Progress Report 4

Support to the Integration of Ukraine in the Trans-European Transport Network TEN-T 

4th Progress Report 

The European Union’s Programme for Ukraine 

Ministry of Transport and 

communications of Ukraine 

Support to the Integration of 

Ukraine in the Trans-European 

Transport Network TEN-T 

Progress Report 4 

August 2010 

i

Project Title: 



Support to the Integration of Ukraine in the Trans-European 

Transport Network TEN-T 

Project Number: EuropeAid /124964/C/SER/UA 

Country: Ukraine 

Project Partner EC Consultant 

Name: Ministry of Transport and 

Communications 

Address: 14 Peremogy Av. 

Kiev Ukraine 

01135 

Corporate Solutions Consulting Ltd 

36 Byron Hill Road 

Harrow-on-the-Hill, 

Middlesex HA2 0HY 

United Kingdom 

Tel. number: +380 444 616 540 +44 208 423 7711 

Fax number: +380 442 387 226 +44 208 423 7766 

Contact person: Mr. G. Legenkiy Ebby Adhami, Project Director 

Signatures: 

Date of Report: August 2010 

Reporting 

period: 

Author of report: 

EC M&E team 

EU Delegation 

EC Project 

Manager 

1 st February 2010 to 31 st 

July 2010 

Corporate Solutions Consulting Ltd 

[name) [signature] [date] 



i



Table of Contents 

1. PROJECT SYNOPSIS .................................................................................................................1 

2. SUMMARY OF PROJECT PROGRESS, PERIOD 4 ....................................................................2 

2.1 STEERING COMMITTEE AND WORKING GROUPS ................................................................................ 2 

2.2 WORK PACKAGES ............................................................................................................................. 3 

2.3 RESOURCE UTILISATION .................................................................................................................... 6 

3. SUMMARY OF PROJECT STATUS AND PLANNING, UPDATED FOR THE REMAINDER OF 

THE PROJECT ...........................................................................................................................6 

3.1 MILESTONES AND RESULTS TO DATE ................................................................................................. 6 

3.2 STRUCTURE OF ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................................... 9 

4. DETAILED PROGRESS IN THE CURRENT REPORTING PERIOD .......................................... 10 

4.1 STEERING COMMITTEE AND WORKING GROUPS .............................................................................. 10 

4.2 WP 1: POLICY, REGULATORY INSTITUTIONAL AND INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING ISSUES ................ 11 

4.3 WP 2: RAILWAY TRANSPORT .......................................................................................................... 12 

4.4 WP 3: ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE ...................................................................................................... 13 

4.5 WP 4: ROAD TRANSPORT ............................................................................................................... 14 

4.6 WP 5: MARITIME AND INLAND WATER TRANSPORT ......................................................................... 16 

4.7 WP 6: AIRPORTS AND AIR TRANSPORT ........................................................................................... 17 

4.8 WP 7: CROSSCUTTING ISSUES ........................................................................................................ 21 

4.9 WP 8: SECTOR STRATEGY AND PLAN ............................................................................................. 22 

4.10 WP 9: HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING ............................................................. 23 

5. PLANNED ACTIVITIES FOR THE NEXT REPORTING PERIOD 5, TO DECEMBER 2010 ........ 24 

5.1 GENERAL 

........................................................................................................................................ 24 

5.2 PLANNED DELIVERABLES ................................................................................................................. 24 

6. PLANNED ACTIONS IN PERIOD 5 ........................................................................................... 24 

6.1 WP 1: TRANSPORT POLICY ............................................................................................................. 24 

6.2 WP 2: RAILWAY TRANSPORT .......................................................................................................... 25 

6.3 WP 3: ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE .............................................................................................. 26 

6.4 WP 4: ROAD TRANSPORT ............................................................................................................... 27 

6.5 WP 5: MARITIME AND INLAND WATER TRANSPORT ......................................................................... 27 

6.6 WP 6: AIRPORTS AND AIR TRANSPORT ........................................................................................... 27 

6.7 WP 7: MULTIMODAL TRANSPORT .................................................................................................... 28 

6.8 WP 8: STRATEGY AND ACTION PLAN .............................................................................................. 28 

6.9 WP 9: TRAINING AND STUDY TOURS ............................................................................................... 29 

7. PLANNED ACTIONS IN EXTENSION PERIOD ......................................................................... 29 

ii



8. APPENDIX A: EC PROJECT PLANNING FORMS .................................................................... 30 

8.1 FORM 2.2: PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT ..................................................................................... 30 

8.2 FORM 2.3: RESOURCES UTILISATION REPORT ............................................................................... 31 

8.3 FORM 2.4 OUTPUT PERFORMANCE REPORT ................................................................................. 32 

8.4 FORM 1.6 PLAN OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NEXT REPORTING PERIOD .............................................. 34 

9. APPENDIX B: INTERIM REPORT 1.2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................... 35 

9.1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................. 35 

9.2 STRUCTURE OF REPORT ................................................................................................................. 35 

9.3 NEXT STEPS .................................................................................................................................... 35 

10. APPENDIX C: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE BORDER REPORT SECTION INTERIM 

REPORT 7.1 ............................................................................................................................. 36 

10.1 PART 1 ............................................................................................................................................ 36 

10.2 PART II ............................................................................................................................................ 38 

11. APPENDIX D: INTERIM REPORT 8.1. METHODOLOGY TOWARDS IDENTIFYING 

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS .............................................................................................. 43 

12. APPENDIX E: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF TEN-T TRAINING PROGRAMME WP 9.0 ............. 45 

12.1 TEN T TERMS OF REFERENCE ........................................................................................................ 45 

12.2 TEN-T TRAINING PROGRAM ............................................................................................................ 45 

12.3 TRAINING PROGRAM SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... 45 

12.4 GENERAL COMMENTS ...................................................................................................................... 47 

13. APPENDIX F: MEETINGS DURING THE PERIOD 1ST FEB TO 31ST JULY 2010 ................... 48 

14. APPENDIX G: INTERIM REPORTS DELIVERED FROM TEN-T PROJECT TO 31 JULY 2010 . 57 

iii

Abbreviations 



CMU Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine 

DTCSDC 

Department of Transport and Communication System Development and 

Coordination (of MoTC) 

EASA European Aviation Safety Authority 

EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development 

EC European Commission 

ECAA European Common Aviation Area 

ECAC European Civil Aviation Conference 

ENP European Neighbourhood Policy 

ENPI European and Partnership Instrument 

EU European Union 

GTZ German national development assistance programme 

GDP Gross Domestic Product 

GoU Government of Ukraine 

GPS Global Positioning System 

IATA International Air Transport Association 

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organisation 

ICT Information, Communication Technology 

IFI International Financing Institution 

IMF International Monetary Fund 

IRU International Road Transport Union 

MMT/IMT Multimodal/Intermodal Transport 

MoTC Ministry of Transport and Communications 

NGO Non-Governmental Organisation 

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 

PCA Partnership and Co-operation Agreement 

PPP Public-Private Partnership 

SAA State Aviation Administration / (Derzhaviaadministratsia) 

SBS Sector Budget Support 

SC Steering Committee 

SES Single European Sky 

SMS Safety Management System 

TA Technical Assistance 

TACIS Technical Assistance for CIS 

TEN-T Trans-European Transport Network 

TNA Training Needs Assessment 

iv



ToR Terms of Reference 

TRACECA TRAnsport Corridor Europe Caucasus Asia 

UAH Hryvnya 

UNECE United nations Economic Commission for Europe 

UZ Ukrzaliznytsia – Ukrainian Railways 

WTO World Trade Organisation 

v



1. Project synopsis 

Project Title: Support to the Integration of Ukraine in the Trans-European Transport Network TEN-T 

Project Number: EuropeAid/124964/C/SER/UA 

Country: Ukraine 

Overall 

Objective: 

Expected 

Results/Outputs: 

The overall objective of the project is to improve the transport sector through assistance to 

the MoTC in developing and implementing a Strategy and Action Plan for Transport 

Integration into the Trans-European transport network. This implies reinforcement of the 

Ministry’s capacity to coordinate and manage cross-sector issues, and resulting 

identification of priority investment projects, in view of i) improved and sustainable 

command of the global sector management, including cross-sector and multimodal ability, 

ii) integration into the TEN-T network, in coherence with the European Commission's White 

Paper on Transport and iii) harmonisation with EU rules and standards. 

The main results/outputs of the project will be: 

− Immediate Action Plan published 

− Transport Sector Planning Scenarios developed 

− Transport Demand and Traffic Forecasts prepared 

− Training Needs identified 

− National Transport Policy defined 

− National Transport Strategy defined through formulation of: 

- Sub-sector strategy and reforms for the rail sector 

- Sub-sector strategy and reforms for the road infrastructure 

- Sub-sector strategy and reforms for road transport 

- Sub-sector strategy and reforms for maritime & inland water transport 

- Sub-sector strategy and reforms for the aviation sector 

- Selected Measures and Reforms for Multi-modal Transport 

− Short and long term action plans for TEN-T integration formulated 

− List of Priority Investment Projects and Financing Options identified 

− Training, Capacity Development and coordination events held 

Activities: Work package 1: Policy, regulatory, institutional and infrastructure financing issues 

Work package 2: Selected measures and reforms for rail sector 

Work package 3: Selected measures and reforms road infrastructure 

Work package 4: Selected measures and reforms road transport 

Work package 5: Selected measures and reforms maritime and inland water transport 

Work package 6: Selected measures and reforms airports and air transport 

Work package 7: Crosscutting issues 

Work package 8: Sector Strategy and Action Plan 

Work package 9: Human Resources Development and Training 

Target Groups: The target groups are the MoTC, The Department of Transport and Communications 

Systems Development of Coordination (DTCSDC), State Road Service (Ukravtodor), State 

Administration for Road Transport (Derzhavtoadministratsia), State Administration of 

Railway Transport (Ukrzaliznytsia), State Department for Railway Transport; State 

Administration for Maritime and Inland Water transport (Ukrmorrichflotadministratsia), State 

Aviation Administration (Derzhaviaadministratsia). More generally, the programme will 

involve inputs from other stakeholders from the public and private sectors, alternative 

providers of services as well as the recipient of government services and user of transport 

services, civil society, academic and research groups. 

Starting Date: 4 August 2008 

Project Duration: 29 Months 

1



2. Summary of Project Progress, Period 4 

This is the forth progress report (Progress 4), covering the period 1 st February 2010 to 31 st 

July 2010 

of the project “Support to the Integration of Ukraine in the Trans-European Transport Network TEN-T”. 

The project held a number of meetings throughout the period with the EU Delegation, Ministry of 

Transport and Communications (MoTC), executive bodies responsible for each mode of transport, and 

international financing institutions (IFIs). 

There remain some 18 EU funded projects, including TRACECA, currently operating in Ukraine and in 

addition there are many other transport related projects funded by World Bank, USAID and others as 

well as support on transport related issues through a Working Group (of which we are a member) 

established by an NGO “Foundation for Effective Governance” with the consultancy company 

McKinsey. Unfortunately the projects are not coordinated in any way but where possible the TEN-T 

meets with their representatives in Ukraine to limit any duplication of effort or conflict of advice. The 

TEN-T project has no authority to coordinate or advise any other project, nor would it expect to do so. 

Within the evolved strategy plan, Sector Budget Support (SBS) meetings were held by the project 

team with representatives of each individual transport subsector as well as MoTC, Roads Research 

Institute and EU Delegation concerning the establishment of the Sector Budget Support (SBS) 

indicators. The final meeting was held in early July 2010, where the agreement was reached. 

There were subsector meetings held with the EU Delegation on aviation following their request to 

produce an aviation twinning fiche within the resources of the project, by September 2010. 

The appointment of the New Minister of Transport in March 2010 and his later appointments of new 

Section Heads and senior managers for Ukravtodor, MoTC rail, Maritime, HR and Aviation etc. caused 

delays to the project, while the new appointees established themselves. 

Some introductions were facilitated through the MoTC Department of Transport and Communication 

System Development and Coordination (DTCSDC) for which we were very grateful, but the dates for 

subsequent follow up meetings have yet to be confirmed in some cases. 

2.1 Steering Committee and Working Groups 

The third meeting of the Steering Committee was delayed from 17th December 2009 to 25th February 

2010 to give the members time to review the summary of the Interim Reports issued with Progress 

Report 3 in January 2010. These were all accepted and the report approved. At the same time a 

complete set of the full Interim Reports was given to each member on electronic memory sticks but to 

date there has been no feedback from any one of the reports, submitted in English and Ukrainian. 

The fourth Steering Committee meeting was held on 27 July 2010 which reviewed the progress of the 

project and agreed on the activities of the following reporting period. During this Steering Committee 

meeting the possible extension of the project contract for one more year was discussed. The 

addendum to the contract shall be initiated after the signature of the addendum to the financing 

agreement on its extension by the Ministry of Economy. . It was agreed that most of the activities of 

the project shall be finalised by the end of 2010, while during the extension period (until the end of 

2011) the focus will be on Work Packages 1, 8 and 9 as given in the original ToR with minor 

adjustments. The more detailed discussion of the activities during the extension period shall continue 

among the Consultant, Beneficiary and EU Delegation the following months. 

With the changes in personnel resulting from the reorganisations in the MoTC and transport 

subsectors some of the members of the Working Groups established by the project, including some 

head of WGs, are no longer in their positions. Notwithstanding, during the period 12 WG meetings 

have been held in the aviation (8), road (3), and rail (1). In addition a large number of other, less 

formal, meetings have been held to both bring the new personnel on board and discuss specific issues 

(e.g. international drivers’ visas, traffic forecasting, road safety and investment projects) were 

discussed in smaller groups. A list of all the meetings held in the period is attached as Appendix F. 

2

2.2 Work Packages 



All 9 Work Packages have operated during Period 4 with 18 Working Group meetings having been 

held in the aviation (8), road (3), and rail (1). Due to changes in personnel in the transport sector, 

some of these meetings have involved operational staff instead of decision makers. The weekly 

meetings planned between the MoTC and the project have been held on a fairly regular basis. 

As a part of work package on Policy, regulatory, institutional and infrastructure financing issues) 

support has continued to be provided in Period 4 to help the MoTC implement agreements with each 

transport subsector representatives on the SBS indicators for the next four years that will meet the 

objectives set by the EU. 

The SBS implementation is contingent on the acceptance by the Cabinet of Ministers (CMU) of a 

Transport Strategy document, prepared by the MoTC, with assistance from the TEN-T project and the 

Twinning Project, “Support to Transport Policy Design and Implementation in Ukraine”. 

In July 2010, the MoTC circulated their final draft Strategy document to other ministries and decision 

makers for their comments before submission to the Cabinet of Ministers. This will need to be agreed 

by end 2010 at the latest. 

Road / Rail Infrastructure development - Data from Ukravtodor continues to be collected and 

discussions with the working group members has resulted in a better understanding of the main 

issues. A working Group was held on 2 June 2010 as well a two training events during the reporting 

period. 

As part of work package on Sector Strategy and Action Plan, the road network map, linking major 

roads in Ukraine to the European TEN-T network, as proposed at the 2 nd SC meeting (and in effect 

extending the TEN-T network “eastwards”) as required by the ToR, was approved at the 3 rd SC 

meeting by Ukravtodor as well as Ukrzaliznytsia (UZ) on the railway links showing the major routes in 

Ukraine that will link to the European TEN-T network. 

These maps have been widely circulated but with the advent of the new Minister may require to be 

modified. The maps have been used to define the framework for passenger and freight volume 

analysis and traffic forecasting based at present on the assumption of no new road or rail links being 

constructed. 

Aviation - During the reporting period the emphasis was laid upon the training of SAA staff and the 

aviation industry. The objective is to aim for sustainability of the training programs in Ukraine on the 

longer term by creating national training programs by introducing “train the trainer’s concept” This 

initiative is carried out in coordination with the National Aviation University and the State Aviation 

Authority (SAA). 

Regarding the institutional aspects of aviation safety the priorities were initially focused on the review 

and update of safety regulations, certification procedures and safety oversight of Aerodromes. The 

next period to that respect will be a shift towards the Air Navigation Service provision and flight 

operations. 

Railways - The railway team attended a number of meetings during Period 3, with the MoTC and 

Ukrzaliznytsia (UZ) to offer input to the discussions on the proposed railway restructuring, rail 

regulation, railway investment and the opening of the rail network to private operators, in accordance 

with the EU recommendations. This led to no further meaningful discussions until the new Head of 

Section, MoTC rail was appointed during Period 4 (in June 2010). 

Considerable progress was made at a meeting on 22 June 2010 and a schedule of meetings is being 

arranged that will include UZ personnel. We have been asked to advise MoTC rail as their main 

source of technical expertise and become a member of their new working group on railway reform. 

The first meeting of the group is planned for September 2010 in which the role of the group will be 

defined. We anticipate considerable progress will be made in Period 5. 

The work of the railway team during Period 4 concentrated on elaborating the principles of 

reorganisation by producing working notes and offering practical assistance to UZ and MoTC as they 

require. 

3



Maritime and River - In the Maritime sector the difficulties in data collection continued to hinder the 

efficient progress of activities in line with the planned schedule. 

The improved cooperation with the Maritime Department of the MoTC, as reported in Progress Report 

2, did not result in operational benefits but with the appointment of a new Head of Section in June 

2010, we are again encouraged that good progress will be made although it has proved difficult to 

arrange meetings. 

The draft report proposing a “Maritime and River Sector Strategy” published in June 2009 did not elicit 

comments until November 2009 and even then were of minimal content. 

Notwithstanding the many setbacks, the project team has continued to develop its own close contacts 

with the sector professionals, both in the public and private sector, which has enabled the team to gain 

first-hand knowledge and obtain information concerning the day-to-day functioning of the river and 

maritime transport. This has been instrumental in allowing the maritime component of the project to 

make progress. 

The work on defining development planning scenarios for the maritime sector and the evaluation of 

the traffic forecasts, prepared by the EU funded “Ukraine Port Feasibility Study” has been completed. 

The results were documented in Working Paper 5.1, which forms a part of the “Maritime Policy Reform 

and Action Plan paper”. The concept of “Landlord Ports” and “Port Clusters” are under discussion and 

recent published reports from the sector seem to indicate acceptance of the concept. 

All of these issues will be compiled into a comprehensive Port Management Plan, to be produced as 

Interim Report 5.2. 

In addition to simplify the assimilation of the information two training sessions were conducted in 

March 2010 on Maritime and River transport and were very well received with some 20 participants at 

each day selected by MoTC, but no senior decision makers attended. 

To aid the introduction of the new personnel it was decided to draft two brief Interim Reports that 

summarise the proposed Maritime and River Strategy. The Ports report is in for translation and the 

River report will be ready early September 2010 to assist the new head of section appointed in June 

2010. 

Road Transport – Due to changes in personnel in the MoTC, during this period the road transport 

working group met once on 7 th 

June 2010 but other meetings were held to discuss the specific issues 

such as training and legislation. Regular meetings have also been held with AsMAP (representing the 

international road freight carriers) concerning training and the provision of visas for international 

commercial vehicle drivers, at the request of the MoTC in May 2010. 

Cross Cutting - The revised Interim Report 7.1 that now includes border crossing issues has been 

completed following site visits to all of the EU TEN road and rail border crossings. This report was 

translated and published in July 2010, thus comments have not yet been received. A summary is 

attached as Appendix 2. 

A meeting to discuss the report with senior border guards in Kiev was postponed but all the authorities 

at the borders were very helpful not only in arranging the visits but ensuring the Consultants obtained 

a comprehensive understanding of the core issues at each of the selected border crossings. The site 

visits were organised in two programmes due to the disruption to air travel by the Icelandic volcano. 

This part of WP7 is now complete subject to a presentation to border authorities and any further 

discussions on the contents of the report. 

