EUROPEAN COMMISSION. State aid SA (2011/N) Austria Third Prolongation of the ERP Transport Programme

Transcription

1 EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, C(2012) 5052 final PUBLIC VERSION WORKING LANGUAGE This document is made available for information purposes only. Subject: State aid SA (2011/N) Austria Third Prolongation of the ERP Transport Programme Excellency, 1. PROCEDURE (1) On 3 October 2011, the Permanent Representation of Austria to the European Union informed the European Commission by , in accordance with Article 108(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), that it was prolonging a programme, authorised by the Commission by decision of 12 September 2007 ( the 2007 decision ) 1, which provides for soft loans to assist in the shift of transport from road to rail or inland waterway. The prolonged programme is entitled Third Prolongation of the ERP Transport Programme. (2) By letter dated 14 October 2011, the Commission asked the Austrian authorities for additional information. The Austrian authorities replied on 30 November On 12 January 2012 and 19 April 2012, the Commission addressed further requests for information to the Austrian authorities, to which the Austrian authorities replied on 17 January 2012, 14 February 2012, 12 March 2012 and 25 April 2012, respectively. 1 SA (N76/2007), OJ C 282, 24 November 2007, p.5. This decision concerned the prolongation of Case N 644/2001, OJ C 88, 12 April 2002, p. 16, which itself concerned the prolongation of Case NN 97/95 authorised by the Commission by decision of 27 March Seiner Exzellenz Herrn Dr. Michael SPINDELEGGER Bundesminister für europäische und internationale Angelegenheiten Ballhausplatz 2 A Wien Commission européenne, B-1049 Bruxelles/Europese Commissie, B-1049 Brussel Belgium Telephone: (0)

2 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE Extension of the programme authorised by the 2007 decision (3) The Government of Austria has for some time pursued a policy of stimulating the transfer of freight traffic from road to other, more environmentally friendly, modes of transport. According to the Austrian authorities, the measure covered by this notification is fully in line with this objective and represents the prolongation of a similar programme which was authorised by the Commission on 12 September Legal basis (4) General provisions (Guidelines) of the ERP Transport Programme, including the general provisions for the ERP Programmes for the tourism, agriculture, forestry and transport sectors. Type of aid (5) The ERP Transport Programme provides for the award of soft loans (ERP loans). The ERP fund is an instrument controlled by the Bundesministerium für Finanzen (Austrian Federal Ministry of Finance) with the aim of granting soft loans. Beneficiaries (6) Transport businesses with a registered office or establishment in Austria are eligible to apply. This includes all types of business (natural and legal entities, and private companies under Austrian civil and commercial law) and establishments that can prove that they are economically active in Austria (registered office, branch office, agency or fixed establishment there, being no legal definition of some of these concepts). Overall budget (7) EUR 25 million in total and up to approximately EUR 8 million per year of soft loans. Duration (8) The duration of the ERP Programme will be extended for five years, i.e. from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2016, following the approval of the Commission. Eligible projects (9) Investments by transport businesses (special arrangements for combined and intermodal transport) that contribute to switching transport from road to rail or waterway. The application of new technologies and the implementation of research and development findings in the field of transport logistics shall also be taken into account. (10) Investments that are eligible for funding under the ERP Transport Programme are destined exclusively for combined or intermodal freight transport. Appropriate use of the funding is compulsory and verifiable. 2

