

o IWW

o ITS

o MOS

o RRT

o Ports

o Airport

o Multimodal

• Contribution of the project to the indicator – drop-down list:

o Rail: electrification

o Rail: track gauge 1435mm

o Rail: ERTMS implementation

o Rail: Line speed>=100km/h in accordance with art. 39 para. 2. Item a) (ii) of the Regulation 1315/2013

o Rail: Axle load (>=22.5t)

o Rail: Train length (740m)

o Road: Express road/ motorway

o Road: Availability of clean fuels

o IWW: CEMT requirements for class IV IWW

o IWW: Permissible Draught (min 2.5m)

o IWW: Permissible Height under bridges(min. 5.25m)

o IWW: RIS implementation (% of km on which the minimum requirements set out by the RIS directive are met)

o Ports: Connection to rail

o Ports: Connection to IWW CEMT IV

o Ports: Availability of clean fuels

o Ports: Availability of at least one freight terminal open to all operators in a non-discriminatory way and application of transparent charges

o Ports: Facilities for ship generated waste (only for seaports)

o Airports: Connection to rail

o Airports: Availability of at least one terminal open to all operators in a non-discriminatory way and application of transparent, relevant and fair charges

o Airports: Availability of clean fuels

o Rail Road Terminals (RRT): Capability for Intermodal (unitised) transhipment

o Rail Road Terminals (RRT): 740m train terminal accessibility

o Rail Road Terminals (RRT): Electrified train terminal accessibility

o Rail Road Terminals (RRT): Availability of at least one freight terminal open to all operators in a non-discriminatory way and application of transparent charges

• Total expenditure for the project (€): total amount of money invested to the project from all financial sources.

• Total expenditure "Financial source" (€): total amount of money spent to the project by the reporting fund.

• Expenditure "Financial source" 2014 (€): amount of money spent to the project by the reporting fund in 2014.

• Expenditure "Financial source" 2015 (€): amount of money spent to the project by the reporting fund in 2015.

The following columns are filled in only if the project is co-financed by any other financial sources.

• Total co-financing from other sources (€) CEF: amount of money from CEF spent on the project.

• Total co-financing from other sources (€) EIB: amount of money from EIB spent on the project

• Total co-financing from other sources (€) CF: amount of money from CF spent on the project

• Total co-financing from other sources (€) National funding: amount of money from national funding spent on the project

• Total co-financing from other sources (€) Other: amount of money from other funds spent on the project. Please, specify amount and source.

Annex 4: Data collection template for the Member States Project code

Location country

code

Section name

GIS ID of TEN-

T Section

Project title

Project short

description

Type of project

I

Type of project

II

Project Start Date

(year)

Project End Date

(year)

Beneficiary country

code

Type of network

Mode of transport

Contribution to the

indicator

Total expenditure

for the project (€)

Expenditure in 2014 (€)

Expenditure in 2015 (€)

The guidelines for filling in the table are presented below:

• Project code: code used by the reporting source

• Location country code: code of the country where the project was running

• Section name: section where the project was located

• GIS ID of the TENtec section: GIS ID of the section, available in TENtec

• Project title: indicate the project title

• Project short description: short description of the project

• Type of project I – drop-down list:

o Studies

o Mixed (studies and works)

o Works

• Type of project II – drop-down list:

o New construction

o Rehabilitation/ Upgrade

o New implementation e.g ERTMS implementation

• Project Start Date and Project End Date: years when the project was started and finished.

• Beneficiary country code: code of the country(ies) benefited from the project

• Type of network - drop-down list:

o Core

o Comprehensive

o Core and Comprehensive

• Mode of transport - drop-down list:

o Road

o Rail: ERTMS

o IWW

o ITS

o MOS

o RRT

o Ports

o Airport

o Multimodal

• Contribution of the project to the indicator - drop-down list::

o Rail: electrification

o Rail: track gauge 1435mm

o Rail: ERTMS implementation

o Rail: Line speed>=100km/h in accordance with art. 39 para. 2. Item a) (ii) of the Regulation 1315/2013

o Rail: Axle load (>=22.5t)

o Rail: Train length (740m)

o Road: Express road/ motorway

o Road: Availability of clean fuels

o IWW: CEMT requirements for class IV IWW

o IWW: Permissible Draught (min 2.5m)

o IWW: Permissible Height under bridges(min. 5.25m)

o IWW: RIS implementation (% of km on which the minimum requirements set out by the RIS directive are met)

o Ports: Connection to rail

o Ports: Connection to IWW CEMT IV

o Ports: Availability of clean fuels

o Ports: Availability of at least one freight terminal open to all operators in a non-discriminatory way and application of transparent charges

o Ports: Facilities for ship generated waste (only for seaports)

o Airports: Connection to rail

o Airports: Availability of at least one terminal open to all operators in a non-discriminatory way and application of transparent, relevant and fair charges

o Airports: Availability of clean fuels

o Rail Road Terminals (RRT): Capability for Intermodal (unitised) transhipment

o Rail Road Terminals (RRT): 740m train terminal accessibility

o Rail Road Terminals (RRT): Electrified train terminal accessibility

o Rail Road Terminals (RRT): Availability of at least one freight terminal open to all operators in a non-discriminatory way and application of transparent charges

• Total expenditure (€): total amount of money spent to the project by the Member State.

• Expenditure in 2014 (€): amount of money spent to the project by the Member State in 2014.

• Expenditure in 2015 (€): amount of money spent to the project by the Member State in 2015.

Annex 5 Guidelines for Member States

GUIDANCE NOTES

Please read this guidance notes before starting to fill in the data collection template.

Objective The objective of this data collection exercise is to

a) Identify national data/information sources existing in each Member States where this

information/data can be (partly) found. This means that in the future this exercise can be

done without this request to the Member States – Data collection sheet 1

b) look to the past (years 2014 and 2015) and collect the information about the projects

in each Member State from the core and comprehensive network that contribute to the

TEN-T implementation that are not being reported to the EC.

The Consortium has already collected the information from CEF and TEN-T programme,

EIB loans database, DG Regio and corridors project list from 2014 – Data collection sheet

2

Data collection template

This file is organised in the 5 sheets described below:

Data collection 1: contains the request on the identification of data/information sources and

used reporting tools

Data collection 2: correspond to the template to fill in the projects data information. Please

follow the indications in the cells and in the guidance notes part B to facilitate the analysis of

the data in a later stage.

Guidance notes: guidance notes on how to fill in the data

Contact person: identify a contact person responsible for filling in the questionnaire, so that

we can contact that person in case of doubts.

Consultant contact details: contain the consultants contact details for questions and to send

the data collection template filled in.

Part A

Selection criteria for the projects

The projects should be selected according to the following criteria:

Projects that are located in the core and comprehensive network. You can consult the core

and comprehensive network on TENtec

Projects that run between 2014 and 2015: menaing projects that have started before 2014

but where still running on 2014 and/or 2015 or later: projects that started somewhere in

2014 and/or 2015 and are still running

Type of projects: only works (implementation) and/or mixed projects, but not studies. Pilot

works should be classified as "works"

Type of works: works that lead to upgrade / rehabilitate projects (current maintenance

should not be included)

Projects that contribute to the objectives of TEN-T (article 4). The objectives are indicated

below in part B.

Projects above 1 million

The projects to be selected should be the ones that are not already being reported in the

corridors project list from 2014, submitted to EIB/CEF/TEN-T programme/DG Regio. It

should be mainly projects in the comprehensive network.