Infrastructure Investments – Under work packages 1 and 8, the list of 235 transport investment 

projects provided by the MoTC, along with many other projects put forward by transport subsectors, 

has been placed in the database pending their evaluation and prioritisation. In their present form there 

is insufficient information about individual projects to fully evaluate them as seldom are pre-feasibility 

studies made. A revised investment project list is thought to be planned that would be generated by 

4



the Working Group established by the Foundation for Effective Government, working for the President, 

to which we have been invited to cooperate. 

The need for creating the skills in the transport sector to undertake such pre-feasibility analysis is now 

agreed and a pilot training programme, originally proposed by the project in November 2009, was run 

in March 2010 for the MoTC’s investment team and other selected personnel. This training was well 

received and was repeated in April 2010 with the intention of monthly updates to continue throughout 

the project. Unfortunately not all the original team have been able to attend each session and there 

was no representative from MoTC at the last session although the date had been specified by them. 

Once again the level of authority of the participants was lower that expected and they were not 

decision makers – although hopefully they will be in future. A plan to reproduce the training in Odessa 

is under consideration for Period 5. 

Other projects aimed at facilitating trade flows will be added to the database as they are identified by 

the project, as well as the four strategic transport projects identified as a result of the resolution of the 

Cabinet of Ministers called: “On investment projects of strategic importance for economic development 

of the country”, (Number 1432-r dated 7 Oct 2009 and rendered to the government of Ukraine on 23 

Dec 2009). 

Training - In June 2010 the former head of HR MoTC was reinstated as the deputy head and 

meetings are scheduled to re-establish the new MoTC HR policy starting in August 2010. 

The project has provided practical on-the-job training through the Working Group meetings, SAA 

workshops and conferences and regular meetings with the stakeholders since June 2009. It is hoped 

that with the new initiatives proposed by the Minister the training schedule and participant seniority will 

be improved. 

The TEN-T website (www.ten-t.org.ua) is now fully operational and all MoTC approved reports are 

available for anyone to access them. The website incorporates the website of the “Accession and 

Implementation by the Ukraine of International Agreements and Conventions on Transport”. 

In addition the TEN-T project established a series of files on the office network server to record all 

documents translated in English and Ukrainian including legal text that was provided to the 

international experts. In particular a Legislative Database was created but this remains independent 

from the website of the “Accession and Implementation by the Ukraine of International Agreements 

and Conventions on Transport” as it contains working documents of some 187 pages. Some 

documents were translated using a computer software and others done by a translator but none have 

been reviewed by a legal translator. The links to the websites where the original text in Ukrainian was 

obtained are shown. This work will be updated in Period 5 when the latest version of the Association 

Agreement is available we will review the updates needed. 

The deliverables from work packages were restructured in the 2 nd 

Progress Report and referred to as 

“Interim Reports” to provide a more rational structure for deliverables. The table of Interim Reports and 

their status is included in Appendix G. In line with the proposed structure, the following reports have 

been submitted as part of the project’s progress reports and circulated to the relevant personnel 

including the heads of departments at the MoTC: 

1. Policy 

1.1 Institution and Legislation 

1.2 Transport Statistics 

1.3 Integrated Transport Policy 

2. Railways 2.1 High speed passenger services 

2.2a Railway Competition 

2.2 b Railway Interoperability 

2.3 Railway restructuring vs. existing organisation in Ukraine 

2.4 Railway restructuring in Europe 

3. Roads Infrastructure 3.1 Construction Standards 

5



3.2 Organisation and financing road infrastructure 

3.3 Road Safety 

3.4 Road construction cost comparisons with Ukraine 

4. Road Transport 4.1 Road Transport market, all issues 

5. Maritime and Inland Water 5.1 Maritime policy reform and action plan 

5.2 Port Administration and Port Policy 

5.3 Maritime Policy 

5.4 Waterways policy 

6. Airports and air transport 6.1 Market Access 

6.2 Airports, 

6.3 Upgrading SAA safety oversight capacity 

7. Cross cutting issues 7.1 All cross cutting issues 

8. Strategy and action plan 8.1 Strategic planning 

9. Training and study tours 9.0 (9.1 and 9.2 combined), training needs analysis, training and 

study tours 

Most of the above reports were generated jointly with the Working Groups before the reorganisation of 

the MoTC and the transport subsectors and the appointment of many new personnel. Although the 

above reports were submitted as attachments to the project’s progress reports, the approval of 

progress reports does not imply that the contents of the Interim Reports have been read and 

assimilated by the present decision makers and will feed in to the MoTC’s planning process. It is for 

this reason that in the reporting period instead of more working group meetings a large number of 

informal meetings have been held to raise the awareness of the new personnel of the project’s output. 

In Period 5 it is planned to set a deadline for receiving comments on the Interim Reports already 

issued and revise them based on feedback from the new Minister of Transport and his team. The 

Interim Reports are also being used to provide the core of the training, as “manuals” covering the key 

training subjects for the project, as required. 

2.3 Resource Utilisation 

During the 4th period 1,601 person days were planned of which 1,489 person days were used, 

representing a utilisation of 92%. The 8% deviation is largely due to the limited railways contact. 

The project has a balance of 2,349 person days to utilise in the remaining 5 months of the project to 

31 December 2010. At the present time it is anticipated that the project duration will be extended to 

December 2011. The extension is to enable the TEN-T project to continue to support the activities of 

the MoTC and to compensate for the early delays in launching the project and the later delays caused 

by the change of government in February 2010 and subsequent changes of personnel at the MoTC 

and transport subsectors. 

3. Summary of project status and planning, updated for the remainder of the 

project 

3.1 Milestones and Results to date 

Immediate Action Plan 

The Immediate Action Plan (IAP) assisted the government with decisions needed to respond to the 

immediate impact of the financial crisis on the transport sector. The IAP addressed the most critical 

issues in the short-term whilst ensuring that longer term reforms are not compromised. A draft report 

was submitted and followed up. Although a later paper was produced by the MoTC, the project was 

6



not asked for further assistance. It is understood that some of the original recommendations were 

implemented and therefore this milestone can be considered as having been achieved. 

Transport Sector Planning Scenarios Developed 

Planning scenarios are important for strategic planning and for traffic forecasting and will offer the 

foundation for identifying and prioritising investment projects. The former political and economic 

uncertainties have made this goal both more critical and complicated to achieve, but new initiative 

being proposed may bring more focus to the key Objectives of a planned long term Policy. 

Four broad scenarios are being considered as the basis for sector planning which include: 1) the 

process of EU Accession; 2) relations with Russia; 3) the world economy; and 4) the Ukraine 

economy. The next step is to formulate a set of assumptions under each scenario as the basis for 

traffic forecasting, using the primary traffic database which is being populated. 

The finalisation of the planning scenarios would benefit from the approval of the Transport Strategy 

document The project is also in the process of receiving and compiling the requested historical traffic 

data categorised by mode of transport, commodity, destination and origin, albeit the process is slow. 

In particular origin and destination data is not readily available and this limits the planning activity. All 

these elements are proving slow and time consuming to progress but it is hoped that with the formal 

acceptance of the Strategy document by end 2010, the MoTC’s resources can then shift to agreeing 

the scenario planning as being proposed by the project. . 

The project drafted the forecast and proposed scenario planning at the end of this period and will 

discuss the outline strategy with MoTC to reach agreement on the base criteria. Once these are 

agreed, the forecast and scenario planning will be completed by the project in Period 5 for review with 

the MoTC. 

Transport Demand and Traffic Forecasts Prepared 

Traffic forecasts are required as input to assessing the appropriateness and feasibility of the proposed 

investment projects. This was delayed due to the speed of data collection which proved to be slow. 

This data has now been processed and models of existing demand have been prepared. The road 

model is a static model (as opposed to a dynamic model such as EmmE/3, Visum and Cube) 

presented in a Quantum GIS, an open source GIS system. The reason that a dynamic model cannot 

be prepared (that represents the effects on journey patterns of changes to road infrastructure, 

increasing traffic congestion, changing population) is that there is no information regarding the origin 

and destinations of journeys. 

A similar GIS representation has been made of the rail data. However, in this case (as some O and D 

information is available) an additional simple dynamic model has been prepared that allocates 

matrices of demand (numbers of passengers, tonnes of freight) between major stations to routes 

through the network. The model is being developed using the “open access” software QRS II that will 

be compatible to EmmE/3 etc. at a future date, should this be a chosen route. 

Data for the development of traffic forecasting has been gathered from all available sources. The 

collection process has been discussed regularly at working group member meetings held with road 

and rail subsector (See Appendix F) to agree the manner in which data is collected, documented and 

used to ensure a sustainable output. 

The tentative signs of world economic recovery in recent months help to forecast traffic in Ukraine with 

more confidence and reliability. The database, on which the forecasting is based, is now available in a 

pilot form to demonstrate its potential as a management tool for the MoTC. 

Global forecasts of transport demand (passengers and freight) to the year 2050 are currently being 

prepared but we need even closer cooperation with MoTC. The MoTC would benefit from establishing 

a new unit for infrastructure planning as we have discussed on many occasions with the coordination 

section of the MoTC, without gaining their acceptance of the principle. However, with the endorsement 

of the new Minister of Transport it is possible that in Period 5 a start will be made to establish a small 

7



team of specialists to undertake this work within the planned restructuring of the MoTC that would help 

to institutionalise this process and establish a sustainable platform. 

An initial set of traffic forecasts has been produced for the years 2010, 2020, 2030, 2040 and 2050 for 

road traffic. The forecasts are based on a set of central assumptions relating to population, regional 

economic development and elasticitities. The methodology used and sources of prime data have been 

discussed with Ukravtodor and Ukradiprador to ensure the acceptability of the forecast by MoTC. 

Rail traffic forecasts are not yet completed but based on current progress we should have initial 

forecasts by the beginning of Period 5 to discuss with the new MoTC rail team. A summary of the 

progress on Project identification is in Appendix 3 attached. 

Training Needs 

The Training Needs Analysis that was extended to allow the MoTC to get a better picture of the 

training needs of the entire transport sector was conducted in Period 1 and the results were published. 

It provided the basis for defining the short-term training needs of the MoTC as well as offering a basis 

for formulating a long term training strategy. Since this was done the staff turnover has been high so 

the conclusions from the analysis may be invalid and this will be the subject of urgent discussions with 

the new Head of Section, MoTC HR in August 2010. 

Because of the changes in personnel within HR some coordination between projects that was 

previously done by HR MoTC was lost. This is now being rectified by HR and closer links are being 

established between all projects to ensure that there is no duplication in the training offered by the 

different projects and that they are complementary. 

However, the situation was later rectified and a schedule of the agreed training to December 2010 is 

attached as Appendix F. 

National Transport Strategy Defined 

A number of drafts of the “MoTC Strategy Paper” were produced with the assistance of TEN-T and the 

Twinning project, “Support to Transport Policy Design and Implementation in Ukraine”. A final version 

was circulated in July 2010 by the MoTC to other stakeholders for comments and approval. Earlier 

drafts were not accepted by other ministries and it is hoped that the new draft will be accepted. The 

project will continue to help in this process as required. 

Sector Budget Support (SBS) Indicators 

As part of the developing strategy process the SBS indicators will show progress of achievement of 

the transport strategy against agreed progress milestones. To encourage this process the EU SBS 

programme will trigger a possible grant in the form of financial assistance of some €65m over the next 

4 years. The role of the TEN-T project has been to get each subsector to agree a series of indicators 

that will be used to measure progress towards improvement in the transport system in Ukraine, set as 

“targets to be achieved”, within the overall transport strategy. 

It is therefore necessary for each subsector to agree with the project to specific, achievable and 

realistic targets, in a manner that is acceptable to secure funding from the EC. 

Naturally this is a difficult task and time consuming for all participants. However, through the work 

done by the project in explaining the process and the reasons for the decisions the indicators were 

agreed, the financing agreement was drafted and the schedule for further consultations with Ukrainian 

authorities and EU has been set. The financing agreement is due to be signed by the end of this year. 

In parallel the monitoring tools and explanatory notes have been generated by the project and update 

of the baselines shall be carried out during the next period 

8



Transport Sector and Sub-Sector Strategies Defined 

The TEN-T project continues to work with the existing sub sector strategy plans and to make 

recommendations for changes through meetings with subsectors listed in Appendix F. The draft 

maritime policy and strategy has been prepared by TEN-T and commented on by the members of the 

working group during this period and was attached as an Interim Report to the 4 th 

Progress Report. A 

further two shorter policy documents for Maritime and River are nearing completion for discussion with 

the new Head of Section in period 5. 

The institutional capacity of the MoTC will need significant strengthening and some reorganisation is 

likely to be necessary. This will be elaborated in the Interim Report 1.1 that was due for publication in 

February 2010 but has been delayed pending further discussion with the new Minister of Transport 

and his team as all previous drafts have been negated by the change of leadership. 

Short and Long Term Action Plans for TEN-T Integration 

The action plans are aimed at providing a route map for TEN-T integration by identifying the steps 

necessary in the short and long term. The MoTC will also need to put in place processes that ensure 

plans are regularly reviewed and adjusted and this will be closely coordinated with the Policy Twinning 

Project. 

This short and long term action planning process for TEN-T integration is progressing well in the 

aviation and maritime transport sectors and will be developed in all sectors in future reporting periods. 

List of Priority Investment Projects and Financing Options 

The outline of the programme to evaluate and assess investment projects as the basis for selecting a 

list of priority investments, using multi criteria analysis (MCA), is now available. The MoTC will be 

expected to play an important role in defining and agreeing criteria that will be used for the 

prioritisation of projects. 

The framework is a management “tool” that has been developed and is being populated with projects 

as the detail of each project is made available. At present the evaluation process within the MoTC is 

not sufficient to enable projects to be fully evaluated and the team have been addressing this issue 

through training in period 4 and this will continue throughout the remainder of the project. 

This management tool will be available to the MoTC and its personnel will be trained to use it to help 

select priority investments based on a number of factors including: (a) meeting the future needs of 

Ukraine for an effective transport infrastructure, and (b) facilitating the integration of Ukrainian 

transport network with those of the European Union. 

Although these are similar objectives, the timing and focus may require the establishment of more 

than one set of criteria. The MoTC and the Steering Committee will play an important role in refining 

and agreeing criteria for the prioritisation following the project’s recommendations. 

Apart from the existing projects that have been identified by MoTC, the forecasting models are now 

starting to identify further projects for consideration and these will be elaborated in Period 5. More 

detail is contained in the summary report Appendix 3 attached. 

3.2 Structure of Activities 

The framework for project planning remains essentially the same as that described in detail in all 

earlier reports. The only exceptions are shown in the forward planning section of this report. 

9



4. Detailed Progress in the Current Reporting Period 

The current reporting period covers the period 1 st February 2010 to 31 st 

July 2010. Detailed reporting 

is presented for each work package in sections 4.3 to 4.11. 

4.1 Steering Committee and Working Groups 

The third meeting of SC was planned for 17th December 2009 but postponed until mid February 2010 

in order for the members to be able to read and discuss summary of the interim reports attached to 

Progress Report 3. The report was approved but there was subsequently no feedback on the detailed 

reports. Due to later appointment of the new Minister of Transport and Heads of Sections as well as 

the possible project extension to December 2011, the planned SC meeting during Period 4 was held 

on 27 July 2010. 

During the period 12 WG meetings have been held in the aviation (8), road (3), and rail (1). In addition 

a large number of other, less formal, meetings have been held to both bring the new MoTC personnel 

on board and discuss specific issues (e.g. international drivers’ visas, traffic forecasting, road safety 

and investment projects) were discussed in smaller groups. A list of all the meetings held in the period 

is attached as Appendix F. 

Constraints and problems 

In this period personnel resource utilisation is 92% of the planned utilisation. This is mostly 

due to the lack of positive contact with MoTC rail and UZ pending the outcome of the elections and the 

decision on implementation of the Decree on railway restructuring. The project continues to implement 

the overall plan for the TEN-T project as noted in the ToR, with the exception of the planned work with 

the railway sector, but this should be resolved in Period 5. 

We previously reported issues over access to people and information and although these have 

generally eased in Period 4, the changes in personnel and uncertainty of appointment tenure, at many 

levels in the MoTC structure have resulted in limited access to MoTC staff. The project has however 

continued to talk to the wider transport industry at every level. 

Excellent progress has been made the aviation sector in every respect and this is confirmed by 

correspondence received from the SAA. 

In the road infrastructure sector there is now some doubt over the acceptability of the proposed 

expansion of private sector participation (as a result of a change of policy) in the road sector. 

Also some stakeholders in the public sector continue to be reluctant to fully engage with the project 

(particularly railways and to a lesser extent now maritime) and offer data and information to the level of 

detail required for the project. This may in part be explained by the statement made by the Chairman 

at the 3 rd 

Steering Committee meeting “that in Ukraine there is a prohibition on demand for information 

or data from enterprises that is not officially required by the state statistics”. However in some cases 

the official statistics do not provide the level of detail needed for strategic planning and more detailed 

information must be made available. It is therefore important this issue is addressed as it not only 

affects the implementation of this project but also will hinder future projects and initiatives. 

To minimise this problem, the project signed a number of confidentiality agreements with the SAA and 

one confidential agreement with Ukravtodor in April 2009, to allay their concerns over providing the 

team with what they considered to be confidential information. This action facilitated some aspects of 

our work but the problems remained. This may in future make the dissemination of information more 

difficult within Ukraine, as the information we have is now considered to be confidential to individual 

transport subsectors and defeats the objective of the coordination of all transport modes to achieve 

the most cost effective solution for the benefit of Ukraine. 

It is clear that there is not a standard mechanism by which information about the transport system can 

be systematically collected and made available to the project without special arrangements being 

made. 

10



The severe economic crisis, and its impact on the Ukrainian economy, has also shifted attention of 

senior people to dealing with its immediate effects on the transport sector. 

The staff of the MoTC Department of Transport and Communication System Development and 

Coordination (DTCSDC), have continued to be very supportive but they are also overloaded with 

additional responsibilities which are in contrast to the limited resources available to the Department. 

This may act as a potential constraint to further progress in all components of the project and it 

remains a critical success factor to the sustainability of the project, yet to be fully addressed. 

As reported since the start of the project, there is an identified need to increase the academic and 

vocational qualifications of MoTC staff. Although vocational training is being offered by the TEN-T 

project, there is a need for formal management education leading to recognised management 

qualifications which has been discussed with the HR department of MoTC. 

4.2 WP 1: Policy, Regulatory Institutional and Infrastructure Financing Issues 

This work package continues to be coordinated closely with the Twinning project “Support to Transport 

Policy Design and Implementation in Ukraine” to help the MoTC prepare a Transport Strategy Paper, 

support the preparation of the SBS indicators and strengthen its capacity in policy and strategic 

planning. 

Stage 1: Transport Policy and Sector Budget Support (SBS) 

During this period the project provided further advice and support to the MoTC on transport policy that 

resulted in a further draft report, referred to as the “MoTC Strategy Paper”, being circulated by the 

MoTC in July 2010 to all other ministries. This is now under review by the other ministries prior to 

being submitted to the Cabinet of Ministers (CMU). 

In close cooperation between the TEN-T and MoTC the SBS indicators were agreed, the financial 

agreement was drafted and the schedule for further consultation with the Ukrainian authorities and the 

EU has been set. The financing agreement is due to be signed at the end of 2010. In parallel the 

monitoring tools and explanatory notes have been drafted by TEN-T for implementation in 2011. 

A draft Interim Report 1.1 was produced to reflect the institutional issues that remain to be addressed 

by the MoTC. However given the appointment of the new Minister of Transport in June and heads of 

sections combined with new plans for reform that are currently circulating in the ministry, it was 

thought advisable to delay issuing the report until face to face meetings could take place with senior 

people. The Team Leader held a brief meeting with the Minister in late July 2010 where a number of 

broad issues related to the transport sector and the TEN-T project. It was agreed that further 

meetings would take place but these were postponed. 

