NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
FOR WRITTEN REPLY
QUESTION NO 1731
DATE REPLY SUBMITTED: MONDAY, 25 JULY 2011
DATE OF PUBLICATION IN INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: FRIDAY, 24 JUNE 2011
(INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER: NO 18 â 2011)
Mr M S F de Freitas (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:
(1) (a) Which companies were contracted to undertake feasibility and
costing studies with regard to the construction aspects of the Gauteng
toll road project, (b) what were their terms of reference and (c)(i)
how were they appointed and (ii) on what criteria was the selection of
each specified company based;
(2) what was the (a) budgeted and (b) actual cost for each aspect that
was (i) researched and (ii) determined by the specified companies;
(3) what deadlines were set for each aspect that was (a) researched and
(b) determined by the specified companies;
(4) whether the specified deadlines were met; if not, in each case, (a)
why not and (b) what action was taken to remedy the situation?
NW1955E
REPLY:
The Minister of Transport:
(1) (a)
Consulting Engineering Services for the Proposed Gauteng Freeway
Upgrading and Expansion Project: Traffic Modelling, Toll Strategy and
Toll Feasibility Studies:
â Goba (Pty) Ltd/Tolplan (Pty) Ltd JV
The above feasibility study also included two specialist studies,
namely:
⢠Macro Economic Impact Study: School of Business from the University
of Cape Town, together with Arup
⢠Social Impact Study: University of Johannesburg
The services to be provided by the Traffic Modelling, Toll Strategy
and Toll Feasibility Advisor in respect of the Gauteng Toll Project
were described as follows in the tender document for service
providers:
Section A1 (Traffic Modelling):
⪠Prepare and workshop with the South African National Roads Agency
Limited (SANRAL) an implementation schedule covering all facets of
traffic modelling for the assignment.
⪠Review existing traffic information and the available SATURN traffic
model that was developed in 2001/02 for Gauteng. More information is
available from SANRAL. SANRAL intends to use this model, updated to a
2005 base date.
⪠Update the SATURN model to a 2005 calibrated and validated base date
model. The proposal must make provision for the required traffic
surveys and costs to update and recalibrate the model.
⪠Review proposed toll strategies developed under Section A2, proposed
toll plaza/point locations, impact of the toll strategy on alternative
routes, and other aspects of alternative toll strategies, that may be
generated through the toll strategy and financial modelling process.
⪠Model the effect of different toll tariff scenarios and discount
scenarios in order to determine the impact on gross toll revenue
streams and toll diversion.
⪠Assist SANRAL on an ad hoc basis to model the impact of alternative
options/requests received from provincial and metropolitan government
as well as the public.
⪠Service providers may make an alternative proposal with respect to
the use of the SANRAL SATURN model. The alternative must be well
motivated and explain the specific model to be used as well as the
advantages of using this model. This alternative will be priced
separately in Part C, Section A1.1 of the pricing Schedule. In the
event of an alternative offer, points 2 and 3 need not to be completed
by the tenderer.
Section A2 (Toll Strategy and Feasibility)
⪠Familiarise with and review the proposals envisaged by SANRAL, as
well as the institutional environment/situation that may impact on the
project.
⪠Prepare and workshop with SANRAL an implementation schedule covering
all facets of the assignment.
⪠Develop and workshop a comprehensive list of possible toll strategy
scenarios.
⪠Review, research and advise on the estimated initial capital, future
capital (expansions), future routine and periodic maintenance costs as
well as the toll capital and operational costs for the purposes of
setting up a financial model. A critical aspect of the submission
will be the experience in the project team with respect to the
technical and cost related aspects of open road free flow tolling in
an urban environment.
⪠Investigate directional toll principle vs other strategies such as
semi-open, closed systems, etc. Then determine the toll plaza/point
locations, all possible alternative routes (and the impact of toll
diversion on the capacity of these routes) as well as perceived road
user cost savings.
⪠Determine the financial feasibility of the project, taking into
account three traffic growth scenarios (Low, Medium, High).
⪠Determine the range of possible toll tariffs, discounts and gross
toll revenue streams.
⪠Comparison of advantages and disadvantages of alternative toll
strategies.
⪠Determine options available to benefit high occupancy vehicle usage
and public transport usage.
⪠Determine scope for and the financial implications for the provision
of public transport infrastructure (Strategic Public Transport
Networks) as part of the Gauteng freeway improvement and expansion
scheme.
⪠Assist SANRAL on an ad hoc basis to determine the impact of
alternative options/requests received from provincial and metropolitan
government as well as the public.â
(b) The project terms of reference for the Economic Studies (Macro and
Social) included:
⪠Determining the contributions to GDP as a result of:
⢠the impact of road construction;
⢠the ongoing maintenance and operation of the proposed
roads;
⢠the road user benefits that would be generated; and
⢠the network savings that would be generated.
⪠Contribution to the Gross Geographic Product
⪠The economic relevance of transport infrastructure and
infrastructure spending.
⪠Job creation (direct, indirect, job relocations, long/short
term).
⪠The macro-economic impact as a result of the generation of
direct and indirect income tax, company tax, other capital
expenditure and indirect household income.
