Draft:EU Rail Capacity Regulation

Legislative Proposal of the EU Rail Capacity Regulation From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The proposed Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the use of railway infrastructure capacity in the single European Railway area or EU Rail capacity regulation is an EU legislative proposal subject to the ordinary legislative procedure. It is intended to set out new rules how railway infrastructure managers shall plan and manage the use of capacity on railway infrastructure as well as the allocation of such capacity to railway operators and other applicants for capacity rights on railway infrastructure. The regulation is expected to facilitate more, faster and more reliable international train connections through better cross-border coordination and more efficient use of railway infrastructure. Thus, it shall contribute to the shift of both passengers and freight from more ecologically harmful modes of transport to rail transport.[1][2][3][4]

  • Comment: For the draft as a whole, notability needs to be established via independent sources, so typically newspaper coverage, and in depth. At the moment that overall coverage has internalised sourcing which makes it difficult to demonstrate that someone external to this initiative has decided this is notable enough to write up a newspaper story or similar. That presumably can be fixed, it just needs independent coverage.
    The second big issue is that there is a firm rule against original research, see WP:NOR and since the bulk of the draft's text is sourced against a primary document, it's difficult to avoid that issue here. It may be over-ambitious in scope, as things stand.
    Finally, and this is not the reason for a decline, kindly consider using Template:Sfn for this sort of article, it's easier for you, the reader and for maintenance. If you combine this with this tool, the middle block responses will do most of the work for you, creating citation and sfn:
    https://citer.toolforge.org/ ChrysGalley (talk) 11:17, 1 March 2026 (UTC)


Development of the Legislative Proposal

Since 2014, RailNetEurope (RNE, an association of rail infrastructure managers) together with Forum Train Europe (FTE, an association of European railway operators) and with the support of the European Rail Freight Association (ERFA) elaborated the TimeTableRedesign project (TTR). The main goal of this project is to complement the dominant annual capacity allocation procedure by new mechanisms allowing earlier timetabling in particular for passenger services while safeguarding sufficient quantity and quality of capacity for later capacity requests, in particular for freight services. Furthermore, cross-border capacity allocation should become more efficient and allow for better cross-border rail services.[5][6]

In 2021, declared by the European Commission as the “European Year of Rail”, the European Commission and the European Parliament commissioned a study about cross-border long-distance and night trains. Following the results of this study, the European Commission published the Action Plan to boost long-distance and cross-border rail services. Both documents highlighted the importance of efficient use of the rail network through improvements in the capacity allocation procedure. [7][8]

In the Action Plan, the European Commission announced to “assess the need and propose if necessary regulatory action in 2022 to improve capacity allocation and traffic management processes, aiming at better coordination of the capacity allocation within the overall rail system, covering passenger and freight services” [9]

The legislative proposal was published by the European Commission on July 11th 2023.[10] On March 12th 2024, the European Parliament adopted its position as a legislative resolution (first reading according to the ordinary legislative procedure).[11] The European Council reached their general approach on June 18th 2024.[12] After more than a year of trilogue negotiations, a provisional agreement was reached on November 19th 2025.[13][14] The final regulation is expected to be adopted and to enter into force in the second quarter of 2026.[15]

Legal Status

As an EU regulation, it will be directly applicable without the necessity of implementation in national law of the member states. The regulation will repeal regulation 913/2010 on a European rail network for competitive freight entirely and directive 2012/34 on a single European railway area partially.[16]

The full implementation of the regulation will be effective for the annual timetable 2031 (start of operation in December 2030) as the duration of the preparatory procedures according to the regulation itself does not allow an earlier implementation.[17]

Significant parts of the regulation must be applied only on the core and extended core trans-European network (TEN-T), but infrastructure managers and member states may extend the application on further parts or the entire railway network they are responsible for.[18]

The regulation foresees several empowerments for the European Commission to adopt delegated or implementing acts. Many of these empowerments for non-legislative acts are intended to be used if the coordination of national entities between each other and the provision of non-binding framework documents by them does not lead to the desired seamless use of the European Railway Network.[19]

New principles and solutions in capacity allocation and management

The main paradigm change through the rail capacity regulation can be summarized in the transitioning from an annual, manual, and national approach to a flexible, digital, and European framework for capacity and traffic management[20]

The regulation imposes several rights and obligations in favour of cross-border train services:

