Contracting in urban public transport Appendix: Contract Tables Submitted to EC – DG TREN by inno-V | KCW | RebelGroup | NEA | TØI | SDG | TIS Contracting in urban public transport (appendix: contract tables) Contracted by: European Commission – DG TREN Contractors: NEA (NL), inno-V (NL), KCW (D), Re- belGroup (NL), TØI (N), SDG (GB), TIS.PT (P) Project co-ordinator: inno-V (NL) Main report written by: Didier van de Velde, Arne Beck, Jan- Coen van Elburg, Kai-Henning Ter- schüren With further contributions of: Bård Norheim, Jan Werner, Christoph Schaaffkamp, Arthur Gleijm Contract tables provided by: Didier van de Velde, Arne Beck, Bård Norheim, Frode Longva, Tamás Dombi, Nicole Rudolf, Andrew Mellor, Daniela Carvalho, Rosário Macário, Kai-Henning Terschüren Layout: Didier van de Velde, Annemone Meyer, Arne Beck Disclaimer: This report was produced for DG En- ergy and Transport and represents the Consultants views. These views have not been adopted or in any way ap- proved by the Commission and should not be relied upon as a statement of the Commission's or DG Energy and Transport's views, nor of the confor- mity of described practices with appli- cable Community law. The European Commission does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this report, nor does it accept responsibility for any use made thereof. File: contracting in urban public transport - contract tables (v4.2) pub.doc Date: Amsterdam, 14 January 2008 Contracting in urban public transport (appendix: contract tables) 2 Table of contents 1 TEMPLATE...........................................................................................................4 2 AMSTERDAM (NL): DIRECT AWARD WITH COMPETITIVE THREAT ..........................6 3 BARCELONA (E): DIRECT AWARD TO PUBLIC OPERATOR........................................9 4 BRUSSELS (B): DIRECT AWARD TO PUBLIC OPERATOR ..........................................11 5 BUDAPEST (H): DIRECT AWARD TO PUBLIC OPERATOR........................................ 14 6 DIJON (F) : TENDERED NETWORK MANAGEMENT CONTRACT .............................. 16 7 DUBLIN (IRL): TENDERED ROUTE CONTRACT WITH INCENTIVES (TRAMWAY)...... 19 8 ELMSHORN (D): FUNCTIONAL TENDERING OF NETWORK CONTRACT ...................22 9 FRANKFURT/M. (D): TENDERED ROUTE BUNDLE CONTRACTS............................. 25 10 GIFHORN (D): SUB-CONTRACTING BY A PUBLIC OPERATOR .................................28 11 GIFHORN (D): COMPETITION FOR MARKET-INITIATED AUTHORISATIONS ............ 31 12 GRENLAND (N): TENDERED NETWORK CONTRACT WITH SUPER-INCENTIVES .......34 13 HAARLEM (NL): FUNCTIONAL TENDERING OF NETWORK CONTRACT ...................36 14 HALMSTAD (S): TENDERED NETWORK CONTRACT WITH ADDITIONAL INCENTIVES38 15 INNSBRUCK (A): DIRECT AWARD TO REORGANISED PUBLIC OPERATOR ................ 41 16 KRAKOW (PL): DIRECT AWARD TO PUBLIC OPERATOR WITHOUT EXCLUSIVITY ..... 45 17 LEEDS (GB): QUALITY PARTNERSHIP WITHIN FREE MARKET ............................... 47 18 LONDON (GB): TENDERING OF GROSS-COST BUS ROUTE CONTRACTS...................49 19 LONDON (GB): TENDERED GROSS-COST CONTRACT (RAIL) WITH INCENTIVES...... 53 20 LYON (F) : TENDERED NETWORK MANAGEMENT CONTRACT................................56 21 MANCHESTER (GB): TENDERING NON-COMMERCIAL ROUTES.............................60 22 MUNICH SUBURBS (D): TENDERING OF ROUTE CONTRACTS.................................62 23 OVIEDO (E): TENDERED NETWORK CONTRACT ...................................................65 24 PARLA/MADRID (E): TRAMWAY CONCESSION (INCLUDING BUILDING) ................68 25 PORTO (P): METRO CONCESSION (DBFO)...........................................................71 26 PRAGUE (CZ): DIRECT AWARD TO PUBLIC OPERATOR.......................................... 73 27 ROME (I): DIRECT AWARD AND PARTIAL TENDERING .......................................... 75 28 SANTIAGO DE COMPOSTELLA (E): TENDERED NETWORK CONTRACT ....................78 29 SONDRIO/LOMBARDY (I): TENDERING OF ROUTE BUNDLES ................................ 81 30 STOCKHOLM (S): TENDERED ROUTE BUNDLES GROSS-COST CONTRACTS..............83 31 SUNDSVALL (S): TENDERED NET-COST NETWORK CONTRACT ..............................86 32 TRIESTE (I): TENDERED NETWORK CONTRACT....................................................88 33 WARSAW (PL): TENDERING OF ROUTE CONTRACTS.............................................90 34 WITTENBERG (D): COMPETITION FOR MARKET-INITIATED AUTHORISATIONS ......92 Contracting in urban public transport (appendix: contract tables) 3 1 Template The following template is used to present in a synthetic manner contrac- tual practices that are currently encountered in Europe. Main description Remarks and variations General description of the ♦ Describe briefly the authority/ies involved This column is used for two