Stage 2: Strengthening the Transport Sector Management 

In Period 4 there remained some 18 operational EU funded projects in Ukraine related to transport, 

including TRACECA, which needed to be coordinated to ensure no overlaps and ensure consistency 

of advice being offered to the MoTC. The TEN-T project remains in close contact with related EU 

funded projects and achieves what coordination it can, without a remit or authority, but there needs to 

be a focus of activity within the MoTC as well. 

Recommendations were made during the process of developing the strategy document to establish, 

within the MoTC, a transport planning unit (TPU), generated initially without extra cost by selection of 

existing staff members. At present this concept is not adopted. 

This will be evaluated in more detail during the finalisation of Interim Report 1.1, following detailed 

discussion with the Transport Minister and his team. 

Meetings were held with the new head of the legal department to establish their planning for 2010 and 

the work that was completed to close the gaps between EU legislation and Ukrainian law in 2009. The 

2009 gap analysis is being reviewed by the project and an updated action plan is being developed 

11



Stage 3: Strengthening strategic planning and Information Management 

During this period the project established an Excel model designed to be populated with data to 

analyse and assess the existing traffic flows, where known. The location of nodes and their associated 

links has been determined and traffic activity between them is being collected with the support of all 

local experts. This is described in more detail in interim report 8.1, an updated summary of which is 

attached to this report. 

All the transport related projects are being collected into a single database for later multi-criteria 

analysis (MCA). 

The project databases require accurate data which necessitates the active participation of staff of 

MoTC and sub-sectors in data collection. 

It is also planned to make a comparative analysis of the compliance of transport statistics compiled in 

Ukraine with those of Eurostat. 

Discussions continue with Ukradiprador (who are contractors to Ukravtodor) concerning initiatives to 

link the data collection to the forecasting requirement of Ukraine using GIS systems such as MapInfo 

and ArcView. 

Stage 4: Provision of financial mechanisms for development of maintenance and 

management of infrastructure 

The work done to date is detailed in interim report 3.2 that was circulated with Progress 3 report. 

4.3 WP 2: Railway Transport 

The priorities for the rail team are summarised as: 

• Acting as the catalyst to facilitate decisions regarding reform 

• Assisting UZ with unbundling its accounting systems 

• Contributing towards the preparation of plans to separate rail infrastructure from operations 

• Assisting the MoTC to separate state regulating functions from commercial functions. 

Due to the delay in the railway reform process, despite the issue of a Railway decree on 16 th 

December 2009 it became clear that progress in this area was restricted. The Project Monitor came to 

a similar conclusion and in February 2010 recommended that progress on rail issues be suspended 

until clear indicators on the reform progress and commitment are in place. 

Accordingly, work on rail restructuring was scaled back until progress could be made with agreeing 

clear indicators. 

Stage 1: Definition of development scenarios 

The project continued to generate background information from rail freight users and service providers 

and used the intermodal transport model to examine the possible impact of some of the reforms being 

tabled. The model being prepared by the Project will consider the possible development scenarios for 

Ukraine (demography, regional economic development, industries and services development,) and 

this will produce transport forecasts. 

The rail team secured traffic data from UZ, MoTC and other sources, which provides the basic raw 

traffic information in terms of passenger ticket data (origin and destination pairings), freight traffic data 

and the percentage of route capacity currently used. 

The rail experts re-commenced meetings with MoTC in June 2010, and at the initial meeting with Mr. 

Snitko (the new Head of Sector of the Rail Department) made very good progress towards defining the 

basis for active participation in the railway reform process. Subsequent to this MoTC supplied the 

12



project with a road map setting out the key elements of transport reform, in which rail restructuring 

plays a significant part. 

We have now written to MoTC proposing dates for the next round of meetings and active participation 

in the process in early September 2010. 

Members of the MoTC team made a study visit to Germany in early July as a part of the Twinning 

programme), and the TEN-T rail team intend to discuss the findings of this visit and to build on the 

lessons they have learned to help define the direction of the reform process. 

Stage 2 Strategy of European Integration 

Interoperability is a key part of the EU strategy. In this respect Ukraine presents a difficulty, 

in that the track is the CIS broad (1,520mm) gauge rather than the European standard (1,435mm) 

gauge, which restricts opportunities for through working of locomotives and rolling stock to Europe. 

The project has made a series of visits to border stations to examine the efficiency of the current 

processes and to determine ways in which the border crossing times and procedures can be 

improved. 

Adoption of the reform programme presents an opportunity to revisit the issues of interoperability, 

particularly as Ukraine is also rationalising its trunk routes to provide the opportunities to implement 

higher speed passenger corridors, with freight trains moved to alternative routes. 

To help prepare MoTC and UZ for this challenge, the Project has prepared reports on High Speed 

Rail, the interoperability concept and a report on EU competition policy. These reports are intended to 

function as sources of information and to demonstrate some of the basic standards which would have 

to be achieved to enable Ukraine to conform to EU policy objectives, including implementation and 

proposed actions. 

Stage 3: Identification of list of projects 

The project has examined the current UZ investment programme to identify current projects which 

improve the viability of the TEN-T corridors. Given UZ’s current financial difficulties and its focus on 

restructuring, there is currently little progress in project identification. 

The TEN-T project team also participated in the project’s feasibility study workshop held in Kiev on 

17 th 

June and led a session on the practicalities of examining the feasibility of an airport link by rail, 

using a hypothetical example. MoTC rail department members participated in this workshop. 

Stage 4: Assistance to restructuring and economic regulation 

In the last two months a new rail team has been put in place at MoTC and a firm reform programme 

has been published by the government (the roadmap). The project has exploited this opportunity and 

has now met twice with the MoTC rail team. There are scheduled meeting planned with MoTC rail and 

UZ during Period 5 to identify areas for cooperation and support. We have already established a good 

working relationship, which we are confident we can build on, and the MoTC rail team appear 

committed to involving us as informal advisors to the process. 

We intend that this is the start of a far more intense dialogue between the project and the ministry, and 

we are pushing for a coordinated programme of interface meetings over the next few months. 

4.4 WP 3: Road Infrastructure 

Interim Reports 3.1 on construction standards, 3.2 on the organisation and funding of road 

infrastructure and 3.3 on road safety were produced and executive summaries of them were attached 

to Progress 3. During this period there were changes to the senior personnel in Ukravtodor so the 

reports were reissued and Ukravtodor has confirmed that the recommendations made in the report are 

13



appreciated but they are still deciding on what action they will take and what additional support will be 

required during the next period. 

Stage 1: (TEN-T) Road extension and forecast 

The strategic network and map have been further developed. Data on the dimensions, capacity and 

traffic flows has been received and presented in Quantum GIS, an open source GIS system. 

The ToR call for recommendations for harmonisation of building standards to EU principles and the 

project has undertaken an examination of the standards for road construction materials and methods 

with the European norms. 

Stage 2: Organisation and funding mechanisms 

The organisation and funding of the road sector has been considered in depth in Interim Report 3.2. 

The proposals were considered and approved by the Working Group prior to completion of the report. 

This report identifies how sufficient funding can be obtained for the road infrastructure sector, and 

proposes how the major road network could be recovered to a decent standard within 5 years. 

The new Head of Section may now have quite different ideas of the way forward and meetings are 

being arranged 

The project team continue to assist Ukravtodor with ad hoc advice and capacity building on funding 

and PPPs in response to specific requests. 

Stage 3: Road Safety 

An interim report 3.3 on road safety was produced and widely circulated in Period 3 and we are 

awaiting feedback from the various groups involved as there is currently no coordination on road 

safety in Ukraine and the MoTC are not directly responsible. A Road Safety Coordination Council is 

planned to be reformed. The Council was originally established some years ago but has never met. 

The road safety pilot project in Lviv ended in July 2010 and analysis from the data collected will be 

produced in Period 5. 

Members of the project team participated in a Road Safety workshop with the World Bank on 25 May 

2010 where the Lviv pilot project was identified as a positive action for Ukraine. 

Stage 4: Identification of the list infrastructure projects 

The QGIS model is being used to identify sections of the road network that will be potentially operating 

over their capacity in the years 2010, 2020 and 2030. No account is currently taken of possible new 

high speed roads as they are not yet specified and when they are new transport modelling software 

will be needed along with a great deal more data including origin and destination of road freight and 

passenger traffic. 

4.5 WP 4: Road Transport 

Interim Report 4.1 was circulated in Period 3 and it addressed all the issues under the work package 

and came to a series of conclusions that led to recommendations and proposals for implementation. 

The report contained 7 chapters under the following headings: 

1. analysis of the road transport market and its management; 

2. analysis of Tariffs, financial and tax system in road transport; 

3. tax policy in the road transport sector; 

4. transport safety; 

14



5. energy and Environmental safety; 

6. improvement in monitoring and statistics; and 

7. Simplification of border crossing procedures. 

The Interim Report 4.1 was generated through the working group members and was widely accepted 

by the key stakeholders, although there has been no specific feedback on the recommendations made 

from other recipients so far. During the period further meetings on selected topics were held as 

identified in Appendix F and during Period 5 the recommendations made in 4.1 will be reviewed and 

will result in an agreed Draft Final Report 4.1 being produced with the cooperation of all stakeholders. 

Stage 1: Analysis of road market 

The issue identified in the ToR and the progress so far is summarised below: 

Analysis of Ukrainian road market. – this was completed for both passengers and freight in section 1 

of Interim Report (IR) 4.1. 

Analysis of tariff, financial and taxing systems in the road transport sector – IR 4.1 covered the basic 

tariff policy and the issue of tariffs for passengers, obligations under the public service obligation 

(PSO) and tariffs for freight. 

Analysis of domestic and international passenger and freight traffic and forecast for the short term (5 

years) and the medium to long term (6 to 15 years).- IR 4.1 projected road goods volume to 2025 and 

provided detail of the actions needed to improve the current situation. 

Improvements in methodology for statistics in the road transport sector in light of EU best practice – IR 

4.1 provides clear guidance on what can be done and the reasons for the issues that have yet to be 

resolved. This will also form a part of the TEN-T overall view on transport statistics within the separate 

Interim Report on Policy 1.2. 

Stage 2: Assessment in coherence with European rules and standards 


Assist the national authorities to assess road transport market in terms of compliance with EU 

legislation. – this is a continuous process and will continue during the prime project period. By 

reference to IR 4.1 it can be seen that support and advice has been given to the working group 

members by the TEN-T project in order for them to understand the requirements of the EU legislation. 

Introduce EU legislation concerning driving times and rest periods. – this is in force for international 

transport and was being gradually introduced into domestic freight transport on certain routes. 

Generally the government policy for most domestic freight vehicles is now changing and without 

discussion with TEN-T is now said to be based on the removal of all controls. As this action is counter 

to the EU guidelines, the project will seek to suggest a reversal of this decision in Period 5. 

Recommendations for the creation of a driver rest point network – this would be expected to be a 

private sector initiative and on all main routes from Kiev to EU there are already established TIR 

secure parking places with all facilities including accommodation, refuelling stations with parking for 

large commercial vehicles. The position in the East of Ukraine has not been seen by the TEN-T 

project but drivers interviewed by TEN-T report no problems and confirm that they have to conform to 

tachograph legislation before they cross the border, otherwise they cannot work in Europe. Therefore 

it is unnecessary for the government to create such a plan 

Organisation and technical support for the introduction of the tests for driving duration and rest periods 

– this is already well in hand and subject to gradual improvement. The project continues to monitor the 

position through the individual working group members 

Recommendations for unification of border crossing technologies – all of the TEN-T borders have 

been seen by TEN-T specialists and a detailed report made as IR 7.1. There are currently no pressing 

issues in this area as they have been resolved by earlier projects since the ToR was drafted. 

15



Assist improvement of energy safety technologies, stepping up energy efficiency – Chapter 5 of IR 4.1 

covers this area in great detail and makes clear recommendations 

Recommendations for road transport and environmental issues analysis and technologies 

improvement – are discussed in IR 4.1 

In order to comply with cross border trade agreements by road all international trucks comply with 

international rules and regulations concerning driver’s hours. Discussions with service providers at the 

border and truck drivers in April 2010 revealed no issues to be resolved in Ukraine but many delays on 

the European side due to slow processing. 

AsMAP are keen to work with the project on the training to domestic drivers and managers and to link 

the Certificate of Professional Competence (CPC) as applied in Europe. At present the law in Ukraine 

is vague on the certification required to meet current legislation and although training is required, its 

level and scope is not specified. 

Stage 3: Identification of the list of projects 


Define a list of short (5 years) and medium to long term (6 to 15 years) environment and energy safety 

projects – IR 4.1 in chapter 5 discusses the issues in some detail and makes recommendations for 

their implementation 

Prepare the institutional framework for identification of the priority list of projects for driver’s rest point 

network – although there remain some plans to provide government supported rest points for drivers 

in principle it is considered better to leave the issue to the industry and the private sector to resolve, as 

this is already being done. 

Prepare the institutional framework for the identification of the priority list of border crossing projects – 

in the detailed IR 7.1 no new border projects were identified as needing to be done, save the 

completion of those already started 

A further request concerning the delay in the issue of visas for international freight drivers to Europe 

was made by MoTC and the background to the problem and possible solutions are being discussed 

with AsMAP for a full report in Period 5. 

Interim Report 4.1 was circulated in Period 3 but there was no feedback from the recipients due to the 

changes in senior personnel. However, as the content of the report has been checked with the key 

stakeholders, they are not expected to raise objection. 

AsMAP are keen to work with the project on the training to domestic drivers and managers and to link 

the Certificate of Professional Competence (CPC) as applied in Europe. At present the law in Ukraine 

is vague and although training is required, its level and scope is not specified. 

A further request concerning the delay in the issue of visas for international freight drivers to Europe 

was made by MoTC and the background to the problem and possible solutions are being discussed 

with AsMAP for a full report in Period 5. 

4.6 WP 5: Maritime and Inland Water Transport 

The focus during Period 4 remained on the maritime sector, with the main objective being to produce a 

first draft of the Maritime Action Plan (IR 5.3). 

Interim Report 5.3 provides conclusions and recommendations for sustainable policy reforms and was 

circulated in July 2010 including to the new head of Maritime Administration. The report includes a 

proposed action plan for the prioritisation of investments based on cost benefit analysis and an 

innovative approach to reviewing the manner in which project are reviewed. 

As we have mentioned before, completing the maritime strategy proved particularly difficult because 

the TEN-T experts did not received any reaction on the various proposals or formal indication about 

16



objectives and goals for the maritime sector and these are now subject to change under the new 

government. 

In spite of this the focus in the Maritime Strategy Report (IR 5.3) remained on the long-term 

transformation of the way the sector is governed. In the opinion of the TEN-T project team the shortterm 

(financial) problems within the transport sector within Ukraine should not be allowed to be a 

reason for inaction in the sector and to be a reason for avoiding the necessary overhaul of the 

administrative and regulatory framework, as has been used as an excuse for retaining the “status quo” 

by the MoTC in the past. 

WP 5a: Maritime and Seaport Sector 

The work for the Maritime Sector (WP5a) continued to focus on the administrative and regulatory 

framework. The work has been completed and the final results, including conclusions and 

recommendations have been summarised in the Maritime Strategy Report (IR 5.3). 

WP 5b: River Transport Sector 

5b.1 .1 - 5: Appraisal of Inland Waterways Performance 

The focus in Period 4 was fully on the maritime sector while activities related to river transport 

continued to be organised on a more ad-hoc basis. 

During this period, the works undertaken by the local experts have been reviewed in detail, with 

particular attention to: 

• River transport freight carriage market 

• Sea-river transport market 

• Analysis of the deep water ship way (DWSW) 

• Technical information on the Danube and Dnipro Rivers 

• Classification of inland waterways of Ukraine 

• The potential of river transport for grain transport 

The individual results are now restructured to be integrated into the next report on river transport 

planned for Period 5. This will deal with the administrative and regulatory reforms and the action plan 

for sector development that will be drafted under the title “WP5.3: River Transport Sector Diagnostic”. 

An important part of this report will relate to estimating the potential of future volumes of transport via 

the river. This task is particularly difficult because of the high volatility of recent traffic and the lack of 

historic traffic data. Historic traffic volumes cannot be considered representative as they were 

generated by a guided market structure where free choice of transport mode was not an option. 

5b.1 .6: Recommend measures to improve organisation and management 

This action is the main objective of the next reporting period and a range of investigations is ongoing 

to prepare this work. 

4.7 WP 6: Airports and Air Transport 

The project team carried out its work in close cooperation with the SAA in setting priorities, reviewing 

legislation, development of procedures and organizing training courses. The TEN-T deliverables for 

airports (5) were consolidated into one document. 

In Period 4 the team reviewed 2 airports (Kharkiv and Kiev/Zhuliany) on long term development plans 

at request of the SAA, bringing the total of reviewed airports to 7. 

The team regularly reported the interim project results to the points of contact in DGMOVE and 

17



received guidance on the implementation of the EU regulations and in the preparation of the workshop 

on ANSP certification. 

In anticipation of the review of the Ukraine Air code in Period 5, a basic structure was developed to 

serve as a compliance checklist to ICAO and EU regulations. An initial document was drafted on 

liabilities in aviation based on the German Air law and the Warsaw Convention. 

It was agreed with the EC delegation that TEN-T will provide support to the development of the next 

Twinning Fiche (2011 – 2014) on airports and air navigation services in cooperation with the SAA. 

Meetings were conducted with the EC delegation and the Ukraine authorities to decide on the scope 

and ToR of the project. 

The Fiche will be produced by end of September 2010. 

Stage 1: Market access/ economic regulation 

Aviation Market Access review of the current position 

Workshop on certification of ANSP’s 

A workshop was organised by TEN-T in close cooperation with SAA on the certification of Air 

Navigation service providers (12 – 13 July 2010.). 

The certification of ANSP’s by the National Supervisory Authority (NSA) is a requirement for the EU 

member states being mandatory since 21 December 2006 in accordance with EC 2096. In view of the 

European context of the Single European Sky (SES) regulations and the need for harmonization of 

safety standards regarding the Air Navigation Services in non EU states, a workshop was organized 

on ANSP certification for ANSP’s and aviation authorities of Ukraine and of the neighbouring states. 

The workshop was attended by 74 participants, including representatives from the 5 neighbouring 

states of Azerbaijan, Latvia, Moldova, Poland and Turkey. 

Speakers to the workshop were invited from the EC MOVE, EUROCONTROL, ANSPs (Netherlands 

and Germany) and National authorities (Netherlands) to share their international and national 

experience on ANSP certification and best practices. The workshop was chaired by Mr. Babeichuk, 

Dept. Chairman SAA, acting as moderator with support of the TEN-T project team. 

Presentations were addressing the current EC regulations on certification and SES, the impact of the 

regulations on EU and non-EU states and to that regard common practices applied during the 

implementation. In particular, attention was given to the responsibilities and competences of the NSA 

and the necessary measures to be taken by the ANSP in preparation of the certification in areas such 

as Safety management and incident investigation. 

The workshop was very successful with an effective interaction with the audience and fruitful 

discussion on specific technical subjects. 

In cooperation with the speakers Conclusions were drafted and presented to the audience as results 

of the workshop. They emphasized the need to review national regulations and common practices on 

ANSP certification to be consistent with the SES regulations and to optimize the Air Navigation 

services in a (sub) regional context. 

Research and development 

A study tour was carried out to the Netherlands by the NAU (Vice Rector R&D + staff) to explore 

possibilities for cooperation with the University in Leiden on Air law, the Technical University in Delft 

and the Aeronautical Research Institute NLR. 

Particular attention was given to cooperation in the area of EC research programs related to the Single 

European Sky II and their impact on Ukraine Air Navigation services. Information was exchanged on 

R&D facilities and on current R&D programs. An initial draft agreement was presented to the three 

institutes. Follow-up will be initiated during the 4 th International World Congress “Safety in Aviation and 

Space technology” in Kiev (21 – 23 September 2010) to which TEN-T have been invited to contribute. 

