1. TAC and influence on RU’s in NL 21 th of Januari 2015Aldert Gritter

2. ProRail, 21 January 20152 Overview  Parties involved  Basic information about TAC in NL  Present situation about TAC in NL  Conclusions of impact of TAC

3. ProRail, 21 January 20153 Parties involved in TAC in NL  ProRail: methodology and tariffs in Network Statement  Ministry: approves level  Regulator: monitoring used methodology  RU’s: paying TAC

4. ProRail 21 January 20154 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) 1.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

5. ProRail 21 January 20155 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 %

6. ProRail 21 January 20156 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

7. ProRail 21 January 20157 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)

8. 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 20158

9. 9 Policy study on influencing railway use by differentiating TAC 3 policy goals:  Better capacity use  Higher cost recovery  Other socially desirable outcomes

10. 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

11. 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