Brussels, April 4th 2008
Performance Regimes:
the Italian experience
& the European Performance
Regime project
Agenda
q Italian Performance Regime
q Why a Performance Regime
q A short history
q Basic principles & main features
q Supporting IT Tool & procedures
q European Performance Regime
q Organization of the Project
q Outcomes of 2005-2006
q Activities in 2007
q Commercial Model
q Next steps
q RFI experience: some inputs
2
THE ITALIAN PERFORMANCE REGIME
3
Why a Performance Regime
q Need to define internationally accepted and measurable qualitative standards at
the aim of stimulating the industry and improve the provided service
q Need to fulfil the requirements of both national (Concession Act – 2000 and dlgs.
188/2003) and international legislation (EU Dir.2001/14)
RFI
RFI created
created aa system
system which
which
q focuses on the most important market value punctuality
q provides regulation for the “lack of quality” (bad performance) rather than for the “lack of
service” (cancellations)
q is applied on the whole network and all RUs are involved
q foresees monetary flows but the penalties are kept low by applying ceilings and
thresholds to avoid financial risk for the partners
4
02--04
02
02-04
Testing
Testing
00--01
00
00-01
Study and
and
Study
working out
out
working
of the
the model
model
of
A short history
è
2000 - RFI starts working on a Performance scheme both at national and at
international level on the basis of the outcomes of the EPR I and II UIC
Projects.
è
End 2001 - RFI presents its proposal to the Ministry of Transport
è
2002-2004 – Test of the and fine tuning of the model
è
July 2004 – Presentation to RUs
è
Until December 2004 - Shadow running in cooperation with RUs
2005 -2005
today
today
January
January 2005
2005 official
official start
start
è
MONITORING
è
FINE TUNING (thresholds, ceilings, delay attribution …)
5
Basic principles
Oriented towards the
most valuable market
value: punctuality
Incentivating
and not
compensative
Produces
financial
flows
Main
Main features
features and
and
basic
basic principles
principles of
of
the
the chosen
chosen model
model
Measurable &
Quantitative
(based on delays)
Differentiated by
type of traffic
Controllable by IT
Tools
Symmetrical
the delays caused by IMs and RUs
“costs” the same amount
(• thresholds: 15’ for
passenger, 30’ for freight and
)
5’ for regional
6
financial flows
flows
33 financial
calculation
22 calculation
Monitoring
11 Monitoring
Main features
è
Monitoring made per train
è
Delay measurement in terms of minutes
è
Cause attribution for each single minute
ü
Secondary delays are attributed to the related primary cause
ü
Undocumented delays are attributed to RFI
AUTOMATIC
AUTOMATIC
MANUAL
MANUAL
è
Late trains above threshold are taken into account
è
Minutes of delay at destination are shared according to attributed responsibilities (excl.
external causes)
è
Penalties are calculated according the above mentioned share of delay
è
Unitary value : 2€/minute
è
Ceilings: 20% of the TAC of the delayed train (for single trains) and 15% of the total
charge (for each RU at the end of the invoicing period)
è
Penalties are calculated and attributed per train/RU
è
Compensations between parties are applied
7
Supporting IT tools & procedures
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
REAL
REAL TIME
TIME
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
Monitoring
Monitoring of
of traffic;
traffic;
Delay
registering;
Delay registering;
Causes
Causes attribution
attribution
PIC
Penalties
Penalties calculation
calculation
Statistics
Statistics
TACs
TACs calculation
calculation
CONSOLIDATED
CONSOLIDATED DATA
DATA
In order to guarantee privacy, integrity and
reliability of data RFI obtained the TÜV
Certification for:
On-line connection
On
RUs
On-line
connection of
of RUs
RUs (Suite
(Suite WEB
WEB RUs)
RUs))
q IT Security Management System
(BS 7799) applied to SISCTRIACE
RUs
RUs can
can agree/disagree
agree/disagree within
within 24h;
24h; in
in case
case of
of
disagreement
disagreement there
there are
are three
three levels
levels of
of discussion:
discussion:
by24h,
by24h, 48h,
48h, 88 days.
days. IfIf no
no agreement
agreement special
special inquires
inquires are
are
settled
and
those
trains
excluded
from
calculation
settled and those trains excluded from calculation
q Quality Management System
(UNI EN ISO 9001:2000) applied
to the Security Data Base (BDS)
8
Some results ….
q
Better knowledge of the performance: the share of undocumented causes has sensibly
decreased, from a quarterly average of 26% (with peaks of 75%-80%) in 2002 to 10%-12%
q
The financial flows account for about 1% of the total TACs
q
The The total PR delays have been decreasing since the year 2002
9
… some results ….
q
The punctuality has improved since 2005
10
… some results
q
The system is managed without overwhelming administrative costs
Data
Data processing
processing
Data
Data analysis
analysis and
and
evaluation
evaluation
Attribution
Attribution of
of financial
financial
penalties/bonuses
penalties/bonuses
Data
Data input/collection
input/collection
about
about delays
delays
Attribution
Attribution of
of
causes/responsibilities
causes/responsibilities
Managing
Managing of
of
financial
financial
flows
flows
Managing
Managing of
of
claims
claims by
by
interested
interested
subjects
subjects
The
The system
system is
is
the
the same
same
Costs for the PR for RFI:
q
Setting up of the system €
200.000 (una tantum)
q
Managing of the
450.000 per year
system
The
The shadow
shadow running
running
phase
phase did
did not
not show
show
an
an increase
increase in
in
“disagreements”
“disagreements”
€
11
THE UIC EPR PROJECT
12
Organization
The Project has been organized in three
Working Groups dealing with Commercial,
Technical and Legal aspects of the project.