18



Controller/pilot data link 

Ukraine airline AEROSVIT has requested participation in an EC/EUROCONTROL data link evaluation 

program and EC support to install airborne equipment. 

An earlier attempt last year was unsuccessful and not accepted by the EC as only EC members states 

may benefit from the program. Concern was expressed by SAA and AEROSVIT on EC funding 

constraints regarding Ukraine as non EU member to participate in the evaluation of data link 

communication and support in the procurement of airborne data link system. In view of the need of 

implementation of EC Single European regulations in Ukraine airspace, reconsideration of the EC 

position would be highly appreciated. This action will be followed up by TEN-T. 

Stage 2: Airports 

Based on regulations, procedures and common practices applied by the Amsterdam airport 

management and the Netherlands Civil Aviation authorities, a basic information document was 

developed with a number of “Recommendations” to the SAA, addressing the regulatory aspects, 

organizational structures, safety management and the certification of ground handling services at the 

airside of the airport. 

A review of the long term development of Kiev Zhuliany airport revealed that, given the projected by 

Airport Consulting Partners, it is unlikely that the airport will be able to attract any commercial 

financing. Operations at the airport are currently very limited and mainly general aviation and to put 

the airport on more solid financial foundation a minimum volume of daily scheduled services is 

required. 

In view of the limited facilities of the site as a logistic or cargo centre makes the creation of a cargo 

centre unrealistic. There is a need to position itself as the preferred City Centre Business Airport for 

Kiev. However to be sustainable it will need to compete with Boryspil to attract low cost carriers. 

Therefore, the entire airport redevelopment must be completed with the full support of the State for the 

airport to be in a position to compete at arm’s length with Boryspil. 

The review of Kharkiv airport has been recently carried out. A report will be provided shortly. 

Stage 3: Upgrading the SAA safety oversight capacity 

Safety oversight Aerodromes 

The TEN-T proposal on amending the Air code and Aviation regulations for aerodromes certification 

was reviewed on any impact by EC Regulation 1108/ 2009 and amended as appropriate. This EC 

regulation contains recent requirements for the harmonization of aerodrome safety and the related 

responsibilities of EASA and national safety oversight authorities 

Based on common practices in the EU States the team developed an Aerodrome Certification Manual 

with internal procedures and flow diagrams to support the SAA inspectors that will audit and inspect 

the aerodrome as part of the aerodrome certification process and for related inspections on the 

compliance with the appropriate safety regulations. The document has been presented to SAA for 

comments. 

In addition the team developed a first draft of a generic model (“blue print”) for the development of an 

Aerodrome Safety Management manual by the Ukraine aerodromes, being an EU requirement as 

integral part of the certification process. It is expected to be finalized in October 2010. 

Safety oversight Air Navigation Services 

The Compliance checklist, to be used for review of the Ukraine Air code and regulations on National 

Air Navigation Services to comply with the ICAO and EU, have been completed and updated with the 

EC regulation 1108/2009. SAA has provided the current documents, which will be reviewed in the next 

reporting period and provided a point of contact to support the TEN-T. 

19



A mission was carried out to three (of the five) UkSATSE Area Control Centres (ACC) with the main 

objective to obtain some insight into their operational organization and their operational facilities. 

These were: 

• ACC Kiev 

• ACC Dnepropetrovsk 

• ACC Simferopol 

A PowerPoint presentation was provided to the staff on the developments in the EU member states 

regarding certification of services and increased efficiency by integration of services (Functional 

airspace blocks). The presentation finished with a number of questions to challenge the discussion on 

the future developments in aviation, the harmonisation with the current and future EU air navigation 

regulations, the need for interoperability of systems & procedures and safety validation of the new 

technologies. 

The operations rooms of the ACC’s are equipped with up-to-date modern radars and ATC systems 

that have been installed by Spanish manufacturer INDRA (INDRA AIRCON 2000). 

General impression of these visits is that the ACC’s are well organised operational & technical centres 

with efficient information processing and an integrated civil / military Air Space Management. Present 

air traffic volume in Ukraine airspace seems to be low and consideration should be given to integration 

of the 5 ACC services in line with the EU principles of the Single European Sky (SESII), based on 

forecasted future air traffic density. 

The knowledge of future developments of ACC staff seems to be rather limited with no participation in 

EUROCONTROL technical meetings, being exclusively a domain of UkSATSE headquarters. 

Aviation Training 

Train the trainer’s concept 

Within the context of the “train the trainer’s concept” the initiative was taken to develop a Safety 

Management System training program on aerodromes in cooperation with a local expert of the 

National Aviation University in cooperation with the SAA. 

The SAA approved Training program consists of a theoretical part and related practical tasks and will 

be managed by the NAU on a commercial basis. The target audience of the training course is the 

aerodrome management and staff accountable for safety policy and responsible for safety 

management at the various operational levels and for State safety oversight inspectors (SAA). First 

training by NAU is expected on October 2010. 

Specific Training courses 

The following training courses were conducted during the reporting period. 

• With the objective to develop a Ukraine National Training program on airport management an 

“Advanced Airport Management Training Course was conducted by the “Netherlands Aviation 

Academy”. Duration: 4 days, location: Amsterdam, for 10 persons. 

• SAFA inspectors training by JAA-TO to improve skills of SAA staff, carrying out safety 

inspections of foreign aircraft operating to the aerodromes in Ukraine in accordance with the 

EASA and EU member state practices. The practical part of the course was carried out at 

Boryspil airport (Boeing 737). Duration 4 days, location Kiev MoTC, for 12 persons. 

• Training course on Auditing Techniques for aerodromes by JAA-TO to prepare the Aerodrome 

SAA inspectors for auditing the Aerodromes as part of the aerodrome certification process and 

the safety oversight of the aerodrome. Duration 3 days, location Netherlands, for 4 persons. 

20



• 5 Training sessions in the English language were provided for by the TEN-T project team, 

specifically in the area of Air Navigation Services and specific theoretical theme’s. Duration 3 

hours each session each, location Kiev/MoTC, for 6 staff from SAA/ATM. 

JAA Regional Training Centre in Kiev. 

The initiative was taken to establish a platform for cooperation between the National Aviation 

1 

University (NAU) in Kiev and the JAA –TO , being the European training organisation for technical and 

operational aviation training courses (approximately 120 courses) that services the ECAC 2 

member 

states (44 states). The objective of this cooperation is to have national (NAU) trainers being authorised 

to provide JAA training in the Russian or English language. The training will be aimed at the safety 

oversight authorities and to the aviation industry in Ukraine as well as to the aviation industry in the 

East European region. 

Negotiations were held in Hoofddorp (NL) and Kiev (NAU) and based on similar arrangements with 

training centres in London, Singapore and Belgrade, a Memorandum of Cooperation (MOC) have 

been agreed between NAU and JAA-TO which was signed mid July and will be implemented the 

coming months. The first training sessions are intended to take place in October/November 2010. 

4.8 WP 7: Crosscutting Issues 

Work during this period gave priority to the cross-border issues, as these were seen to be particularly 

relevant to further infrastructure development in connection to the EURO 2012 championships 

Ironically, although the main focus of this component within the ToR was on integration with the EU 

and its border technologies, the key findings of the study were that border transits between Ukraine 

and the EU are principally delayed by slow processing on the EU side. 

While there is also significant scope for simplification of procedures, especially in relation to the 

amount of support documentation required, the overall impact of such improvements would be 

predominantly at the maritime borders (the ports) rather than at the land borders. This would be 

reflected in reduced container dwell times. 

In general the border infrastructure is in a reasonable condition and only limited further investment is 

required. The priority is to complete existing projects. 

There are no priority border projects in the rail sector as there are sufficient resources to meet 

projected demand. 

A comprehensive revised Interim Report 7.1 on border issues was completed in June 2010 and 

translated and circulated in July 2010. This includes new material and recommendations in order to 

have an integrated stand-alone report linking the key border issues. 

Stage 1: Multimodal transport 

In order to define compatibility of EU policy with TEN-T eastward extensions, the network of road and 

rail routes has been agreed with the MoTC for the links to the European TEN-T network and the 

compatibility of policy is being progressed through discussion with each subsector. Multimodal 

transport will be the subject of a special review in Period 5 to update the information already collected 

on this emerging market segment. 

Stage 3: Cross border issues 

The requirements of the ToR were addressed and his subject has been fully evaluated and 

documented in Interim Report 7.1 that was updated and circulated in July 2010 to ensure that the 

many links between the cross border subjects were presented in the clearest manner possible. 

1 

Joint Aviation Authority Training Organization 

2 

European Civil Aviation Conference 

21

Stage 4: Galileo 



This work was fully completed with the production of Interim Report 7.2 which was submitted to the 

MoTC. 

4.9 WP 8: Sector Strategy and Plan 

Stage 1: Prepare an Immediate Action Plan 

The previous Minister of Transport issued a letter to the project requesting it to draw up 

recommendations for mitigating the immediate effects of the financial crisis and to assist with 

immediate reforms. The project responded quickly and a working paper was produced. It is 

understood that this paper enabled the Minister to implement some reforms, although no direct follow 

up was requested of the project to the action plan. 

During a meeting on 12 June 2009 in the office of the General Director of Odessa Port, the project 

was asked to produce a summary of the recently announced Government changes to the law 

governing the establishment of Joint Stock Companies in Ukraine with particular emphasis on 

companies operating in the port sector. The Director General had a meeting on the 16 June 2009 with 

the First vice Prime Minister and the project delivered a letter explaining the current position on 15 

June 2009. This was done with the assistance from a legal firm in Odessa and we were later advised 

that the advice was much appreciated. 

Stage 2: Transport sector strategy 

The transport strategy paper has been revised based on the comments received from the other 

stakeholders a revised version has been circulated for comments. It is hoped that the new version will 

be accepted by the other ministries and can be presented to the Cabinet of Ministers. This will offer 

the framework within which subsector strategies can be agreed and implemented. 

Stage 3: Forecast and transport balance 

The feasibility of investment projects to be proposed as part of the subsector work packages (Road, 

rail, maritime, aviation, etc) will depend largely on three factors: 

1. The present condition and capacity of the network 

2. The predicted amount of future traffic 

3. The amount of financing likely to become available 

Only the first of the above is known and can be controlled whilst the other two factors depend on 

socio-economic development, and the nature and location of this development will depend on events 

outside the control of the MoTC. 

Discussions held with MoTC during the period have resulted in agreement being reached on the 

criteria to be used for forecasting and scenario planning and a draft proposal will now be generated by 

the project during Period 5 for further discussion with the MoTC and subsectors to reach an 

agreement on the impact this will have on the identification of infrastructure projects that will prevent 

bottlenecks from forming within the infrastructure. 

There are a number of lists of projects of strategic importance in circulation and meetings are planned 

for August 2010 to clarify which are to be considered that have been selected based on clear criteria. 

The approach is to consider alternative planning scenarios that would result in a different distribution 

of traffic around the network. Therefore consideration will be given during this process to the likely 

transfer of goods and passenger traffic from road to rail or vice versa. 

Projects considered for financing will need to be tested under each of these possible future transport 

distributions. A project which scores favourably under all or most scenarios may be regarded as less 

risky than a project that only scores well under one or two scenarios. In this way the most robust 

projects can be identified, and also the ones that carry greater risk of failure. 

22



Four broad scenarios are being considered as the basis for sector planning. The different pattern of 

traffic distribution under each scenario will be identified as part of the traffic modelling process during 

Period 5 

When completed, the model will allow assumptions on inputs such as future transport costs by mode 

to be varied to reflect the results of alternative policy choices. The process will allow analysis of policy 

options and lead to new projects being identified that will then need to be further prioritised across 

transport modes to ensure that they are compatible, one with another. This is to ensure, for example, 

that port development is linked to the development of access to rail and road infrastructure, at the right 

time. 

The information system being prepared could be used for forecasting and defining modal balance and 

should be taken over by the MoTC after the completion of the project. The additional manpower 

requirements on MoTC and/or its agencies must also met to enhance the sustainability of the project. 

Traffic forecasting is an ongoing activity and the completion of the traffic forecasting is expected in 

Period 5. 

Stage 4: Action plan 

The purpose of this stage is to provide short and long term action plan for transport TEN-T integration 

and develop a common list of priority projects and suggest funding sources/schemes for those 

projects. Preliminary plans were developed but are yet to be discussed with the Minister and the 

senior staff to take on board their priorities and strategy. 

4.10 WP 9: Human Resources Development and Training 

Stage 1: Preparation and Set up 

The former Head of HR MoTC has been reinstated as deputy head and meetings are arranged with 

the MoTC section head in August 2010 to re-start the discussions on the management control 

systems that they had requested by them in 2009. 

In particular, a database was requested by MoTC HR in December 2009 with the purpose of recording 

all HR information, including training, in a single database 

The project did some work to estimate costs but the departure of the then head of HR delayed 

decisions. However she is now reappointed as the deputy head and wishes to revisit the 

implementation of a database. This is being discussed and a decision will be made in the next 

reporting period. 

Stage 2: Training Needs Analysis and Training Strategy 

A summary of the training done to date and training that is planned is contained in Appendix E 

attached 

The MoTC specifically requested that a number of people be trained in project preparation to 

international standards that meets the requirements of the IFIs in Ukraine. This was agreed and 

planned in November 2009 and two sessions were held in Period 4. Although very successful for the 

candidates selected by MoTC (by evaluation reports returned), the key decision makers in the 

transport sector did not attend. It therefore has limited impact on the industry. 

Now that the former head of Section of the HR MoTC has been reinstated we will again review the 

plan that the MoTC’s HR Department would take the lead in the TNA coordination and implementation 

of all training programmes. 

23



Stage 3: Implement training programme 

The plan established so far is contained in Appendix E, but a number of new initiatives on railway and 

maritime training are under development either for implementation in Period 5 or possibly delayed until 

the extension period. 

5. Planned Activities for the Next Reporting Period 5, to December 2010 

5.1 General 

Interim Reports have now been produced on all areas of the project and they will form the basis for 

further debate in Period 5 leading to further precise training being delivered and subsector strategies 

formulated. 

During the 2 nd 

reporting period a thorough review of the deliverables was made in order to consolidate 

the Technical Notes and Working Papers into a more cohesive series of reports. Annex G shows the 

status of project deliverables as at the end of period 4. 

5.2 Planned Deliverables 

As the project is now moving into its final phases there are many issues being raised that are common 

to more than one subsector such as the need to amend laws and strengthen the investment climate in 

Ukraine by providing incentives and guarantees of security in partnership ventures. In addition there is 

a need to ensure that transport subsectors are part of a clearly defined transport plan and have 

decision making authority for future planning, within the agreed plan. With changes to the government 

from February 2010, any former plans are now subject to review in Period 5. 

6. Planned actions in Period 5 

6.1 WP 1: Transport Policy 

Interim Report 1.1 Institutions and Legislation in the Transport Sector 

Recommendations stemming from this report will need to take account of the transport strategy paper 

which the MoTC is in the process of gaining the approval of other ministries. When the strategy paper 

is completed and approved it will have an impact on the structure of transport sector and legal 

framework governing it to successfully implement the policy. 

The draft recommendations will be discussed with the MoTC and the working groups with conclusions 

based on a consensus view over all stakeholders. This process may take time and certain aspects 

may need further study throughout the remaining period hence the report is delayed until agreement 

on the future policy is determined. The links between the MoTC Strategy paper and the SBS indicators 

that will indicate what progress is being made, discussions on the transport policy for Ukraine, the 

objectives that have yet to be identified and the changes required within institutional reform and the 

law, will be subject to further meetings during Period 5. Implementation of the agreed plans would be 

expected during the planned extension phase. 

Recommendations stemming from this report will need to take into account in the MoTC produced 

transport strategy paper delayed we believe until December 2010. When completed and approved it 

will have an impact on the structural and legal changes required for the successful implementation of 

the policy. The draft recommendations will be discussed with the MoTC and the working groups with 

conclusions based on a consensus view over all stakeholders. This process may take time and 

certain aspects may need further study throughout the remaining period hence the report is delayed 

until agreement on the future policy is determined. 

24



Interim Report 1.2 Transport Statistics 

Interim Report 1.2 is completed and will be circulated in English with Ukrainian translation in August 

2010. 

Much progress has already been made in aligning the statistical reporting to current practice in 

Europe. There are still gaps in the published information and ways to overcome the obstacles will be 

explored. 

Interim Report 1.3 Integrated Transport Policy 

Once the transport strategy prepared by the MoTC has been submitted to the CMU for approval and 

proposals agreed for its implementation, the project will use the resultant paper as the basis for 

integrating it with the transport subsector strategies. This is anticipated to happen in Period 5 therefore 

all existing Interim Reports will be reviewed and issued as Draft Final Reports to supplement the 

National Transport Strategy report that will make recommendation on the 6 subsector strategies, as 

required by the ToR. 

6.2 WP 2: Railway Transport 

In Period 5 closer cooperation with MoTC Rail and UZ is anticipated following the appointment of the 

new Head of Section. Exchange of information is ongoing and a quick recovery to full cooperation is 

expected. 

Interim Report 2.1 Proposals for High-Speed Passenger Services 

UZ is anxious to develop its high-speed passenger services but the current definition of such a service 

is different from that understood in EU. This issue will be further explored to clarify what can be done 

within the current financial constraints. 

Interim Report 2.2 EU Integration Strategy 

Interoperability is detailed in the interim report and will be discussed in greater detail once a closer 

contact has been established with UZ. Border crossing technologies will be linked to the activities of 

WP7 

Harmonisation of rules and standards –Ukraine’s situation is such that conformity with the GOST 

specifications (compatibility with the CIS countries) must be maintained. From this starting point the 

interim report on improving interoperability with the Trans-European railway network has been 

prepared as a firm base upon which further discussion within the working group can take place. 

Logistics centres and cargo handling – the present UZ policy on the provision of logistics centres 

and on providing for intermodal transport will be investigated and explained, together with the 

locations of the centres, the traffic throughput and plans for further development. This will be an input 

into the overall studies on multimodal transport which are included in Work package 7 and will be the 

focus of this package in Period 5. 

Energy saving – most of the principal lines on the UZ network are already electrified or are in process 

of being so, leading to improved environmental practice. Modern locomotive technology, both electric 

and diesel, offers considerable scope in reducing fuel consumption. Proposals that could have the 

most immediate and significant impact will be explored in Period 5 to see if a strong case for external 

funding can be made. 

Interim Report 2.3 Railway Restructuring 

Existing organisation –A working paper has been produced for further debate and to ensure correct 

mutual understanding of the present situation, the objectives of reform and the proposals that are on 

25



the table. This complex subject is part of the planned review through structured meetings with MoTC 

rail and UZ scheduled for Period 5. 

Restructuring Proposals – Greater competition in the rail market is an objective of the EU policy and 

is widely regarded, by both the MoTC and UZ, as being of potential benefit to Ukraine. A review of the 

Ukrainian situation and possible solutions has been prepared for discussion in Period 5. 

The pace at which Ukraine wishes to adopt European legislation will be relevant, as there are many 

steps to be taken in the harmonisation process. The conclusions reached by the end of Period 4 will 

be included in a further report in Period 5. 

Corporatisation and financial freedom – UZ is presently an arm of Government which supervises 

six regional railways. There is a need for a more commercial approach throughout the railway 

business so that rail is able to compete vigorously in the changing transport market. Issues on how 

this can be done are already identified for discussion in Period 5. 

Cross-subsidising of passenger services – this issue has long been debated and will again be 

reviewed and updated in Period 5, assuming that the railways have the will to change. There is a need 

not only for more commercial passenger operations but also for support for socially-required but lossmaking 

services, by way of a Public Service Obligation (PSO) agreement. 

The project experts believe this is a key issue for the future development of Ukrainian Railways as a 

commercial entity inviting competition on its network in accordance with the European model. 

This question has been identified by the participants to the Rail Working Group as a key priority. 

Moreover, the IFIs continue to push changes in accounting to introduce more transparency and be 

compliant with EU standards, while many sources of funding for capital investment will make their 

offers conditional on such reform. 