Please find below the explanation of each collumn from data collection2

PART B

Collumn Name of the field

A1 ID This should be filled in by Panteia

B1 Location_country_name Country name using the country code e.g PT for Portugal

C1 Location_section_name Section name, could be identified between city A and city B. If you have the name of the section according TENtec, please don't fill in this field but the E1 collumn

D1 Section_TENT Section name from TENtec

E1 Project_title Indicate the project title

F1 Project_short_description Write a short description of the project. A short paragraph is enough, the idea is to understand the type of project

G1 Type_of_project Indicate if it is new construction, rehabilition that lead to an upgrade, etc

H1 Project_start_Date report in the format mm.yy, if you don't know the month use "00.2014"

I1 Project_end_Date report in the format mm.yy, if you don't know the month use "00.2014"

J1 (i) accessibility and connectivity of all regions of the Union, including remote, outermost, insular, peripheral and mountainous regions, as well as sparsely populated areas;

(ii) reduction of infrastructure quality gaps between Member States;

(iii) for both passenger and freight traffic, interconnection between transport infrastructure for, on the one hand, long-distance traffic and, on the other, regional and local traffic;

(iv) a transport infrastructure that reflects the specific situations in different parts of the Union and provides for a balanced coverage of all European regions;

K1 (i) the removal of bottlenecks and the bridging of missing links, both within the transp.infrast. and at connecting points between these, within MS' territories and between them;

(ii) the interconnection and interoperability of national transport networks;

(iii) optimal integration and interconnection of all transport modes;

(iv) the promotion of economically efficient, high-quality transport contributing to further economic growth and competitiveness;

(v) efficient use of new and existing infrastructure;

(vi) cost-efficient application of innovative technological and operational concepts;

L1 (i) development of all transport modes in a manner consistent with ensuring transport that is sustainable and economically efficient in the long term;

(ii) contribution to the objectives of low greenhouse gas emissions, low-carbon and clean transport, fuel security, reduction of external costs and environmental protection;

(iii) promotion of low-carbon transport with the aim of achieving by 2050 a significant reduction in CO2 emissions, in line with the relevant Union CO2 reduction targets;

M1 Increasing the benefits for its users through: (i) meeting the mobility and transport needs of its users within the Union and in relations with third countries;

(ii) ensuring safe, secure and high-quality standards, for both passenger and freight transport;

(iii) supporting mobility even in the event of natural or man-made disasters, and ensuring accessibility to emergency and rescue services;

(iv) the establishment of infras. requirements, in the field of interoperability, safety and security, which will ensure quality, efficiency and sustainability of transport services;

(v) accessibility for elderly people, persons of reduced mobility and disabled passengers.

N1 Beneficiary_country Fill in using the country code e.g PT for Portugal

O1 Type of network Indicate if it is core or comprehensive network by using "core" or "comprehensive". This can be consulted in TENtec or in the annex 1 from the Regulation 1315/2013

P1 Mode_of_transport Indicate the transport mode e.g air, road, rail, airport, port, iww, multimodal, ITS, MoS, ERTMS, RIS

Q1 Total expenditure 2014 (€) The amount spent in 2014 for this project, in euros

R1 Total expenditure 2015 (€) The amount spent in 2015 for this project, in euros

S1 Total amount spent with the project If the amount spent is not known, but the total amount of the project is, please indicate the total amount. In that case, please also indicate the duration of the project in collumn V1

T1 Duration of the project Total duration of the project

U1 Comments Any comment that you believe it will be relevant.

Sustainability through:

Efficiency through:

Cohesion through:

To which objective (article 4 from

Regulation 1315/2013) the project

is contributing to

Explanation

Annex 6 FAQ’s

Frequently Asked Questions – FAQ’s

Question/ Remark Answer

1 Can Panteia add some criteria regarding the scale of the projects that shall be reported? Otherwise it could happen that even small projects like local traffic light upgrade would be included.

Report only the projects above 1 million € ( work and mixed projects: study + works). It should be clear that the projects have to be on the Comprehensive and Core Network and not on a side street of an urban area.

2 Will the collected database be implemented in TENtec? Yes, the idea is to include the data collected into TENtec.

3 Is the requested Excel table in the format that will be used for reporting in future?

The template will serve as a basis for future reporting obligations according to Art. 49.3, however, minor adaptations due to "lessons learned" might be necessary.

4 The information for 2015 is not available yet. If this is the case, please use indicative project information.

5 Does the information concern only projects with EU funding or MS need to provide data for projects with other types of funding (national, PPP, loans, etc.)?

The exercise is exactly to collect all the other projects from core and comprehensive network that are not reported to the EC via CEF or EIB or DG Regio or the corridors project lists, as Panteia have access to those. In the end, a duplication check will be done to guarantee that projects are not reported twice.

6 Is it ok if the information is sent in pieces instead of compiled by country? It would facilitate the process if each Member State could act as national coordinator, compile all the information from his country and send everything in a bundle. If not, please send them in parts.

7 As the 4 TEN-T objectives is a broader definitions, is it ok if the criteria to select the projects follow the infrastructure requirements as set out in art. 39, 2 a) for rail and 39, 2 c) for road of the TEN-T Regulation?

In general, we need to list projects which have a broader scope (covering also the Comprehensive Network) than the specific infrastructure requirements stated in Article 39, since they are related to the Core Network. Therefore we propose that the decision about whether the project fulfils one or more of the four

Question/ Remark Answer

objectives (Cohesion, Efficiency, Sustainability, Increasing the benefits for its users) shall be done by checking whether this project satisfies at least one of the criteria determined for each objective in Article 4. These criteria are also provided on the “Guidance notes” tab of the Excel sheet. It is up to Member States to determine the impact of each of the objectives.

8 Clarifying question about timeline of the projects that shall be included. Should a project that was ongoing in 2014-2015, but will be finalised only in 2016 be included?

Yes,. All projects running during 2014-2015 needs to be identified and included, even if they will be finalized at a later stage. In fact it's like taking a snapshot for 2014-2015 (in terms of technical and financial implementation), doesn’t matter if projects started before this period or if they will end after this period., as long as they were running somewhere in 2014 and/or 2015.

9 As regards ports, airports, and RRTs: Are there any types of projects that you are especially interested in regarding these modes of transport?

For ports, airports and RRTs we are particularly interested in hinterland connectivity, last mile access, rather than e.g. maritime access or aviation. We are also interested in innovation projects, clean fuels and ICT.

10 The ports and airports are not state owned, and therefore MoT does not have all the relevant info.

Please forward this request to them or send Panteia the contact details so that they could contact them.

11

Clarification on the location (core, comprehensive, coore network corridors) of the projects that should be reported, to avoid collecting information that the Consortium already have.

The Core Network is defined as a subset of the Comprehensive network (entire TEN-T), and the Core Network Corridors (CNCs) are part of the Core Network to facilitate the completion of the Core Network by 2030. Since we have the information on CEF co-funded and EIB co-financed projects on the CNCs, we only need the remaining national projects, which are not yet covered (geographically) on the Core and the Comprehensive network.

Question/ Remark Answer

So all projects which are not on your CNC project list, but which are in line with the selection criteria we communicated on 08/04/2016.

12 Shall MS provide information only about the projects that include works?

Please include projects that are either works or mixed projects (works + studies), meaning that if it is only a study, it should not be reported. On the other hand if it is works but had a study before, you should include both.

13 Shall MS provide information only about the projects that lead to upgrade / rehabilitate projects

Yes, this is correct.

14 Shall we report reopening lines projects and new lines projects? If "re-opened" lines will lead to an upgrade (not maintenance or rehabilitation), then please report those too. "New lines" should be reported too.

15 Shall MS provide information only about the projects that are not located in the CNC?

This is correct as the projects located on the CNC shall be already included to the Core Network Corridors project list from the corridors studies from 2014.

16 In case that a project is located on two or more sections of TEN-T network, shall MS split the relevant expenditures per section? Furthermore how to split costs for horizontal projects?

In those cases, you don’t need to split the expenditures per section, just identify the sections in the cell where that is asked.

17 Roads - does MS need to collect information only on TEN-T network which is strictly in TENtec system with ID nr., or should they also collect information on all transit streets which connects the cities with TEN-T network?

Those projects only need to be reported if they are above 1 million and if they play an important role in long-distance freight and passenger traffic, integrate the main urban and economic centres, interconnect with other transport modes or link mountainous, remote, landlocked and peripheral NUTS 2 regions to central regions of the Union. If the project is a current maintenance work should not be reported, but if it is a rehabilitation that leads to an upgrade yes.