⪠Changes in property values.
⪠The cost of traffic diversion.
⪠Network capacity and road user benefits.
⪠Determine the journey times and cost of travel for different
categories of road users, per area, income, age, travel mode,
etc.
⪠Determine vehicle operating costs as well as the value of time
for different user and vehicle classes.
⪠Determine the net economic impact on road users of the
proposed Gauteng Freeway Improvement Scheme (GFIS).
⪠Determine the direct benefits and costs to the society in the
GFIS area.
⪠Determine the impact of construction, operations and
maintenance activities on sustainable job creation (direct,
indirect, long and short term).
⪠Determine the impact of construction, operations and
maintenance activities on training and education.
⪠Advise on the likelihood and extent of possible long term
effects of land use changes as a result of the implementation of
the project.
⪠The study must take into account Provincial and Metropolitan
transport policies and the positioning of the proposed GFIS and
tolling within these policies.
(c) (i)
The traffic and toll feasibility project was appointed on an open
tender basis and tenders
were received from the following consortiums/companies:
⪠Gauteng Toll Study Consortium consisting of Arup/Africon/PD
Naidoo/Plan Associates/ Deloitte
⪠Stewart Scott/BKS
⪠Tolplan/Goba
⪠Urban Toll Specialists consisting of ITS/LTE/Steer Davies Gleave
⪠Vela VKE
The University Of Cape Town/Arup, as well as the University of
Johannesburg, was appointed on a time and cost basis for the macro and
socio impact studies.
(ii)
The criteria for the selection of the successful consortium for the
traffic and toll feasibility study were as follows:
⪠Quality
The quality criteria and maximum score in respect of each of the
criteria were as follows:
|Description of quality criteria and sub|Maximum number of tender|
|criteria |evaluation points |
|Technical experience in comparable |50 |
|projects | |
|Managerial ability appropriate to the |30 |
|size and nature of the work | |
|Continuing Professional Development of |5 |
|the key staff | |
|Organisation, logistics and support |5 |
|resources | |
|Quality assurance systems which ensure |10 |
|conformance to Employerâs stated | |
|requirements | |
|Total evaluation points for quality |100 |
⪠Financial offer
⪠Preference
The weightings of the three factors in the final score were:
⪠Quality 72%
⪠Financial 18%
⪠Preference 10%
The appointments for the macro and social economic studies were based
on SANRALâs need to appoint independent specialist experts in these
fields.
(2) (a) and (b) (i) and (ii)
The budgeted and actual costs for the major aspects involved in the
study (all excluding
VAT) were as follows:
|PHASE 1: GFIP Toll Feasibility Study |Budget |Actual |
|Traffic Modelling, Toll Strategy and |R5 894 737 |R6 362 542,00 |
|Feasibility | | |
|Disbursements â Traffic surveys, |R2 000 000 |R2 487 426,09 |
|Economic studies, etc. | | |
|*Total (excluding VAT) |R7 894 737 |R8 849 968.09 |
*Apart from the feasibility study, an amount of R2Â 288Â 881,53 was
spent at the tendered hourly rates to perform various additional
investigations required by or as a result of interaction with the
Gauteng Province and/or the metropolitan areas.
The additional expenditure for this phase of the study was approved
and budgeted for.
Subsequent to the feasibility study, SANRAL initiated in the 2009/2010
and 2010/2011 financial years an update and review of the original
study in order to take cognisance of actual tendered cost information
that became available, as well as other updated information. SANRAL
also required several hundreds of detailed traffic, tariff and
discount scenarios and associated revenue and financial evaluations to
be performed in order to arrive at tariff and discount recommendations
to the Minister of Transport.
|PHASE 2: GFIP Tariffs and Discount Study |
| |Budget |Actual |
| | |Expenditure |
|Traffic Modelling |R1 880 000 |R2Â 912Â 436,89 |
|Discount, Revenue and Financial |R2 480 000 |R3Â 284 938,30 |
|Modelling | | |
|Economic Impact Study |R 490 000 |R 795Â 481,80|
|Contingencies |R2 000 000 | |
|e-Toll Calculator Development | |R 178Â 310,00|
|TOTAL |R6 850 000 |R7Â 171Â 166,99 |
These amounts were budgeted for in the 2009/10 and 2010/11 budgets of
SANRAL.
The additional expenditure for the above phase of the project relates
to extensive modelling to determine the discount regime for the toll
implementation, prior to the original announcement of the toll
tariffs. After the toll tariffs were suspended, further scenarios
were tested as part of the proceedings of the Gauteng Freeway
Improvement Project (GFIP) Steering Committee.
(3) (a) and (b)
The tender document required a 12-month âtarget durationâ for the
feasibility study. The tender also required assistance on an ad hoc
basis to determine the impact of alternative options/requests received
from provincial and metropolitan government, as well as the public.
In 2010, SANRAL also required the traffic, toll and economic studies
to be updated with the latest available information in order to
finalise the recommendation to the Minister of Transport, with respect
to the toll tariffs for the GFIP.
(4) (a) and (b)
The specific deadline was met in that the feasibility report
supporting decision-making was completed.