6.3 WP 3: ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE 

Interim Report 3.1 Construction Standards 

This Interim Report was produced at the specific request Ukravtodor on “standards and costs”, and 

has met the requirement of Ukravtodor. 

Interim Report 3.2 Road Management 

Maintenance practices and standards, outsourcing possibilities – maintenance is still largely 

performed by the public sector and for some maintenance activities there is a need to enhance the 

private sector capabilities and introduce more competition to ensure best practice and value-formoney. 

The policy may now change as a result of the appointment of a new Section Head and 

meetings are arranged to determine the future plans. 

Decentralisation and Reorganisation Proposals – various proposals have been tabled in recent 

years but no final decisions have been taken, as above 

Road safety - The project team is working with the Ukrainian Road Safety Association (URSA) to form 

a non-profit institute of excellence of road safety. The proposed institute will carry out research on best 

practices available worldwide for implementation suited to the needs of Ukraine, and facilitate best 

practice on driver training and assessment, traffic engineering including road safety audits, road safety 

education and post-accident management and care. A review of the data from the Lviv pilot project will 

be evaluated in Period 5. 

26



6.4 WP 4: Road Transport 

Interim Report 4.1 Road Transport Market 

The domestic market remains unstructured and poorly controlled and this is well recognised within the 

industry. Road user charges are a subject for debate and maybe cancelled although road transport, 

including private transport, is expected to contribute to the general tax revenue but should also 

compensate for the cost imposed on society (such as road maintenance costs). 

Another issue is that of unequal tax treatment for the different classes of road transport operator, 

which may cause distortions in the market and hence potential inefficiency. Identification of the many 

issues is contained in the interim report and will be subject to further debate in Period 5. 

6.5 WP 5: Maritime and Inland Water Transport 

Interim Report 5.1 Maritime Policy Reform and Action Plan 

Competitiveness and performance of key sea ports – The study has been completed and the 

results circulated. 

Performance of inland transport links – this study has now also been redirected to the river 

transport research in the next period in addition to the intermodal analysis. It is known that for several 

ports there is a mismatch between the port capacity and the inland transport system and these areas 

will be identified and recommendations made. 

Traffic demand including transit – this work has started with the establishment of a data base now 

being populated with all available data. The transit data will be sought in this period to add to the 

model. The first draft of the model will be produced in Period 4 under WP8. A more comprehensive 

study of future traffic has also started within the context of the diagnostic of river transport, the results 

foreseen to be published in the next reporting period on the river transport diagnostic report. 

Policy and reform plan – this process has now been completed and the draft version of this report 

will be part of the river transport diagnostic report that will be available in the next reporting period. 

.This diagnostic report, together with the maritime transport policy paper, will be presented in the next 

Period for discussion with the working group. 

Interim Report 5.2 Port Management 

Recommendations on legislation, port services, assessment of port administration and 

harmonisation with EU/WTO. 

Research related to all these aspects have been completed and the final results have been reported in 

a summary report (Maritime Policy Paper: Conclusions and Recommendations for sustainable Policy 

Reforms) submitted in July 2010. We await comments. 

The inland waterway analysis, river traffic forecasts, and needs assessment of inland waterways, as 

well as the development of a comprehensive policy and development strategy for the inland waterway 

sector, will be developed in Period 5. 

6.6 WP 6: Airports and Air Transport 

Interim report 6.1: Market access 

In the context of the implementation of Single European Sky regulations and the TEN-T ToR, 

consideration will be given to any action that may result from the Conclusions of the Workshop on 

ANSP certification that was held in Kiev on 12 and 13 July. 

27



Interim report 6.2 Airports 

Pending the priorities set by the SAA, the airport plans for the remaining 2 airports will be evaluated 

following visits in Period 5. The reports to date have been very well received by the SAA. 

Interim report 6.3 Upgrading SAA Oversight Capacity 

Support will be provided by TEN-T in reviewing the Ukraine air code in close cooperation with the SAA 

and under supervision of the Deputy Chairman SAA. A compliance checklist of applicable ICAO and 

EU regulations will be used as a reference during the review. 

A review will be carried out of Air Navigation Services (ANS) regulations and based on common 

practices of EU states the TEN-T intend to develop, in cooperation with SAA, an ANS certification 

manual /checklist as a guideline for the SAA during ANSP certification will be produced. This will be a 

major effort by TEN-T up to the end of 2010. In this regard cooperation with SAA and UkSATSE will 

be essential. 

As part of the TEN-T Training programme 4 SAA inspectors will participate in a Safety Management 

Training Course of the JAA-TO specifically for Flight Operations inspections of the airlines. 

Initiatives will be taken, in cooperation with EASA, for “on the job training” of Safety Assessment of 

Foreign Aircraft (SAFA) inspectors by a senior SAFA inspector if the Civil Aviation Authority in an EU 

state. 

Initiatives will be taken for the implementation of the ECAC training support program to participate in 

JAA-TO training for SAA staff members (approximate 40 candidates). 

Pending the approval of the extension of the TEN-T project, an initial programme for 2011 has been 

drafted with in particular attention to the safety oversight of flight operations and environment. 

6.7 WP 7: Multimodal Transport 

Interim Report 7.1 Multimodal Transport 

Multimodal transport policy: standardisation; containerisation; transit improvements – A 

comprehensive interim report was produced in Period 4 and on-going contributions to conferences 

have been made by the project. In Period 5 work will concentrate on transit transport and the future 

development of container services. This will link in with forecasting being conducted under other work 

packages 

Logistics technology: regional issues; performance; modernisation – A comprehensive report 

was produced in Period 3 and further work was deliberately postponed due to ongoing work on the 

“International Logistics Centres for Western NIS and the Caucasus” and the Twinning Projects, both of 

which involved logistics facility training. It is planned that in Period 5 further consultation with the 

logistics sector will be conducted and a revised Interim Report produced focusing on 

recommendations on the placing and prioritisation of national and international logistics centres and 

the role of the MoTC in their future development. 

Cross-border issues: unify procedures with EU; improve multimodal transport near borders – 

Following the production of the revised Interim Report on cross-border issues, work in Period 5 will 

depend on the feed-back arising from this report and the emerging policy plans of the new Minister. It 

is intended that a presentation of the key findings will be provided in September 2010. 

6.8 WP 8: Strategy and Action Plan 

Interim Report 8.1 Strategic Planning 

Study network –maps now agreed and certified by Ukravtodor and UZ that identify the road and rail 

network for inclusion in the proposals for TEN-T integration have been produced and circulated. The 

forecasting will be based on this agreed network. 

28



Road and rail database – the data base for the road and rail network has been established and is 

being populated to build a basis on which strategic planning can be developed in later periods. It 

includes the technical parameters of the infrastructure and the traffic being carried on the 

infrastructure. 

Preliminary project long list – the database is being established into which the known proposed 

projects will be loaded. Additional potential projects from all transport sub-sectors will be added as 

they are identified. It seems that little work has been done on developing pre-feasibility studies and 

this will therefore be the subject of further training to be developed over the next periods 

Transport sector planning scenarios – scenarios will be developed and tabled as part of the 

forecasting process during Period 5. Also detailed in Appendix E attached. 

6.9 WP 9: Training and Study Tours 

Interim Report 9.1 and 9.2 combined: Training Needs Analysis and Training 

Training needs analysis – this has been completed and the results circulated 

Proposed training – based on the training needs assessment and additional information a training 

plan has now been agreed with the MoTC for an early start of the additional specific training courses 

agreed in Period 4 to run until December 2010. The initial training that has already been delivered will 

be evaluated to ensure that further training is appropriate in scope and depth. The preliminary 

proposals have now been finalised, 

Proposed study tours – plans for study tours for the MoTC staff that will have had primary training 

are being planned to be conducted in Period 5. The detail is included in the training programme. 

7. Planned actions in extension period 

Agreement has not yet been confirmed by Ukraine on the extension of the project from 31 December 

2010 to 31 December 2011 although MoTC, EU Delegation and Brussels have, we understand, 

agreed to an extension of the project without additional funding. The extension is to enable the TEN-T 

project to continue to support the activities of the MoTC and to compensate for the early delays in 

launching the project and the later delays caused by the change of government in February 2010 and 

subsequent changes at the MoTC and transport subsectors. 

It was agreed that on the signature of the extension of the FA (NAP 2005) the addendum on the 

extension of the project contract shall be initiated. During the extension period the work shall continue 

on Work Packages 1, 8 and 9. This selection covers all the issues of policy, regulatory institutional and 

financial issues along with the establishment of a transport sector strategy and action plans (including 

SBS) as well as assistance with their implementation. 

A detailed work plan will be established during Period 5 to determine the precise allocation of man 

days to each sector and the people to be involved that will be selected from the current team of 

international and local experts. 

Due to delays in implementation of agreed meeting schedules as a result of a change in government 

from February 2010, some additional man days have been saved that will be used in the extension 

period 

29

8. APPENDIX A: EC Project Planning Forms 

8.1 FORM 2.2: Project Progress Report 

Project title : Support to the Integration of Ukraine in the Trans- 

European Transport Network TEN-T 



Project number: 

EuropeAid /124964/C/SER/UA 

Country: Ukraine Page : 1/1 

Planning period : 1 st February 2010 to 31 st 

July 2010 Prepared on: 31/07/10 

EC Consultant: Corporate Solutions Limited 

Project objective : To improve the transport sector through helping MoTC in developing and implementing a strategy and an action plan for transport integration into TEN-T 

TIMEFRAME INPUTS 

1 st st PERSONNEL 

February 2010 to 31 July 2010 

EC Consultants 

No ACTIVITIES February March April May June July Planned Utilised 

WP1 

WP2 

WP3 

WP4 

WP5 

WP6 

Policy, regulatory, institutional & 

infrastructure financing 

Selected measures and reforms for rail 

sector 

Selected measures and reforms road 

infrastructure 

Selected measures and reforms road 

transport 

Selected measures and reforms 

maritime transport 

Selected measure and reforms 

airports and air transport 

X X X X X X X X X X X X 230 202 

X X X X X X X X X X X X 201 148 

X X X X X X X X X X X X 240 183 

X X X X X X X X X X X X 160 102 

X X X X X X X X X X X X 210 273 

X X X X X X X X X X X X 170 238 

WP7 Crosscutting issues X X X X X X X X X X X X 170 132 

WP8 Sector Strategy and Action Plan X X X X X X X X X X X X 100 90 

WP9 

Human Resources Development & 

Training 

X X X X X X X X X X X X 120 121 

1601 1489 

Equipment 

and 

Materials 

Planned 

Utilised 

OTHER 

Planned 

Utilised 

Visits to 

locations 

outside 

Kiev 

30

8.2 FORM 2.3: Resources Utilisation Report 



Project title : Support to the Integration of Ukraine in 

the Trans-European Transport Network TEN-T 

Project number: EuropeAid /124964/C/SER/UA Country: Ukraine Page : 1/1 

Planning period : 1 st February 2010 to 31 st 

July 2010 Prepared on: 31/07/10 


Project objective : To improve the transport sector through helping MoTC in developing and implementing a strategy and an action plan for transport 

integration into TEN-T 

RESOURCES/INPUTS TOTAL PLANNED PERIOD PLANNED PERIOD REALISED TOTAL REALISED 

AVAILABLE FOR 

REMAINDER 

PERSONNEL 

Team Leader 560 120 105 445 115 

Road Key Expert 240 50 47 228 12 

Rail Key Expert 440 44 6 173 267 

Maritime Key Expert 460 80 77 232 228 

STE - Senior Expert 2 300 352 391 1 270 1 030 

LTE junior experts 2 000 345 354 1 600 400 

STE Junior Expert 1 500 610 509 1 203 297 

Sub-total 7 500 1 601 1 489 5 151 2 349 

EQUIPMENT AND 

MATERIAL None None 

Sub-total 

OTHER INPUTS 

Steering Committee 350,000 125,000 106,112 141,998 208,002 

Travel costs outside Kiev 25,000 4,000 2,315 6,458 18,542 

Per diems 175,000 30,000 24,264 64,283 110,717 

Sub-total 550,000 159,000 132,691 21,739 337,261 

31

8.3 FORM 2.4 Output Performance Report 



Project title: Support to the Integration of 

Ukraine in the Trans-European Transport 

Network TEN-T 

Project number: EuropeAid /124964/C/SER/UA Country: Ukraine Page: 1 / 3 

Prepared on : 26 July 2010 EC Consultant : Corporate Solutions Ltd 

Output results 

Deviation original plan 

+ or - % 

Reason for deviation Comment on constrains & assumptions 

Inception Report -100% On 11 September 2008 it was 

agreed to postpone the 

submission of the IR to the end 

of November 2008. The first 

draft was submitted in 

December 2008. The IR was 

restructured and resubmitted on 

23 February 2009. 

It was assumed that the project ToR could be 

revised but on 16 January 2008 it was agreed to 

include the changes in the project’ work plan. 

Immediate Action Plan published None No comments received from the MoTC 

SBS Strategic Indicators None Working closely with MoTC to agree with each 

transport subsector on which indicators they will 

accept for submission with the National Transport 

Strategy plan to achieve the financial support from 

the SBS system. Process completed June 2010 

Progress Report I 10% Change of Team Leader in April 

2009 

Transport Demand and Traffic 

Forecasts prepared 

Early draft reports were revised at the request of 

the MoTC and later accepted 

None The process to collect data is agreed and a 

database is being populated with information from 

all transport subsectors 

Training Needs identified None Training started in Period 3, intensified in Period 4 

and will continue to agreed plan. 

32



Project title: Support to the Integration of 

Ukraine in the Trans-European Transport 

Network TEN-T 

Project number: EuropeAid /124964/C/SER/UA Country: Ukraine Page: 1 / 3 

Prepared on : 26 July 2010 EC Consultant : Corporate Solutions Ltd 

Output results 

Deviation original plan 

+ or - % 

Reason for deviation Comment on constrains & assumptions 

National Transport Policy/Strategy 

defined 

National Transport Strategy defined 

through formulation of sub-sector 

and multimodal strategies. 

Short and long term action plans for 

TEN-T Integration defined 

List of Priority Investment Projects 

and Financing Options formulated 

Training, Capacity Development 

and Training Events held 

None With support from the TEN-T project and the Policy 

Twinning Project a strategy paper was circulated by 

MoTC in Nov 2009, revised many times until a final 

version in July 2010, now being reviewed. 

None Reform plans have been defined for maritime, road 

and railways and are under preparation for the 

aviation sector. Once an overall policy is defined, 

these may need to be revised to ensure compliance 

with the policy. 

None This output is dependent on the successful 

achievement of other milestones. 

None Agreements not yet reached with the MoTC on 

criteria for prioritising investment projects. 

Financing options will be influenced by the financial 

crisis as well as whether the transport policy, sector 

reform programmes and PPP law are enacted. In 

preparation, a database is being populated with all 

known sector projects. 

None The TNA analysis was completed in Period 2 and 

approved by the working group and MoTC HR 

department Following personnel changes at MoTC 

HR the programme was modified. Training started 

in Period 3 (particularly in aviation) was intensified 

in Period 4 and continued in period 5. 

Progress Report 2 None Delivered on time and accepted 

Progress Report 3 None Delivered on time and accepted. 

Progress Report 4 None Delivered on time 

33

8.4 Form 1.6 Plan of Operations for the next reporting period 

Project title : Support to the Integration of Ukraine in the Trans- 

European Transport Network TEN-T 



Project number: 

EuropeAid /124964/C/SER/UA 

Country: Ukraine Page : 1/1 

Planning period : 1 st August 2010 to 31 st 

December 2010 Prepared on: 31/07/10 


Project objective: To improve the transport sector through helping MoTC in developing and implementing a strategy and an action plan for transport integration into TEN-T 

TIMEFRAME INPUTS 

1 August 2009 – 31 December 2010 PERSONAL 

EQUIPMENT 

AND MATERIAL 

No Activity 8 9 10 11 12 Senior 

Experts 

1 Sector policy and management 

Senior X X X X X 103 

2 Rail transport 

3 Road infrastructure 

4 Road transport 

5 Maritime transport 

6 Airports and air transport 

7 Crosscutting issues 

8 Sector strategy and plan 

9 Human Resources Development 

Junior 

Experts 

Junior X X X X X 50 










Junior X c X X X 100 







TOTAL: 515 813 

Computer 

Software 

and hardware 

Materials for 

Working Group 

Meetings 

HRD Data Base 

Software 

OTHER 

Steering 

Committee 

Meeting 

Travel and 

Per diems 

for travel 

outside Kiev 

Financing of 

various 

Events 

34



9. APPENDIX B: 

Interim Report 1.2 Executive Summary 

9.1 Background 

The overall objective of the project is to enhance the transport sector by assisting the MoTC in Ukraine 

in developing and implementing a Strategy and Action Plan for transport integration into the Trans- 

European Transport Network (TEN-T). 

The study is structured around nine work packages, of which one (Work Package 1) is concerned with 

policy, regulatory, institutional and funding issues. Within that work package (WP 1) the statistical 

component of the study is should: 

• Analyse the Ukrainian statistics methodology and its correspondence with the EU; 

• Make recommendations for harmonising the statistics methodology with that of the EU. 

The project is also required to establish a transport planning database for forecasting and evaluating 

transport development options. That work is being undertaken separately, and this report is 

concerned with the two tasks listed above. 

9.2 Structure of Report 

This draft report is intended as a consultation paper, a step towards the preparation of a compendium 

showing the source and availability of transport statistics in Ukraine. It is divided into three main 

sections: for rail transport, for road transport and for inland waterway transport. Aviation, coastal 

shipping and other transport statistics are not included at this stage. 

Within each section, EU standard statistical definitions are taken from the document Glossary for 

Transport Statistics (UN/ECE, EU/Eurostat/ECMT, 3rd Edition, 2003). It is then indicated whether the 

Ukrainian statistics methodology corresponds to these headings totally or partly, or whether Ukraine 

uses an alternative definition or does not collect such a statistic at all. 

9.3 Next Steps 

During the next phase of the project this paper will be discussed with the State Statistics Committee, 

MOTC and others with the following objectives: 

• To correct any mistakes and fill gaps; 

• To indicate where the statistics can be found (which publication or website, etc.) 

• To clarify or determine the sources of data 

• To address any concerns as to the accuracy of the data 

• To establish means of filling gaps in the required data 

• To make recommendations accordingly. 

Any comments on this paper or the subject of transport statistics in Ukraine generally should be 

addressed to the Team Leader, 

Les Cheesman: L.cheesman@ten-t.org.ua. or Lescheesm@aol.com 

35



10. APPENDIX C: 

Executive Summary of the border report section Interim Report 7.1 

The ToR require the Consultant to examine the needs and measures for unification of cross border 

technologies with EU standards, to propose measures to improve multimodal (assumed to be 

intermodal) operations near border areas and to identify priority infrastructure and collaboration 

developments. The client for this project is the Ministry of Transport, thus compliance with the ToR 

poses significant difficulties, given that border responsibilities are predominantly concentrated within 

other Ministries. This Interim Report provides an initial assessment of the overall border crossing 

environment, profiling the current situation and highlighting some of the key issues needing to be 

addressed later to facilitate trade and transport movements along an extended TEN-T network. It 

attempts to balance the institutional perspective, with the current day-to-day experience of border 

users. 

10.1 Part 1 

Four types of border crossing were initially evaluated – airports, seaports, road crossings and rail 

crossings. With regard to international airports there have been major improvements in passenger 

processing and the methodology and performance are broadly compatible with those in the EU. 

Clearance of freight remains suboptimal, despite being the premium service level. However it is 

clearance of freight at the country’s main seaports which represents a key problem area which is 

adversely affecting the national trading performance and increasing transaction costs. This is reflected 

in high cargo dwell times, especially in the main container terminals. Import containers stay within 

these facilities for 22-25 days following discharge, more than double the EU average. 