Annex 7 Country Fiches for the MS Progress

Country Fiches for the MS Progress Introduction This country analysis is presented with more detail in Chapter 5.3. This annex is presentig a two page summary per country. On the one hand, it is presented the information on project investments and on the other, data on the progress of the indicator implementation. The analysis has been conducted at country level with the goal towards linking the projects conducted within the network with improvements in infrastructure. It should be noted that only those projects where data on costs were available, were taken into account. This analysis is considering the projects running solely in one country, as the financial information of cross boarder projects was provided without indicating each country share. This information in terms of budget and number of projects is provided in Chapter 3 (table 11). A summary for the 28 MS is presented in this Annex and present the following content: General information: • Map with the core and comprehensive network illustrated (Source: TENtec) • Number of projects in 2014/2015 per network type Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial investment information • Total project expenditure in 2014/2015 per transport mode and type of funding source • Realisation of the TEN-T network: technical parameters indicators • Indicators calculated per transport mode Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network: levels of financial investment vs technical compliance realisation • The project’s contribution towards the state of implementation of the network in 2014/2015.

Before reading the following analysis, there are a couple of notes explained below regarding the source data/information and due limitations of analysis. General information: The projects on the type of network core/comprehensive correspond to the projects that covered both type of network e.g horizontal projects, or where this information was not provided by the sources.

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information The information provided by the funding sources entails several aspects to bear in mind, as the data provided in not in the same level for all the sources, e.g while data from EIB cover the period 2014-2015, the data from DG Regio only cover 2014, as 2015 was still not available. This details are explained below for each of the funding sources:

CEF (Entails the previous TEN -T 2007-2013 results and CEF 2014 Results) The projects from CEF Programme are organised in a database providing almost all the needed information for this study. The previous TEN-T Programme, now managed by INEA, still had projects running and that information was provided together with CEF Results from 2014. INEA indicates for each project, the beneficiaries, the country location, transport mode, type of project (study, works or mixed), expenditures spent in 2014 and 2015, CEF funding and total cost of the project. This enabled to introduce the data into the financial database and to run the procedures defined to select the relevant projects for analysis (detailed in chapter 3). The information about the budget share for each country, for the horizontal projects that run into more than one country is not presented for CEF projects, neither for any other of the sources, which doesn't enable to consider these "common projects" in the country analysis. According to our methodology, in the future, this should be identified, so that horizontal projects could be analysed at a country level (i.e one project, but specific share per MS). Also, the contribution to the indicator that this project is contributing to, is needed to perform a more detailed analysis of investment in the projects on the network and due realisation of the network. The CEF Results 2015 were not available when the data collection was done. The results were available in the beginning of July. Although, the recommendation for the future to collect the data from the EU Funding sources is between April and June, the results from CEF 2015 can be included when the MS data collection is being done. EIB The projects from EIB were provided in a database with aggregated figures. The country, expenditures for 2014/2015, EIB share and total cost of the project is provided. The information about the transport modes(s) were missing, so this was filled in according to the description of the projects. In the future, this information should be requested, to guarantee that the transport mode is identified without any uncertainty. DG Regio (Cohesion Fund, ERDF, CF+ERDF) The Projects coming from DG Regio, due to the format of the data provided, were very difficult to tackle and assumptions had to be done. No information about the type of projects is presented, so it is assumed that they are all works and/or mixed (study + works). The information per project only present the total amount/cost of the project and no indication of the duration of the projects, so that extrapolations could be done. The Operational Programmes per country provide the investment in 2014 (2015 is missing). To be able to use this data, the individual projects were associated to the respective Operational Programme, as both excel files had a code for this. This means that the number of projects of DG Regio is underestimate, as it is being considered one project as the Operational Programme that contains a set of projects. This was the only possible way to use this data in a meaningful and reliable way. Due to this, the number of projects is underestimate and also, the expenditures are also only for 2014, so when comparing to the other sources, it is known that the budget for DG Regio projects should also be higher for the reporting period. Finally, the categories Cohesion Fund projects, ERDF projects and ERDF+CF were used but in the future the projects catalogued with CF+ERDF should present the budget splitted to have the two categories CF and ERDF.

Member State The data collected from the MS was requested in a format that would allow to perform the analysis needed for this study. However, there were several obstacles regarding this data request consultation, i.e One month was not enough for the majority of the countries to collect the data; April as the data collection month was not the adecuate, as some countries only have their financial figures closed in May/June; and finally, some of the requested information per project was not provided. Due to the short time to treat the data, there was not enough time to go back with further requests/clarifications to all MS, which means that some information is still missing. MS reported some projects that were also reported via the EU sources, which lead us to create a procedure to detect some duplications of projects more easily. This duplication check is very difficult as different sources have different titles and descriptions of the same projects, which means that although is the same project, it might not be detected. This means that despite this duplication check that was done, some projects might face the risk of being reported twice. In the future, the recommendation is to first collect the information from EU sources and send this to MS to complete. This way, this obstacle will not appear again. CNC Project list 2014 studies The projects from the CNC Project list developed in 2014 were used as a starting point to collect projects contributing to the TEN-T networks that were collected by the Consultants together with MS at that time. However, the quality and uncertainty of some of the data for this study purpose was not the best. There is information missing and the funding source identification is the most crucial one, as it is not possible to assign the funding source to some projects. The solution found to be able to include this projects was to created a category called "Other Financial Sources". This should be National/Regional sources, as the projects with EU Funding, were reported by EU Institutions. Also, by the description (which is lacking for several projects) it is not clear if the projects are studies, works or mixed, which again, compromise the reliability of all data collected via the CNC Project List. The Project list was done in 2014 which means that the projects reported with starting date 2015 were a prediction that might not occurred. Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network The calculation of the indicators compliance is based on the TENtec data, downloaded in March 2016, and therefore it is linked to the current filling rates of TENtec for 2014 (as presented in table 7, Chapter 2). This justifies why some of the indicators shows 100% of compliance, when it is known that it cannot be the case. It is related with the filling rate of the indicator and the current data that was provided and validated by the MS. As already mentioned in Chapter 2, the data for 2014 and 2015 will be completely and accurately filled in by the current studies launched by the European Commission. This lead to the recommendation regarding the relevance of the completeness and accuracy of the data in TENtec and the necessity to have MS filling in this information on a more frequent basis.

AUSTRIA (AT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information When looking at projects running solely in Austria, 104 projects have been identified from the reviewed

sources. The combined expenditures for all projects for 2014 and 2015 amount to 10.304 m Eur. The

majority of projects (76 projects) were running on the core network, while 18 projects addressed the

comprehensive network. Furthermore, 10 projects covered both type of networks or the type of

network was not specified.

Type of network

Total

expenditures

(m Eur)

Number of

projects Comprehensive 489 18

Comprehensive/Core 1.775 10 Core 8.039 76

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

AUSTRIA (AT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information The funding sources used to fund the Austrian TEN-T network in 2014 – 2015 were MS / National funding,

CEF and EIB financing. The highest investment was done by the MS / National funding – 4.649 m Eur

(93%), while EIB financing was significantly lower, 230 m Eur. The funding from CEF correspond to 2% of

the total expenditures - 102 m Eur.

The highest share of the projects (61 projects) are related to rail, followed by road projects (27 projects).

In terms of expenditures these are also the transport mode related projects with higher figures. For the

other transport modes the number of projects is significantly lower and varies between 5 projects for IWW,

4 for RRT, 3 for Ports and 2 for both Multimodal and Airports.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

BELGIUM (BE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

From the available sources, 57 projects were identified for Belgium, 46 of which were located on

the core network, while for 11 projects the type of network was not specified and/or covered

both types of network. In total, the expenditures for Belgian projects in the years 2014 – 2015

amounted to 3.397 m Eur.