3 (11) Eligible projects should, in terms of both their nature and scope, represent tangible financial relief even for economically sound businesses. Businesses with enough liquid funds to finance investments by swapping assets should therefore not be offered support (to avoid free-rider effects). Eligible Costs (12) The following expenditure is eligible: a) procurement of special containers 2 for ground transport ("Landtransport") and inland waterway transport ("Binnenschiffahrt") (no deep sea containers) b) purchase of special railway carriages 3 and special vehicles 4 for intermodal transport; c) swap bodies and adaptations on vehicles making them suitable for loading 5.; d) investments in new IT-technologies such as traceability systems for hazardous goods 6, transport telematics, logistics systems 7 and handling and loading technologies Special containers are containers that are developed especially for use in combined transport. In most cases it would technically be possible to use them outside the scope of combined or intermodal transport but the aid is generally linked to the requirement to use them for the purpose for which they were intended. Also, specific requirements and an obligation to produce supporting documents are sometimes stipulated in the contract. In addition, the plausibility of the proposals submitted and their conformity with the objectives of the ERP transport programme are checked and evaluated ex ante, for example, the level of carriage up to now in combined goods transport and its foreseeable development (project impact, specific assignments). There are different types of carriages available for combined or intermodal transport: container wagons, pocket wagons (for transporting semi-trailers) RoLa wagons (for transporting entire trains of lorries on the railways). These wagons can only be used for transporting combined goods transport containers since they have neither side walls or sideboards nor floors. Trucks or trailers with hydraulic horizontal loading devices such as mobilers and terminal tractors are both examples of special vehicles. Special vehicles are not appropriate for road use as special transhipment equipment means they are heavier than traditional vehicles and loading is therefore limited. Adaptations to make them suitable for loading are, for example, additional gear to make it possible to top-lift conventional semi-trailers. Top-lifting semi-trailers have special axles, static reinforcements and mounting fixtures that make it possible to vertically load the trailer on to a railway wagon. Hazardous goods tracking systems are relevant for combined or intermodal transport if it is necessary to track or monitor containers of this kind, e.g. hazardous goods tracking systems for monitoring tank and chemical containers. Examples of logistics systems would be tracking systems (both hardware and software) systems for monitoring the loading status of containers, booking systems for container block trains, systems for intercompany and intermodal data exchange (e.g. between railway companies, terminals, road hauliers, loaders, receivers, etc.). 3

4 (13) All beneficiaries are obliged to demonstrate the adequate ("widmungsgemäße") usage of the supported investments by submitting suitable evidence ("Nachweis"), e.g. transport confirmations, to the granting authority during the whole support period. Non-eligible Costs (14) Expenditure in the following areas is not eligible: procurement of land (including site preparation) and buildings; purchase of consumable capital goods; repairs of any kind; construction of administrative buildings, staff accommodation, garages, railway stations, internal filling stations, and storage depots which are not directly required for intermodal transport operations; purchase of cars, vans, lorries (delivery vehicles and special vehicles such as trailers of any kind, excepting equipment suitable for combined transport such as internal transport equipment); costs arising before submission of application; costs incurred by restructuring. Loan values (15) The loans are usually for amounts between 0.35 million and 4 million per project per year. Applicants are expected to co-finance at least 25 % of the total investment costs using their own and other funds (bank loans etc.) A detailed financing plan for the project should be provided including own funds and all other funds. (16) The beneficiary has to cover 25% of the total project costs of his own and other funds (such as bank loans, etc.). 75% of the total project costs can be financed by an ERP soft loan. The conditions of this soft loan, as set out in recitals (17) to (27), are such that the gross grant equivalent (Bruttosubventionsäquivalent) or aid intensity is limited, at a maximum of 20 % of the eligible total project costs. A gross grant equivalent or aid intensity of up to a maximum of 30 % of the eligible total project costs is possible, if the support of the ERP-Programme is combined with funds from other sources, incl. De minimis aid. (17) In case of the ERP programme, the aid intensity is rather low, as the notified aid scheme provides soft loans. In this case, the aid element is the difference between the market interest rate for a loan to finance a given project and the actual interest rate paid 8 Handling and loading technologies means processes and equipment for transhipping or loading containers, trailers, swap bodies etc. between lorries, trains and/or ships e.g. container cranes, reach-stackers, trucks with hydraulic horizontal loading devices and other horizontal loading systems. They are indispensable for combined or intermodal transport. 4