Clearances at the road borders tend to have the highest profile because of its public interface in terms 

of passengers traffic. Long delays can occur at the western borders, especially with Poland and to a 

lesser extent Hungary, at weekends and holiday periods due to the ‘peaking‘ effect, when processing 

demand significantly exceeds processing capacity, probably on both sides of the border. Slow 

clearance processing of freight traffic also leads to long queues of trucks on the border approach 

roads. Passenger rail clearances are broadly in line with EU practices, but there are delays in freight 

traffic although these may not be critical due to other potential operational delays. 

The problems at the borders tend to be a manifestation of more general issues in the border clearance 

environment. The first is the number of organisations present. In the EU the numbers have declined 

through new approaches such as single window and integrated border management techniques, 

whereas in Ukraine stakeholders are indicating the opposite trend. International surveys confirm this 

situation. This growth is perceived to be partially based on the potential ‘opportunity’ to extract 

revenue on imports, rather than on identified need for such services. The next major problem is the 

high documentation requirements, double that required in OECD countries. It takes time to collect all 

these various documents, with surveys confirming that the major delays in clearances is the time taken 

to collect and submit the documents rather than the actual physical processing. In trade facilitation 

there is a simple formula: more border organisations = more complex border clearance procedures = 

delays obtaining all signatures and stamps = additional costs + border congestion. 

The relevant border legislation is substantial and complex, directly resulting in inconsistencies of its 

application by the authorities and lower levels of compliance by stakeholders who often do not 

understand all the requirements. This is made more difficult by additional legislation being issued at 

short notice. This caveat is a potential governance concern. Corruption is relatively common at most 

borders, including both coercive and collusive fraud. Whilst this is mainly institutionally based, some 

traders can benefit from the governance problems and are also party to it through financial 

irregularities, such as revaluations. Customs now officially acknowledge this is a problem area that 

needs to be addressed. 

The widespread application of IT technologies is limited in many cases by connectivity and utility 

problems, especially at the rail and more remote road borders. This potentially restricts the 

introduction of more advances techniques, such as risk management, single window etc. More 

importantly most IT applications are transaction recording rather than processing systems, thus there 

is duplication between the automated and manual approaches. Each border organisation has its own 

36



isolated system making interconnectivity difficult. Indeed, most border related data is considered 

‘secret’ and the concept of sharing data is not fully supported by the respective organisations. 

The emphasis in border operations is principally concentrated on authoritarian control and revenue 

generation, rather than trade facilitation as promoted by international conventions. This approach 

provides limits the scope for effective consultation with stakeholders and merely reinforces current 

negative attitudes towards the border authorities, not all of which is fully justified. Stakeholders, being 

the users of borders, are not yet perceived as full ‘partners’ by the authorities in the progression 

towards more user-friendly and efficient border operations. 

The ports represent the maritime border crossings and are the country’s primary trade gateways. As a 

result, constraints at the ports would be expected to have the most impact on the national trading 

performance. In addition to the general constraints highlighted above, there are a number of additional 

issues contributing to border delays. The first issue is the presence of appreciable volumes of disputed 

or abandoned cargoes. This is cargo on which there may be a technical dispute on ownership or 

definition of product, shipments awaiting resolution of the customs re-assessment/dispute procedures, 

importers with financial problems, food products without the necessary certificates etc. The result is 

the goods are often abandoned. An additional factor has been the financial crisis resulting in more 

problems in clearance. The current Custom’s approach to the removal and sale of such shipments is 

ineffective and resolution of how to deal with this type of cargo will become increasingly important to 

avoid major congestion at the container terminals in 2010. 

An additional constraint at the ports is the high percentage of cargo cleared within the port boundary, 

whereas in the EU it is mostly outside. This is mainly due to the lack of through Bills of Lading, traffic 

imbalances, high demand for ‘local‘ clearances and the problems inherent in the current inland 

clearance regime, which almost involves a duplicate clearance. The current system of on-dock 

clearances is supported by the port administrations as it generates revenue to them. There are no 

appreciable incentives to clear off the dock whilst there are plenty of potential disincentives. 

The problems of the road borders are based on a combination of processing times, capacity and 

accessibility. Processing times is the time from entry to exit of the border control zone. Passenger 

processing is slower in the Ukraine than in much of the EU, mainly due to the need for the driver, and 

sometimes the occupants, to exit the car for processing. Freight processing is extended due to the 

high documentary requirements, numbers of agencies present and high examination levels. 

Processing capacity is determined by a combination of infrastructure and personnel. As regards 

infrastructure, for passenger traffic this is the number of processing lanes and for freight traffic it is the 

parking capacity of the freight yard. As regards personnel, this dictates the number of processing 

points active concurrently. The peaking characteristics of the passenger traffic can result in shortages 

of processing lanes, but it has been noted that even at these peak times some processing lanes are 

unmanned. For freight, the key manning problem areas are registration, examination and assessment, 

as these tend to dictate overall transit speeds as they are the most time-consuming elements of the 

clearance. Availability of personnel in the smaller agencies has also been sited as a problem. 

The third key feature is processing accessibility, which addresses the issue of the ability to physically 

reach the processing area. Accessibility is dictated by the combination of processing times and 

processing capacity which results in a given flow rate into and out of the control zone. As soon as the 

processing demand exceeds the processing capacity, queues will start to form along the approach 

roads. There are lines of freight vehicles outside all the main border crossings in Ukraine and 

significant car queues at peak periods. This accessibility problem is not solely determined by the 

processing times and capacity of the Ukrainian facilities. In the outbound direction, if the partner 

border post cannot process the traffic as fast as the Ukrainian authorities can, then there is a build-up 

of traffic in the ‘no-mans’ land between the two border posts, thus the Ukrainian border post can 

become congested due to problems on the other side. Indeed in Part II this is highlighted as the key 

problem at the TEN-T borders 

The peaking of passenger traffic is caused by a number of factors. The price differential on certain 

goods, such as fuel and alcohol, encourages ‘visitors’ at weekends. This artificially increases volumes 

within a relatively short time window, thus resulting in peaks when processing capacity exceeds 

processing demand. It also causes back-up from the EU facility due to the extra inward compliance 

checks. In addition there are the holiday periods where overall volumes increase significantly. 

The EC has been actively involved in infrastructure development at the road borders, especially at 

Yahodyn, Chop and Uzhgorod. However, development of the road borders is complex and multi- 

37



dimensional. Merely constructing larger borders with increased infrastructure is unlikely to be the 

optimum solution and is far too simplistic an approach. The key to development is to balance the 

processing times, capacity and accessibility elements and to have a more comprehensive 

understanding of the reasons for delays. More infrastructure in isolation will not improve existing 

processing and eliminate delays and queuing at the Ukrainian borders. 

At the western rail borders the cargo may need to be transhipped due to the different rail gauges in the 

CIS and EU. Theoretically, eastbound cargo is transhipped on the Ukrainian side and westbound on 

the EU side. However, in practice importers prefer transhipment in the EU. The main reason is 

understood to be goods are transferred to road transport and brought in through the road border for 

final delivery. The Ukrainian transfer activity is perceived as less reliable and efficient than the EU. The 

rail documentation between the EU and CIS rail systems is not yet compatible, although progress 

towards a joint railway bill is slowly underway. 

Problems remain at most of the Ukrainian borders, with stakeholders indicating limited improvements 

in recent years. Indeed some are suggesting that the increase in border organisations, legislation and 

documentation are making transit more difficult and expensive. This situation, if correct, suggests 

congestion will increase again following resolution of the temporary financial crisis. It also suggests a 

potential risk in the drift away from unification and integration with EU standards. 

10.2 Part II 

Part II of this revised Interim Report focuses predominantly on the Trans-European Transport Network 

interfaces, as the overall remit of the project is integration of Ukraine with the TEN-T. The Ukrainian 

borders that directly interface with the TEN-T road and rail network are as follows: 

• Hungarian border interface – road: Tysa; rail: Chop/Bat’ovo; 

• Polish border interface – road: Krakovets, Rava-Ruska, Yahodyn, rail: Yahodyn, Mosty’ka II; 

• Romanian border interface – road: Dyakove, Porubne, rail: Dyakove, Vadul Siret; and 

• Slovak border interface - road: Uzhgorod, rail: Chop. 

Site visits were made to all of these borders to evaluate the operations being undertaken and to 

identify the core problem issues, prior to making recommendations on prioritisation of border 

development. These were as follows: 

• Tysa – no significant problems; 

• Chop/Bat’ovo rail – falling demand with road transfers being made the other side of the 

border; 

• Krakovets – slow processing on the Polish side leading to queues backing through the 

Ukrainian post and congestion on the approach road; 

• Rusta-Rava – some minor delays outbound; 

• Yahodyn – insufficient processing capacity at peak times, especially for freight, and slow 

processing on the Polish side leading to queues back through the Ukrainian post and 

congestion on the approach road; 

• Yahodyn rail – falling demand; 

• Mosty’ka rail – falling demand; 

• Dyakove - slow processing on the Romania side leading to queues back through the Ukrainian 

post and congestion on the approach road; 

• Porubne - slow processing on the Romania side leading to queues back through the Ukrainian 

post and congestion on the approach road; 

• Dyakove rail – no problems but low demand; and 

• Uzhgorod - slow processing on the Slovak side leading to queues back through the Ukrainian 

post and congestion on the approach road, as well as design problems with the new 

structures. 

The project was requested to examine the ‘needs and provide measures for unification of cross border 

technologies with EU standards’. This potentially infers that EU technologies may be superior and 

38



Ukraine needs to modernise their technologies in a way so as to be compatible with those in the EU, 

whereas the site evaluations suggest the primary problem at the interface between Ukraine and the 

TEN-T is slower processing on the EU side of the frontier. Whilst there could be improvements in 

processing on the Ukrainian side, this will yield negligible benefits without significant performance 

changes on the EU side. There are two key problem areas at the borders with the EU: 

• cross border trade adversely affecting passenger traffic; and 

• X-ray examinations delaying freight traffic. 

The first problem area, cross border trade, to a certain extent reflects the historical situation and its 

primary impact is on the movement of passenger vehicles between Ukraine and its neighbours. As the 

countries have developed the prices and product availability between Ukraine and its neighbours has 

generally converged and thus the cross border trade in general merchandise has largely disappeared. 

However, the exception is the residual trading in products having a high excise or other form of 

taxation in one country and a much lower one in the other. The main examples of this are in alcohol, 

cigarettes and petrol/diesel, products which carry a high level of taxation in many countries. There are 

significant rewards available in purchasing these products in Ukraine and reselling in the neighbouring 

countries. It appears difficult to resolve this issue without action on the Ukrainian side, even though it 

would potentially reduces revenue to the state. The most serious problem is on the Polish border 

where the issue has reached endemic proportions. The Slovak border and the western border with 

Romania have similar problems, but the delays are less mainly due to the lower traffic levels. Whilst 

the cause may not be in Ukraine, there is no doubt the present situation with long exit queues creates 

an adverse image of the country, as the majority of the ‘waiting time’ is actually incurred on Ukrainian 

territory. 

This situation poses a particular problem for the 2012 European Football Championships unless the 

cross border trade can be eliminated (or constrained) by that time, or temporarily suspended in some 

way during the Championships or some form of traffic segregation system can be developed that 

separates local cross border traffic from longer distance traffic. A strategy to deal with this situation in 

relation to the 2012 needs to be defined and agreed, as its implementation may involve recruitment 

and training which needs to commence in 2010. 

The second and equally serious problem is the x-raying of trucks coming into the European Union 

from Ukraine. The main EU borders have all been equipped with scanning devices in order to enhance 

‘controls’ on the market’s exterior connections. The use of advanced electronic information and 

electronic systems for risk analysis was expected to identify high risk cargo heading into the market, 

including from Ukraine. Technology has the potential to increase the efficiency of the 

inspection/examination of cargo and the number of shipments which can be examined. The key 

problem on Ukraine’s borders is that most of the EU neighbours are x-raying all their incoming 

vehicles – i.e. 100% examination. Thus, the current application is in conflict with both WCO and EC 

policies which clearly suggest that technologies such as x-rays should be applied as part of a risk 

management system – i.e. only those vehicles that have been identified as ‘at risk’ should be 

examined. Some countries also x-ray empty vehicles, which theoretically should pose no risk. Poland, 

Slovak Republic and now Romania x-ray all loaded vehicles and some x-ray empties as well. Hungary 

appears to be the only EU neighbour using its technology as part of a risk management system and 

hence no significant delays at their borders. 

The current situation has two dimensions - health and safety; and processing capacity. The first is 

likely to be an increasing concern and is already one whereby Ukraine has adopted a different policy 

to its neighbours. The levels of radiation used vary with some technologies using low radiation such 

that the drivers can remain in the cab whereas others use high levels to improve the image and the 

driver has to exit the cab. Many of these trucks are on regular runs to neighbouring countries and the 

truckers are becoming increasingly concerned at the potential for a ‘build-up’ in radiation levels which 

could adversely affect the health of their drivers. It is evident that it is seen as a health and safety 

concern on the Ukrainian side. 

The main impact of the widespread use of scanners has been the reduction in processing capacity. 

Because most borders have a single scanner, the ability to process freight traffic is dictated by 

individual scanning speeds. Discussions with stakeholders indicate as a direct result of the allscanning 

procedures transit times have risen over recent years. It is not recommended Ukraine adopts 

39



this EU practice with significantly increased levels of scanning. Scanners should only be used as part 

of a risk management system. 

TIR is an established international customs transit Convention to which Ukraine is a signatory. The 

advantages of the TIR system are expedited processing at the border crossings. Border transit should 

take 15-20 minutes compared with 1 hour for non-TIR traffic. There are two main reasons why the TIR 

system in Ukraine is not working to its optimum potential - restricted access; and breaking of seals. 

The first problem arises because the access roads to the borders are in most cases too narrow to 

provide segregation of freight traffic. In practice, there should be one lane for expedited clearance – 

TIR and empty units and a standard lane for non-TIR imports, exports and transit. It is recommended 

within the border crossing itself that separate lanes are designated for TIR and non-TIR traffic. 

However, a more serious concern is the regular breaking of Customs seals on TIR traffic to and from 

Ukraine in order to undertake physical examinations. This is a clear breach of the Convention, which 

indicates that Customs can break the seal and examine the contents only when there is evidence of a 

possible violation. It is recommended that Ukrainian Customs comply with its obligations under the TIR 

Convention, to which it is a signatory, by eliminating the practice of systematic seal breaking as a 

standard activity at its road border crossings. 

The problems of the high number of documents required to undertake a clearance was highlighted in 

Part 1, with Ukraine requiring 40% more export documents and double the number of import 

documents compared to the average OECD country. This directly results in increased clearance times, 

thus resulting in higher transaction costs on Ukrainian traffic. This appears to be much more of a 

problem at the seaports than at the road and rail borders. A key difference between the EU and 

Ukraine is the approach to Customs clearance. In most of the more advanced countries in the EU the 

clearance can be undertaken on-line without the submission of most of this support documentation. 

This is often undertaken prior to the physical arrival of the goods. 

There are three aspects to moving towards integration of the system with that in the TEN-T countries. 

The first is a reduction in the mandatory submission of support documents at the borders, be it a 

road/rail crossing or at the ports. This can be achieved by a business processing exercise supported 

by clear legislation. The second is increased application of electronic systems and from that the 

acceptance of electronic documents and signatures. The current system in Ukraine is dependent of 

the production of hard copy documents and original signatures. This significantly increases both the 

size and the difficulty in putting together the clearance pack of documents. The third key issue on 

documentation is consistency in the requirements. Modern Customs systems are based on the 

concept of ‘informed compliance’. This means the importer or exporter is aware of the requirements 

and is then compliant with them. Unlike the EU where details of what is required are widely available 

over the internet and publications, in Ukraine the requirements are not clear, partly because the 

legislation is not transparent and is in some cases conflicting. 

There has been a significant increase in the use of IT at the borders. Unfortunately this has not 

resulted in significant improvements in clearance times. There are a number of reasons for this 

situation. The first reason is that there are manual and automated systems working in parallel. In 

reality, the Ukrainian Customs system is a transaction recording system, rather than a Custom 

processing system. Another problem is that it is not as yet a full on-line system, such as that of the 

Border Guards. As a result some of the smaller borders, particular rail borders, are working in 

isolation. It is not possible to operate an effective Customs IT system unless it is online to all locations. 

Concepts such as risk management and other applications (such as valuation, classification etc) can 

only be effective if it has nationwide coverage and thus consistency of approach is possible. 

In recent years there has been significant progress towards the application of single stop processing in 

Ukraine. However, the next step in line with EU integration would be progress towards a single 

window system. In simple terms, single stop is about undertaking all the clearance activities at a single 

location whereas with single window it is at a single position/desk. Ukraine has not really started the 

transition to single window processing. It is recommended that Ukraine forms a Coordination 

Committee on Single Window to commence progress towards developing such a single window 

capability. This is seen as a gradual process where more parties can be added as the system 

progresses. 

One of the problems highlighted by importers was the difficulty in changing their points of clearance. 

Importers have to register with a particular Customs office. This has the advantage in that a 

relationship is formed between that Customs office and their client. Despite the obvious governance 

40



risks, this system works reasonably well. The problems arise when the importer either wishes to or has 

to change his logistics and thus clear at another location. It is recommended that consideration is 

given to development of easier means to Customs clear at multiple locations using centralised 

registrations. 

The Terms of Reference request recommendations to improve multimodal operations in areas near 

the border crossing area. This is assumed to relate to intermodal operations. As regards the bogie 

changing facilities, it is clear that there are sufficient resources, particularly given the decline in traffic 

levels. The general policy of processing Ukrainian outbound traffic on the EU side and EU outbound 

on the Ukrainian side is designed to share the workload and in the case of transhipment the handling 

revenue. However, this policy when extended to bogie changing means duplication of resources. As 

these resources reach the end of their working life and need significant replacement, it would be 

logical to concentrate bogie changing facilities on one side of the border, rather than continue on with 

the current duplication. 

Bogie changing operations are reasonable and not considered to be a specific constraint to 

international rail transportation, but there are two critical areas in relation to wagon-to-wagon 

transhipment. The first and most serious concern is the availability of quality 1520 mm rolling stock for 

inbound traffic. Importers are complaining UZ cannot provide reasonable quality covered wagons, 

most are old and leaking, and this situation results in unacceptable damage levels. The second area 

of concern again relates to higher value products in that the transhipment service quality is considered 

to be better on the EU side than in Ukraine. This is reflected in lower pilferage and damage levels due 

to more care being taken in the transhipment process, be it rail-rail or rail-road. Discussions with 

importers of consumer goods suggest that they use rail on the EU side from their manufacturing 

factories around the EU but then use road for the final delivery to Ukraine, rather than continue on with 

rail. This means some potential loss of revenue to UZ and rail generally is particularly exposed to 

competition from the road sector at the ‘premium end’ of its market. 

There are competing facilities near the borders undertaking intermodal transfers, but the volumes 

handled are small. This situation highlights a long term concern as to how long UZ can continue to 

provide wagon-load type services – collection and delivery of 1-2 wagons to individual sidings. This 

type of activity has been gradually phased out in the EU as uneconomic. There is a danger that too 

many of these terminals will mean that they cannot achieve the necessary traffic levels, in what is 

already a restricted market, to be viable. It is not considered there is a shortage of facilities at the 

Ukrainian borders constraining intermodal (and rail) transport. Indeed, there is ample evidence of a 

surplus given the declining volumes. 

The Terms of Reference required identification of the priority list of projects for border infrastructure 

development. There are a number of such lists of border developments, but these are not widely 

available and are not coordinated between the parties involved in border development. As regards 

connectivity with the TEN-T the following are considered to be the priority border projects: 

1) Yahodyn Road Border - completion of the southern part of the border crossing; 

2) Porubne Road Border – completion of the new freight terminal, thus segregating passenger 

and freight movements; 

3) Uzhgorod Road Border – completion of the outstanding works; 

4) Krakovets Road Border - construction of a new passenger crossing to the north of the existing 

border facility; and 

5) Dyakove Road Border - rehabilitation of the existing facility, including increased paving and 

overhead awnings, as well as refurbishment of the main building. 

