1

and implemented by the Consortium:

Louis Berger SAS, KLC Law Firm, SYSTRA SA

This project is funded by the European Union

PROJECT: “Integration of Trans-European Transport Network and Border Crossing Points”

Belarus - Ukraine

Transport Policy EC and Republic of BELARUS

ROUND TABLE

Minsk

04/02/2010

2

to contribute to the development and adoption of a comprehensive strategy linking-up actual and future transit needs, transport and border crossing capacities;

to prepare the pre feasibility studies for the identified priority projects;

to serve as a practical tool on which sustainable transport cooperation between the beneficiary countries and between them and the EU can be based on in future.

Overall objectives:Overall objectives:

3

Reviewing the situation at borders (road and rail) including in-depth statistical analysis of trade and traffic data; Assessments for defining and prioritising the investments/projects; Proposing methodology to adjust border crossing needs to both expected traffic flows and expected transport capacity; Conducting the required pre-and feasibility studies and preparation of the terms of reference for other projects/feasibility studies financed by the EU or IFI’s; Preparing preliminary proposals on financing possibilities, involving relevant IFIs and banks and identification of relevant infrastructure funding mechanisms; Designing tools for the national authorities for monitoring and adjusting the relevant strategies/master plans.

Specific objectives :Specific objectives :

4

R1 - A Study on the situation at the relevant borders encompassing the road and rail modes of transport is carried out;

R2 - A set of scenarios on the potential trade and people flows for relevant border crossing points are prepared;

R3 - Review on border control procedures, following the new status of partner states as EU neighbours is done; a set of recommendations and relevant legal instruments on their improvement is prepared;

R4 - At least two (pre) feasibility studies are conducted;

R5 - The tools in order to allow national authorities to monitor and adjust the list of measures and priorities are designed.

Expected Results:Expected Results:

5

• Findings of Inception period April 2009• Recommendations for extensions to TEN-T June

2009• Study on Current Situation July 2009• Methodology to adjust BC /access needs July 2009• Conceptual Border Crossing Master Plan October 2009• Traffic Forecast December 2009• Tools for master plan monitoring December 2009• At least 2 (Pre) Feasibility Studies November 2010• Training sessions & Study Tour 2010

Project Milestones and Timetable:Project Milestones and Timetable:

6

Geographical Area and Target Groups:

Geographical area to be covered: The Project will cover Ukraine and Belarus, in particular border areas and border crossing points on the IX Corridor (TEN-T).

Target groups:The Ministries of Transport and Communications of Ukraine and Belarus.In project implementations shall also be involved other stakeholders from the public and private sectors, such as Customs Services of the countries concerned, related other ministries and services, freight forwarders and their associations, civil society representatives, academics and research groups.

7

Transport overview in ENP countries and Russia - 2006

Length of road (other than motorways) thousand km

Road share of inland freight transport (%)

Road freight (million t/km)

Number of passenger cars

(thousand)

Armenia 6.0 59.3 91 N/A

Azerbaijan

18.8 42.6 8,222 549

Belarus

83.6 69.3 15,779 1,970

Georgia

20.3 7.4 586.1 416.3

Moldova

9.5 N/A 2,418 298.3

Russian Federation

518.5 0.9 42,228.7 26,656.3

Ukraine 169.1 8.2 40,566.5 5,603.6

Source: Eurostat. ENP: European Neighborhood Policy Partner Countries.

8

Foreign trade of the Republic of Belarus with CIS countries in 2007(mln. USD)

  Export Import

2006 2007 2006 2007

Total 8608,8 11221,4 14511,7 19015,7

Ukraine 1234,0 1469,8 1223,7 1534,3

Sources: Belstat

9

Commodity structure of exports and imports in 2007(per cent of total)

Export   Import

Sources: Belstat

10

Corridor IX

11

Freight Flow scenario between E 29 and EU Neighbouring Countries for 2020 (mln. tons)

12

Railway Transit flows in Belarus in 2006

Sources: Ministry of Transport Belarus

14

Pan-European Corridor IX crossing Russia, Lithuania, Belarus, Moldova and Ukraine in comparison with other corridors, has a particular potential for economic development of the region. In many regional economic studies, places along corridor IX, such as Kaliningrad, St. Petersburg, Moscow in Russia, Klaipeda, Kaunas, Vilnius in Lithuania, Minsk, Mohiliv, Gomel, Vitebsk inBelarus and Kiev and Chernigov in Ukraine, are described as potential key-areas for efficient economic development due to high density of population and industrial activities.

