Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  225 / 272 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 225 / 272 Next Page
Page Background

TAR NC Implementation Document – Second Edition September 2017 |

225

OBTAINED REVENUES

Postage Stamp

CWD

Postage Stamp

CWD

TSO A

Entry A2

9.23m€

30.00m€

TSO B

Entry B1

60.00m€

37.5m€

Exit Dom A3

46.15m€

27.27m€

Exit Dom B2

15.00m€

37.5m€

Exit A4

4.62m€

2.73m€

Sum

75m€

75m€

Sum

60m€

60m€

ITC

–10.00m€ –10.00m€

ITC

10.00m€

10.00m€

Revenues after ITC

65m€

65m€

Revenues after ITC

70m€

70m€

Table 55:

Revenue table after the merger (separate case)

Compared to the pre-merged situation, the revenues are reallocated after the remov-

al of points A1 and B3 solved via a tariff increase at all points in the postage stamp

case, but via a mixed evolution of tariffs depending on the points in the CWD case.

REVENUE SHORTFALL OF POINTS A1 AND B3 HAS TO BE RECOVERED

AT OTHER POINTS

Revenue to recover – m€

Revenue to recover – %

Post Stamp

CWD Post Stamp

CWD

TSO A

Revenue A1

29m€

28m€

41%

40%

TSO B

Revenue B3

24m€

25m€

38%

39%

Table 56:

Revenue reallocation after the merger (separate case)

The table below provides a summary of tariffs derived for each of the 3 configura-

tions analysed in this example. In the two multi-TSO system configurations, entry A1

and exit B3 are not anymore commercial points, due to the merger. Therefore, they

have no tariffs.

SUMMARY OF TARIFFS IN ALL CONFIGURATIONS

Same RPM separately/

2 one-TSO systems

Same RPM jointly/

1 Multi-TSO system

Same RPM separately/

1 Multi-TSO system

PS

CWD

PS

CWD

PS

CWD

TSO A

Entry A1

3.18

3.07

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Entry A2

3.18

3.67

4.82

3.03

4.62

15.00

Exit Dom. A3

3.18

3.00

4.82

5.10

4.62

2.73

Exit A4

3.18

5.00

4.82

6.52

4.62

2.73

TSO B

Entry B1

2.71

2.71

4.82

5.12

5.00

3.13

Exit Dom. B2

2.71

2.38

4.82

3.32

5.00

12.50

Exit B3

2.71

2.82

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Table 57:

Summary of tariffs in all configurations

As a final remark, it is necessary to be aware that the outcome of a merger within a

MS is that some points disappear, prompting the need for a reallocation of costs and

revenues to the remaining points. This effect is similar to the one obtained by a

potential European-wide removal of IPs as commercial points.