It should be noted that there are no proposals for investment at the rail borders. Indeed, the significant 

expenditure on passenger stations at the borders where there is either no origin/destination traffic or 

minimal local traffic does not appear justified, particularly at a time when urgent developments at the 

road borders have been suspended due to lack of funds. Potential priority investments at the maritime 

and aviation borders are addressed in separate project Work Packages. 

Had the original EU TACIS Cross Border Cooperation Programme still been active, the scale of these 

individual border developments would have been such that they would have been suitable for possible 

funding. This programme has been replaced by the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument 

41



(ENPI) covering the eastern borders of the EU and is designed to facilitate economic and social 

development in the border regions, but in some cases also including development of border 

infrastructure. If funding is required to undertake these priority projects an approach to the ENPI CBC 

Programme should be considered. 

The Terms of Reference requested recommendations on and the establishment of priorities for transborder 

collaboration. This is a two dimensional issue - establishment of an institutional framework to 

undertake the proposed collaboration; and priority issues on which to then collaborate. The former is 

considered to be the most difficult. In Ukraine, cooperation between the various border organisations 

is a potential problem, in common with most of the CIS. Each organisation tends to be defensive of 

their role of ‘protecting the nation’, thus the inability so far to reduce the number of agencies present at 

the border. An additional complication is that the various agencies come under different Ministries and 

the Border Guard is a military unit, thus it is recognised that interagency communication and 

cooperation is potentially quite difficult. 

A good example of this lack of effective collaboration is the absence of any common coordinated 

national border development programme. As indicated, there are several border agency-related lists of 

projects, plus other lists related to the 2012 Championships and others indicated in various 

government plans. There is as yet no common comprehensive border development programmes 

agreed to by all the relevant Ministries both in terms of priorities and funding. 

Thus, it can be seen that the first problem in trans-border collaboration is institutional. Who can 

represent Ukraine in any trans-border collaboration discussions with parties in the neighbouring EU 

states? Trans-border collaboration discussions will need to be conducted at a higher strategic level, 

such as ensuring that developments undertaken on one side are balanced with changes on the other 

to the common benefit of stakeholders using that border link. In order to undertake trans-border 

collaboration it will be necessary to develop some form of institutional framework, preferably with some 

legal status. This could be in the form of an International Trans-border Collaboration Committee 

involving all the key stakeholders. The requirement is to establish a national committee which can then 

communicate with neighbouring EU countries based on a common national strategy. The membership 

should consist of senior operational personnel who have experience of border operations, rather than 

being represented by foreign relations departments. This is because the primary function of the 

Committee would be to discuss practical issues, rather than negotiate diplomatic linkages and 

agreements. 

Having established the principle of an institutional framework, then the next key issue is what forms of 

trans-border collaboration are required? The first area of collaboration is on cross-border 

development. Modern border planning is about coordinated planning development of both sides of the 

border in parallel, rather than being viewed as two totally separate programmes. There is little 

evidence of coordinated border development between the EU and Ukraine and vice versa. 

Another priority area that the Committee could collaborate with neighbours is to try to resolve the core 

problems of the existing cross-border trade and x-raying. This type of issue is not border crossing 

specific in that it represents a common problem, even though it may manifest itself differently at 

individual posts. Thus, the existing local discussions between personnel either side of the problem 

cannot resolve the problem, as it is more of a ‘high level’ strategic level issue. The current situation 

with its delays and costs cannot continue for ever and therefore some effective cross-border 

collaboration is required in order to address what are joint problems. 

It should be recognised that cross-border collaboration, like trade facilitation, is notoriously difficult to 

both establish and generate positive results in the short term. However, collaboration on border 

development and resolution of the cross border trade and x raying problems would demonstrate that 

such an institutional mechanism can generate positive results to the benefit of stakeholders. 

42



11. APPENDIX D: 

Interim Report 8.1. Methodology towards identifying infrastructure projects 

The objective of this task is to prepare a long list of projects, define a project pipeline in order to 

achieve a network of transport links that will integrate the Ukrainian networks with the TEN-T that will 

provide the potential to attract funding. 

Networks of main transport routes across Ukraine that link together all regions of the country and 

connect to the TEN-T are now defined and an agreed map produced. In order to render these 

networks functional, projects will be proposed, evaluated and prioritised. Examples of projects may 

include: infrastructure construction, infrastructure rehabilitation and modernisation, upgrading or 

replacement of rolling stock, improvement of physical management and organisational infrastructure 

such as signalling and traffic control and implementation of safety measures. 

Evaluation of the projects will be based on such aspects as: their strategic relevance (is the project 

located on the identified networks?), economic indicators (does the project have a satisfactory net 

present value and rate of return?), does the project contribute to safer travel? And does the project 

have a positive environmental impact? 

Projects from all modes of transport will be ranked on the basis of the results of the evaluation, leading 

to the establishment of a “project pipeline”. 

Road, rail, water and air modes are being considered separately for passengers and freight. The 

overall task has been sub-divided as follows 

1. The road, rail, water and air networks to be considered have been approved by the relevant 

authorities. The road and rail networks are defined on the basis of the Ukrainian international 

transport corridors. These are set out in the Decree of the CMU of 4 August 1997 no. 821 

relating to the approval of the concept of the establishment and functioning of the national 

network of International Transport Corridors in Ukraine. Additional links are included to 

connect the corridors to all areas of the country. 

2. Each network is described as a series of ”nodes” connected together by ”links”. Nodes are 

identified at locations such as: major road and rail intersections, major towns, border 

crossings, locations where characteristics change (e.g. 2 track becomes single track, 

mountainous road becomes flat etc). 

3. Links between pairs of nodes on road or rail are described in terms of their attributes such as: 

name, corridor on which they are located, administrative region in which they are located, 

length of each link (kilometres), road type (motorway, dual carriageway etc), rail power type, 

number of tracks, traffic type terrain type (flat, rolling or mountainous), number of lanes, 

condition (roughness) and traffic volume. 

4. For projects to be evaluated, it is necessary to know the current and forecast demand in terms 

of numbers of passengers, tonnes, vehicles, trains etc. Ideally, matrices of demand between 

pairs of zones would be input to a dynamic traffic model using specialised software (e.g. 

VISUM, EMME/3). It was not intended for the project to use such a model so the alternative 

approach to forecasting was adopted based on the existing flows of traffic on each link of the 

transport networks. This approach is much simpler and less reliable but does not require 

specialised software. 

5. National GDP and population growth during the period 2000 to 2008 and forecast growth to 

2014 was obtained from the IMF database. An index of regional development has been 

derived, based on regional statistics, to take into account different rates of economic growth in 

different parts of the country. National and regional population forecasts to the year 2050 were 

obtained from the Ukrainian Institute of Demography. 

6. Other data has been collected from various sources: including values of time that have been 

calculated on the basis of average wage rates, road vehicle operating costs appropriate for 

local conditions in Ukraine have been estimated using HDM-4. Rail operating costs are based 

on previous studies (e.g. SYSTRA) and Consultant experience. Maintenance costs of any new 

infrastructure will be included in the economic evaluations as costs. Typical maintenance 

costs per kilometre by type of road and railway are being sought. Information on accident 

43



rates by type of road and type of accident, as well as the costs of accidents, is required, and is 

being prepared based on accident data, previous studies and Consultant experience 

elsewhere. Projects may have external costs or benefits i.e. costs or benefits that are not 

related directly to the transport of passengers and freight. The external costs that will be 

considered include the costs of noise, air pollution and climate change. The costs have been 

calculated based on recent studies and adjusted to the economic situation in Ukraine. 

General forecasts of traffic are being made that predict the total numbers of passengers and tonnes by 

mode using year 2000 as a starting point. The Consultant is in the process of applying appropriate 

rates of growth and elasticities to the various modes to produce forecasts for Ukraine. 

The implementation period during which projects will be considered is 2010 to 2030. The economic 

evaluation of projects requires an evaluation period of at least 20 years, thus implying that demand 

forecasts are required to at least 2050. These will be made on the basis of the forecasts of GDP and 

population set out above. Alternative scenarios that may be considered could include assumptions 

relating to: EU accession, relations with Russia, the world economy, transport policy in Ukraine. 

The general structure of the database of projects has been established and will be populated with 

existing projects that have been proposed by Ukrainian authorities such as the MOTC, and with 

projects identified by the Consultant as a result of the traffic forecasts and analysis of constraints and 

bottlenecks. Projects will initially be assessed for their strategic relevance. 

A project of direct relevance to the identified modal networks (e.g. forming part of or located on the 

networks) will receive a score of 2. 

Projects that are not directly related to the networks but nevertheless still have some connection will 

receive a score of 1. 

Projects that have no relevance will receive a score of 0 and, importantly, will not be assessed further. 

In this way, only projects of some relevance to the overall rationale will be put forward for evaluation. 

Evaluation 

Example to be used as a basis for Ukraine to decide the parameters 

Project strategic relevance 30% Crosscutting objectives 15% 

2 On TEN-T priority axis Economic viability (30%) Environment (10%) Equal oppo 

1 On TEN-T, TEN-T link or national importance 2 EIRR > 10 2 Substantial benefits 2 

0 Other 1 EIRR 5-10 1 Some benefits 1 

Project quality 55% 0 EIRR < 5 0 Neutral 0 

Project readiness (15%) Contribution to safety (10%) Job creation (2.5%) 

2 FS completed and approved 2 Project objective 2 Substantial benefits 

1 FS completed but requires updating 1 Positive impact 1 Some benefits 

0 No FS or not to be included 0 Neutral 0 Neutral 

The detailed report contains more explicit information on each step. 

44



12. APPENDIX E: 

Executive Summary of TEN-T Training Programme WP 9.0 

12.1 TEN T Terms of Reference 

The work programme for WP9 is divided into 3 stages of which Stage 3 covers the ‘Implementation 

and evaluation of the Training Programme” as shown Table 1-1 

Table 1-1 Terms of Reference TEN-T Project, WP 9 – Stage 3: 

9.3.1 Prepare training schedule and materials 

9.3.2 Deliver the training programme 

9.3.3 Evaluate the effectiveness of the training programme 

12.2 TEN-T Training Program 

The preparation of the trainings schedule and materials were coordinated by the Team Leader 

and the Sector coordinators and prepared by HRD short-term training expert. 

The design of the training schedule took into account the workload of participants and the intensity 

that is appropriate and practical. By the decision of the 3 rd 

Steering Committee the training program 

was approved. 

12.3 Training Program Summary 

In the process of the Training sessions preparation and based on the actual demand from the MoTC 

and subordinate organisations some adjustments were introduced to the initially approved Training 

Program. 

The Summary of the Trainings for the Period 4 of the Project - delivered, on-going and planned is as 

follows: 

COMPONENT PLANNED TRAININGS STATUS 

Work Package 2 

Railways 


Road Infrastructure 

Training “Interoperability of the Rail System 

including the special aspects of Rail 

interoperability between 1520/1435 mm railway 

networks” 

Seminar about the creation of a National Safety 

Agency for Railway Transport 

Seminar about EU Policy towards public 

passenger transport services and the 

implementation in different member states 

Study Tour – Technical Modernization of the Rail 

System and Development of it use in the railway 

sector 

Financing Mechanisms for road infrastructure 

Postponed till the 

agreement is reached 

with MoTC rail and UZ 



with Ukravtodor 

45





Road Transport 


Maritime and River 

Strategy 


Aviation 

ATP Training 

Seaports management training session 

River Sector Management training session 

Seaports and River Sector Management Study 

Tour 

Workshop on safety management in aviation: 2 

papers to a workshop on the State Safety 

Programme -“Acceptable Level of Safety (ALOS)” 

as part of the State Safety Programme and 

“Incident Reporting 

High level conference on EU Single European 

Sky: participation in the discussion on expert 

level. 

Study tour to Holland. This will be followed by a 

structured training programme supported by the 

TEN-T in training others to achieve airport 

certification to international standards in the 7 key 

Ukrainian airports in 2010 

Train the Trainer study tour to Holland with a 

follow-up to develop a national training program: 

Advanced Airport Management Course by 

Training institute “Netherlands Aviation Academy” 

Workshop specifically addressing the certification 

of ANSPs by the National Supervisory Authority 

Development of a National Training program for 

Aerodrome Safety Management (SMS) 

Auditing Techniques of aerodromes. Training of 

aerodrome inspectors. Training institute: JAA 

training Centre in Hoofddorp, The Netherlands 

Training sessions on English language used in 

ATS 



with Training Provider in 

EU 

Took place on 11 – 12 

March 2010, Kiev -16 

Participants – 

employees of MoTC 

and relevant 

Organisations 


March 2010, Kiev -13 

Participants – 

employees of MoTC 

and relevant 

Organisations 

Scheduled for the end- 

September-October 

2010 


June 2009, Kiev -70 

Participants 


June 2009, Kiev – 

around 70 Participants 

Took place on 23-27 

November 2009, Kiev – 

around 70 Participants 

Took place on June – 4 

participants 

Took place July 12-13, 

2010 in Kiev. Around 70 

participants 

NAU and TEN-T 

project. Started end 

April 2010 till present 

Took place 14 – 16 

July, 2010 

2 days at NAU every 

month through the 

duration of the TEN-T 

Project 

46





Aviation 


Sector Strategy and 

Action Plan 

Work Package 1 – 

English Language 

Course for MoTC 

personnel 

12.4 General comments 

SAFA inspectors training 

Flight Operations inspectors training on SMS 

Preparation of the Investment Project’s. 

Investment Projects’ Evaluation training sessions 

English Language course for the personnel of 

MoTC and subordinate organisations 

Scheduled for 

September – October, 

2010 

Scheduled for 

September – October, 

2010 

Fist Training session 

took place on March 16 

– 17, 2010. 16 

participants from MOTC 

and organisations. 

Second session tool 

place June 17, 2010. 10 

participants from MOTC 

and organisations. Third 

session is scheduled for 

September, 2010 

Training sessions 

started in April 2010. 

Total of 160 hours will 

be delivered to 47 

people from MOTC and 

organisations 

• All training is evaluated by a request to each participant for their comments and observations. 

To date all the feedback has been very positive. 

• Participants to the courses are chosen by MoTC and we have no pre-selection criteria 

• Most participants at the courses run by the project are not decision makers at this time and 

have commented that the training would be good for “their boss”. 

47



13. APPENDIX F: Meetings during the Period 1st Feb to 31st July 2010 

DATE RESPONSIBLE COMPANY MEETING TITLE ATTENDEES 

02/02/2010 Les Cheesman (LPC) MoTC 

INSTITUTIONAL / LEGISLATION / POLICY 

Meeting with the new members of the 

legal department of the MoTC to try to 

establish their future plans 

Les Cheesman (LPC)., N. Kupriianova 

(NK), Olga Shevchenko, Marc Graille, + 

head of the legal department of the MoTC 

02/03/2010 Marc Graille MoTC SBS indicators meeting Antonina K, LPC, Marc Graille, NK 

03/02/2010 Les Cheesman MoTC 

05/02/2010 Les Cheesman MoTC, DDCTS 

08/02/2010 Les Cheesman 


State Agency Investment 

Office 

USAID in Kiev to TEN-T 

office 




Twinning on rail 

reformation 

Rail seminar with 

Twinning in MoTC 

Early meeting to establish the agreed 

Investment projects list and evaluation 

criteria to be considered and participants 

Weekly meeting, to update on actions 

taken and discussion of future work plan 

Planned for each Friday subject to the 

availability of GL. 

Meeting to discuss investment projects, 

their selection and proposals 

Meeting to discuss possible new project 

to support the formation of a PPP Unit in 

Min of Finance. 

Weekly meeting, discussion of pending 

and specific issues, met new Deputy 

Minister (but not finally confirmed) 

RAILWAYS 

Workshop where DB Germany gave 

detail of their reformation process and 

this discussed in terms of the plans for 

Ukraine 

Further discussion on reformation of rail 

O.Gurynenko, MoTC Investment section, 

LPC, S. Sanin 

G. Legenkiy, LPC, Sanin 

Anatoily Zayets 1st deputy head, Marc 

Graille, Sanin 

Jerome Esmay, Carl Mitchell. 

G. Legenkiy, LPC, S. Sanin 

Jorg Schmidt, DB head of policy, 

Gerd Kashell, Ralf Schweinsberg VP 

Federal Railway Authority Germany, 

Norbert Kuna DB MAV, LPC 

48





22/06/2010 Rupert Dyer MoTC rail 



MTCU Railway 

administration 

Foundation for Effective 

Governance, McKinsey & 

Co. 

MoTC (all Heads of 

sections), FEG 

03/02/2010 Tony Pearce Lviv city administration 

15/02/2010 Les Cheesman Road safety Twinning 



01/03/2010 Tony Pearce URSA 

Road Safety Twinning 

meeting in office of TEN-T 

DAI re road safety SBS 

Indicators 

WG meeting to establish with Mr Snitko 

the new MoTC rail section Head how 

TEN-T can give assistance to the 

Railway Administration reform process 

WG meeting followed on 23 by review 

with local experts and further meeting 25 

June 

New initiative by Minister of Transport to 

produce a Roadmap for transport 

infrastructure projects 

Roadmap for transport infrastructure 

projects – overall discussion followed by 

meeting between Minister, VM Baranov, 

Mr Legenkiy, FEG and LPC. 

ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE 

Meeting to establish road safety pilot 

project on speeding and seat belts 

WG and seminar on road safety for 

Ukraine 

Meeting on road safety and presentation 

on some German operational practice 

Discussions in DAI HQ to try to confirm 

SBS indicators on road safety 

Establishment of the plan for the road 

safety institute 

03/03/2010 Tony Pearce Lviv City Administration Meetings on road safety pilot project 

04/03/2010 Tony Pearce Lux Agency, Lviv 

Promotional campaigns on speeding and 

seatbelts wearing 

LPC, Rupert Dyer, Mr. Snitko, Mr. 

Rodionov, NK 

Mr Snitko MoTC, I. Rodionov, Svetlana 

MoTC rail, Rupert Dyer, LPC 

Leyli Abbasova, V. Chernavskis, LPC, 

S.Sanin 

K.Yefimenko Minister, A.Baranov-Vice 

Minister, All acting Heads of MoTC 

sections, FEG, LPC, S.Sanin 

Oleg Zasadniy, Tony Pearce, NK, Oksana 

Romanukha 

Eric Hoyrup, 2 Austrians, LPC + 5 from 

MoTC 

Eric Hoyrup, Gerald Lamprecht, LPC 

Marc Graille, Jurate, LPC 

Andrey Kustov, Tony Pearce, NK 

Tony Pearce, NK, Oleg Zasadniy, Head of 

Lviv DAI, Oksana Romanukha 

Oksana Romanukha, Tony Pearce, NK, 

head of the agency Olha Zavoiko 

49




10/03/2010 Les Cheesman Ukravtodor 

31/03/2010 Tony Pearce URSA 

09/04/2010 Tony Pearce Lviv city administration 

15/04/2010 Les Cheesman Road Safety Twinning 


NGO Road Safety 

Association meeting with 

TEN-T 

16/04/2010 Les Cheesman Lviv city administration 



Final road safety twinning 

conference PASRUS 

Hotel 

19/05/2010 Les Cheesman Ministry of Emergency 

25/05/2010 Les Cheesman World Bank 

Construction costs standards for roads in 

EU 

To discuss the formation of a Road 

safety institute within Ukraine 

Students’ contest on posters for the road 

safety campaign 

Road Safety seminar with Twinning at 

President Hotel 

Further work towards establishing a new 

road safety initiative in Kiev 

Visit of the Head of EU Delegation to Lviv 

to launch road safety campaign but due 

to date change by EU TEN-T were 

represented by N. Kupriianova 

WG meeting to debate WSP report on 

road construction cost comparison 

Handover from twinning to TEN-T and 

medal from DAI 

Meeting to discuss road safety and 

rescue 

World Bank Road safety conference at 

WB office in Kiev where WB papers were 

presented and Lviv road safety pilot 

scheme was discussed and 

complemented on 

Tyschenko A. U. (Ukrdiprodor), Karnova 

I.S. (Ukrdirpodor), Goncharenko Fedor 

(Ukravtodor), Babych T., LPC, John Miller, 

John Carr, NK 

Mr. Berlin, Tony Pearce 

Tony Pearce, NK, O. Romanukha, Oleg 

Zasadniy, representatives from the city 

administration, design schools, advertising 

agencies 

Eric Hoyrup with team and 20 participants 

Rohit Baluja, LPC 

Head of EU Delegation to Ukraine Mr. 