Type of network

Total expenditures (2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive/Core 587 11

Core 2.809 46

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

BELGIUM (BE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

Three financial sources were used to fund the projects running in Belgium in 2014 – 2015: MS / National

funding, CEF and EIB. The highest investment was done via MS / National funding (1.365 m Eur), which

corresponds to 87% of all expenditures. The investment made by EIB, which was the second biggest financial

source, reached 131 m Eur. CEF contributed with the equivalent to 5% - 75 m Eur.

With regards to the transport mode, 49% of the projects were related to Rail. The overall costs for these

projects amounted to 1.372 m Eur, representing 40% of the total expenditures. The second largest amount

of projects (14 projects) addressed the IWW network, and accounted for 24% of the total expenditures,

followed by Road projects that represented 27% of the total costs spread across 7 projects and Ports also

with 7 projects (8% of the total expenditures). Only 1 project addressed Airports and represents the smallest

share of expenditures (1% of the total costs).

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

General information

In total, 39 projects were reported for Bulgaria, with the combined budget of 3.534 m Eur . The majority

of the projects were running on the core network (21 projects), while 7 projects addressed the

comprehensive network. For 11 projects, the location covered both types of network and/or was not

defined.

Type of network

Total expenditures

(2014 and 2015) (m Eur)

Number of

projects

Comprehensive 196 7 Comprehensive/Core 1.642 11

Core 1.696 21

BULGARIA (BG): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

The highest amount of expenditures comes from MS / National financial sources (1.293 m Eur), followed by

ERDF + CF (646 m Eur). The share of the other financial sources in the total amount of investments was

significantly lower: EIB – 40 m Eur (2%), ERDF – 21 m Eur (0,8 %), CF – 12 m Eur (0,6%), CEF – 3,5 m Eur

(0,2%).

The largest investments were made in multimodal projects which amounted to 1.674 m Eur (47% of the total

expenditures). The second largest investment was made for Roads and amounted to 1.211 m Eur (34% of

total expenditures), while 17% of the total costs were invested in the development of Rail transport. In IWW

and ITS, only 1% was invested.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

BULGARIA (BG): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 37 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all projects

in 2014 and 2015 amounting to 1.985 m Eur. 56% of the projects (22 projects) addressed the

comprehensive network, while for 4 projects the type of network was not specified and/or covered both

types of network. The remaining 11 projects pertained the core network.

Type of network

Total expenditures (2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 128 22

Comprehensive/Core 1.784 4

Core 74 11

CROATIA (HR): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

CROATIA (HR): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

The majority of the investment (1.904 m Eur - 95,9%) for the development of the TEN-T infrastructure in

2014 – 2015 was done from MS / National funding. The share for the other funding sources was very small:

66 m eur (3,3%) invested by ERDF, 13 m Eur (0,7%) – by EIB, 1 m Eur (0,1%) – by CF.

Cost-wise, the highest expenditures are documented for the EIB co-financing programme during 2014-

2020; the project aims at co-financing ESIF supported schemes in Croatia during the programming period

2014-2020 under a Structural Programme Loan (SPL) and is not mode specific. It is purposed for improving

the societal needs (such as pollution abatement).

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

CYPRUS (CY): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 2 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all projects

in 2014 and 2015 amounting to 206 m Eur. For both projects the appartenence of a specific network

couldn’t be determined and/or covered both types of network.

Type of network Total expenditures (2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive/Core 206 2

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

CYPRUS (CY): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

The majority of the investment (204 m Eur or 98,8%) for the development of the TEN-T infrastructure in

2014 – 2015 was done from MS / National funding. The share for the other funding sources were 204 m Eur

- 98,8%.

The majority of the investment (204 m eur or 98,8%) for the development of the TEN-T infrastructure in

2014 – 2015 was done from MS / National funding. The share for the other funding sources were around 2 m

Eur - 1,1%.

CZECH REPUBLIC (CZ): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

From the reviewed sources, 97 projects which satisfy the selected criteria, were identified for the Czech

Republic. In total, these projects amount to 8.322 m Eur. The majority of projects were implemented on

the core network (50 projects), while 27 projects were carried out on the comprehensive network. The

type of network was not specified and/or covered both types of network for 20 projects. Type of network

Total expenditures

(2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of

projects

Comprehensive 2.142 27 Comprehensive/Core 2.956 20

Core 3.224 50

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

CZECH REPUBLIC (CZ): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

The projects financed in the Czech Republic in 2014 – 2015 had four financial sources: CEF, CF, ERDF and

MS / National funding. The expenditures coming from MS/ National funding corresponds to slightly more

than half of the total of the expenditures - 3.409 m Eur. The second higher funding source was CF, 46%

(3.066 m Eeur). ERDF and CEF showed almost the same amount of investments (61 and 60 m Eur

respectively).

The most attention, both in terms of total expenditures and number of projects, was given to the Rail

network. Seventy projects were running in 2014-2015 to improve the quality of the Czech Rail network,

which accounted for 5.874 m Eur or 71% of the total expenditures. There were 23 projects addressing Road,

amounting to a total of 2.351 m Eur (28%). For the other modes of transport the number of projects, as well

as expenditures, were significantly lower. For IWW, 3 projects were reported with the total costs amounting

to 82 m Eur (less than 1%). The smallest investments were made in Airport projects (15 m Eur). For other

categories/modes of transport no projects were reported.

DENMARK (DK): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

From the reviewed sources, 24 projects were identified for Denmark, which have the total expenditures

amounting to 436 m Eur. Ten projects were running on the core network and nine on the comprehensive

network. For five projects, no information was available on the type of network and/or covered both types

of network.

Type of network

Total expenditures

(2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of

projects

Comprehensive 267 9 Comprehensive/Core 119 5

Core 50 10

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

DENMARK (DK): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

Two financial sources were used to fund the TEN-T projects running in Denmark in 2014 – 2015: MS /

National funding and CEF. The highest amount of investments was done via MS / National funding (405 m

Eur), which constituted 94% of all expenditures. The investments made by CEF were significantly lower,

around 24 m Eur (6%).

The reported projects addressed only three modes/categories: Rail, Road and Ports. The majority of the

projects (15 projects) were focused on improving the Rail infrastructure, followed by 8 Road projects. Only 1

project was identified for Ports.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

ESTONIA (EE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 14 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all projects

for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 397 m Eur. The majority of the projects (8 projects) addressed the core

network, with only two projects purposed for the comprehensive network. The type of network was not

specified and/or covered both types of network for the remaining 4 projects.

Type of network Total expenditures (2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 11.660 2

Comprehensive, Core 365 4

Core 21 8

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

ESTONIA (EE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

For Estonia, 92% of the investment came from ERDF + CF, namely 365 m Eur. The remaining 8% (33 m

Eur) of the expenditures were invested by MS / National funding sources.

Projects funded covered the following modes of transport: road, rail (network-wise) and multimodal, ports

and airports (node-wise). Most projects referred to ports (10 out of 14), followed by road (2 projects) and

rail and multimodal with 1 project each.

In terms of expenditures, the highest costs were allocated to rail (79.3% of the total costs), followed by

road investments (9%), ports (12%) and multimodal projects (3,5%). The following figures reflect this

remark.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 53 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all

projects for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 3.494 m Eur. Almost 72% of the projects (38 projects)

addressed the core network and for the remaining projects, 12 belonged to the comprehensive network.

For 3 of the projects, the type of network was not indicated and/ or covered both types of network.

Type of network Total expenditures (2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 182 12

Comprehensive, Core 531 3

Core 2.780 43

FINLAND (FI): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

FINLAND (FI): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: Three funding sources were financing the Finnish TEN-T projects in 2014 – 2015: MS / National funding, CEF

and ERDF. The majority of the expenditures were covered by MS / National funding (1.424 m Eur), while the

other financial sources provided significantly lower share of investments: 24 m Eur (2%) came from CEF

and 16 m Eur (1%) from ERDF.

All modes were represented in Finland’s projects. Most projects were reported for road (22 projects), rail

(15 projects) and ports (10 projects). Multimodal and Airports had two projects each and there was one

project for each ITS and RRT.