  • Applicants for railway capacity (operators, freight forwarders or public transport authorities) have the right to request capacity for cross-border trains in a single place and operation or via a single interface (“one-stop-shop” principle)[21]. Besides the final capacity request, this requirement also concerns the information the operator needs to assess the feasibility of the intended services with regard to the availability of suitable capacity.[22]
  • Applicants have the right to request multi-annual framework agreements for capacity, in case of cross-border trains a framework agreement can be concluded with multiple infrastructure managers.[23]
  • Allocation of capacity for cross-border trains must be non-discriminatory compared to domestic services.[24]
  • Member states are obliged to coordinate to ensure consistency of their strategic guidance.[25]
  • Infrastructure managers are obliged to coordinate in order to achieve cross-border consistent strategic capacity planning (including temporary capacity restrictions), capacity allocation (including framework agreements) and rescheduling or rerouting in case of disruptions.[26]
  • Infrastructure managers are obliged to deal with cross-border trains in their entirety from origin to destination, not just from border to border.[27]
  • Whenever it becomes necessary to re-route a train compared to the intentions of the operator or the initial capacity allocation, alternative routes shall be considered, including such via the railway networks of other member states and infrastructure managers.[28]
  • Strategic capacity planning shall be based on a European Transport Market Study.[29]

The current capacity allocation process gives priority to requests within the annual timetable deadlines over later or ad-hoc requests and doesn’t offer to operators reliable capacity for more than one year. According to the rail capacity regulation, in particular passenger operators and public transport authorities will benefit from the possibility to request capacity rights over more than one annual timetable period through framework agreements. Multi-annual capacity allocation allows passenger rail undertakings to start selling tickets earlier before the timetable change and to achieve better financing conditions for rolling stock that can be reliably deployed for several years. On the other hand, during the earlier phases of capacity allocation (framework agreements and annual timetabling), a part of the total available capacity is kept for capacity allocation in the later phases of ad hoc and rolling planning capacity allocation. This change improves the conditions for freight operators, as their business is often less predictable than that of passenger operators.[30] For public authorities responsible for public service obligation (PSO) contracts, earlier capacity allocation for passenger services through framework agreements makes it easier to find out which services will expectedly be delivered by the market on a commercial basis before it is too late to procure the respective train connections as a public service obligation.

To a certain extent, integrated clock-face timetabling can be enforced as specific timetable designs may be binding elements of strategic guidance of the member states, regardless whether the concerned services will be based on commercial operation or on public service contracts.[31]</ref>

The rail capacity regulation introduces operational, socio-economic and environmental criteria for decision-making as well as an auction for exceptionally difficult cases of capacity allocation.[32]

For cases of cancellation or worsened conditions of already allocated capacity rights, the rail capacity regulation stipulates an obligation for the infrastructure manager to pay a penalty to the concerned applicant. Similarly, a rail undertaking or other applicant not using an allocated capacity right to operate the respective trains has to pay a penalty to the infrastructure manager.[33]

Involved bodies

The regulation mentions the following organisations:

  • The European Network of Infrastructure Managers (ENIM), already mentioned in the existing directive 2012/34, becomes a more formal organisation of all concerned infrastructure managers with at least the power to adopt guidelines, frameworks or recommendations.[34] The existing organisation PRIME (Platform of Rail Infrastructure Managers in Europe) is likely to transform into ENIM.[35]
  • The network coordinator, supporting ENIM by preparation of decision-making and acting as a secretary[36]. The existing organisation RailNetEurope (RNE), deeply involved in the TimeTableRedesign project as one of the drivers of the regulation, was appointed by the infrastructure managers to be entrusted with the role of the network coordinator.[37]
  • The European Network of Rail Regulatory Body (ENRRB) as the umbrella organisation of all national regulatory bodies responsible for the railway market.[38]
  • The European Railway Platform (ERP) representing all operational stakeholders except infrastructure managers (in other words: train operators, other applicants like PSO authorities and freight forwarders as well as operators of service facilities)[39]. Forum Train Europe (FTE) coordinates the preparation of a proposal together with other associations[40]
  • The Performance Advisory Board, consisting out of maximum nine independent and impartial experts[41]

For coordination between member states in the context of their strategic guidance, there is no body explicitly mentioned in the regulation. Instead, the regulation states that member states shall coordinate within existing fora and on the most appropriate geographic level.[42]