5 to the ERP fund as grantor of the loan. While the aid intensity of the notified aid scheme is limited to 20% of the eligible total project costs as described above, such aid intensity will normally not be reached. (18) Given the currently applicable interest rates for the calculation of the aid element of the ERP programme, the average cash value (Barwert) or aid intensity of an ERP programme soft loan stands currently at 7.7%. The Austrian authorities pointed out that an aid intensity of 20% was never reached in the previous years. For a soft loan amounting to EUR 4 million (=the maximum loan amount for an individual project), this cash value represents a gross grant equivalent of EUR ERP loan conditions (19) The following conditions will apply to the scheme: Period of use Length of the repayment period Grace period Repayment period 6 months 6 years up to 2 years 4 years (20) The base rate for the step interest rate (sprungfixer Zinssatz) is in principle 3.75 % p.a. (21) If the 1-year EURIBOR rate increases in the last three months published before the interest period (= excluding the preceding month) to 6 % or more, or to 7.5 % or more, the interest rate will be raised by 1, or 2, percentage points (on top of the base rate) starting in the quarter following publication. (22) If the 1-year EURIBOR rate decreases in the last three months published before the interest period to less than 4.5 % (3 %), the interest rate will be reduced by 1 percentage point (2 percentage points) (from the base rate). (23) If the 1-year EURIBOR rate increases in the last three months published before the interest period beyond the above limits, the interest rate cut is reduced or not applied. (24) The table below summarizes the different calculations of the step interest rate: Development of the 1 year EURIBOR Actually charged interest rate under 3% 1.75% 3% to under 4.5% 2.75% 4.5% to under 6% 3.75% 6% to under 7.5% 4.75% 7.5% and higher 5.75% 5

6 (25) The interest rates applicable when the guidelines are issued are given for each individual ERP programme. Any changes to the interest rates during the financial year are announced in an appropriate manner by the ERP fund. The reference rates are published on the European Commission's website. (26) The ERP fund is entitled to adapt the interest rates for ERP loans for future loan authorisations during the same financial year if the basis for calculating the cash value of the support, which is determined by the European Commission, changes (e.g. base rate / reference rate). The rates are adapted in such a way as to ensure that the cash value of an ERP loan for a particular ERP programme remains as stable as possible over an extended period of time. (27) In principle, the interest rates set when the loan is approved apply for the entire duration of an ERP loan (loan agreement). Should interest rates on the gold and capital markets increase significantly (i.e. if the 1-year EURIBOR rate rises to at least 11 %) thereby forcing a rise in the European Union's reference rates during the loan period, the interest rates for ERP loans that have already been approved can also be adapted accordingly on the basis of the ERP guidelines for the ongoing financial year. If it is not possible to come to an agreement with the borrower, either party is free to end the contract by giving three months' notice. Accumulation provisions (28) If further support, incl. De minimis aid, is awarded for the project in addition to the ERP loan, the cumulative cash value of the total subsidy (gross grant equivalent or aid intensity) may not exceed 30 %. Differences in comparison with the aid programme that is to be prolonged (29) Under the current aid scheme, changes in the variable interest rates are dependent on the 5 year Euro interest rate swap rate; however, the notified version of the ERP programme guidelines refers to the 1-year EURIBOR rate. (30) The notified version of the ERP programme guidelines states the following: "If the 1- year EURIBOR rate decreases in the last three months published before the interest period to less than 4.5 % (3 %), the interest rate will be reduced by 1 percentage point (2 percentage points) (from the base rate)." This distinction was not included in the current aid scheme as a 1.5 percentage point reduction in interest rates (from the base rate) was applied if the 5 year Euro interest rate swap rate fell below 4.5 % in the last three months published before the interest period. 3. APPRECIATION OF THE MEASURE 3.1. Assessing the existence of aid (31) Pursuant to Article 107(1) TFEU any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the internal market. 6

