NETWORK

The net­work is about access to the rail­ways, the train paths. Opti­mal capa­ci­ty uti­li­sa­ti­on requi­res far-sigh­ted con­s­truc­tion plan­ning, fair pri­ces and good organisation.

At pre­sent, seven infra­struc­tu­re mana­gers (IMs) in Switz­er­land ope­ra­te their inde­pen­dent stan­dard gauge net­works at huge cost in terms of extra admi­nis­tra­ti­ve work and loss of syn­er­gy. For this reason we call for a sin­gle stan­dard gauge net­work for this coun­try that’s also con­nec­ted with the world bey­ond the bor­der – just like the roads.

Time­ta­bles – i.e. the avai­la­bi­li­ty of train paths – are curr­ent­ly geared to rapid pas­sen­ger tran­sit and fre­quent stops for regio­nal trains, all of which slows the avera­ge speed of freight trains. Rail path pri­cing also impacts the com­mer­cial inte­rests of freight ope­ra­tors. That’s why we’re cam­paig­ning for rail freight to be split into two tariffs, A and B, depen­ding on pro­duc­ti­vi­ty and how long the freight spends in the network.

The fact that tracks are curr­ent­ly con­s­truc­ted pri­ma­ri­ly with pas­sen­ger com­fort and con­ve­ni­ence in mind sub­stan­ti­al­ly increa­ses the costs of buil­ding and main­ten­an­ce. Here we call for more far-sigh­ted plan­ning and a more inno­va­ti­ve approach to main­ten­an­ce. When stan­dards of pas­sen­ger tran­sit are rai­sed, this should be off­set by dis­coun­ted char­ges for freight using the rail net­work. After all, swit­ching yards are just as much part of the rail network’s respon­si­bi­li­ty as com­muter train stations.

Read more about the topic in economiesuisse’s Infra­struc­tu­re Report 2019 (in german).

 

Actors in the network sector

Track con­s­truc­tion company

Engi­nee­ring offices

Informative

Current construction site situation on the Swiss railway network

 

Perspective RAIL 2050

 

Track access charges and network access

In the 2021 train path price revi­si­on and amend­ment of the Rail­way Net­work Access Ordi­nan­ce, we advo­ca­ted grea­ter com­pe­ti­ti­ve­ness for rail freight trans­port. To this end, we wel­co­med the plan­ned reli­ef for freight rail­ways with an amount of CHF 30 mil­li­on and the main­ten­an­ce of the noise bonus. Docu­ments on this can be found in the archive.

Ordinance on the Organisation of the Railway Infrastructure (OBI-VO)
Space, Transport, Environment 2050
Sectoral plans, concepts, strategies
Freight Transport 2030 Infrastructure
Infrastructure development
Railway infrastructure expansion

In the most recent packa­ge, the 2035 expan­si­on step (ES 35), par­lia­ment appro­ved invest­ments of CHF 12.89 bil­li­on in 2019.

Strengthening passenger rights in public transport
Archive
Train path prices and network access
Ordinance on the Organisation of Railway Infrastructure (OBI-VO)
Organisation of Railway Infrastructure (OBI-VO)
Expert Group Organisation Railway Infrastructure (EOBI)
Infrastructure development
Railway infrastructure expansion
«MODERATE» ADJUSTMENT OF THE TRACK ACCESS CHARGE: A FATAL BURDEN FOR RAIL FREIGHT TRANSPORT

«MODERATE» ADJUSTMENT OF THE TRACK ACCESS CHARGE: A FATAL BURDEN FOR RAIL FREIGHT TRANSPORT

The Fede­ral Office of Trans­port (FOT) has announ­ced that it will increase the train path price for rail trans­port by 2.1 per cent from the begin­ning of 2025. This mea­su­re is aimed at mee­ting the legal requi­re­ments for cost reco­very, but car­ri­es the risk of pla­cing a con­sidera­ble bur­den on rail freight trans­port and jeo­par­di­sing the modal shift to rail.

That’s the point:

  • Track access char­ge increase unacceptable
  • Eco­no­mic cri­sis, rising ener­gy pri­ces, glo­bal down­turn make rail freight trans­port more expensive
  • What we can do for the shift to rail transport

 

Our opi­ni­on on this is clear: we reject an increase in track access char­ges for freight trans­port. With an increase of 2.1%, it is also extre­me­ly mis­lea­ding to descri­be the adjus­t­ment as “mode­ra­te”, as it could lead to fatal and irrever­si­ble con­se­quen­ces. Against the back­ground of traf­fic los­ses in dome­stic, import, export and tran­sit traf­fic as well as the signi­fi­cant­ly more favoura­ble track access char­ges in Euro­pe, a price increase is unacceptable.

Economic background and challenges

The Euro­pean eco­no­my is curr­ent­ly strugg­ling with a pro­found cri­sis, which is being exa­cer­ba­ted by the ongo­ing con­flict in Ukrai­ne, rising ener­gy pri­ces and the glo­bal eco­no­mic down­turn, par­ti­cu­lar­ly in China. These fac­tors are lea­ding to a decli­ne in the exch­an­ge of goods and are having a signi­fi­cant impact on the trans­port sector.

