Week 1 Bone - 11 Januari 2012Week 1 Bone - 11 Januari 2012Week 1 Bone - 11 Januari 2012
TAC and influence on RU’s in NL 21 th of Januari 2015Aldert Gritter.
-
Upload
rebecca-greer -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of TAC and influence on RU’s in NL 21 th of Januari 2015Aldert Gritter.
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