José Manuel Pinto Teixeira, Mayor of Lviv 

Mr. Sadpvyi, Lviv City administration, NK, 

CIUDAD project 

F. Goncharenko, T. Babych, E.Terosipov, 

LPC, S.Sanin 

Sergiy Budnyk, Dep. Director, Major – 

General of Police. Hans Rhein, Svitlana 

Dudkivska and 20+ others. 

URSA, LPC 

The World Bank: Patricio V. Marquez, 

Tamara Sulukhia, URSA: Mr. Berlin, Ms 

Alexandra K., Mr. Prutnik, LPC, NK, 

Svitlana Didkivksa 

50




26/05/2010 Les Cheesman HPR office (Ukravtodor) 


16/02/2010 Les Cheesman AsMAP 


03/06/2010 Les Cheesman TEN-T office 


Ukravtodor – The state 

road administration of 

Ukraine 

All Ukrainian Association 

of Road Carriers in Kiev 

Roads Research Institute 

(RRI) 

Meeting to discuss OPRC to prevent 

duplication with Ukravtodor 

Meeting to re-establish contact with new 

personnel and discuss progress planning 

ROAD TRANSPORT 

Opening of new training centre in Kiev 

with press and TV meeting many active 

AsMAP members discussed road training 

and gave interview re TEN-T 

Meeting to introduce twinning road safety 

experts and discuss formation of road 

safety council 

Meeting on road transport, drivers visa 

issues 

WG meeting to follow up on IR 4.1 and 

determine work plan 

Martin Kerridge, LPC 

Yevgen Prusenko, Dept Chairman, 

Tereziya Babych, Head of FER activities 

dept 

President of AsMAP, Sergiy Kokot, 

Larissa Dobrukha, LPC, NK +30 invited 

guests and press and TV 

Eric Hoyrup, 3 Austrians, LPC and NK 

V. Ageiev, LPC, T. Bayley, S.Sanin 

Agiev as chairman, AsMAP, SMAP, +4 , 

LPC, Sanin 

22/07/2010 Les Cheesman AsMAP WG meeting on visas, training and policy Sergiy Kokot, Larissa Dobrukha, NK 



03/03/2010 Eddy Declercq 

10/03/2010 Eddy Declercq 

River – Sea transport 

meeting 

Maritime & River transport 

Administration, MoTC 

WG maritime meeting at 

MoTC 

MARITIME AND RIVER 

Meeting with Mr. Shchyptson dept head 

maritime administration to discuss future 

strategy based on IR given (he was later 

replaced) 

One of a number of meetings with this 

progressive private enterprise company 

Data collection 

Mt Shchyptson, LPC, Serge Sanin, NK. 

Aquarelle, Anastasiya Zadorozhnaya, 

Director, Dnepropetrovsk 

A.Prylipko, L.Kondzerskaya, Eddy 

Declercq, A.Lysenko, S.Sanin 

Presentation of IR on maritime issues WG members as a small group in MoTC 

51




15/03/2010 

L. Cheesman, Eddy 

Declercq 

16/06/2010 Eddy Declercq Ukrrichflot 

08/02/2010 Bert Kraan SAA 

09/02/2010 

Les Cheesman, Hans 

Mohrmann 


Maritime & River transport 

Administration, MoTC 

MoTC, DDCTS 

09/02/2010 Hans Mohrmann EU Del Kiev 





Discussion of problem areas in Maritime 

& River transport 

Meeting to discuss their policy for future 

development of river activity and their 

problems 

AVIATION 

Meeting to organise the ANSP 

certification workshop in July 2010. 

Discussion on training and consequent 

study tours to Holland on aviation 

WG meeting to discuss aerodrome 

certification regulations and plans for 

change 

Discussion on aviation and possible new 

twin fiche 

WG meeting on responsibilities on airside 

regarding safety 

WG meeting on aviation safety 

management systems (SMS) programme 

English training session for aviation (ATM 

department) 

SMS training programme in National 

Aviation University 

A.Schiptsov, A. Prylipko, LPC, Eddy 

Declercq, S. Sanin 

Eddy Declercq. LPC, Andrey Chayko, 

D. Babeichuk, Bert Kraan, NK., Alexandr 

Ivanov 

A.Kuzmenko, LPC, H.Mohrmann, S. 

Sanin 

Mr. Suvorov, Ms. Shendeluk, Mrs. 

Terletska, Bert Kraan, Alexandr Ivanov, 

NK 

Hans, LPC, Svitlana 

Mr. Kordyanin, Bert Kraan, Alexandr 

Ivanov, NK 

Mr. Chynchenko, Ms. Shendeliuk, Bert 

Kraan, Alexandr Ivanov 

Bert Kraan, Alexandr Ivanov, NK, ATM 

inspectors 

Mr. Chynchenko, Mr. Suvorov, Bert 

Kraan, NK, Alexandr Ivanov 

11/03/2010 Bert Kraan SAA ANSP legislation Mr. Borzenets, Bert Kraan, NK, A. Ivanov 



English training session for ATM 

inspectors 

Meeting on the progress of the air work 

package of the projects 

Bert Kraan, NK, A. Ivanov, inspectors of 

the ATM department 

Mr. Babeichuk, Bert Kraan, A. Ivanov, NK 

52




12/04/2010 JAA and Bert Kraan SAA 


13/04/2010 Bert Kraan ANSP at Boryspil airport 


14/04/2010 Bert Kraan 

National Aviation 

University (NAU) 

14/04/2010 Les Cheesman JAA-TO to Kiev 

12/05/2010 N. Kupriianova 




University 


University 


University 

03/06/2010 Hans Mohrmann EU Delegation ,Kiev 

12 and 13 

/06/2010 

Bert Kraan MoTC conference 

Pilot training programme on Safety 

Management System 

WG on air navigation service providers 

(ANSP) legislation and preparation for 

the workshop in July 2010. 

Meeting with the providers of air 

navigation services to establish current 

practices 

Presentation of the Joint Aviation 

Authority Training organisation (JAA TO) 

to the SAA personnel 

First meeting facilitated by TEN-T for 

future training cooperation of JAA-TO 

with NAU 

Detailed meeting on plans for joint 

venture with NAU, SAFA training in Kiev 

and future cooperation 

Planning meeting on cooperation of JAA 

TO and NAU and visit to Holland 

Cooperation of JAA TO and NAU 

(preparation of the Memorandum of 

Understanding) 


(Annexes to the MoU discussed and 

agreed) 

Plan for development of new aviation 

twinning fiche 

International ANSP conference with 70 

participants including DG Move, 

Eurocontrol and delegates from Holland 

and Azerbaijan 

Bert Kraan, Mr. Chynchenko, SAA 

personnel 

Mr. Simak, Bert Kraan, A. Ivanov, NK 

ANSP deputy head, Bert Kraan, A. 

Ivanov, NK 

Bert Kraan, Joost Jonkers (JAA), A. 

Ivanov, NK, SAA 

Bert Kraan, Joost Jonkers, A. Ivanov, NK, 

Vladimir Kharchenko – vice rector, prof. 

Galina Suslova, Dmytro Bugaiko 

Joost Jonkers (JAA), Hans, Bert. 

Mr. Kharchenko Valdimir, prof. Galina 

Suslova, Dmytro Bugaiko, NK 





LPC, Hans, Svitlana 

Fernandez, IR EU Brussels, Bruggen, 

ATC Holland, Morscheck, ANS Germany, 

Kiss ATM EASA, Germany 

53




22/06/2010 Hans Morhmann POA 

23/06/2010 N. Kupriianova (NK) NAU 

24/06/2010 Hans Morhmann SAA 




25/06/2010 Hans Morhmann EU Delegation 

17 April to 

27 April 

2010 

Les Cheesman 

TEN-T border crossing 

reviews road and rail 



Meeting on the establishment of the new 

Twinning Fiche on aviation 


(discussion on the agreement to deliver 

the first training in September 2010) 

WG on Air navigation management 

department development of Twinning 

fiche 

WG meeting with department on 

certification of aerodromes and airports 

on Twinning Fiche 

WG meeting on the sector of 

international projects on Twinning Fiche 

Meeting with the External relations 

department of SAA on Twinning Fiche 

development 

Twinning Fiche discussions and 

agreement on progress towards 

finalisation end Sept 2010. 

CROSS CUTTING 

Interviews with Customs and Border 

Guards, SMAP, truck drivers, car drivers 

etc. to produce a full report 8.1 

Meeting to discuss border-crossing 

points 

Meeting arranged to discuss with Border 

Guards the findings from the recent EU 

border review with MoTC but BG did not 

show. 

O. Chorniy, Svitlana Didkivska, H. 

Morhmann, A. Ivanov, NK 


Suslova, Dmytro Bugaiko, Y. 

Chynchenko, NK 

Mr. Borzenets, Mr. Fediakov, H. 


Ms. Shendeliuk, Tchaykovskiy Mykola 

(Kievecologproject), H. Morhmann, A. 

Ivanov, NK 

Ms. Novichenko, Mr. Novak, Ms. 

Mykoliavska, H. Morhmann, A. Ivanov, NK 

Mrs. Melnik, Mr. Reshetnyk, H. 


Svitlana Didkivska, Eleonora Nikolaichuk, 

H. Morhmann, A. Ivanov, NK 

All TEN-T road and rail borders seen 

except 1 to Romania, Martin Kerridge, 

LPC, NK. Tony Bayley prevented by 

volcanic ash cloud. Full report and 

pictures 

O.Gandziy, A. Dyachuk, LPC, T. Bayley, 

S.Sanin 

G. Legenkiy, O. Gnadziy, T. Bayley, M. 

Kerridge, LPC, NK 

54




13 to 15 

/06/2010 

Les Cheesman 

Border crossings with 

Romania 

09/03/2010 John Miller TEN-T office 



11 and 12 

/03/ 2010. 

16 and 

17/03/2010 

22 and 

23/03/2010 

Eddy Declercq Maritime training 

Les Cheesman TEN-T 

Eddy Declercq River training 

Porubne and Vadul Siret to meet 

Customs, Border Guards and speak with 

users of the services 

STRATEGY / PROJECTS 

WG meeting with Ukradiprodor on road 

transport traffic database development 

followed by WG meeting on rail transport 

traffic database development 

WG meeting to establish what seaport 

investment projects are current for future 

pre-feasibility study and financial 

evaluation 

WG meeting to demonstrate the work 

done by TEN-T on the traffic forecasting 

in concert with Ukradiprodor 

TRAINING 

2 day training seminar on maritime 

issues including some management 

training in analysis techniques 

Training session on investment projects 

held at RRI 

2 day training on river transport including 

management techniques, SWOT, PEST, 

Porter’s 5 forces, MOST etc 

11/05/2010 Les Cheesman Aviation training Launch of training in MoTC 4 day course 

14/05/2010 Les Cheesman Aviation training 

Certificate presentations for SAFA at 

Boryspol airport 

Martin Kerridge, Tony Bayley, NK, LPC. 

MoTC invited but unable to attend 

John Miller, NK, Leonid Rybitskiy, Viktor 

Mironenko 

G. Legenkiy, LPC, A.Dyachuk, S. Sanin, 

O.Gurynenko 

Mr. Goncharenko, Evgeniy Terosipov, 

Tyschenko A. U. (Ukrdiprodor), L. 

Rybitskiy, LPC, John Miller, NK 

Eddy Declercq, LPC, O.Sanina 

Martin Kerridge, John Miller, Marc Graille, 

LPC, 17 trainees 

Eddy Declercq, LPC 

Bert Kraan, 2 trainers from JAA, LPC + 12 

students 

Bert Kraan, 2 trainers from JAA, LPC + 12 

students 

55




17/06/2010 Les Cheesman Investment training 

30/06/2010 Les Cheesman MoTC HR division 

25/02/2010 Les Cheesman MoTC, TEN-T Project 


Progress 4 steering 

committee 

One day on investment training and 

management skills 

Review action plans following reappointment 

of Antonina as deputy head, 

update on progress on training, discuss 

possible database for HR to record all 

staff records – as started in 2009. 

OTHER 

TEN-T Project Steering Committee 

Meeting – 3 Chairman Dep Min Mr. 

Kozachok (since left this post) 

Approval of Progress 4 and plan for 

Period 5 

Rupert Dyer, Martin Kerridge, Tony 

Bayley, LPC 

Lena Sanin, Antonina M, LPC 

List of attendees attached to Protocol 

As on Protocol of the meeting 

Note: It was agreed to hold regular meetings with Mr Legenkiy on Friday at 4pm which happened subject to his availability. 

These provided details of activities in the current week and plans for the next week and issues to be discussed. 

56



14. Appendix G: Interim Reports delivered from TEN-T Project to 31 July 2010 

(ED) Eddy Declerq, maritime, (TP) Tony Pearce, roads infrastructure, (MK) Martin Kerridge, Economist / Policy coordinator, (MG) Marc Graille, 

Strategist, (TL) Les Cheesman, Team Leader and road operations, (AB) Anthony Bayley, borders and multi/Inter modal, (JM) John Miller, economist / 

traffic forecast and modelling, (HM) Hans Morhmann, aviation, (BK) Bert Krann aviation, (PH) Peter Hafner, rail, (RD) Rupert Dyer, rail, (RB) Rohit 

Baluja, road safety, (JC) John Carr, road construction, (NJ) Niels Joergensen. 

Component Doc. Title of Deliverables Editor Contents Author 

1. Policy 

2. Railways 

1.1 

Institutions and 

Legislation in the 

Transport Sector 

MG 

1.2 Transport Statistics MK 

1.3 

2.1 

Integrated Transport 

Policy 

Proposals for High-Speed 

Services and Tariffs 

Institutional framework and 

bottlenecks 

Existing legislation and legal 

framework 

Recommendations 

UA statistics methodology 

Harmonisation with EU 

MG 

MG 

MG 

MK 

MK 

Includes 

following items 

previously 

agreed 

Specifications 

for strategic 

transport 

planning 

database 

Planned 

Planned for Period 4 

but delayed pending 

government change 

and new Transport 

Minister 

1st draft produced for 

further discussion with 

Statistics Dept. 

MK Policy draft paper MK Completed April 2009 

MK 

2.2a Railway Competition RD 

Existing proposals and their 

justification 

Present situation 

Recommendations 

Interoperability and border 

crossing technologies 

Harmonisation of rules and 

standards 

Logistics centres and cargo 

handling 

Energy saving 

RD 

MK 

TB 

RD 

EU railway 

policy; 

interoperability 

Completed and 

circulated January 

2010. 

Completed for 

discussion with UZ 

and MoTC rail. Logs 

centres due Sept 

57




3. Roads 

2.2b Railway Interoperability RD 

2.3 Railway Restructuring RD 

2.4 

Rail restructuring in 

Ukraine, what has 

happened in Europe 

RD 

3.1 Construction Standards TP 

3.2 

Organisation and 

financing road 

infrastructure 

TP 

3.3 Road Safety TP 

3.4 

Highway construction cost 

comparisons 

JC 

Terminology 

EU Policy and the TEN-T network 

Rail Interoperability and EU policy 

Ukraine system and its 

compliance with EU 

interoperability standards 

Recommendations for the 

implementation of rail 

interoperability in Ukraine 

Existing organisation 

The case for separation 

Corporatisation and financial 

freedom 

Cross-subsidising of passenger 

services 

Case studies for Germany, UK, 

France and the implications for 

Ukraine 

Harmonisation of construction 

standards 

Present organisation 

Maintenance practices and 

standards, outsourcing 

possibilities 

Decentralisation 

Analysis of the present situation 

Initiatives of TEN-T including Lviv 

pilot 

Special report request from 

Ukravtodor 

RD 

RD 

MK 

RD 

Includes 


previously 

agreed 

Competition 

rules 

UZ costing 

system 

Planned 

Completed January 

2010 for discussion 

with UZ and MoTC rail 

Completed for 

discussion with UZ 

and MoTC rail. 

Completed March 

2010. 

TP Completed 

TP 

TP 

TP 

TP 

RB 

Setting up PPP 

unit now 

changed to 

advice on PPP 

unit 

implementation 


2010. 


2010. 

JC Completed Jan. 2010. 

58




4. Road 

Transport 

5. Ports and 

Inland 

Waterways 

6. Air 

Transport 

4.1 Road Transport Market TL 

5.1 

5.2 

Maritime Policy Reform 

and Action Plan 

Port Administration and 

Port Policy 

ED 

ED 

5.3 Maritime Policy Paper ED 

5.4 Waterways Policy Paper ED 

6.1 Market Access HM 

6.2 Airports HM 

6.3 

Upgrading SAA safety 

oversight capacity 

HM 

Analysis of the market, passenger 

and freight 

Tariffs, financing and tax systems 

Transport Safety 

Energy and Environmental safety 

Improvement of monitoring and 

statistics 

Border crossing procedures 

Competitiveness and 

performance of each port 

Performance of inland transport 

links 

Traffic demand including transit 

Policy and reform plan 

Recommendations on legislation 

Recommendations on port 

services 

Assessment of port administration 

Harmonisation with EU/WTO 

An abbreviated and updated 

version of the previous papers 

An abbreviated and updated 

version of the previous papers 

Air traffic management and Single 

European Sky 

Review of airport rehabilitation 

plans 

Airport certification and safety 

management systems 

TL 

ED 

ED 

ED 

ED 

BK 

BK 

BK 

Includes 


previously 

agreed 

Road user 

charging 

Port efficiency 

matrix 

Maritime Sector 

Policy Analysis 

Implementation 

ECAA 

Review airport 

plan to 2020 

Planned 


2010. 


2010 

Completed February 

2010. 

Completed July 2010 

Due September 2010 

Separate papers for 

SAA 


SAA 


SAA 

59




7. Cross- 

Cutting 

Issues 

8. Strategy 

and Action 

Plan 

9. Training 

and Study 

Tours 

7.1 

Cross Cutting Issues, 

Multimodal Transport, 

Logistics and Border 

issues 

TB 

7.2 Galileo GNSS TB 

8.1 Strategy and Action Plan JM 

9.1 

and 

9.2 

Training Needs Analysis 

and assessment 

Intermodal policy: standardisation; 

containerisation; transit 

improvements 

Logistics technology: regional 

issues; performance; 

modernisation 

Cross-border issues: unify 

procedures with EU; improve 

MMT near borders; 

Regional logistics centres 

Global navigation satellite 

systems and their application 

Study network 

Road and rail database 

Preliminary project long list 

Transport sector planning 

scenarios 

TB 

NJ 

JM 

TL Training needs analysis TL 

Includes 


previously 

agreed 

Improving 

logistics 

services 

Border crossing 

performance 

indicators 

Specifications 

for Strategic 

Planning 

Database 

Transport sector 

planning 

scenarios 

Planned 

First report completed 

January 2010. 


2010. 

First report January 

2010 outlining the 

deliverables due in 

Period 5 

Completed and 

training is based on 

the findings 

60

Disclaimer 



“The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the Consultant (Corporate 

Solutions Consulting Limited, Arup, WSP and NACO) and can in no way be taken to reflect 

the views of the European Union”. 

61

Progress Report 4

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?