Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/909 of 12 June 2015 on the modalities for the calculation of the cost that is directly incurred as a result of operating the train service (Text with EEA relevance)
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/909of 12 June 2015on the modalities for the calculation of the cost that is directly incurred as a result of operating the train service(Text with EEA relevance)THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,Having regard to Directive 2012/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 establishing a single European railway areaOJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 32., and in particular Article 31(3) thereof,Whereas:(1)A need for accelerated renewal or maintenance resulting from a more intense use of the network may be taken into account for the purposes of calculation of direct costs, provided it is ensured that only costs directly incurred as a result of operating the train service are included.(2)Infrastructure managers are under the obligation to operate networks whilst they face restrictions hampering efficient management and cost control. Consequently, Member States should have the opportunity to set direct costs at the level of costs of efficient service provision.(3)Setting the track access charge at the costs directly incurred by the train service should not set out to cause that the infrastructure manager to experience either a net financial loss or a net financial gain as a result of operation of the train service.(4)Historical asset values should be based on the amounts paid for acquisition of assets by the infrastructure manager provided that the infrastructure manager remains liable for such amounts.(5)The infrastructure manager should not be allowed to recover the cost of investment in an asset where it is not obliged to repay that cost.(6)Since the modalities for the calculation of the cost that is directly incurred as a result of operating the train service should be applicable throughout the Union, they should be compatible with the existing infrastructure cost accounting systems and cost data applied by the infrastructure managers.(7)The use of forecast costs and performance levels should not give rise, under usual business circumstances, to higher levels of direct costs, track access charges and eventually an ineffective use of the network. Therefore historic asset values should be applied and only if such values are not available, or where current values are lower, could current values be considered. Alternatively, estimated values or replacement values, forecast costs and forecast performance levels could be used provided the infrastructure manager substantiates to the regulatory body how it established them and that it established them objectively.(8)The infrastructure manager should be allowed to include in the calculation of its direct costs only costs that it can objectively and robustly demonstrate that they are triggered directly by the operation of the train service. For example, wear and tear of track-side signals and signal boxes does not vary with traffic and therefore should not be subject to a direct cost-based chargeThe CATRIN study provides a synoptic view of different studies as regards the infrastructure characteristics used in econometric rail cost studies of seven EU infrastructure managers. Six of the seven infrastructure managers did not consider traffic management or signalling as a relevant characteristic for their econometric cost studies (see table 13, Deliverable 1 of the CATRIN study, p. 40).. Conversely, parts, such as point infrastructure, will be exposed to wear and tear by operating the train service and thus should partially be subject to a direct cost charge. As sensors become more widely deployed on trains and infrastructure, these could provide additional information on the actual wear and tear caused by the train service.(9)The Court of Justice delivered a judgment on the calculation of direct costs incurred by operating the train serviceJudgement of the Court in Commission v Poland, C-512/10,, ECLI:EU:C:2013:338, paragraphs 82, 83 and 84.. This Regulation takes that judgement into account.(10)Electric supply equipment such as cables or transformers are generally not subject to wear and tear by the operation of the train service. These are neither exposed to friction nor to other impacts caused by the operation of the train service. Therefore these costs of electric supply equipment should not be included in the calculation of costs directly incurred by an operation of the train service. However, trains, when they use electric traction, wear down the contact medium (overhead wire or the electrified third rail) due to friction and the electric arcs they cause. Consequently, a part of the maintenance and renewal costs of these contact mediums could be considered as directly incurred by operation of the train service. Maintenance and renewal costs of other components of overhead line equipment can also degrade as a direct result of traffic movements which cause electrical and mechanical stress.(11)The use of vehicles or railway lines with certain design features results in different levels of direct costs incurred by the train service. Member States may allow their infrastructure managers to modulate average direct costs in accordance with, inter alia, best international practice to reflect such differences.(12)It is a well-established economic principle that user charges based on marginal costs ensure the optimum effective use of available infrastructure capacity. Hence, the infrastructure manager may decide to use the proxy of marginal costs for calculating its cost directly incurred as a result of operating the train service.(13)Furthermore, international best practiceDeliverable D1 of the CATRIN study, coordinated by VTI, March 2008, p. 37-54 and p. 82-84. has established methods and models such as econometric or engineering modelling, to calculate the marginal costs of infrastructure use. At the same time, international best practice will continue to develop as further independent analysis and research — verified independently of the infrastructure manager, such as by the Regulatory Body — is undertaken, including analysis and research which may be specific to an individual Member State because of particular infrastructure characteristics. Consequently, the infrastructure manager should be allowed to use such models to identify the direct costs incurred by the operation of the train service.(14)Different forms of econometric or engineering modelling might offer a higher degree of precision in calculating direct costs or marginal costs of the use of infrastructure. However, cost modelling requires a higher level of data quality and expertise than methods based on deducting from the full costs certain non-eligible cost categories. Moreover, regulatory bodies may not yet be able to verify the compliance of a concrete calculation with the provisions of Directive 2012/34/EU. Consequently, where these higher requirements are met, the infrastructure manager should be given the right to calculate direct costs on the basis of econometric or engineering modelling or a combination of both.(15)Regulatory bodies should be able to check whether the different charging principles are applied consistently with the information the infrastructure manager provided to them. Therefore, Annex IV of Directive 2012/34/EU requires the infrastructure manager to detail in the network statement the methodology, rules and, where applicable, scales as regards both costs and charges.(16)International studiesGRACE project coordinated by the University of Leeds, Deliverable D7 "Generalisation of marginal social cost estimates", page 22, 23. calculated values of direct unit costs in close collaboration with infrastructure managers. Although these studies analysed various methods used in Member States for different fleet compositions and different destinations, many values of direct costs per train kilometres were found to be below EUR 2 (at 2005 prices and exchange rates, using an appropriate price index) per train km of a 1000 t train. To curb administrative effort for regulatory bodies, the same degree of detail should not be required of the calculation of direct costs when their value remains below this level.(17)For different reasons, such as productivity gains, the spread of new technologies or a better understanding of cost causation, the calculation of direct costs should be updated or reviewed regularly in accordance with, inter alia, best international practice.(18)Given that railway undertakings need predictable charging systems and have reasonable expectations for the development of infrastructure charges, the infrastructure manager should provide a phasing-in plan for railway undertakings operating the train services that may see their charges significantly increase following a review of the implementation of the existing calculation modalities, if such a phase-in plan is required by the regulatory body.(19)The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee referred to in Article 62(1) of Directive 2012/34/EU,HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: