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