7 (32) Therefore, in order to determine whether the measure at issue constitutes state aid within the meaning of Article 107 (1) TFEU, it must be established (a) whether the measure has been financed through State resources, (b) whether the measure confers an economic advantage on certain undertakings or the production of certain goods, (c) whether the measure distorts or threatens to distort competition and, finally, (d) whether the measure is liable to affect trade between Member State. (33) State resources: Under the notified measure, the Federal Finance Ministry is responsible for the ERP fund. Beneficiaries will thus receive payment from the Austrian Government, so the measure should be considered to be financed through State resources. (34) Selective economic advantage: Under the notified measure, beneficiaries are granted loans for eligible projects with interest rates that are lower than normal market interest rates (soft loans). The measure thus confers on the beneficiary undertakings an economic advantage they would not have obtained under normal market conditions. The measure is selective in that it gives certain businesses an economic advantage over others. (35) Distortion of competition and effect on trade between Member States: When aid granted by a Member State strengthens the position of an undertaking compared with other businesses competing in intra-union trade, the latter must be regarded as affected by that aid 9. It is sufficient that the recipient of the aid competes with other businesses on markets open to competition 10. (36) In that regard, the fact that an economic sector has been liberalised at EU level is an element which may serve to determine that the aid has a real or potential effect on competition and on trade between Member States. 11 (37) Council Directive 92/106/EEC of 7 December 1992 on the establishment of common rules for certain types of combined transport of goods between Member States 12 has liberalised the combined transport operations referred to in Article 1 from all quota systems and systems of authorisation since 1 July (38) In addition, rail freight transport 13, road freight transport 14 and inland waterway transport 15 have been liberalised at EU level. 9 See, in particular, Case 730/79 Philip Morris v Commission [1980] ECR 2671, paragraph 11; Case C-53/00 Ferring [2001] ECR I-9067, paragraph 21; Case C-372/97 Italy v Commission [2004] ECR p. I-3679, paragraph Case T-214/95 Het Vlaamse Gewest v Commission [1998] ECR II Siehe Rechtssache C-409/00, Spanien/Kommission, Slg. 2003, I-1487, Randnr OJ L 36, , p Directive 2004/51/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 amending Council Directive 91/440/EEC on the development of the Community's railways, OJ L 220, , p

8 (39) The Commission therefore finds that the notified aid scheme involves aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the TFEU. (40) In addition, Article 108(3) of the TFEU provides that Member States may not implement new State aid measures before they have been approved by the Commission Compatibility of the aid General observations (41) The notified measure concerns aid to promote a modal shift from road transport to rail and inland waterway transport. The Commission is of the opinion that the compatibility of the present aid should be examined on the basis of Article 93 of TFEU. (42) After the entry into force of the Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on public passenger transport services by rail and by road and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) Nos 1191/69 and 1107/70 16, Article 93 TFEU became directly applicable as a legal basis for establishing the compatibility of aid to the transport sector not covered by that Regulation. Since the aid measure at issue is not covered by Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007, its compatibility will be assessed directly under Article 93 TFEU. (43) Article 93 TFEU provides that aids shall be compatible with the Treaties if they meet the needs of coordination of transport [ ]. (44) The Court of Justice has ruled that Article 93 acknowledges that aid to transport is compatible with the Treaty only in well-defined cases which do not jeopardise the general interests of the Community. The concept of "coordination of transport" used in Article 93 TFEU has a significance which goes beyond the simple fact of facilitating the development of an economic activity. It implies an intervention by public authorities which is aimed at guiding the development of the transport sector in the common interest arising notably in the presence of market failures. 14 Regulation (EC) No 1072/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 on common rules for access to the international road haulage market, OJ L 300, , p Council Regulation (EEC) N 3921/91 of 16 December 1991 laying down the conditions under which nonresident carriers may transport goods or passengers by inland waterway within a Member State, OJ L 373, , p. 1 and Council Regulation (EC) No 1356/96 of 8 July 1996 on common rules applicable to the transport of goods or passengers by inland waterway between Member States with a view to establishing freedom to provide such transport services, OJ L 175, , p OJ L 315 of , p.1. 8

9 (45) The final objective of measures of coordination of transport should be the creation of an efficient and high-quality system of different modes of transport. The coordination of transport covers in particular: (a) Correction of disparities between the different modes of transport: (i) (ii) (iii) Reduction of negative externalities (for example congestion, pollution), Reduction of external costs (for example cost of access to transport infrastructure) and Encouraging modal shift to transport modes generating lower external costs; (b) Better interlinking between different transport modes by (i) (ii) establishing connections between transport modes and networks and adoption of common interoperability standards (including promoting greater safety, and the removal of technical barriers). (46) The notified measures contribute to the coordination of transport since the objective of the envisaged aid programme is to better interlink different transport modes to encourage a further modal shift from road to other, more environmentally friendly, modes of transport, such as rail and inland waterway. (47) As regards the compatibility of the notified measure, the Commission notes, as a preliminary matter, that this measure represents the prolongation of a previously approved aid scheme. The changes introduced to that scheme by the notified measure, as described in recitals (29) and (30) above, do not alter the grounds upon which the assessment of the initially authorised measure was found to be compatible with the internal market on the basis of Article 107(3)(c) TFEU. The objective linked to the authorised measure has not changed since the previous authorisation of the measure. The conditions for granting the aid, in particular the aid amounts per categories, also remain unaltered. Nor have European transport policy and its objectives changed since the approval of the preceding aid scheme. (48) Nevertheless, between the last prolongation of the ERP Transport Programme and the current notification, the legislative framework for the assessment of aid for coordination of transport has changed, as explained in recital (42) above. Measures to promote a modal shift from road to rail transport (49) As regards the railway transport sector in particular, rules for the interpretation of Article 93 TFEU have been set out in Section 6 of the Community guidelines on State aid for railway undertakings 17 (hereinafter the Railway Guidelines). 17 Community Guidelines on State aid for railway undertakings, OJ C 184 of , p. 13, paras. 85 et seq. 9

10 (50) According to point 95 of the Railway Guidelines, aid which meets the needs of transport coordination has to be considered compatible with the Treaty. Point 96 of the Railway Guidelines provides that for a given aid measure to be considered to meet the needs of transport coordination, the aid has to be necessary and proportionate to the intended objective. Furthermore, the distortion of competition which is inherent in aid must not jeopardise the general interests of the Community. (51) Through the measures described in recitals (12) a) to c) above, the Austrian authorities aim to achieve a reduction in negative externalities and external costs by granting aid to stimulate the transfer of freight traffic from road to other, more environmentally friendly modes of transport, in particular to rail freight transport. (52) In point 100, the Railway Guidelines underline that "the assessment of the compatibility of aid for [ ] reducing external costs [ ] with respect to [Article 93 TFEU] is in keeping with the Commission's decision-making practice pursuant to Article 3(1)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 1107/70." (53) According to point 103 of the Railway Guidelines, as regards aid for reducing external costs, the eligible costs are the part of the external costs which rail transport makes it possible to avoid compared with competing transport modes. Rail freight transport has much lower external costs, especially in terms of accident and environmental pollution costs, when compared to road freight transport. Rail transport modes also have considerable spare capacity and can therefore play a role in providing alternative means of transport for congested parts of the road network. (54) The table below, provided by the Austrian authorities, 18 sets out the external costs of freight transport in Austria and the difference between road and rail transport. While the data in this table dates from 2009, it clearly demonstrates that rail freight transport generates far less external costs than road transport. This data can be considered as a "transparent, reasoned and quantified comparative cost analysis between rail transport and the alternative options based on other modes of transport" as required in point 105 of the Guidelines. Table 1: External Costs of freight transport in EUR / 1000 tkm based on 2009 data Landscape impairment Soil and water pollution Up- and Downstream Climate Air Noise Accidents Total Road Transport (lorries >3,5 t) 2,17 10,56 8,26 3,3 4,2 1,43 2,88 32,8 Rail freight transport 0,07 0,26 1,24 0,43 3,73 0,03 0,33 6,09 Difference road - rail 2,1 10,3 7,02 2,87 0,47 1,4 2,55 26,71 (55) In line with points 103 to 105 of the Railway Guidelines, the Commission concludes that the eligible costs of the scheme correspond to the part of the external costs which rail transport make possible to avoid compared with road transport. (56) According to paragraph 107 of the Railway Guidelines, the Commission considers there to be a presumption of necessity and proportionality of the aid when the aid intensity complies with the two conditions contained in subsection (b) thereof. In this 18 HERRY Consult GmbH: Berechnung beihilfefähiger Kosten für den Schienenverkehr, Wien 2011, S.23 10

