ThePTA:

Dimitra Komnianou

Elsa Adamantidou

Chrysa Vizmpa

How EPTA helped Thessaloniki

to organise its PT?

Tendering and awarding the

bus transport services in

Thessaloniki

EPTA Final Conference

28 May 2014, Brussels

Overview

2

1. Introduction

2. Approach

3. Good Practices

4. Contract Awarding

5. The case of Thessaloniki

6. Scenarios Evaluation

7. Remarks – Conclusion

1. Introduction

ThePTA is undergoing a crucial transition stage into a PTA with

extended responsibilities

3

New Integrated

PTA

Formulate policy Promote

public transport

Monitor operators of

transport services

Tender & Award

Manage transport services

contracts

Integrate multimodal transport

Plan transport system

2. Approach

4

Review of European Studies

Best practices from the EU Project EPTA and the European experiences

Opinions of distinguished experts coming from the industry and the academy

3. Good Practices

Pillar GP transfer Correlation to ThePTA needs

Tendering

& Awarding

GP2: SRM the Agency for Mobility and

Local Public Transport, Bologna - The

experience of network competitive

tendering of net-cost contract

Selection of the most suitable type of

contract based on the strong and weak

elements of the Bologna experience.

GP14: Rogaland Public Transport

Company, (RKT) “Kolumbus” - The

experience of competitive tendering of

gross-cost contracts

Selection of the most suitable type of

contract based on the strong and weak

elements of the Rogaland experience.

Monitoring GP34: A common tender to realize

surveys on service quality and

customer satisfaction referring to Local

Public Transport - The experience of

Emilia-Romagna Region

Mutually agreed methodology between

PTA and Operator: On-board and at bus

stops surveys with the use of specific

indicators.

GP35: A system to monitor and control

the performance service of the PT

Operator - Province of Forlì-Cesena

Integration of methodology proposed:

Employees of the PTA travel around

network following a path to check bus

trips.

5

4. Thessaloniki - Main Facts

Main facts

Second largest city in Greece ~ 1 mil.

inhabitants

More than 2 mil. daily passengers

(PT share 27%)

Annually approximately 44 mil. vehicle-km

(2012) by the bus operator

Annual system capacity of 405 mil. seats,

average occupancy of 41% (2011)

6

4. Thessaloniki - PT Agencies

7

• Private operator

• Direct awards from the Greek State

• Fleet: 621 buses

• 79 bus lines

Organization of Urban Transportation of

Thessaloniki (OASTh)

• Public authority under the Ministry of Transport

• Established in 2001

• Supervision of OASTh & KTEL S.A.

Thessaloniki Public Transport Authority

(ThePTA)

• Private operator

• Inter-municipal PT services

• Approximately 3% of the total services

Association of Bus Operators of the

Region of Thessaloniki (KTEL)

4. Thessaloniki - Market conditions

End of the existing contract between OASTh and

the Greek State until 2019

OASTh is the only provider of public passenger

transport for 57 years - No procurement until now

– Need time to adapt

Assets: Two private bus depots, all other assets

move to Greek State

The greatest risks are carried by the Greek State

New PT services: Metro system by 2019

8

5. Contract Awarding

Basic Parameters to be considered when

drafting a contract

Asset ownership

Planning of transport services

Risk Allocation - Optimal type of contract

Setting of reasonable compensation payment

Creation of conditions to ensure perfect

competition

9

6. Scenarios Evaluation (1/4)

Scenarios

4 basic scenarios were formulated and

evaluated using the international experience

and the local circumstances:

Scenario 1: In-house operator direct award

Scenario 2: Network competitive tendering

Scenario 3: Route competitive tendering

Scenario 4: Network segments competitive tendering

10

6. Scenarios Evaluation (2/4)

11

6. Scenarios Evaluation (3/4)

12

6. Scenarios Evaluation (4/4)

Awarding the bus network in 2019.

3 Gross-cost contracts.

Three separate parts based on geographical characteristics.

Depots: Greek state must grand them to the final contractor.

Competent authority: Responsible for the overall planning of the network.

Operators: Suggest network planning improvements.

13

Selection Scenario 4: Network segments competitive tendering

7. Remarks – Conclusion

(1/2)

1. Compare operator’s performance with

international benchmarks.

2. Integrate quality issues.

3. Clearly determine the competent authority

and its role.

4. Make data available to all potential bidders.

5. Ensure the same access to all interested to

the assets.

6. Conduct a detailed network redesign study.

14

7. Remarks – Conclusion

(2/2)

The goals of the current EU policy for efficient and

affordable PT services can be achieved only if a

competitive market is in place and may guarantee that:

a) an adequate number of suitable competitors will

appear

b) the competent authority is able to set clear objectives

and goals for the requested PT services

c) the competent authority is able to run a fair and

transparent bidding competition and

d) the winner will meet the pre-set service quality

standards at a reasonable price.

15

Thank you for you attention!

Contact Details:

Dimitra Komnianou

Transport Planner Engineer (MSc)

Thessaloniki Public Transport Authority

E-mail: d.kom@sasth.gr

url: http://www.thita.gov.gr

16