Since mid-2022, we have seen a con­ti­nuous decli­ne in rail freight trans­port volu­mes in Euro­pe. The avera­ge 10% increase in the cost of rail trac­tion is dri­ving many com­pa­nies to shift more of their freight to the road. The umbrel­la orga­ni­sa­ti­on of com­bi­ned trans­port pro­vi­ders UIRR reports a decli­ne in rail freight trans­port of around 15% for 2023, while road trans­port has only fal­len slightly.

Cost increases and their toxic effect

In this dif­fi­cult envi­ron­ment, the plan­ned price increa­ses for ener­gy and the wear fac­tor are having a dis­pro­por­tio­na­te impact on freight trans­port. The wear fac­tor will be increased by 9% from 0.33 to 0.36 CHF/BTkm, and a decis­i­on on how ener­gy costs will rise will be made in July.

The reason given for the increase in the basic wear and tear price is the rise in weight-depen­dent mar­gi­nal costs, alt­hough the cal­cu­la­ti­on of these costs is not trans­pa­rent and is based on the infra­struc­tu­re expan­si­on stan­dards for pas­sen­ger trans­port. This price com­po­nent, inten­ded as an incen­ti­ve for the pro­cu­re­ment of rol­ling stock that is gent­le on the track, does not acce­le­ra­te the repla­ce­ment of rail­way car­ri­a­ges with their long ser­vice life of 2–3 deca­des. The incen­ti­ve is too low to cover the addi­tio­nal costs for low-wear rol­ling stock, which signi­fi­cant­ly increa­ses the costs for rail freight trans­port and redu­ces its competitiveness.

Conclusion

Alt­hough a 2.1% increase in the track access char­ge is inten­ded to meet the legal requi­re­ments for cost reco­very, it will lead to con­sidera­ble addi­tio­nal costs for freight trans­port. This mea­su­re could under­mi­ne efforts to shift traf­fic to the rail­ways and fur­ther exa­cer­ba­te the eco­no­mic bur­den in an alre­a­dy chal­len­ging envi­ron­ment. It would be desi­ra­ble for rail freight trans­port, which suf­fers from the high expan­si­on stan­dards of pas­sen­ger trans­port in the mixed ope­ra­ti­on of pas­sen­ger and freight trans­port, to be fun­da­men­tal­ly reli­e­ved. This is the only way to make rail freight trans­port com­pe­ti­ti­ve and suc­cessful­ly drive for­ward the mobi­li­ty transition.

RailCom: Promoting a competitive railway system through innovation and transparency

RailCom: Promoting a competitive railway system through innovation and transparency

Patri­zia Danioth is a lawy­er and nota­ry and has been Pre­si­dent of Rail­Com since 2013. In this inter­view, she gives us an over­view of RailCom’s tasks, her posi­ti­on on the draft legis­la­ti­on for freight trans­port and talks about the future mobi­li­ty infra­struc­tu­re (MODI).

That’s what it’s all about:

  • Rail­Com ensu­res non-dis­cri­mi­na­to­ry access to the rail­way network
  • Pro­mo­tes com­pe­ti­ti­on in the rail­way system
  • Sup­ports the streng­thening of the EWLV
  • Access to data for grea­ter trans­pa­ren­cy and innovation

 

Mrs Danioth, what is Rail­Com respon­si­ble for?

Rail­Com ensu­res non-dis­cri­mi­na­to­ry access to the rail­way net­work, CT tran­ship­ment faci­li­ties and local deli­very ser­vices. In this way, Rail­Com con­tri­bu­tes to a com­pe­ti­ti­ve Swiss rail­way sys­tem. Rail­Com also expres­ses its views on issues that fall within its remit as part of the legis­la­ti­ve pro­cess. This is the case with the cur­rent draft legis­la­ti­on on the future of Swiss rail freight transport.

What is RailCom’s posi­ti­on on the cur­rent draft legis­la­ti­on on the future of Swiss rail freight trans­port? Where do you see a need for action?

Rail­Com sup­ports the streng­thening of sin­gle wagon­load trans­port and the fur­ther deve­lo­p­ment of mul­ti­mo­dal trans­port chains. Howe­ver, Rail­Com iden­ti­fies two cri­ti­cal aspects in par­ti­cu­lar in the draft law on Swiss freight trans­port, which need to be regu­la­ted in a coher­ent man­ner with exis­ting legislation.

What are the cri­ti­cal aspects? What requi­re­ments would the draft legis­la­ti­on have to ful­fil in order to be con­sis­tent with exis­ting legislation?