In terms of expenditures, the highest costs were allocated to rail (52,2% of the total costs), followed by

road investments (16,6%) ports (16,3%) and airports (14,7%). The costs for the remaining modes

altogether, did not exceed 0,1% of the total costs.

FRANCE (FR): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 45 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all projects

for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 4.834 m Eur. Almost 50% of the projects (25 projects) addressed the core

network. For 19 projects (40%) the type of network was not indicated and/or covered both types of

network and less than 1% was allocated to the comprehensive network.

Type of network

Total expenditures

(2014 and 2015) (m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 6 1 Comprehensive,

Core 4.434 19

Core 394 25

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

FRANCE (FR): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

The biggest share of investment came from MS / National funding, which reached 4.198 m Eur (89,5%).

Additionally 326 m Eur (7%) were invested via EIB, while 158 m Eur (3,4%) were coming from CEF. The

smallest amount (6 m Eur) was covered by ERDF.

In terms of expenditures, the highest costs were allocated to rail (39.5% of the total costs – 3.819 m Eur),

followed by ports (4.0%), road covered 3.8% of the expenditures, inland waterway investments (2.1%)

while airports, did not exceed 1 % of the total costs.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

GERMANY (DE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 570 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all

projects for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 52.047 m Eur. For the majority of the projects (474 projects),

the type of network was not specified and/or covered both types of network, while the remaining 96

projects (or 18% of the projects) were due to the core network. No projects were solely identified for the

comprehensive network.

Type of network Total expenditures (2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive, Core 39.849 474

Core 12.198 96

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

For Germany MS/National funding played the key role in terms of the investment in TEN-T network - 44.203

m Eur, which corresponds to 97% of the total investment done in 2014-2015. The other funding sources

only contributed with less than 3%: 868 m Eur (1,9%) by ERDF, 389 m Eur (0,9%) – by CEF, 119 m eur

(0,3%) – from EIB.

For the modes of transport , the largest share of the projects (294 or 33,5% of the total projects) were

related to road, followed by rail and inland waterways (121 and 110 projects respectively). Altogether these

three types covered more than 90% of the projects analysed for Germany. For the other modes, the number

of projects was significantly lower; 26 for ITS, 14 for ports, 3 for airports, 1 for RRT and 1 for multimodal

transport.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

GERMANY (DE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

GREECE (GR): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 60 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all projects

for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 15.895 m Eur. Almost half of the projects (27 projects) addressed the

core network alone. The remaining projects were almost equally shared between the comprehensive

network and the projects for which no type of network was identified and/ or covered both types.

Type of network Total expenditures (2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 494 14

Comprehensive, Core 9.387 19

Core 6.013 27

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

GREECE (GR): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

The majority of the investment done for the development of Greek TEN-T infrastructure network was done

via MS / National financial instruments (11.782 m Eur). The second higgest share of investment (3.409 m

Eur - 22%) was covered by ERDF + CF, while the other sources investment was significantly lower: CEF -

154 m Eur, ERDF – 88 m Eur, EIB – 81 m Eur.

The investments were done in the following modes of transport: road, rail, (network-wise) , ports and

airports (node-wise). and two multimodal projects with 30% of the expenditures. Most projects referred to

road and rail (26 and 27 projects respectively), followed by the other modes.

HUNGARY (HU): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 82 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all

projects for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 9.115 m Eur. 72% of the projects (59 projects) addressed the

core network, with slightly more than 7% of the projects purposed soley for the comprehensive network.

For the remaining projects the type of network was not defined and/or covered both types.

Type of network Total expenditures (2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 164 6 Comprehensive,

Core 3.579 17

Core 5.372 59

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

HUNGARY (HU): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

Half of the investments (2.625 m Eur) for the development of TEN-T infrastructure was done via MS /

National funding. The second highest funding source was ERDF + CF, with 41% of total investments (2.168

m Eur). The remaining 10% of the expenditures were funded from CF (406 m Eur) and EIB (80 m Eur).

In terms of expenditures, the highest costs were documented for rail (73,5% of the total costs – 6.699 m

Eur), followed by road (15,4% - 1.407 m Eur). The port projects amounted to 11 m Eur and the multimodal

less than 1.000 m Eur. Altogether, they represented approximate 11% of the total expenditures.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

IRELAND (IE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 12 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all

projects for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 374 m Eur. 76% of the projects (9 projects) addressed the

core network, with slightly less than 8% purposed only for the comprehensive network. For the

remaining projects the type of network was not specified in the reviewed sources and/or covered both

types of network.

Type of network Total expenditures (2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 6 1

Comprehensive, Core 194 2

Core 175 9

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

IRELAND (IE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

Three funding sources have funded projects in Ireland in 2014 – 2015: MS / National funding, EIB and CEF.

MS was responsible for over three quarters of the total expenditures (191 m Eur), while EIB covered 22%

(55 m eur) and CEF investments amounted to 6 m eur (3%).

The projects were focused on road (network-wise) with 3 projects, rail (network-wise) with 6 projects and 2

IWW and on ports with 1 project respectively. In terms of expenditures, the highest costs were documented

for road (61% of the total costs – almost 230 m Eur), followed by rail (14% - 54 m Eur) and finally ports

with 5 m Eur and IWW - almost 86 m Eur.

ITALY (IT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 114 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all

projects for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 16.704 m Eur. For 58% of the projects (68 projects), the type

of network was not identified and/or covered both types of network. There were 46 projects (40%)

dedicated entirely to the core network, while no projects were defined for the comprehensive network.

Type of network

Total expenditures

(2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of

projects

Comprehensive, Core 13.021 68

Core 3.683 46

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

ITALY (IT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

In Italy, the majority of the costs (92% - 13.684 m Eur) related to the TEN-T projects was covered by MS /

National funding. The share of investments done by the other financial sources was significantly lower: EIB

(643 m Eur - 4%), ERDF (383 m eur - 3%) and CEF (171 m eur - 1%).

All modes were covered by the projects identified for Italy. Rail (55 projects), ports (25 projects) and road

(21 projects) were the most frequent modes in the project lists. Together, they represented 89,5% of the

projects. Airports (6 projects), RRTs (4)and inland waterways (2) represented the remaining 10,5%. One

project was not classified in the above mentioned categories.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

LATVIA (LV): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

In total, 59 projects were identified from the reviewed sources. The combined budget of these projects

in 2014 and 2015 amounted to 1.734 m Eur. Thirty six projects were located on core network and

twenty projects were located on the comprehensive network. For the remaining three projects the

location was not specified and/or covered by both types of network.

Type of network Total expenditures (2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 79 20 Comprehensive, Core 499 3

Core 1.156 36

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

LATVIA (LV): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

For Latvia TEN-T network, there were three funding sources, two of them funding in almost equal shares,

MS / National funding (470 m Eur) and ERDF + CF (468 m Eur). Furthermore 0,2% of investments were

coming from CEF (2 m Eur).

The total expenditures for each mode of transport were in line with the number of projects identified:

Road investments constituted 44% of the total expenditures (768 m Eur), Rail – 36% (631 m Eur), Ports –

18.4% (319 m Eur), Airports – 1% (17 m Eur).

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

LITHUANIA (LT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 10 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all

projects for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 2.025 m Eur. 30% of the projects (3 projects) addressed the

core network, and one project was dedicated to the comprehensive network. For 6 projects the type of

network was not specified and/or covered by both types of network.

Type of network Total expenditures (2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 2 1

Comprehensive, Core 1.973 6

Core 50 3

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

LITHUANIA (LT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

The projects funded in Lithuania in 2014 – 2015 were financed via four financial sources: CEF, EIB, and

ERDF+CF, MS / National funding. The expenditures coming from ERDF+CF represent 90% of the total

expenditures amounting 1.784 m Eur. The other financial sources provided significantly lower investments:

MS / National funding was responsible for 7% of total expenditures (148 m Eur), 2% by CEF (30 m Eur) and

1% by EIB (14 m Eur).