In addition to establishing ENIM and the Network Coordinator, the regulation requires the infrastructure managers to designate Focal Points as central interfaces for coordination.[43]

Framework documents

The regulation mentions the following three framework documents to set out details of the procedures that are not provided by the regulation itself:

  • The European framework for capacity management[44]
  • The European framework for the coordination of cross-border traffic management, disruption management and crisis management[45]
  • The European framework for performance review[46]

These framework agreements shall be developed by the European Network of Infrastructure Managers (ENIM). As ENIM has no legislative power, the frameworks issued by ENIM are not legally binding. In order to achieve the desired effect of harmonized procedures anyway, infrastructure managers shall follow a “comply or explain” approach.[47] Furthermore, the European Commission is empowered to adopt delegating acts making the framework documents legally binding and eventually amending them.

Instruments and procedures for capacity planning and allocation

Strategic guidance by member states[25]

In chronological order, the first instrument in the context of capacity planning and allocation is the strategic guidance of the member states, directed to the respective infrastructure managers. Member states are not obliged to issue strategic guidance.

Strategic guidance may comprise outlooks on the planned development of rail infrastructure and of PSO services as well as general policy objectives, guidelines and requirements. Strategic guidance may also contain more specific and binding requirements:

  • integrated clock-face timetables or other specific timetable designs
  • minimum capacity volumes for market segments like freight, long-distance passenger service and regional passenger services
  • pre-planning of infrastructure capacity on certain lines and nodes
  • national parameter values for the application of operational, socio-economic and environmental criteria

On one hand, such binding elements significantly reduce the degree of freedom for the infrastructure managers who must respect them when applying all the other instruments of the regulation. On the other hand, the degree of freedom for member states providing strategic guidance is limited by the requirement to leave to the infrastructure managers sufficient operational margin to fulfil their tasks and responsibilities.

Capacities subject to specific timetable designs must be available in a non-discriminatory way. In order to avoid new obstacles for cross-border rail services, strategic guidance of different member states is subject to compulsory coordination.

If sufficiently detailed, the strategic guidance has influence on the conclusion of framework agreements[23] and on a possible grouping of trainpaths in the context of pre-planning.[48]

Although strategic guidance must be provided by the member states timely before the infrastructure managers start strategic capacity planning, possible binding elements of the strategic guidance like specific timetable designs or minimum capacity volumes for certain market segments are on higher level of detail than the required level of detail of the capacity strategy as the first step of strategic capacity planning.

Strategic capacity planning by infrastructure managers[49]

Strategic capacity planning is a task of infrastructure managers. The result of strategic capacity planning are the following three documents, which shall be consistent across borders, consistent with each other and consistent with the strategic guidance of the member states:

  • The capacity strategy[50] shall be elaborated during the timespan from 60 to 36 months in advance. It shall inform about the physical development of the railway network and the availability of capacity (including major temporary capacity restrictions due to planned infrastructure works), about demand forecasts and about of capacity that is already allocated through framework agreements or that may be required for PSO services. If the member state provided strategic guidance, it shall be content of the capacity strategy too.
  • The capacity model[51] shall be published 18 months before timetable change. It is based on the capacity strategy, but more detailed: It contains a quantification of capacity volumes, divided in different market segments (e.g. freight, passenger long-distance and passenger regional) and different methods of capacity allocation (framework agreements, annual requests, ad-hoc and rolling planning). Furthermore, it indicates capacity that is unavailable as it is reserved for temporary capacity restrictions. It shall also highlight capacity that is particular suitable for cross-border services. The validity period is one timetable year and the level of detail is numbers of trains per relevant section and one or several representative days.
  • The capacity supply plan[52] shall be published 11 months before timetable change. It is much more detailed than the capacity strategy and the capacity model. The capacity supply plan shall contain capacity restrictions in the form of concrete capacity planning objects and inform about alternative capacity in case of capacity restrictions or network disruptions. Where relevant, it shall contain information about specialised infrastructure that is restricted for certain types of traffic, and about pre-planned capacity. Besides capacity on the railway network the capacity supply plan also includes information about capacity available in service facilities. It indicates capacity, that has been already allocated, not only through framework agreements, but also through the rolling planning process of previous timetable periods. The capacity supply plan serves as a basis for capacity allocation as capacity requests consistent with the capacity supply plan have priority over other capacity requests. The allocation of capacity not consistent with the capacity supply plan within the annual timetable process is allowed as long as a balance is kept with the aim to keep sufficient capacity available for ad-hoc and rolling planning requests.