First­ly, the state sub­si­di­s­a­ti­on of sin­gle wagon­load trans­port must be com­pe­ti­ti­on-neu­tral. Block train trans­port, which is self-suf­fi­ci­ent, must not be cross-sub­si­di­sed by the sub­si­di­sed sin­gle wagon­load trans­port. Such a dis­tor­ti­on of com­pe­ti­ti­on must be pre­ven­ted with the pre­sent draft law on Swiss freight trans­port. Be it that the pro­vi­der of sin­gle wagon­load trans­port makes a finan­cial, legal and orga­ni­sa­tio­nal sepa­ra­ti­on bet­ween the self-eco­no­mic ser­vices of block train trans­port and sin­gle wagon­load trans­port. Be it that stric­ter requi­re­ments as well as con­trol and sanc­tion opti­ons effec­tively pre­vent cross-subsidisation.

The aim of the pro­po­sal is to pro­mo­te an inno­va­ti­ve offe­ring in sin­gle wagon­load trans­port with a high level of cus­to­mer ori­en­ta­ti­on. Fair frame­work con­di­ti­ons are essen­ti­al for this.

Second­ly, exis­ting legis­la­ti­on in the rail­way sec­tor and in freight trans­port sti­pu­la­tes that if a com­pa­ny recei­ves finan­cial sup­port from the state, it must make its ser­vices or access to its faci­li­ties available to third par­ties on a non-dis­cri­mi­na­to­ry basis. Alt­hough the draft law on Swiss freight trans­port pro­vi­des for non-dis­cri­mi­na­to­ry access to sin­gle wagon­load trans­port ser­vices in prin­ci­ple, it does not yet suf­fi­ci­ent­ly spe­ci­fy this requi­re­ment. This is shown by a com­pa­ri­son with the legis­la­ti­on on the pro­mo­ti­on of CT tran­ship­ment faci­li­ties or the law on under­ground freight trans­port: For exam­p­le, the legis­la­tor regu­la­tes the rights and obli­ga­ti­ons of the ope­ra­tors of CT tran­ship­ment faci­li­ties in more detail than those of the net­work pro­vi­der in sin­gle wagon­load transport.

With MODIG, a bill is being draf­ted to ensu­re that the infra­struc­tu­re and ser­vices of public and pri­va­te trans­port can be opti­mal­ly ope­ra­ted and uti­li­sed thanks to a bet­ter flow of infor­ma­ti­on. The mobi­li­ty infra­struc­tu­re (MODI) should one day enable the various play­ers to be net­work­ed and data to be pro­vi­ded and exch­an­ged. What does Rail­Com think of MODI?

Data and data exch­an­ge are an indis­pensable pre­re­qui­si­te for mobi­li­ty. Along­side rail and other trans­port faci­li­ties, data the­r­e­fo­re forms a sys­tem-rele­vant infra­struc­tu­re. Data is also a pre­re­qui­si­te for the uti­li­sa­ti­on of infra­struc­tu­re: Data that is rele­vant for access to the rail net­work, CT tran­ship­ment faci­li­ties and last-mile ser­vices, for exam­p­le, must be available to all users in a trans­pa­rent and user-fri­end­ly man­ner and be easy to find. The data must be made publicly acces­si­ble in a non-dis­cri­mi­na­to­ry man­ner, i.e. com­ple­te, cor­rect and free of con­tra­dic­tions. MODI can make a signi­fi­cant con­tri­bu­ti­on to this.

MODI and open data in gene­ral also streng­then non-dis­cri­mi­na­ti­on through increased trans­pa­ren­cy, equal tre­at­ment and the pos­si­bi­li­ty of third-party par­ti­ci­pa­ti­on. Open data thus pro­mo­tes eco­no­mic effi­ci­en­cy and cus­to­mer-ori­en­ta­ti­on by streng­thening com­pe­ti­ti­on. The poten­ti­al for inno­va­ti­on in the sec­tor is increased. The pri­va­te­ly ope­ra­ted web­site www.puenktlichkeit.ch, for exam­p­le, allows insightful com­pa­ri­sons to be made on the punc­tua­li­ty of trains.

Mrs Danioth, thank you very much for this interview!

Flexibilisation of train path protection for freight transport

Flexibilisation of train path protection for freight transport

That’s what it’s all about:

  • Net­work uti­li­sa­ti­on con­cept and plan (NNK/NNP) secu­re train paths for goods trains in the long term
  • Unu­sed freight train paths – demand from pas­sen­ger transport
  • Moti­on 23.4259 Method for deter­mi­ning train paths for long-las­ting con­s­truc­tion sites
  • Tem­po­ra­ry fle­xi­bi­li­sa­ti­on only with bin­ding agree­ment to solve the bottleneck

 

Network utilisation concept and plan (NNK/NNP) secure train paths for goods trains in the long term