Three modes were addressed by the projects identified for Lithuania: rail (6 projects), road (3 projects),

airports (3 projects). Cost-wise, road and rail almost equally shared the total amount of expenditures with

50% (1.012 m Eur) and 49,9% (1.011 m Eur) respectively. Consequently, the other two modes

represented less than 0,1% of the total expenditures.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

LUXEMBOURG (LU): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

From the reviewed sources, 12 projects were identified for Luxembourg. The total costs of these projects

for the years 2014 – 2015 amounted to 666 m Eur. Three projects were running on the core network and

for 6 projects the type of network was not specified and/or covered both types. Three projects were

defined for comprehensive network.

Type of network Total expenditures (2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 21 3

Comprehensive, Core 35 6

Core 610 3

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

Only two funding sources contributed to TEN-T projects in 2014 – 2015, which MS / National funding and

CEF. The majority of investments (73 m Eur - 94%) was done via MS / National financial sources, while CEF

was responsible for the remaining 6% of investments (5 m Eur).

All the identified projects were aimed to improve rail infrastructure, no projects are identified for other

modes of transport.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

LUXEMBOURG (LU): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

MALTA (MT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

From the reviewed sources, 15 projects were identified for Malta, which in total amount to 149 m Eur.

In contrast to the other countries, the majority of the projects (10 projects) were running on the

comprehensive network, while 4 projects were implemented on the core network. For 1 project the type

of network was not specified and/or covered both types of network.

Type of network

Total expenditures

(2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of

projects

Comprehensive 55 10

Comprehensive, Core 80 1

Core 15 4

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

Two funding sources were responsible for the investment in the TEN-T network related projects in 2014

– 2015: MS / National funding and ERDF + CF. The latter one was responsible for 53% of total

expenditures (80 m Eur), while 47% of total investment (69 m Eur) came from MS / National funds.

The most attention, both in terms of number of projects and expenditures, was given to Roads. There

were 13 projects (93%) running towards improvement of the Road infrastructure in 2014 – 2015, with a

total budget of 138 m Eur (93% of the total expenditures). For Ports, 2 projects were implemented that

amounted to 11 m Eur (7.4% of the total expenditures).

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

MALTA (MT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

THE NETHERLANDS (NL) Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

From the reviewed sources, 100 projects were identified for the Netherlands with total expenditures of

9.224 m Eur in the years 2014 – 2015. The majority of projects were located on the core network (79

projects), while 15 projects were located on the comprehensive network. For 15 projects the type of

network was not specified and/or covered both types.

Type of network

Total expenditures

(2014 and 2015) (m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 780 15 Comprehensive, Core 725 14

Core 7.720 71

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

THE NETHERLANDS (NL) Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

Almost all investments (4.957 m Eur - 98%) of the TEN-T projects in 2014 – 2015 came from MS / National

financial instruments. The share of other funding was very low: EIB was responsible for 48 m Eur, while CEF

was responsible for 29 m Eur.

The projects were defined for 5 modes of transport: IWW, Multimodal, Ports, Rail, Road. The majority of the

projects (38 projects) addressed the IWW network, while almost a third of the projects aimed towards

improving the Roads. The next largest group were the projects that were focused on the improvement of

Rail (26 projects).

When looking into the division of the expenditures between the modes, it was observed that the situation

differed significantly. Almost 59% of all expenditures (5.863 m Eur) were invested in Road. The budget of

the IWW related projects in 2014 -2015 was 1.874 m Eur (26%), while the Rail projects accounted for

1.297 m Eur or 13% of the total expenditures.

POLAND (PL): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

In total 243 projects that satisfy the chosen criteria have been identified for Poland. The budget of these

projects combined amounted to 25.381 m Eur.

The majority of the projects (147 projects) were implemented on core network and 24 projects

concerned the comprehensive network. For 72 projects it is not possible to identify the type of network

from the collected data and/or covered both types of network.

Type of network Total expenditures (2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 944 24 Comprehensive, Core 14.304 72

Core 10.133 147

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

Almost half of all investments came from MS / National funding, which amounted to 11.099 m Eur. The

second highest investment (42,2% - 9.403 m Eur) belongs to the ERDF + CF. Additionally, 1.043 m Eur

(4,7%) were invested by EIB, while 720 m Eur (3,2%) came from CF. The lower share of expenditures (17

m Eur - 0,1%) was covered by CEF.

In terms of expenditures, the largest investments were made in road transport (66% of total

expenditures), followed by rail (29% of total expenditures). For other modes/categories the investments

were significantly lower and varied between 474 m Eur for Ports, 493 m Eur for Airports and 256 m Eur for

Multimodal (2%, 2% and 1% of total expenditures respectively).

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

POLAND (PL): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

PORTUGAL (PT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Forty two projects have been identified for Portugal, which in total amount to 1.940 m Eur. For the

majority of projects (23 projects) it is not possible to identify whether they addressed core or

comprehensive infrastructure from the collected data and/or if they covered both types of network.

Seventeen projects were carried out on core infrastructure and two on comprehensive. Type of network

Total expenditures

(2014 and 2015) (m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 21 2 Comprehensive, Core 1.190 23

Core 729 17

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

PORTUGAL (PT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

The two major funding sources of the Portuguese TEN-T network were ERDF and MS / National funding,

accounting for 58% (474 m Eur), and 40% (383 m Eur) of total expenditures respectively. The CEF

investments in the Portuguese projects amounted to 24 m Eur (2%), while EIB invested 6 m Eur (0,5%).

With regard to funding, ports and rail projects had the largest total costs of 714 m Eur (44% of total

expenditures) and 764 m Eur (41% of total expenditures) respectively. The costs of road projects

amounted to the 10% (317 m Eur) of the total expenditures for Portuguese projects in 2014 - 2015. For

airports the expenditures were significantly lower and amounted to 99 m Eur (3%), followed by IWW on

which 46 m Eur (2%) was spent. The smallest investments were made for Multimodal transport (around 1

m Eur).

ROMANIA (RO): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

From the reviewed sources 76 projects are identified, which amount to 5.704 m Eur. The majority of

the projects were running on core network (56 projects), while 9 projects took place on comprehensive

network. For the rest 11 projects no data about type of network was available from the collected

information and/or covered both types of network.

Type of network Total expenditures (2014 and 2015)

(m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 377 9 Comprehensive, Core 1.648 11

Core 3.679 56

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

ROMANIA (RO): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

Four financial sources were used to fund the projects for Romania in 2014 – 2015: MS / National funding,

CF, EIB and ERDF + CF. The latter one provided the highest share of investments (1.649 m Eur - 51%).

The investment made by MS / National funding, which was the second highest financial source,

corresponds to 1.526 m Eur (47,3%). Furthermore, 1,6% of the total expenditures were covered by CF (52

m Eur), while 0,1% was funded by EIB (3 m Eur).

The expenditures for road infrastructure represent 50% of all costs associated with Romanian projects that

were running in 2014-2015. The second largest investments (1.881 m Eur) were done in rail infrastructure,

while 385 m Eur (10,6% of total expenditures) were invested in Ports.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

SLOVAKIA (SK): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

In total 57 projects were identified for Slovakia. The total expenditure for these projects amounts to 4.282

m Eur. The majority of the projects took place on core infrastructure (43 projects), while 6 projects

addressed the issues of the comprehensive network. For 8 projects the type of network has not been

specified and/or covered both types of network.

Type of network

Total expenditures

(2014 and 2015) (m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 207 6 Comprehensive, Core 1.897 8

Core 2.178 43

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

From the four funding sources for Slovakia, three of them contributed with similar shares. From those,

the major contributor was the MS / National funding (1.498 m Eur - 37%), closely followed by ERDF + CF

(1.377 m Eur - 34%) and CF with 1.104 m Eur (28%). The EIB investments constituted 1% of the total

expeditures amounting to 36 m Eur.