The documents of strategic capacity planning are subject to updates in case of relevant changes later in the process. The level of detail of the strategic capacity planning documents, in particular the capacity supply plan depends on the challenges of capacity allocation in the concerned parts of the network: Where infrastructure is closer to congestion and there are more different interests of operators or public authorities involved, strategic capacity planning has to be more detailed than on lines or in nodes, where different capacity requirements can be met more easily.

In contrary to capacity allocation, strategic capacity planning deals with the question, which capacity characteristics shall be offered to which market segments, not with the question, which operator or applicant shall get which capacity. The requirement of a non-discriminatory approach applies to strategic capacity planning similarly as to capacity allocation.

In contrary to the current process, where capacity allocation means arranging capacity requests that had been elaborated by operators without such significant timetabling restrictions coming from the infrastructure manager, infrastructure managers need more information about demand and needs from the market. This information shall be gathered through stakeholder consultations[53] (including capacity need announcements from applicants) and demand research (including the European Transport Market Study).[29] Both the timeline and the detailed contents of the strategic capacity planning are subject to delegated acts to be eventually adopted by the European Commission.

Framework Agreements[23]

The conclusion of framework agreements between applicants and infrastructure managers is a method of allocation of capacity rights[54], subject to the general requirements to capacity allocation, in particular non-discrimination of applicants by the infrastructure manager and the obligation to pay penalties for infrastructure managers finally not providing or for applicants not using the allocated capacity.

In contrary to annual or ad-hoc capacity allocation, capacity rights allocated through framework agreements have the form of capacity specifications with a lower level of detail than train paths.[55] These capacity specifications are converted into train paths during the annual timetabling process. Within the framework agreements, there shall be provisions ensuring appropriate flexibility for better use of the railway network.

The standard duration of a framework agreement is 5 years with a maximum duration of 15 years in exceptional cases.

Infrastructure managers shall ensure consistency between framework agreements on one side and strategic guidance resp. strategic capacity planning on the other side, but it remains partially open, at which point in time framework agreements shall be concluded and, consequently, which step of strategic capacity planning will influence framework agreements to be concluded later and which will be influenced by framework agreements already concluded earlier. There are neither provisions about the procedure to offer, request and conclude framework agreements including prioritisation between conflicting requests for framework agreements.

In order to keep capacity available for later requests, the share of capacity that is allocated through framework agreements, shall be limited.

Annual timetable[56]

Similar to the current procedures of capacity allocation, the annual capacity allocation process follows the principle of simultaneous capacity allocation: The infrastructure managers consider at the same time all capacity requests from different applicants which had been made in time before the official deadline. Although the infrastructure managers have strategic guidance, strategic capacity planning and socio-economic and environmental criteria available as tools for prioritisation, they shall first try to find consensual solutions or to offer alternative capacity, taking into account the constraints on applicants, including the economic effect on their business.

Ad-Hoc capacity allocation[57]

As in the current capacity allocation regime, short-term capacity requests after the deadline of the annual allocation process are prioritized on a first-come-first-serve basis. The significant change through the capacity regulation doesn’t concern the process of ad-hoc capacity allocation, but the short-term availability of capacity as explicit portions of capacity are not allocated through the annual process or framework agreements, but remain reserved for the ad-hoc process.

Rolling planning[58]

Rolling planning is a new method of capacity allocation, introduced through the capacity regulation and targeting the rail freight market. Similar to ad-hoc capacity allocation, it allows to request capacity after the deadline for annual capacity allocation or even after the beginning of the timetable period. Similar to framework agreements, capacity rights granted under the rolling planning have a longer validity than one timetable period (up to three years), but only as capacity specifications which must be converted into train paths during the annual timetable process. Under the rolling planning procedure, capacity is allocated following the first-come-first-serve principle.

Partitioning of rail infrastructure capacity[59]

If infrastructure managers during the consultation of the capacity model or the capacity supply plan receive inputs from applicants, that can’t be reconciled with each other and with the available capacity even if the capacity model resp. supply plan differs within reasonable limits from the input received, the infrastructure manager shall partition the available capacity. For partitioning the capacity into portions available for different market segments, a non-discriminatory procedure must be applied, based on socio-economic and environmental criteria and respecting the need for cross-border trains.