As part of the «Finan­cing the rail­way infra­struc­tu­re» bill in 2013, infra­struc­tu­re expan­si­on tar­gets for freight trans­port were defi­ned in Art. 48a lit. b of the Rail­way Act (EBG). These include impro­ve­ments for dome­stic, import and export traf­fic as well as impro­ving the avai­la­bi­li­ty of train paths. As part of the draft revi­si­on of the Freight Trans­port Act, the so-cal­led net­work uti­li­sa­ti­on con­cept and the net­work uti­li­sa­ti­on plan were intro­du­ced in 2015 as a means of secu­ring available freight train paths. With these instru­ments, the long-term expan­si­on and uti­li­sa­ti­on plan­ning of the rail­way infra­struc­tu­re is desi­gned to ensu­re the avai­la­bi­li­ty of a mini­mum num­ber of train paths per hour and direc­tion on the various net­work sec­tions for freight and pas­sen­ger trans­port. The ser­vice con­cepts and rol­ling time­ta­ble plan­ning must be deve­lo­ped along these available train paths. If, through skilful capa­ci­ty plan­ning in the time­ta­ble pro­ce­du­re, more train paths are ulti­m­ate­ly available in the annu­al time­ta­ble than pro­vi­ded for in the NNK/NNP, they are also available to the train path allo­ca­ti­on body for allocation.

Unused freight train paths – demand from passenger transport

As freight trans­port, unli­ke pas­sen­ger trans­port, can­not be plan­ned in the long term and depends on cur­rent mar­ket con­di­ti­ons, secu­red freight train paths are regu­lar­ly not uti­li­sed. This is unpro­ble­ma­tic as long as there are no con­flicts with pas­sen­ger trans­port. Howe­ver, in the case of con­s­truc­tion sites, as is regu­lar­ly the case on the Swiss net­work due to ongo­ing expan­si­on and neces­sa­ry main­ten­an­ce work, con­flicts are prac­ti­cal­ly ine­vi­ta­ble. If freight train paths are actual­ly not used in such con­stel­la­ti­ons, the pas­sen­ger trans­port indus­try and the can­tons are under­stan­d­a­b­ly very unhappy.

Motion 23.4259 Method for determining train paths for long-term roadworks

With moti­on 23.4259, NR Cot­tier FDP/NE is asking the Fede­ral Coun­cil for a method to impro­ve the allo­ca­ti­on of train paths in the event of long-term con­s­truc­tion sites. The aim is to crea­te the pos­si­bi­li­ty of allo­ca­ting unu­sed freight train paths to pas­sen­ger trans­port for the dura­ti­on of con­s­truc­tion sites. The Fede­ral Coun­cil is asking Par­lia­ment to reject the moti­on, as the desi­red fle­xi­bi­li­ty is pro­vi­ded by the cur­rent plan­ning sys­tem. Unu­sed freight train paths can be allo­ca­ted to pas­sen­ger transport.

Temporary flexibilisation only with a binding agreement to solve the bottleneck

The petitioner’s con­cern is under­stan­da­ble. The VAP has also signal­led to the can­tons on various occa­si­ons that it will not refu­se the desi­red fle­xi­bi­li­sa­ti­on of train paths. Howe­ver, this can­not mean a fun­da­men­tal ren­un­cia­ti­on of secu­ring freight trans­port rou­tes à la longue. Rather, an appro­pria­te solu­ti­on must be agreed for each con­flict on a case-by-case basis. In the case of struc­tu­ral con­flicts in par­ti­cu­lar, for exam­p­le as a result of unfo­re­seen expan­si­ons in pas­sen­ger trans­port ser­vices that are not of a tem­po­ra­ry natu­re and the­r­e­fo­re pre­clude the future safe­guar­ding of the freight train path con­cer­ned, a cor­re­spon­ding struc­tu­ral solu­ti­on must be agreed as part of the next expan­si­on phase. Howe­ver, this is legal­ly dif­fi­cult to imple­ment, as it is Par­lia­ment that deci­des on the expan­si­on stages and cre­dits and not the affec­ted can­tons and indus­try representatives.

Pos­si­ble solu­ti­ons are curr­ent­ly being sought at a round table, using the exam­p­le of the ser­vice bet­ween Neu­châ­tel and Gen­e­va. The VAP will par­ti­ci­pa­te as a repre­sen­ta­ti­ve of cus­to­mers, who can also order train paths, in an endea­vour to find balan­ced solutions.

At the end of 2023, the FOT also star­ted work on the eva­lua­ti­on of NNK and NNP. The aim is to eva­lua­te the instru­ments that have now been in use for a con­sidera­ble peri­od of time with regard to any need for impro­ve­ment. The VAP is actively invol­ved in this working group.

 

Focus RailCom: presentation of key people

Focus RailCom: presentation of key people

This is the issue:

  • The Com­mis­si­on gua­ran­tees non-dis­cri­mi­na­to­ry access
  • Who is behind the Com­mis­si­on? We would like to intro­du­ce you.

 

Rail­Com gua­ran­tees non-dis­cri­mi­na­to­ry access to Switzerland’s rail net­work, com­bi­ned trans­port tran­ship­ment faci­li­ties and local freight ser­vices. The Com­mis­si­on is actively com­mit­ted to an open and fair mar­ket access poli­cy in order to pro­mo­te healt­hy com­pe­ti­ti­ve­ness and increase the effi­ci­en­cy of the rail sector.