The largest investments were done in development of road infrastructure, which amounted to 2.550 m

Eur (60% of total expenditures). The second biggest investments were done into rail networks and

amounted to 1.165 m Eur (27% of total expenditures). For the other modes/categories the investments

were significantly lower and amounted to 534 m Eur (12%) for multimodal transport, 7 m Eur (0.2%) for

Ports and 26 m Eur (1%) for RRTs.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

SLOVAKIA (SK): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

SLOVENIA (SI): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

From the reviewed sources 18 projects were identified for Slovenia. The total budget of these projects

amounted to 745 m Eur. The projects that were implemented on the core network represent the majority

of the sample (12 projects), while only 1 project was carried out on the comprehensive network. For 5

projects the type of network was not defined and/or covered both types of network.

Type of network

Total expenditures

(2014 and 2015) (m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 30 1 Comprehensive, Core 333 5

Core 383 12

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

SLOVENIA (SI): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

Slovenia received funding for the TEN-T network implementation from five sources. The two major

contributors were MS / National instruments and ERDF + CF, contributing with 37% (192 m Eur) and 36%

(188 m Eur) respectively. Regarding EIB (54 m Eur) and CEF (53 m Eur), both contributed with similar

shares of 10% of total expenditures. The lowest investment came from CF (38 m Eur - 7%).

The defined projects addressed three modes of transport: ports, rail and road. The majority of the projects

(56%) were carried out to develop rail infrastructure. These projects accounted for the largest share of

expenditures (49%). Seven projects (39%) addressed road and had a total cost of 336 m Eur (45% of

investments). The only port related project had a budget of 42 m Eur (6% of the investments).

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

SPAIN (SP): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

For Spain 279 projects were identified from the reviewed sources. On the core network 86 projects were

run in 2014 - 2015, and 15 projects were run on the comprehensive network. For the majority of the

projects (178) the type of network is not specified and/or covers both types of network. The combined

expenditure for all the projects in 2014 and 2015 was 82.728 m Eur.

Type of network

Total expenditures

(2014 and 2015) (m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive 209 15 Comprehensive, Core 9.405 178

Core 73.114 86

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

SPAIN (ES): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

The majority of the investment in TEN-T network (52.433 m Eur - 90,8%) was done by MS / National

funding. The share for the other funding sources was significantly lower: 2.779 m Eur (4,8%) by ERDF+CF,

2.003 m Eur (3,5%) – by ERDF, 411 m Eur (0,7%) – by EIB. CEF also contributed with 116 m Eur (0,2% of

the total expenditures).

The largest investments were made in the development of Rail infrastructure which accounts for 56.652 m

Eur which represents 68% of all expenditures. Around 17.152 m Eur (21% of total expenditures) was

invested in Ports, which is the second largest group. The expenditures for other modes, RRTs and Road were

significantly lower and vary between 6.253 m Eur (8%) and 2.460 (3%), respectively. Airports and

multimodal projects represent less than 1%.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

SWEDEN (SE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

In total 50 projects were identified for Sweden from the reviewed sources. The combined expenditures for

these projects amounts to 3.427 m Eur. The largest share of the projects (38 projects) were implemented

on the core network, for 8 projects the type of network was not specified and/or covered both types of

network. Four projects took place on the comprehensive network.

Type of network

Total expenditures

(2014 and 2015) (m Eur)

Number of

projects

Comprehensive 145 4 Comprehensive, Core 1.285 8

Core 1.996 38

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

For Sweden TEN-T network implementation, the MS/ National Funds was the major contributor, with

almost 97% of the total investment done (2.858 m Eur). CEF contributed with a smaller part of 76 m Eur

and EIB with 26 m Eur.

Half of the Swedish projects (25 projects) were targeted toward improving rail infrastructure. The

combined budget of these projects amounts to 1.135 m Eur (33% of total expenditures). The number of

projects for road is approximately half of those for rail (12 projects), however their total budget

represents the larger share of expenditures (46%). The third largest investment category is ports, which

accounts for 470 m Eur (14% of total investments) divided over 9 projects.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

SWEDEN (SE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

UNITED KINGDOM (UK): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

In the United Kingdom a total of 98 projects were determined that satisfy the chosen criteria. The

combined budget for these projects amounted to 4.852 m Eur. Of the 98 projects, 8 were located in the

core network while for the remaining 90 projects it is not possible to identify the network from the

collected data and/or covered both types of network.

Type of network

Total expenditures

(2014 and 2015) (m Eur)

Number of projects

Comprehensive, Core 3.932 90

Core 920 8

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec

UNITED KINGDOM (UK): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

Four funding sources were identified as funding sources for the TEN-T network in United Kingdom: CEF,

EIB, ERDF and MS / National funding. The latter one was responsible for the higher share of expenditures

(4.181 m Eur - 91%). The investments coming from other financial were significantly lower:

EIB investments amounted to 221 m Eur (5%), ERDF investments – 153 m Eur (3%), and CEF

investments – 45 m Eur (1%).

The largest investment was made for road projects (67% of total expenditures), followed by rail projects

(29% of total expenditure). For the port projects and multimodal infrastructure the level of investment is

significantly lower. A total of 156 m Eur (3% of total expenditure) was invested in port projects while 26

m Eur (1% of total expenditure) was invested in multimodal infrastructure.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

Annex 8: Progress indicator calculation

Mode

Indicators for the

realisation of the

TEN-T network Type of network 2014 2015 2016 2017

Progress

indicator (%):

variation

2015/2016

Progress

indicator:

(%)variation

2016/2017

Core network

Comprehensive network

Total

Core network

Comprehensive network

Total

Mode

Total

expenditure

2014 (€)

Total

expenditure

2015 (€)

Total

expenditure

2016 (€)

Total

expenditure

2017 (€)

Progress

indicator (%):

variation

2015/2016

Progress

indicator:

(%)variation

2016/2017

Mode

Indicators for the

realisation of the

TEN-T network Type of network 2014 2015 2016 2017

Progress

indicator (%):

variation

2015/2016

Progress

indicator:

(%)variation

2016/2017

Core network

Comprehensive network

Total

Mode

Total

expenditure

2014 (€)

Total

expenditure

2015 (€)

Total

expenditure

2016 (€)

Total

expenditure

2017 (€)

Progress

indicator (%):

variation

2015/2016

Progress

indicator:

(%)variation

2016/2017

Road

Total km compliant

for type

Type of network

Road

Core network

Comprehensive network

Total

Rail

Track gauge

Traction

Rail

Type of network

Core network

Comprehensive network

Total

2

Mode

Indicators for the

realisation of the

TEN-T network Type of network 2014 2015 2016 2017

Progress

indicator (%):

variation

2015/2016

Progress

indicator:

(%)variation

2016/2017

Core network

Comprehensive network

Total

Core network

Comprehensive network

Total

Core network

Comprehensive network

Total

Mode

Total

expenditure

2014 (€)

Total

expenditure

2015 (€)

Total

expenditure

2016 (€)

Total

expenditure

2017 (€)

Progress

indicator (%):

variation

2015/2016

Progress

indicator:

(%)variation

2016/2017

Mode

Indicators for the

realisation of the

TEN-T network Type of network 2014 2015 2016 2017

Progress

indicator (%):

variation

2015/2016

Progress

indicator:

(%)variation

2016/2017

Core network

Comprehensive network

Total

Core network

Comprehensive network

Total

Mode

Total

expenditure

2014 (€)

Total

expenditure

2015 (€)

Total

expenditure

2016 (€)

Total

expenditure

2017 (€)

Progress

indicator (%):

variation

2015/2016

Progress

indicator:

(%)variation

2016/2017

Ports

Connection to rail

Type of network

Ports

Core network

Comprehensive network

Total

CEMT Class IV

RIS

Type of network

IWW

Core network

Comprehensive network

Total

IWW Draught

Connection to CEMT

Class IV

3

Mode

Indicators for the

realisation of the

TEN-T network Type of network 2014 2015 2016 2017

Progress

indicator (%):

variation

2015/2016

Progress

indicator:

(%)variation

2016/2017

Core network

Comprehensive network

Total

Mode

Total

expenditure

2014 (€)