Highly utilised and congested infrastructure[60]

Whenever the necessity for partitioning arises or the capacity utilisation of a certain element of infrastructure has exceeded threshold values or it is expected that capacity becomes scarce because of major infrastructure works in future, the concerned infrastructure shall be declared to be highly utilised or congested.

Conflicts between individual capacity requests, that can be solved by reasonable timetable amendments compared to the train paths desired by the applicants are not a reason for declaring infrastructure as highly utilised or congested.

Declaring infrastructure as highly utilised or congested leads to the obligation for the infrastructure manager to carry out a capacity analysis[61] and then to establish a capacity-enhancement plan.[62] The use of congested infrastructure can be charged with additional track access charges.

Application of socio-economic and environmental criteria

According to the capacity regulation, socioeconomic and environmental criteria shall be applied for partitioning of capacity[59] and also for formal conflict resolution in the context of simultaneous capacity allocation.[63] Rather than a justification for prioritization of one train resp. operator instead of another, the application of these criteria shall be a cost-benefit analysis of different partitioning resp. timetabling scenarios, resulting in advantages and disadvantages for different applicants resp. market segments. The criteria consider economic and ecological effects as well as territorial connectivity.

Because of the novelty of this method of decision-making in capacity allocation, the methodology shall be tested and calibrated before application.

Pre-Planning[48]

The capacity supply plan may contain pre-planned capacity which is more detailed and closer to actual train paths than other parts of strategic capacity planning. Pre-planning can be carried out if it is deemed necessary by the infrastructure manager in order to ensure that capacity is available for allocation for different rail market segments and in particular for freight and cross-border rail services. Member states may oblige infrastructure managers to pre-plan capacity on certain lines and nodes within their strategic guidance. Consistency with pre-planned capacity leads to higher priority in conflict resolution and pre-planned capacity is more safeguarded in case of temporary capacity restrictions. Similar to capacity allocation in general, pre-planned capacity is subject to non-discrimination of applicants.

Specialised Infrastructure[64]

Railway lines, tracks or other elements of infrastructure may be designated for certain types of rail services it is justified from a social, economic and environmental perspective and if alternative routes are available for other market segments. The declaration of such specialised infrastructure shall not prevent the use by other market segments if capacity is available.

Interdiction of transfers of capacity rights between applicants[55]

It remains prohibited to transfer a capacity right from one applicant to another one, for example by sale or exchange of capacity rights. The use of capacity rights, obtained by an applicant that is not an operator (e.g. a PSO authority or a freight forwarding company) by an operator on behalf of that applicant does not represent such a prohibited transfer of capacity rights.

Management of capacity restrictions and disruptions[65]

One of the main goals of the regulation is to reduce the impact of capacity restrictions and network disruptions on railway operation, in particular on cross-border services. The more severe a planned capacity restriction is, the earlier in time it shall be considered during strategic capacity planning. Most probable disruption scenarios shall be subject to contingency planning.[66]

In case of unforeseen disruptions or crisis, infrastructure managers shall ensure a fast and coordinated reaction in order to stabilise and optimise rail traffic. They shall provide relevant, accurate and up-to-date information to stakeholders and shall make all possible effort to reschedule the traffic affected by the disruption.

Similar to strategic capacity planning and capacity allocation, cross-border coordination including the use of alternative routes via the networks of different infrastructure managers is required for disruption and crisis management too.[67]

Regulatory oversight

Rail Regulatory Bodies shall cooperate within the European Network of Rail Regulatory Bodies (ENRRB) in order to ensure consistency between their decisions, in particular where cross-border trains are concerned.[38] Furthermore, ENRRB is entitled to provide recommendations on various documents like the European framework for capacity management[44] or the European framework for the coordination of cross border traffic management, disruption management and crisis management[45] and to monitor the cross-border coordination procedures. They shall share their experience with the European Commission in the context of eventual delegated acts.[49] The ENRRB shall be informed about cancellations of capacity rights concerning cross-border trains.[54]

Performance review

Infrastructure managers are required to set out performance targets and to monitor, benchmark and report the performance of their rail infrastructure services and related rail transport services.[68] The European Network of Infrastructure Managers (ENIM) shall prepare and publish a performance review report.[69] In addition, an impartial and independent Advisory Performance Panel shall be appointed on European level, providing recommendations to the sector and an autonomous section of the performance review report.[41]

Notes

References

Related Articles

Wikiwand AI