In this blog post, we intro­du­ce the staff who are com­mit­ted to RailCom.

Chairmanship:
  • Chair: Patri­zia Danioth Hal­ter, lic. iur., att­or­ney-at-law and nota­ry, LL.M., Alt­dorf (UR)
  • Vice-Chair­man: Mar­kus Kern, Prof. Dr. iur., LL.M., Pro­fes­sor of Public, Admi­nis­tra­ti­ve and Euro­pean Law at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Berne (BE)
Members of the committee:
  • Cesa­re Brand, lawy­er, Forel (FR)
  • Anna Cia­ran­fi Zanet­ta, Lawy­er, Depart­ment of Finan­ce and Eco­no­my of the Can­ton of Tici­no, Dalpe (TI)
  • Bar­ba­ra Fur­rer, Dr. iur., att­or­ney-at-law, Head of Legal Ser­vices, DHL Express (Schweiz) AG, Hedin­gen (ZH)
  • Man­fred Hal­ler, EMBA, inde­pen­dent con­sul­tant, Unter­kulm (AG)

 

The secre­ta­ri­at pro­vi­des pro­fes­sio­nal and tech­ni­cal sup­port to the com­mit­tee. It fol­lows the Commission’s ins­truc­tions. It is admi­nis­tra­tively atta­ched to the Gene­ral Secre­ta­ri­at of the Fede­ral Depart­ment of the Envi­ron­ment, Trans­port, Ener­gy and Com­mu­ni­ca­ti­ons (DETEC). Its mem­bers are as follows:

Head:
  • Chris­tof Böh­ler, M.A. HSG Inter­na­tio­nal Relations
  • Depu­ty: Melis­sa Rick­li, lic. phil. hist.
Staff members:
  • Ana Dett­wi­ler, Lawy­er, Legal Affairs
  • Ursu­la Erb, Doc­tor of Eco­no­mics, Mar­ket Monitoring
  • Andre­as Opp­li­ger, lic. phil. nat, Mar­ket Monitoring
  • Kat­rin Suter-Burri, Ph. ETH, Com­mu­ni­ca­ti­on, Agen­da and Research

 

Train path price revision 2025–2028: Price increase is unfounded

Train path price revision 2025–2028: Price increase is unfounded

The Fede­ral Coun­cil plans to increase the train path price in freight trans­port from 2025. In detail, it wants to raise the basic price for wear and tear by almost 20%; on the grounds of unco­ver­ed weight-depen­dent mar­gi­nal costs in this area. We reject this unju­s­ti­fied price increase. It acce­le­ra­tes the ongo­ing modal shift to the roads and con­tra­dicts the Fede­ral Council’s modal shift objective.

This is the issue:

  • Track access char­ges not deri­ved transparently
  • Traf­fic los­ses pro­hi­bit price increases
  • Respect the legal prin­ci­ple of cost reco­very and the pol­lu­ter pays principle
  • Incen­ti­ve for low-wear freight wagons reversed
  • Make infra­struc­tu­re mana­gers more accountable

 

Track access char­ges not deri­ved trans­par­ent­ly
The expl­ana­to­ry report of the Fede­ral Office of Trans­port (FOT) of June 2023 is neither trans­par­ent­ly desi­gned nor com­pre­hen­si­bly jus­ti­fied. The reasons for the cur­rent deter­mi­na­ti­on of the train path price remain com­ple­te­ly unclear. Since the FOT refers, among other things, to fal­ling train path reve­nues, the impres­si­on is crea­ted that this is a hid­den cross-finan­cing of the SBB. Against the back­ground of the “Sus­tainable Finan­cing of SBB” bill and the reduc­tion of the con­tri­bu­ti­on mar­gin in SBB pas­sen­ger traf­fic envi­sa­ged the­r­ein, this jus­ti­fi­ca­ti­on is unre­asonable for the repre­sen­ta­ti­ves of freight traf­fic. Our nega­ti­ve respon­se to the above-men­tio­ned bill can be found in our hea­ring respon­se of 7 March 2023 and in our blog post “SBB should take respon­si­bi­li­ty ins­tead of 3 bil­li­on finan­cial packa­ge”.

Traf­fic los­ses pro­hi­bit price increa­ses
A price increase is unac­cep­ta­ble in view of the traf­fic los­ses in dome­stic, import, export and tran­sit traf­fic and the signi­fi­cant­ly che­a­per train path pri­ces in the Euro­pean envi­ron­ment. Ship­pers have been expo­sed to dra­stic price increa­ses for years, espe­ci­al­ly in wagon­load traf­fic. These are jus­ti­fied by exo­ge­nous fac­tors such as train path prices.