11 case, it is also presumed there is no overcompensation pursuant to paragraph 109 of the Guidelines. (57) The first condition contained in paragraph 107(b) of the Railways Guidelines is that aid shall not cover more than 30 % of the total cost of rail transport. The second condition contained in paragraph 107(b) is that aid shall not exceed 50 % of the eligible costs, i.e. the part of the external costs which rail transport makes it possible to avoid compared with competing transport modes. (58) As regards the first condition, the beneficiary has to cover 25% of the total costs of the project through his own and other funds (such as bank loans, etc.). 75% of the total costs of the project will be financed through an ERP soft loan. The conditions of this soft loan, as set out above in recital (16) and the following, are such that the cash value of this ERP soft loan, i.e. the gross grant equivalent or aid intensity (Bruttosubventionsäquivalent) amounts up to a maximum of 20 % of the eligible total project costs. For cases of cumulation of aid from the ERP programme with any other type of aid including De minimis aid, a gross grant equivalent or aid intensity of up to a maximum of 30 % of the eligible total project costs is possible. (59) Since the ERP-programme foresees that the maximum aid intensity to cover the total project costs is limited at 20% and 30% in cases of cumulation with other types of aid, incl. De minimis aid, respectively, it is in compliance with the first condition of paragraph 107(b) of the Railway Guidelines. (60) Given that the maximum aid intensity for the aid measures of the ERP programme will not exceed 20 % (and cannot exceed 30% in cases of cumulation) of the eligible costs, also the second condition of paragraph 107(b) of the Railway Guidelines is met. (61) As regards the measure described in recital (12) d) above, it aims to increase safety and interoperability. According to paragraph 106 of the Railway Guidelines, the eligible costs for interoperability aid cover all investments relating to the installation of safety systems and interoperability. (62) Paragraph 107(c) of the Railway Guidelines provides that a presumption of necessity and proportionality will be present if the interoperability aid does not exceed 50 % of the eligible costs. Again, as the maximum aid intensity under the notified scheme is 20 % (and will not exceed 30% in cases of cumulation) of eligible costs for this measure, the notified measure can be presumed to be necessary and proportionate. (63) Finally, points 110 and 111 of the Railway Guidelines stipulate that, where the recipient of aid is a railway undertaking, it must be proved that the aid really does have the effect of encouraging the modal shift to rail and that there are realistic prospects of keeping the traffic transferred to rail. The modal split of freight transport in Austria is more than twice as high as the EU-27 average. In particular, the share of rail freight transport has increased from 30.8% in 1996, when the Commission took its first decision on the ERP Programme, to 36.4% in Modal Split of domestic freight transport in Austria, see: 11