Total

expenditure

2015 (€)

Total

expenditure

2016 (€)

Total

expenditure

2017 (€)

Progress

indicator (%):

variation

2015/2016

Progress

indicator:

(%)variation

2016/2017

Airport Connection to rail

Type of network

Airport

Core network

Comprehensive network

Total

Annex 9 Matching application Introduction The CorridorProjectMatch application was developed to deduplicate records in project datasets for the project: Article 49.3 Study: Review of Existing Sources of Information/Data and Support for the Preparation of the Progress Report on the Implementation of the TEN-T Network. This Annex sets out the rationale behind the developed application, describes the approach taken, gives instructions on how to change the code if required, and describes the tools required to work with it. Objective As part of the study, an Excel file with the TEN-T projects was compiled and could contain duplicate projects. As the data was compiled from a variety of sources, a simple deduplication may miss identical projects that have different descriptions. The objective of the application is to generate a list of likely matches for each record in the Excel file and to calculate a matching score for each of these potential matches. Based on the supplied data a human being can then make an informed decision. Application The CorridorProjectMatch application was developed in Java and allows a user to parse a Microsoft Excel file (Office 2010 format) to extract project records. These records are then filtered and any matches scoring above a threshold are presented to the user as potential duplicates for each record. The application builds up a matching score by analysing the contents of certain columns of information and, given an allowed error margin, adding a weighted score to the matches’ total score. Application flow The application is a Java application developed in NetBeans. When running, the application performs a number of steps described in this section:

• logs are written to System.out (the output window in NetBeans, or the command-line interface if running from there)

• The config file /config/matcher.cfg is loaded • A list of stop-words for English is loaded. Stop-words are words that add no

meaning and are filtered out in the tokenisation process to enable free text matching.

• The Excel input file is opened. The fourth sheet is expected to contain the input data (this is hardcoded into the source).

• Starting from the second row (hardcoded) until the last row in the sheet, every row is processed:

o Source name is extracted, if empty “BLANK” is used. Records are stored by source name, sources are treated as categories. It is assumed there are no duplicates inside sources, but across sources.

o Expenditures for 2014, 2015 and totals are extracted o Network type is extracted with 4 options:

CORE COMPREHENSIVE COMPREHENSIVE, CORE UNKNOWN (in case of any other type, it is assigned to unknown

and a diagnostic message is printed on the log) o A Project instance is created with:

Source Row number (in Excel row numbers, not 0-based) Location countries (based on comma-separated string) Location section name Project title Short description Start year End year Beneficiary countries (based on comma-separated string) Network type Mode of transport Expenditures 2014 Expenditures 2015 Total expenditures

o The project is added to its source’s data structure • The Excel file is closed • An output csv file is opened and its header line written • For each project for each source, all projects of other sources are checked and

match scores calculated. Comparisons are only performed once: i.e. A->B will result in B->A being skipped. The best n matches (currently 2 as per config setting) are written to the output file:

o A description of the currently analysed source is printed to file o A description of the currently analysed project is printed to file o A description of the source to match is printed o A description of that source’s project is printed o A match score is calculated (for all matches, one or more empty cells

leads to no match): Location countries are matched: if the list of countries matches

exactly, the configured weight is added to the current match’s score

Beneficiary countries are matched: if the list of countries matches exactly, the configured weight is added to the current match’s score

Start year is matched: if the difference between start years is smaller than the max. error loaded from config, the configured weight is added to the current match’s score

End year is matched: if the difference between start years is smaller than the max. error loaded from config, the configured weight is added to the current match’s score

Network type is matched: if both are not unknown, and the types match then the configured weight is added to the current match’s score

Mode is matched: • If they are the same the configured weight is added to the

current match’s score • Otherwise:

o the mode string is split along “/” and matches between individual modes are counted

o Potential matches is calculated as max (modes in a, modes in b)

o Total number of matches between individual modes in a and modes in b is counted

o Floor (Weight from config * (matches/potential matches)) is added to this match’s total score

Expenditures 2014 is matched: • If ABS (expenditures 2014(A) – expenditures

2014(B))/expenditures 2014 (A) is smaller than the max. error defined in config, weighted score is added to this match’s total score

Expenditures 2015 is matched: • If ABS (expenditures 2015(A) – expenditures

2015(B))/expenditures 2015 (A) is smaller than the max. error defined in config, weighted score is added to this match’s total score

Total expenditures matched: • If ABS (expenditures total (A) – expenditures total

(B))/expenditures total (A) is smaller than the max. error defined in config, weighted score is added to this match’s total score

Location section name is matched: • String is tokenised • The same approach as with multiple modes is applied to

tokens Project title is matched:

• String is tokenised • The same approach as with multiple modes is applied to

tokens Project description is matched:

• String is tokenised • The same approach as with multiple modes is applied to

tokens o If the score is above the minimum threshold loaded from config, the

match is added to the project o Up to the maximum matches allowed loaded from config are written as

potential matches to the output file

Config file The config file allows the user to change settings for the application without needing to deal with source code changes. By default, the application loads the config file in: config/matcher.cfg. Any changes saved to the config file are loaded when running the application This section describes the settings:

• Data settings: o inputPath: path to Excel file to load (relative to project folder) o outputPath: path to csv file to write (relative to project folder)

o stopWordsPath: path to English stop words file (relative to project folder)

• Match settings: o minScoreThreshold: minimum score for a match to be considered as a

potential match o maxOptionsPerSource: maximum number of potential matches to write

out per project o xxxWeight: maximum score to give to matches on match item xxx o xxxMaxError: maximum absolute difference between project A and

project B for match item xxx to consider it a match o xxxRelativeError: if the absolute difference between project A and B

divided by the value for project A is smaller than this for match item xxx, it is considered a match

Input file format The input file should be an Excel file (Office 2010 or later .xlsx) with the input table in the fourth sheet. This sheet is generally a normalised version of the original data. The normalisation consists of:

• changing the encoding so that non-Western characters are properly represented (i.e. Slavic characters)

• removing non numerical values from start and end year and the expenditure columns

• ensuring that type of network is one of {CORE; COMPREHENSIVE; CORE, COMPREHENSIVE; “”}

• Ensuring that countries are separated by , and modes are separated by / The “FinancialDatabase” file provided by the Contractor to the Contractee can be used as a template.

The columns for this table should be: • Source • ID • "Location_country_name (the country(ies) where the project is located)" • "Location_section_name (section where the project is located)" • "Section_TENT (If the ID used for the TENtec is used, please write it here)" • Project_title • Project_short_description • "Type_of_project (e.g new construction, maintenance, rehabilition, etc)" • "Project_start_Date (format mm.yy)" • "Project_end_Date (format mm.yy)" • "To which objective (article 4 from Regulation 1315/2013) the project is

contributing to • "Beneficiary_country (country code)" • "Type of network: core or comprehensive network (i.e ""core"" or

""comprehensive"")" • Mode_of_transport • Total expenditures 2014 (€) • Total expenditures 2015 (€) • "Total amount spent with the project (if the information about the year 2014

and 2015 is not known, but only the total amount for the project)"

Tokenisation Free text fields are tokenised. This means the whole text is cut into words. I.e. “Type of network” is cut into an array containing the following tokens: {TYPE, OF, NETWORK}. During tokenisation English stop words are removed, words of less than two characters are ignored, only unique words are counted. The matching is case-insensitive. Running the application There are a number of steps to run options to run the matching application:

• Install Java JDK8u • Make sure input is in correct format and folder • Change the Config in Text editor , if necessary • Double click Run.bat • After it finishes, see the output • See above section for further instructions

Changing the matching One can add or change the way existing matches are performed by changing the Match class inside the CorridorProjectMatch class. Adding a new column to match on will require:

• adding code to get and parse that Cell (cells are column offsets in a Row) in CorridorProjectMatch.main(String[] args)

• adding a new field and code to init and get to the Project class (examples enough)

• add a new function to the Match class and call it from the Match.calcScore() function.