Respect the legal prin­ci­ple of cost reco­very and the pol­lu­ter pays prin­ci­ple
The FOT jus­ti­fies the price increase with the legal prin­ci­ple of cost reco­very. This would be upheld even in the event of a price reduc­tion in freight trans­port. On the con­tra­ry, a price reduc­tion is in line with the pol­lu­ter-pays prin­ci­ple, since freight traf­fic pays the stan­dard mar­gi­nal costs of an avera­ge­ly deve­lo­ped net­work, which is main­ly geared to the needs of pas­sen­ger traf­fic. Ship­pers do not noti­ce the efforts made by the infra­struc­tu­re mana­gers to build and main­tain the infra­struc­tu­re more cheaply.

Incen­ti­ve for low-wear freight wagons twis­ted
The so-cal­led wear fac­tor is sup­po­sed to serve as an incen­ti­ve to use low-wear rol­ling stock. In the mean­ti­me, the oppo­si­te is the case: the Fede­ral Coun­cil is encou­ra­ging the indus­try not only to pay ever hig­her track access char­ges, but also to invest addi­tio­nal finan­cial resour­ces in low-wear rol­ling stock.

Hol­ding infra­struc­tu­re mana­gers more accoun­ta­ble
The pre­sen­ted train-path price revi­si­on goes easy on the infra­struc­tu­re ope­ra­tors. As repre­sen­ta­ti­ves of the siding and ter­mi­nal ope­ra­tors, who are direct­ly affec­ted by the plan­ning, con­s­truc­tion and main­ten­an­ce costs of SBB Infra­struc­tu­re in cen­tra­li­sed sidings, we obser­ve con­sidera­ble inef­fi­ci­en­ci­es and an almost shame­l­ess hand­ling of finan­cial resour­ces. This is most likely equal­ly true for the public net­work. The fede­ral govern­ment should the­r­e­fo­re also obli­ge infra­struc­tu­re mana­gers to con­tain costs.

Winter session 2022

Winter session 2022

On 6 Decem­ber 2022, the Coun­cil of Sta­tes adopted two moti­ons in the second ins­tance. They are important for modal shift in tran­sit, but also con­cern the Basel-North ports route, which is cen­tral for import and export traf­fic. We at the VAP sup­port both moti­ons and encou­ra­ge the exten­si­on of state sup­port to con­ven­tio­nal rail freight transport.

This is what it’s all about:
  • Coun­cil of Sta­tes adopts two moti­ons in favour of the freight cor­ri­dor through Switzerland
  • We at the VAP sup­port the con­tents of the moti­ons – and set priorities
  • Becau­se con­ven­tio­nal rail freight trans­ports are curr­ent­ly still being excluded

 

Promotion of the freight corridor through Switzerland

With the moti­on 22.3013 «Streng­thening the attrac­ti­ve­ness and com­pe­ti­ti­ve­ness of the freight cor­ri­dor through Switz­er­land», the Fede­ral Coun­cil is to spe­ci­fi­cal­ly extend the sup­port mea­su­res in tran­sit to cer­tain regi­ons and groups of goods. We at the VAP sup­port this moti­on. Howe­ver, it excludes con­ven­tio­nal rail freight trans­port and its untap­ped poten­ti­al. This defi­ci­en­cy should be cor­rec­ted as soon as possible.

Artic­le 8 of the Freight Traf­fic Shift Act (in ger­man) allows the pro­mo­ti­on of all – i.e. tran­sal­pi­ne – freight traf­fic in tran­sit. Accor­din­gly, the Fede­ral Coun­cil should be ins­truc­ted to pro­mo­te all freight traf­fic and to pro­vi­de the pro­mo­ti­on instru­ments con­sis­ting of finan­cial sup­port, qua­li­ty moni­to­ring and the expan­si­on of access rou­tes for con­ven­tio­nal traf­fic as well. For these, too, the tar­ge­ted exten­si­on of sup­port mea­su­res to cer­tain regi­ons and freight groups makes sense. By sti­cking to the dogma of «com­bi­ned trans­port», Switz­er­land is miss­ing out on inte­res­t­ing oppor­tu­ni­ties for an addi­tio­nal shift from road to rail.

The Fede­ral Coun­cil should design the sup­port instru­ments in a tech­no­lo­gy-neu­tral way and extend them to all freight trans­port in tran­sit, regard­less of the type of production.

Expansion of the Wörth-Strasbourg Neat feeder road on the left bank of the Rhine

Moti­on 22.3000 «Con­ti­nua­tion of the suc­cessful modal shift poli­cy and gua­ran­tee of sup­p­ly secu­ri­ty thanks to expan­si­on of the Wörth-Stras­bourg cor­ri­dor on the left bank of the Rhine» calls on the Fede­ral Coun­cil to take care of the elec­tri­fi­ca­ti­on and upgrading of the affec­ted sec­tion of the line to NEAT stan­dards. It is con­side­ring the pos­si­bi­li­ty of fun­ding from Switzerland.