12 (64) In the light of the criteria examined above, the Commission considers that the conditions related to the necessity and proportionality of the aid are met. (65) As regards competition between different transport modes, the measure is limited to reducing imbalances between railway transport and road transport, due to the limited aid intensities of the notified aid programme, the Commission does not consider that the aid scheme in question gives rise to a distortion of competition to an extent contrary to the common interest according to point 96 of the Railway Guidelines. (66) Finally, as stated in point 97 of the Railway Guidelines, in view of the rapid development of the transport sector, and hence the need for coordinating it, any aid notified to the Commission for the purpose of obtaining a decision on the basis of Article 93 TFEU, has to be limited to a maximum of five years. As the notified scheme is limited in time for five years, this condition is also fulfilled. In addition, the Austrian authorities have respected their obligation under Article 108(3) of the TFEU. (67) In light of the above, the conditions of the Railway Guidelines can be regarded as fulfilled in the present case. Measures to promote a modal shift from road to inland waterway transport (68) The notified measures also concern aid for the coordination of transport through the use of inland waterway transport. In the absence of guidelines for this particular mode of transport, the compatibility assessment of any aid should be based on Article 93 TFEU directly. (69) According to a constant decisional practice, aid for the coordination of transport will be deemed compatible with the internal market under Article 93 TFEU if the following conditions are met: - The aid must contribute to a well-defined objective of common interest; - The aid must be necessary and provide an incentive effect, - The aid must be proportionate, - Access to the aid in question must be open to all users on a non-discriminatory basis, - The aid must not lead to distortions of competition contrary to the common interest. (70) Objective of common interest: The development of inland navigation and its integration into multi-modal transport is a major objective of EU transport policy, as the Commission explained in its Communication on the promotion of inland waterway transport NAIADES 20. With its Marco Polo II programme, the Commission highlighted the environmental benefits of a modal shift in the freight transport sector 20 Communication from the Commission on the promotion of inland waterway transport NAIADES : An integrated European action programme for inland waterway transport, COM(2006) 6 final of

13 and provided Community funds to support such a transition 21. In its recent White Paper on a Single European Transport Area, the Commission identifies the unused potential of inland waterways for movements of goods. Any barriers that prevent its increased use should be removed. Finally, the Commission calls for the support of multimodal transport and single wagon load business and a stimulation of the integration of inland waterways into the transport system and the promotion of ecoinnovation in freight transport 22. (71) The objectives of the EU Transport policy are reflected in the notified ERP-Transport Programme. As described above, the envisaged measures of this programme aim to promote the use of inland waterways by providing support for transport companies to shift freight transport away from the road. The Commission therefore concludes that aid contributes to a well-defined objective of common interest. (72) Necessity and proportionality of the aid: The higher costs for transport equipment suited for intermodal transport, as described in recital (12) above, can prevent the desired modal shift from occurring so that market forces alone are not be sufficient to bring about such a shift. It measures provided by the ERP Transport Programme therefore appear necessary to foster a modal shift away from road transport to inland waterway transport. (73) Since the planned aid intensity is limited to a maximum of 20 % (with a maximum of 30% in cases of cumulation), it can be considered proportional to achieve the realisation of the ERP Transport Programme. It is also in line with the decisionmaking practice of the Commission. (74) Non-discriminatory access: The Commission notes that for all types of measures under the ERP Transport Programme the access to the aid is granted in a non-discriminatory manner. The broad eligibility criteria allow the largest number of entities of the logistic chain to benefit from aid under the scheme. Therefore the aid is granted on nondiscriminatory terms. (75) The Commission accordingly considers that the aid does not lead to distortions of competition to an extent contrary to the common interest. 21 Regulation (EC) No 1692/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 2006 establishing the second Marco Polo programme for the granting of Community financial assistance to improve the environmental performance of the freight transport system (Marco Polo II) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1382/2003, OJ L328 of , p.1, changed by Regulation (EC) No 923/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 1692/2006 establishing the second Marco Polo programme for the granting of Community financial assistance to improve the environmental performance of the freight transport system (Marco Polo II), OJ L266 of , p White Paper-Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system,, COM(2011) 144 of

14 4. DECISION In light of the above, the Commission has accordingly decided to consider the aid scheme to be compatible with the internal market under Article 93 TFEU. If this letter contains confidential information which should not be disclosed to third parties, please inform the Commission within fifteen working days of the date of receipt. If the Commission does not receive a reasoned request by that deadline, you will be deemed to agree to the disclosure to third parties and to the publication of the full text of the letter in the authentic language on the Internet site: Your request should be sent by registered letter or fax to: European Commission Directorate-General for Competition B-1049 Brussels Fax No: (0) Yours faithfully, For the Commission Joaquín ALMUNIA Vice-President 14