Upload
rebecca-greer
View
215
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
TAC and influence on RU’s in NL
21th of Januari 2015 Aldert Gritter
ProRail, 21 January 2015 2
Overview
Parties involved
Basic information about TAC in NL
Present situation about TAC in NL
Conclusions of impact of TAC
ProRail, 21 January 2015 3
Parties involved in TAC in NL
ProRail: methodology and tariffs in Network
Statement
Ministry: approves level
Regulator: monitoring used methodology
RU’s: paying TAC
ProRail 21 January 2015 4
Basic information about TAC in NL
1. 30 % of total costs of operation, maintenance and renewal
(€ 299 million on a total of € 975, excl HSL, excl new
projects e.g. introducing ERTMS)
2. Price per km freight train 1000 ton: € 2,99
Price per km passenger train of 500 ton: € 1,87
3. 20 freight RU’s, 11 passenger RU’s, 8 contractors
4. System based on business-model
ProRail 21 January 2015 5
Present situation TAC
- 2015/2016: changing methodology, set up in consultation with
regulator, ministry and RU’s
- reason of change:
1. complaints about old methodology by regulator
2. extra income target of € 50 mln from ministry (crisis)
- consequences: increase in TAC of on average 20 %
ProRail 21 January 2015 6
Present situation TAC
1. Incumbant NSR: compensation in ticket prices in 3 years
2. Freight operators: accepted with “attack plan” and subsidy
for 2015
3. Regional operators: problems (not all over compensation in
ticket prices because of agreement in concessions):
complaint by regulator
ProRail 21 January 2015 7
Present situation
Attack plan freight operators:
- Results in improvements for business of freight RU’s so that
they can be the higher prices (20 % increase in TAC is
around 1% up to 4 % increase in costs of freight RU,s
- Examples of suggested improvement:
green wave, no non-commercial stops (higher average speed)
Influence of TAC
For freight: importance very relative
Incumbant: no financial problems
Regional passenger RU’s: contract agreements with
provinces
Much more important: assistance in exploitation RU’s
ProRail 21 January 2015 8
ProRail 21 January 2015 9
Policy study on influencing railway use by differentiating TAC
3 policy goals:
Better capacity use
Higher cost recovery
Other socially desirable outcomes
Policy goals in relation to TAC
Differentiating TAC influencing :
Speed
GOALS:
Punctuality
Path
Time
Dangerous goods
Train Length
Better capacity use
Socially desirerable outcomes
Higher cost recovery
Summary on the effects of using TAC for policy goals
• Better capactity utilisation• scarce capacity can be optimized using TAC • to improve speed, punctuality and train length
• Higher cost recovery• achieving more revenue (using TAC) has limitations
due to the limited fiancial capacity of RUs . • Might only workable for path allocation
• Other social desirable outcome• Price differentiation on route, time and dangerous
might work 11