We in the VAP sup­port this moti­on, as we did with moti­on 20.3003 «State trea­ty for a Neat access route on the left bank of the Rhine». An effi­ci­ent rou­ting of the flat rail­way in the nor­t­hern approach to the NRLA is urgen­tly nee­ded in terms of sup­p­ly secu­ri­ty, alter­na­ti­ve capa­ci­ty for con­s­truc­tion pha­ses, punc­tua­li­ty and qua­li­ty. Elec­tri­fi­ca­ti­on and the intro­duc­tion of the NRLA stan­dard on the affec­ted sec­tion of track, tog­e­ther with the simul­ta­neous expan­si­on of the Kan­nen­feld and Schüt­zen­matt tun­nels to 4 met­res, will allow an initi­al sub­stan­ti­al increase in capa­ci­ty on the nor­t­hern approach to the NRLA.

 

Click here for the SDA news item of 6 Decem­ber 2022 (in german)

«BAHN 2050» – A CRITICAL LOOK AT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S LONG-TERM PERSPECTIVE

«BAHN 2050» – A CRITICAL LOOK AT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S LONG-TERM PERSPECTIVE

The Fede­ral Coun­cil wants to fur­ther streng­then the rail­ways in the long term. To this end, it has revi­sed its long-term rail stra­tegy. It is now focu­sing on impro­ved access to the rail­way and more capa­ci­ty on the east-west axis with new mul­ti­mo­dal tran­ship­ment plat­forms and faci­li­ties for city logi­stics. Here is a cri­ti­cal app­rai­sal of this perspective.

With a view to future expan­si­on steps of the rail­way infra­struc­tu­re, the Fede­ral Coun­cil has adapt­ed its long-term rail per­spec­ti­ve from 2012 and published details from the mee­ting of 22 June 2022. Up to now, the Fede­ral Coun­cil has con­cen­tra­ted pri­ma­ri­ly on eli­mi­na­ting bot­t­len­ecks and incre­asing fre­quen­cy. With the upco­ming expan­si­on steps within the frame­work of the BAHN 2050 per­spec­ti­ve, it wants to impro­ve the rail ser­vice pri­ma­ri­ly on short and medi­um distances, for exam­p­le with addi­tio­nal S‑Bahn ser­vices and an upgrade of the sub­ur­ban sta­ti­ons. In this way, it takes into account the fact that the grea­test poten­ti­al for modal shift to rail lies within the agglo­me­ra­ti­ons and in con­nec­tions bet­ween regio­nal cen­tres and agglomerations.

Promoting modal shift in freight transport

In freight trans­port, access to the rail­way is to be impro­ved and capa­ci­ties on the east-west axis increased. This will be achie­ved with new mul­ti­mo­dal tran­ship­ment plat­forms and faci­li­ties for city logi­stics. With the tar­ge­ted modal shift, the Fede­ral Coun­cil wants to streng­then its stra­tegy for achie­ving the cli­ma­te goals and bet­ter coor­di­na­te spa­ti­al and trans­port plan­ning. This aspi­ra­ti­on is expres­sed in its visi­on: «Thanks to the effi­ci­ent use of its strengths, the rail­way makes a major con­tri­bu­ti­on to the 2050 cli­ma­te goal and streng­thens Switz­er­land as a place to live and do business».

Conflict of goals: free choice of transport

The Fede­ral Coun­cil defi­nes one of the main goals of RAIL 2050 as incre­asing the share of rail in the modal split for both pas­sen­ger and freight trans­port. This goal con­tra­dicts the con­sti­tu­ti­on, which gua­ran­tees the free choice of trans­port mode for dome­stic traf­fic. There is also a con­tra­dic­tion with the Fede­ral Council’s pre­vious goals, in par­ti­cu­lar with goal 7 of DETEC’s 2040 ori­en­ta­ti­on frame­work, «Future Mobi­li­ty». Accor­ding to this, trans­port users in Switz­er­land are free to deci­de which mobi­li­ty offers they use and combine.

Intramodal competition and market-based offers

For us at the VAP, the modal split is the result of a well thought-out infra­struc­tu­re, trans­port and spa­ti­al plan­ning poli­cy. As the voice of the ship­ping indus­try, we advo­ca­te favoura­ble frame­work con­di­ti­ons that boost intra­mo­dal com­pe­ti­ti­on on the rail­ways and ensu­re cus­to­mer ori­en­ta­ti­on and inno­va­ti­on with mar­ket-based offers. In order for such offers to deve­lop their poten­ti­al, suf­fi­ci­ent capa­ci­ties on the net­work with high-qua­li­ty and inex­pen­si­ve train paths as well as suf­fi­ci­ent­ly well-deve­lo­ped logi­stics loca­ti­ons are neces­sa­ry. This is the only way to increase the share of rail freight trans­port in the modal split. We the­r­e­fo­re warn against ideas of fur­ther net­works and coor­di­na­ted sys­tem train paths by SBB Cargo. These hin­der the desi­red intra­mo­dal com­pe­ti­ti­on and have a cor­re­spon­din­gly nega­ti­ve effect on cus­to­mer ori­en­ta­ti­on and innovation.