Each WG is led by a Coordinator.
Also a specific Advisory Group has been set
up to evaluate the output of Working Groups.
A new Data Managers Group has been created
with representatives of RUs/IMs in order to
organize and carry out the test run in 2008.
AdvisoryGroup
Group(IM+RU
(IM+RU))
Advisory
Leadsthe
theProject
Project
Leads
Leader:B.Morgante
B.Morgante(RFI)
(RFI)
Leader:
WGCommercial
Commercial
WG
WGContractual
Contractual
WG
Leader: H.Reisinger, RNE
Leader: R.Achermann, SBB
Leader:J.F. Ducoing, RFF
CommercialModel
Model
Commercial
Supported
Supported by
by CIT
CIT and
and CER
CER
ProjectManagement
Management
Project
WGITITWG
Tools/RNE
Tools/RNE
support
ITITsupport
Representatives
Representatives from
from both
both
IMs
IMs and
and RUs
RUs (UIC
(UIC Forum)
Forum)
Takesdecisions
decisions
Takes
Leader:
D.
Haase
(DBNetz)
Leader: D. Haase (DBNetz)
Legalsupport
support
Legal
WGImplementation
DataManagers
Managers
Data
WG
Implementation ofthe
the
Implementation
Implementation of
of the
system
system
system
Leader: to be
nominated
UICSubgroup
Subgroup
UIC
Leaflet450.2
450.2(UIC)
(UIC)
Leaflet
TEST-TEAM11
TEST-TEAM
TEST-TEAM22
TEST-TEAM
TEST-TEAM nn
TEST-TEAM
13
Outcomes of 2007 - overview
Last year has been very important for the developments of the EPR Project
q Coordination with RUs (passenger and freight)
Presentation of the work done by EPR teams and remarks by RUs; remarks by RUs and
presentation by SNCF of an improvement of the model. The general approach of the
model has been agreed; some points remain open and it has been agreed to deeply
examine the different options
q UPDATING OF THE UIC LEAFLET 450.2
The requirements for a better implementation of the EPR have mainly been met
q TEST RUN
The EPR model proposals have been tested on three Corridors by test teams (RUs+IMs):
ü
Brenner
ü
Rotterdam-Milano
ü
Antwerpen Basel
14
EPR Commercial Model
The common features of the proposed models can be described as follows:
q Based on delays
q Foresees financial penalties
q Corridor – based approach (first step)
q Includes secondary delays (RU/RU) and
provides an incentive to recover delays
q Limits penalties to a warning function
q Applied on the whole train path
q Monitoring made per train
The different options concern
ü
ü
ü
Secondary delays treatment
Recovered time treatment
Technique of penalty calculation
15
Test run 2007
The main objectives of the test runs 2007 were:
Technical/operational
Technical/operational
q
Data quality evaluation
q
Detection
of
technical
and
operational
problems – propositions for solutions
Commercial
Commercial
q
Analysis of the commercial model options
using real data
Very good results:
q Data quality and EOPT
functionality improved,
q Remaining
problems
identified
q Definition
of
next
improvements
q Cooperation and data flow
among partners improved
An analysis on different aspects
but without a deep commercial
evaluation:
new
tests
are
foreseen in 2008
16
Next steps
Since the project has come to a crucial point, participant railways have signed a
Memorandum of Understanding stating their commitment in the Project. This
years activities would be:
q
q
Commercial issues
ü
Deeper analysis of the outcomes of the test run 2007
ü
Analysis of outcomes of the test run 2008
ü
Drafting of a final Commercial Model
Test run
ü
Carried out by the “Data Managers Group”
ü
Corridors to test: same of 2007 (with an improved
automatic procedure) and/or new corridors
q
DEADLINE : end
2008
2009:
dry-runs
foreseen
Fine tuning of
ü
Contractual aspects
ü
Acceptance procedures and disputes resolution
ü
Update version of the Handbook
17
RFI’s experience: some inputs
RFI’ s experience highlighted that the following items are important in setting up
a Performance Regime
Choice of an indicator that best suits the involved network; in
principle it should be
A
A MARKET
MARKET ORIENTED
ORIENTED
SYSTEM
SYSTEM
ü
Measurable
ü
Recognized
by
all
stakeholders
(nationally
and
internationally)
COOPERATION
COOPERATION
The performance of the railway system depends on both IM and
RUs: it is important to involve the RUs at least in a shadow-running
Financial
EFFECTIVENESS
EFFECTIVENESS
flows
should be
foreseen
as they
stimulate the
commitment of partners, in addition the system should also allow a
better knowledge of the causes of bad performance and distinguish
different type of traffic
PR
PR IS
IS A
A MEANS
MEANS NOT
NOT A
A
GOAL
GOAL
If existing, penalties should be kept low, what is important is to
allow the identification of corrective actions
18