1. Short summary of RFC 7 Orient-East/Med Corridor 11

2. Content The beginning – start of the work Our corridor connects 7! countries The governance, our working structure Contact with the RU-s and Terminals 1 2 3 4

3. Regulation 913/2010/EU The GOAL is – to lay down rules for the establishment and organisation of international rail corridors for competitive rail freight To improve the interoperability Common rules for time-tabling, reporting of trains, traffic management, investments, works To eliminate the bottlenecks Improve the coordination among Infrastucture Managers in Europe in order to guarantee relailable level of quality Facilitite the ”One Stop Service” – C-OSS 3

4. 4 The Corridor with its main lines and alternative routes based of the Transport Market Study analyse and results

5. Governance of RFCs Executive Board The EB shall be composed of representatives of the authorities of the Member States concerned. The body is responsible for defining the general objectives of the freight corridor, supervising and taking measures if necessary for the improvement of the project. The participation of each Member States is obligatory. Advisory Groups The MB shall set up an advisory group made up of railway undertakings interested in the use of the corridor managers and owners of the terminals of the freight corridor including, where necessary, sea and inland waterway ports. These AGs may issue an opinion on any proposal by the MB which has direct consequences for them. It may also issue own-initiative opinions. The MB shall take any of these opinions into account. Management Board For each freight corridor, the infrastructure managers concerned and, where relevant, the allocation bodies as referred shall establish a Management Board responsible for taking all operative measures for the implementation of the regulation. The participation of each IM and AB is obligatory. 5 Executive BoardManagement Board Advisory Groups

6. The Milestones Establishment - The Executive Board Memorandum of Understanding – signed on 16th June 2011 Establishment – The Management Board Memorandum of Understanding - signed on 9th September 2011 The RFC-7 Secretariat is operated by MÁV Zrt. from January 2012 The 6 Working Groups were formed – spring 2012 The C-OSS started the operation – 1st May 2013 (Budapest) 6

7. 7 MB EB WGs Advisory Groups Secretariat Marketing Inter - operability/ ERTMS Infra Developm Traffic Managm OSSIT Tools Investment Plan IT Support TMS Satisfaction survey Traffic Management, Priority Rules, Punctuality targets * : Obligatory cooperation for RUs&Terminals * * ERTMS, Interoperability C-OSS office

8. 8 Corridor product: the Corridor Train Path Pre-arranged path Reserve capacity Protected at all phases of its lifecycle: Before capacity allocation: international train path catalogue pre-defined (Art. 14) After capacity allocation: protection from cancellation (Art. 14) During the use of capacity: protection in case of traffic disturbances (Art. 17) Single service point: Information about conditions for the use of the RFC in a single document (Art. 18) Joint body for handling capacity requests – Corridor One Stop Shop (Art. 13) Harmonised product parameters: Harmonized traffic management rules along the corridor (Art. 16) Coordinated infrastructure development (Art. 12) Active contact with customers : Regular consultations before decision-making – advisory groups (Art. 8) Protected at all phases of its lifecycle: Before capacity allocation: international train path catalogue pre-defined (Art. 14) After capacity allocation: protection from cancellation (Art. 14) During the use of capacity: protection in case of traffic disturbances (Art. 17) Single service point: Information about conditions for the use of the RFC in a single document (Art. 18) Joint body for handling capacity requests – Corridor One Stop Shop (Art. 13) Harmonised product parameters: Harmonized traffic management rules along the corridor (Art. 16) Coordinated infrastructure development (Art. 12) Active contact with customers : Regular consultations before decision-making – advisory groups (Art. 8) Regulation (EU) 913/2010

9. 9 RFC7 special characteristics Most countries (7) and companies (9) involved Went operational as first of all freight corridors Most demanding business environment RUs do not plan long time ahead  lot of ad-hoc path requests  less demand for pre- arranged path, tailor- made offers are needed Most demanding business environment RUs do not plan long time ahead  lot of ad-hoc path requests  less demand for pre- arranged path, tailor- made offers are needed Most efficiently operated management Plenty of infrastructure capacity at service

10. RFC-7 AG groups were established 30th October 2012, Budapest The Consultation Rules were accepted The Representatives of TAG/RAG were nominated Letter of intent signed for both AGs 10

11. Tasks related to RFC AGs Management Board Sharing information and proposals for discussion with AGs, Consideration and utilization of AGs’ positions, Defining the rules of consultation between MB & AGs, Organizing 2- 3 regular AG meetings / year. Advisory Groups Studying the information and proposals shared by MB, Formulation of opinion on MB materials, Internal discussion and meetings between AG member organizations, Summarization of opinion of AG members, Communication of AG position to the MB. 11

12. 12 Secretariat AG member 2 3 1 4 MB AG Communication in English by e-mail Information flow

13. 13 RU AG Representative: Rail Cargo Hungária Zrt. (corridor7AG@railcargo.hu) Founding Members: Rail Cargo Austria AG; METRANS /Danubia/ a.s.; Rail Cargo Hungária Zrt. ; AWT RAIL HU Zrt.; DB Schenker Rail Hungária Kft.; GYSEV Cargo Zrt.; SC Unitrans SA; CFR MARFA SA Terminal AG Representative: Rail Cargo Austria AG Deputy Representative: WienCont Container Terminal GmbH Founding Members: Bohemiakombi; Rail Cargo Austria AG; WienCont Container Terminal; METRANS /Danubia/ a.s.; Business Park Sturovo Railway; BILK Kombiterminál; GYSEV Cargo; AWT RAIL HU Zrt.; MLSZKSZ; CFR Marfa S.A.; DB Schenker Rail Hungária Kft.

14. 14 Feedback from the market Proposed additional routes/PaP sections: Sopron – Győr (alternative paths) Stúrovo – Lőkösháza via Rákosrendező – Kőbánya teher – Kőbánya Kispest – Szajol (to avoid unnecessary loco turning round in Ferencváros) Biharkeresztes – Bucuresti via Cluj Napoca (alternative paths) Ruse – Burgas and Ruse – Simeonovgrad via Sindel – Junak – Karnobat – Nova Zagora (new paths)

15. Extention towards North and South Direction to Germany – Rostock – Wilhelmshaven – Bremerhaven – Hamburg Direction to Turkish border – from Sofia to Svilengrad Direction to Ionean See – from Sofia to Patras 15

16. Thank you for your attention! www.rfc7.eu