Ensuring connection to Europe

We wel­co­me the Fede­ral Council’s focus on short and medi­um distances. Howe­ver, it igno­res the com­plex poten­ti­al of inter­na­tio­nal trans­port. This is reg­rettable. In our opi­ni­on, the BAHN 2050 per­spec­ti­ve should pro­vi­de for a favoura­ble con­nec­tion of the Swiss rail­way net­work to the inter­na­tio­nal cor­ri­dors and the Rhine ports as well as sou­thern ports in the desti­na­ti­on area. The Fede­ral Coun­cil is expli­cit­ly cal­led upon to meet this requi­re­ment by Moti­on 22.3000 «Con­ti­nua­tion of the suc­cessful modal shift poli­cy and gua­ran­tee of natio­nal sup­p­ly secu­ri­ty thanks to the expan­si­on of the Wörth-Stras­bourg Neat fee­der line on the left bank of the Rhine» and Moti­on 20.3003 «State trea­ty for a Neat fee­der line on the left bank of the Rhine».

A clear yes to digitalisation

We con­sider the inten­ti­on to con­sis­t­ent­ly use effi­ci­en­cy gains through auto­ma­ti­on and new tech­no­lo­gies as posi­ti­ve, as well as the goal of fle­xi­bly and opti­mal­ly net­wor­king rail ser­vices with other modes of trans­port and ser­vices as part of over­all mobi­li­ty. In addi­ti­on to the afo­re­men­tio­ned mul­ti­mo­dal tran­ship­ment plat­forms, the frame­work and mar­ket con­di­ti­ons for freight rail­ways play a decisi­ve role here. In addi­ti­on to digi­tal auto­ma­tic cou­pling (DAK), this includes open data and boo­king plat­forms in par­ti­cu­lar. With their help, data from the enti­re value chain is recor­ded and exch­an­ged trans­par­ent­ly so that rail freight cus­to­mers can easi­ly book their con­sign­ments and track the flow of goods in real time.

Revised train path price in 2021

Revised train path price in 2021

The 2021 revi­si­on of the track access char­ge will lead to a reduc­tion of CHF 30 mil­li­on in freight trans­port. After the 2013 revi­si­on brought an increase of CHF 25 mil­li­on, the cost block for freight rail­ways is now back at the 2013 level. Accor­din­gly, the costs for rail freight trans­port in the mar­ket should fall. Due to the newly intro­du­ced bonus for trains with a length of over 500m of 1Rp/train km, there is an incen­ti­ve for the for­ma­ti­on of long trains and thus the use of fewer train paths.

Noise bonus still granted

The noise bonus remains in place, but under­goes two nega­ti­ve chan­ges: The bonus will be redu­ced from 2 Rp/km per axle to 1.6 Rp/km per axle. In addi­ti­on, the bonus will only be gran­ted if the goods train con­cer­ned con­ta­ins only low-noise wagons. A sin­gle freight wagon equip­ped with grey cast iron brake blocks leads to the loss of the noise bonus for the rail­way under­ta­king (RU). The RUs have a respon­si­bi­li­ty not to clas­si­fy any wagons with grey cast iron brake blocks, other­wi­se they will be lia­ble to pay dama­ges to the kee­pers of low-noise freight wagons. The noise bonus amounts to around CHF 30 mil­li­on per year. If it were to be fur­ther redu­ced or can­cel­led, the com­pen­sa­ti­on for the 2013 train path price surchar­ges gran­ted with the 2021 train path price would be lost.

Criticism remains unheard

The fun­da­men­tal cri­ti­cism of the FOT’s train path pri­cing model by the indus­try asso­cia­ti­ons once again went unhe­ard. The defi­ni­ti­on of the stan­dard mar­gi­nal costs in the various route cate­go­ries is not fair to the ori­gi­na­tor. What is nee­ded is a dif­fe­ren­tia­ti­on of the route cate­go­ries accor­ding to pas­sen­ger and freight traf­fic. This is becau­se each route cate­go­ry is pri­ma­ri­ly defi­ned, built and ope­ra­ted accor­ding to the needs of pas­sen­ger traf­fic. Freight traf­fic, with its com­pa­ra­tively mode­st train kilo­me­t­res and demands on the net­work, does not defi­ne the stan­dards and thus the so-cal­led stan­dard mar­gi­nal costs per cate­go­ry in the mixed ope­ra­ti­on of pas­sen­ger and freight traf­fic. Nevert­hel­ess, it must bear them in full. This is not fair to the pol­lu­ter. Ins­tead, a lower approach to the stan­dard mar­gi­nal costs should be appli­ed to freight traf­fic in each cate­go­ry, in accordance with its demands on the stan­dard of development.

A step in the right direction

After all, the last reduc­tion in the train path price has its ori­g­ins in the signal boxes and the costs for ope­ra­ti­ons manage­ment. This may be inter­pre­ted as a first step in the right direc­tion of increased pol­lu­ter-pays fairness.