15

$

$$

$

E

E Klaipeda

ESovetsk

E

BELORUSSIA

FINLAND

SWEDEN

ESTONIA

LATVIA

LITHUANIA

POLAND

VILNIUS

UKRAINE

RIGA

TALLINN

St PetersburgHELSINKI

MINSK

WARSAW

Gdansk

IX

I

IX D

RUSSIA

KALININGRAD

Italy

Norway

To Kiev

Sauliai

I А

VI

Transport Corridor I

Transport Corridor I A

Transport Corridor IX

Transport Corridor IX D

Kaunas

STOCKHOLM

MOSCOW

77

Transport Corridor IX, IXB, IXD, I and IATransport Corridor IX, IXB, IXD, I and IA

16

Extension of the major trans-European transport axes to the neighbouring countries and regions

A well functioning transport system connecting the European Union (EU) and the neighbouring countries is essential for sustainable

economic growth and the wellbeing of all citizens in this part of the world

Report from the High Level Group* chaired by Loyola de

Palacio. November 2005

* High Level Group comprised 26 Neibhbouring Countries (including Belarus and Ukraine), the 25 EU

States plus Bulgaria and Romania, EIB, EBRD and WB

17

The five transnational transport axes proposed by the High Level Group of EC are the result of a major strategic reflection on the transport priorities for the EU and its neighborhood, including Ukraine and Belarus/Eastern Partnership.

The five transnational transport axes proposed by the High Level Group of EC are the result of a major strategic reflection on the transport priorities for the EU and its neighborhood, including Ukraine and Belarus/Eastern Partnership.

For the future development of transport sector of Ukraine and Belarus gradual and efficient integration to the TEN-T, especially Central and South/TRACECA axes are very significant for Eastern Partnership countries due to its geographical alignment.

For the future development of transport sector of Ukraine and Belarus gradual and efficient integration to the TEN-T, especially Central and South/TRACECA axes are very significant for Eastern Partnership countries due to its geographical alignment.

18

- Motorways of the Seas: linking the Baltic, Barents, Atlantic, Mediterranean, Black and the Caspian Sea areas as well as the littoral countries within the sea areas and with an extension through the Suez Canal towards the Red Sea.

- Northern axis: to connect the northern EU with Norway to the North and with Belarus and Russia and beyond to the East. A connection to the Barents region linking Norway through Sweden and Finland with Russia is also foreseen. - Central axis: to link the centre of the EU to Ukraine and the Black Sea and through an inland waterway connection to the Caspian Sea. Connections towards Central Asia and the Caucasus are also foreseen, as well as a direct connection to the Trans-Siberian railway and a link from the Don/Volga inland waterway to the Baltic Sea. - South Eastern axis: to link the EU through the Balkans and Turkey to the Caucasus and the Caspian Sea as well as to Egypt and the Red Sea. Access links to the Balkan countries as well as connections towards Russia, Iran and Iraq and the Persian Gulf are also foreseen.

- South Western axis: to connect the south-western EU with Switzerland and Morocco and beyond, including the trans-Maghrebin link connecting Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia. An extension of the trans-Maghrebin link to Egypt as well as a connection from Egypt to the South towards other African countries are also foreseen.

Five major transnational axes: Five major transnational axes:

19

Five major transnational axes: Five major transnational axes:

20

The list of priority projects as identified by the Group:The list of priority projects as identified by the Group:

BelarusRail:1. Railway line section Brest – Osinovka.2. Railway line Lithuanian border –Minsk – Gomel – Ukraine border.Road:1. Road connection Brest-Minsk-Russia border.2. Road connection Lithuanian border-Minsk-Gomel-Ukraine border.

UkraineRail:1. Construction of railway tunnel on section Beskyd-Skotarske.2. Creation and development of logistic centers as well as infrastructure in Chop.Road:1. Upgrading of sections Kiev-Zhashkiv and Chervonoznamenka-Odessa on the road Kiev-Odessa.2. Upgrading of road Lviv-Krakovets (Poland border).

Out of the eight (8) listed projects two (2) projects are part and covered by Pan European Corridor IX and have direct relation with ToR of our project: - Railway line Lithuanian border –Minsk – Gomel – Ukraine border; - Road connection Lithuanian border-Minsk-Gomel-Ukraine border;

Out of the eight (8) listed projects two (2) projects are part and covered by Pan European Corridor IX and have direct relation with ToR of our project: - Railway line Lithuanian border –Minsk – Gomel – Ukraine border; - Road connection Lithuanian border-Minsk-Gomel-Ukraine border;

21

During the site visit in Chernihiv and Gomel regions: (a)technical condition of highway M01/E95/271 (150 km) and 10 bridges of the Road Corridor IX from Chernihiv towards to border crossing point “Novyie Yarilovichi” and Repki – Senkovka, and (b) from Bobruisk towards to border crossing point “Novaya Guta” 150 km and 11 bridges were inspected.

Majority of the bridges were constructed in 1955-1962 and 1973-1974 and do not correspond with Technical Category I of highway standards, which, due to traffic safety reasons, highlights the urgent need for modernization/rehabilitation works.