purposes: contracting parties and their responsibilities (union of authori- ♦ Provide additional relevant information ties, planning capacities, etc.) about the contractual feature, presented ♦ Describe briefly the operators involved succinctly in the column ‘main description’ (ownership, level of competition, etc.) ♦ Illustrate variations on that contractual ♦ Describe briefly how the transport service is feature, if needed. being initiated (authority initiative by law, market initiative by law – public operator or free market, etc. See reference framework) General description of the Present briefly the contract type. Present contract type whether allocation of both cost and revenue risks in a single unit, or in separated units, i.e. single risk versus multiple risks. Add information on the contract length. Awarding procedure Indicate how the contract was awarded Additional relevant information on the rela- (European legal text and national legislation tionship between the national legislation used and procedure used: direct award, competi- and the existing European legislation. tive tendering, which kind, etc.) Regime for Public Service Present briefly the legal feature used for the Obligations Public Service Obligations. Note that this may be several features, possibly in combination with each other (such as a contract, a finan- cial allocation decision, an authorisation, or other legal features specific to the country studied) Policy goals and contractual ♦ Describe briefly the main public transport goals (strategic level) policy goals (Why does the transport au- thority intervene in public transport? influ- encing mode choice? Reducing air pollu- tion?...) ♦ Describe briefly the specific contract goals that may come in addition to the policy goals (Realise a specific investment in new infrastructure? Privatise the existing public operator? Solving a financial crisis dating from the previous regime?...) Service definition (tactical Describe the allocation of tactical compe- level) tences between authority and operator. This should include at least the following: ♦ How much of the service design (routes, timetable, fares) is defined by the authority before the contracting/tendering process? ♦ How much of the service design (routes, timetable, fares) is defined by the (candi- date) operator during the contract- ing/tendering process? ♦ How much freedom to change service de- sign (routes, timetable, fares) does the op- erator have during the contracting period? Service production (opera- Describe the allocation of operational compe- tional level) tences between authority and operator. One example: are operational decisions (such as the allocation of vehicles to the timetable) predetermined by the contracting body, or does the operator decide on this autono- mously? Regime for changes in pro- Describe the contractual features used (if Indicate the maximum extent of the changes duction quantities or con- any) to allow the authority to request of the contract that can be made without tract amendments during changes of production quantities or other needed to re-tender or otherwise review the Contracting in urban public transport (appendix: contract tables) 4 Main description Remarks and variations the contract period contract amendments (production quality, relationship etc.) during the contract period Ownership Present briefly the arrangements concerning the ownership of assets (distinguish between infrastructures, other installations and vehi- cles by mode) Status of the personnel What is the status of the personnel in the Present the main information on the transfer case of a change of operator at contract of workers rights from the old to the new termination? (compulsory take-over or not) operator (general agreements, local company rules, etc.). What are the legal obligations in the country concerned? Did the authority introduce requirement above this? [Make one table row for Present the main financial elements of the Add here information on (if applicable): each risk component in the contract: ♦ Sharing of risks beyond thresholds contract: ♦ the source of each financial component ♦ Indexation clauses ♦ cost, (which authority, the passengers,…) ♦ revenue ♦ the incentive mechanism related to each of ♦ and/or expected deficit] these components (if any…). Distinguish when relevant between: ♦ Cost components when relevant (opera- tions, investments, infrastructure mainte- nance, etc) ♦ Revenue components Present clearly the usage of prox- ies/measurements (such as passenger satis- faction indexes, etc.) when relevant, and present the related financial incentives. Contract price and level of ♦ Indicate the contract price (if not commer- Add information on contractual and factual risk cially secret) possibilities for