Majority of the bridges were constructed in 1955-1962 and 1973-1974 and do not correspond with Technical Category I of highway standards, which, due to traffic safety reasons, highlights the urgent need for modernization/rehabilitation works.

Preliminary Finding of Technical condition of the road

Chernigiv-Gomel-Bobruysk:

22

- Width of majority of bridges is 6,0 m, which is not in compliance with references of Category I Highway, hence the roads are narrowing before and after the bridge. - Waterproofing is not corresponding with standards. - Majority of bridges have limitation of weight per axel 9,5-10.5 t.

- Width of majority of bridges is 6,0 m, which is not in compliance with references of Category I Highway, hence the roads are narrowing before and after the bridge. - Waterproofing is not corresponding with standards. - Majority of bridges have limitation of weight per axel 9,5-10.5 t.

Preliminary Finding of Technical condition of the road

Chernigiv-Gomel-Bobruysk – Cont’d:

N.B. According the SNIP/GOST Standards, after 50 years of operation all bridges have to be demolished or fully reconstructed, due to the aging of metal and concrete constructions.

N.B. According the SNIP/GOST Standards, after 50 years of operation all bridges have to be demolished or fully reconstructed, due to the aging of metal and concrete constructions.

23

III

II

I

IV

Proposed set of Pre Feasibility studies for road section of Road Corridor IX:

Proposed set of Pre Feasibility studies for road section of Road Corridor IX:

24

Set of Pre Feasibility studies for road section of Road Transport Corridor IX for identification:

Set of Pre Feasibility studies for road section of Road Transport Corridor IX for identification:

II. Pre Feasibility studies for upgrading of Road Section Bobruysk - Chernigiv:II. Pre Feasibility studies for upgrading of Road Section Bobruysk - Chernigiv:

I. Pre Feasibility studies for upgrading of Road Section Bobruysk - Kipti

I. Pre Feasibility studies for upgrading of Road Section Bobruysk - Kipti

III. Pre Feasibility studies for upgrading of Road Section Gomel - Chernigiv:

III. Pre Feasibility studies for upgrading of Road Section Gomel - Chernigiv:

IV. Pre Feasibility studies for upgrading of Road Section Gomel – Nova Guta:

IV. Pre Feasibility studies for upgrading of Road Section Gomel – Nova Guta:

Main Conclusions of RWG, 27.01.10, Kiev:Main Conclusions of RWG, 27.01.10, Kiev:

1. Pre-feasibility study should cover all sections of highway (over 350 km) from Bobruysk (Belarus) till Kipti (Ukraine) for the purpose of the road section modernization of the transport corridor IX to the 1st technical category.

2. Preparation of tender documentation for rehabilitation Minsk – Gomel highway section km 57,400 – 131,500.

26

WG on RailThe first meeting of the working group on rail took place in Kiev on the 28th January 2010;

The working groups conclusions are the following:• Full electrification of the railway road from Odessa to Belarus was identified as the main interesting project in term of border crossing improvement for BCP n°2 and 3 (part of corridor n°IX) as far as Gomel. Current stage of development in Belarus seems to be more advanced than in Ukraine.

• To identify and if possible to invite next month specialised experts already involved in electrification projects to be part of the working group team in order to launch a pre feasibility study;

• Weak Vicking train performances in Ukraine is more due to tariff regulations and customs aspects than lack of infrastructures, even if the electrification problem exits also when approaching the border with Belarus.

27

Customs WGThe first meeting of the Working Group on Customs was organized in Kiev on 23 December 2009.

Main outcomes of the meeting was:

• basic bottlenecks of practical application of the PAIES system have been described and analyzed between the current PAIES system operating between Ukraine and Moldova;

• Belarus customs authorities took into account the fact of negative influence of non-unified approaches of preliminary data record and a decision reached on consideration of introduction of general classifications in subsequent work with PAIES;

• the representatives of custom authorities of Republic of Belarus and Ukraine expressed the interest in preliminary data exchange organization on commodities and transport vehicles which move through the state border of Ukraine and Republic of Belarus.

Customs WGThe first meeting of the Working Group on Customs was organized in Kiev on 23 December 2009.

Main outcomes of the meeting was:

• basic bottlenecks of practical application of the PAIES system have been described and analyzed between the current PAIES system operating between Ukraine and Moldova;

• Belarus customs authorities took into account the fact of negative influence of non-unified approaches of preliminary data record and a decision reached on consideration of introduction of general classifications in subsequent work with PAIES;

• the representatives of custom authorities of Republic of Belarus and Ukraine expressed the interest in preliminary data exchange organization on commodities and transport vehicles which move through the state border of Ukraine and Republic of Belarus.

28

Thank You for attention